The Metamorphosis of the Myth of Alchemy: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Asunción López-Varela Azcárate; Estefanía Saavedra

doi:10.7195/ri14.v15i1.1036

PDF HTML

Published: 01-01-2017

Accepted: 05-01-2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v15i1.1036

Keywords:

Alchemy, Frankenstein or the Mode, Prometheus, Metamorphosis, Natural vs. modern science, Poetry, Mary Shelley, Percy B. Shelley

Supporting Agencies

Comunidad de Madrid (proyecto Acis-Galatea) H2015/HUM-3362

Dimensions

Asunción López-Varela Azcárate

(ES)

Complutense University of Madrid

alopezva@ucm.es

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1616-5830 (unauthenticated)

Estefanía Saavedra

(ES)

Universidad Complutense de Madrid

saavedraestefania@hotmail.es

Abstract

This article takes as starting point the myth of alchemy in Mary Shelley´s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, often interpreted as a warning of the risks and dangers of science and technology demonized in the form of the creature. Set in the Romantic period, the paper argues that the novel stages an ambiguous relationship between the advances in natural science and the philosophical and spiritual concerns that Mary Shelley inherited from her father, the philosopher William Godwin, which she discussed with her husband, the poet Percy B. Shelley. In the context of contemporary interdisciplinary discourses that contemplate ‘consilience’ between the humanities and the sciences, this paper offers a reading of Frankenstein and of Percy B. Shelley’s essay “A Defence of Poetry” as critical of empirical science in their ambiguous positioning with regards to alchemy and contemporary science. Furthermore, the research seeks to establish links with eco-cybernetic theories which bring to the fore a renewed interest on humanistic aspects.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 1 (2017): TECHNOPOÏESIS: TRANSMEDIA MYTHOLOGISATION AND THE UNITY OF KNOWEDGE

Section

Monograph

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

Asunción López-Varela Azcárate, Complutense University of Madrid

Asun López-Varela is professor at Facultad Filología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid since 1994. She holds a PhD Anglo-American Culture and Literary Studies, and Diploma of Advance Studies in Spanish Literature from UNED, and a Master in Educational Management from the Open University London. Her research interests are Comparative and World Literature, Cultural and Education Studies, as well as Cognitive and Intermedial Semiotics.

In 2007 she created the research program Studies on Intermediality and Intercultural Mediation SIIM.

López-Varela has been visiting scholar at Brown University (2010) and Harvard University (2013) and visiting professor at Delhi University (2011), Beijng Language and Culture University (every year since 2012), Kazakh National University, Almaty (2013, 2014). Tamkang University, Taipei & Sun Jat Sen Univ. Kaohsiung (2014-2015).

She is a member of Hermeneia Research Group at Universitat de Barcelona Mitocriticism Research Group at Complutense Madrid and Semiótica Comunicación y Cultura

A proactive member of the profession, López-Varela is in the Executive Committee of the Association of Alumni of the Real Colegio Complutense in Harvard University, and in the European Network of Comparative Literary Studies (ex officio)

In order to strengthen relations between Europe and Asia, López-Varela coordinates the Complutense-One Asia Foundation Seminar Series on Cross-cultural dialogue funded by the One Asia Foundation.

She is also external evaluator for the EU Educational, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency EACEA the European Union Research Program Horizon 2020 , the postgraduate programs of Comparative Literature at Dublin City University and the Institute for Intermedial Studies at Linnaeus University. She has also ollaborated as advisor with the Department of Romance Studies Harvard University.

Lopez-Varela is keen in giving international visibility to research by colleagues and younger peers, and her editorial activities are a clear sign in this direction

For more information, please see http://www.ucm.es/siim/asun-lopez-varela

Estefanía Saavedra, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Profesora (Academia Learn & Enjoy) Doctoranda

How to Cite

Azcárate, A. L.-V., & Saavedra, E. (2017). The Metamorphosis of the Myth of Alchemy: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Journal ICONO 14, 15(1), 108-127. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v15i1.1036

References

Adorno, Theodor. (2002). The Stars Down to Earth and other essays on the irrational in culture. Introd. By Stephen Crook. London and New York: Routledge.

Bacon Roger. (1985). The root of the world: forty seven step to the Philosopher´s Stone. U.S.A: The Alchemical Press.

Bianchi, Luigi Massimo. (1994) “The Visible and the Invisible. From Alchemy to Paracelsus” in Alchemy and Chemistry in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Rattansi Piyo and Clericuzio eds. Klumer Academis Publisher. Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0778-5_2

Bulhof, Ilse Nina, (1992). The language of science: A study of the relationship between literature and science in the perspective of a hermeneutical ontology. New York & Leiden: E.J. Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004246836

Brailsford, H.N. Shelley (1913). Godwin and Their Circle. London : Oxford University Press.

Castle, Terry. (1995) The Female Thermometer: Eighteenth-century Culture and the Invention of the Uncanny. New York and London. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195080971.001.0001

Cho, Joanne Miyang, Kurlander, Eric, and McGetchin, Douglas T. (2014). Transcultural Encounters between Germany and India: Kindred Spirits in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. London & New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780315856745

Clericuzio Antonio. (1994). “The internal laboratory. The chemical Reinterpretation of Medical spirits in England (1650-1680)” in Alchemy and Chemistry in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Rattansi Piyo and Clericuzio eds. Klumer Academis Publisher. Netherlands. 1994, 51-85 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0778-5_3

Davy, Sir Humphry. (1812). Elements of Chemical Philosophy. London: Johnson and Co. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5479/sil.328466.39088000955757

Ebeling, Elizabeth. (1935). “A Probable Paracelsian Element in Shelley.” University of North Carolina Press: Studies in Philology, 32.3 (1935): 508-525 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4172289

Eliade, Mircea (1978). The Forge and Crucible: The Origins and Structures of Alchemy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226026541.001.0001

Ellis, Markman. (1999). “Fictions of Science in Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’” Sydney’s Studies in English 25. http://openjournals.library.usyd.edu.au/index.php/SSE/article/view/537

Godwin, William. Diary 1788-1836. http://godwindiary.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/index2.html

List of books read. http://godwindiary.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/bibl/

Greshko, Michael. (2016) “Isaac Newton's Lost Alchemy Recipe Rediscovered” National Geographic on April 4th 2016 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160404-isaac-newton-alchemy-mercury-recipe-chemistry-science/

Harpur, Patrick. (2002). The Philosopher’s Secret Fire: A History of the Imagination. London: Penguin.

Hawkins, Desmond. (1995). The Grove Diaries: The Rise and Fall of an English Family, 1809-1925. New Jersey: The Dovecot Press.

Hughes Jonathan. (2012). The Rise of Alchemy in Fourteenth-Century England: Plantagenet Kings and the Search for the Philosopher´s Stone. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. London. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472599193

Jacob, Margaret. (1981). The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Lawrence M. Principe, (2007) Ed. Chymists and Chymistry: Studies in the History of Alchemy and Early Modern Chemistry. Philadelphia: Chemical Heritage Foundation. Sagamore Beach, Mass.: Science History Publications.

Murray J. Christopher (2004) Ed. Encyclopedia of the Romantic Era, 1760-1850. Vol. I. London: Taylor & Francis Books, Inc.

LópezVarela, Asunción. (2015a). "Intermedialidad y metamorfosis: de analogías, simetrías, bucles y Orbis Tertius.” En Nuevos dispositivos enunciativos en la era intermedial. Amélie Florenchie and Dominique Breton (Eds.) Villeurbanne, France: Éditions Orbis Tertius, 63-85.

López-Varela Azcárate, Asunción. (2015b) “El futuro de las narratologías híbridas en Alicia en el país de las maravillas.” 1616. Anuario de literatura comparada, 5 (2015b): 137-162. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

López-Varela Azcárate, Asunción. (2016). "El futuro de las narratologías híbridas II: A través del espejo de Lewis Carroll". En Justo, Susana y Laura Pereira (eds.). Espacios transliterarios: hibridez, digitalidad, migración. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela: Santiago de Compostela, 2016. 10-45.

Mellor, Anne Kostelanetz. (1988). Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. Methuen.

Moran, Bruce T. (2005). Distilling Knowledge: Alchemy, Chemistry, and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674041226

Nummedal, Tara. (2007). Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226608570.001.0001

Owen, Alex. (2004). The Place of Enchantment: British Occultism and the Place of the Modern, University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226642031.001.0001

Robinson, Charles E. (1996). The Frankenstein Notebooks. Garland.

Robinson, Charles E. (2009) The Original Frankenstein. Bodleian Library 2008. Random House Vintage Paperback.

Saavedra, Estefanía. (2013) Radix Mundi: Alquimia, mística y semiótica en un texto de Roger Bacon. Master Thesis. Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

Simmel, Georg (1906). “The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies,” trans. Albion Small, The American Journal of Sociology, XI.4 (1906): 441-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/211418

Scrivener, Michael Henry. (1982) Radical Shelley: The Philosophical Anarchism and Utopian Thought of Percy Bysshe Shelley. New Jersey. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400856879

Shelley Mary. (1818) Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/stream/Frankenstein1818Edition/frank-a5_djvu.txt

Shelley Mary. (1831) Frankenstein. Second Norton Critical Edition. Edited by Paul Hunter.

Shelley, Percy B. (1897). Letters to Thomas Jefferson Hogg. https://archive.org/details/lettersfrompercy00shelrich

Shelley, Percy B. (1820). The Complete Poetical Works, by Percy Bysshe Shelley: Volume 25. Oxford Edition 1914, edited by Thomas Hutchinson. https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/shelley/percy_bysshe/s54cp/volume25.html

Shelley, Percy B. “A Defence of Poetry” in Essays, Letters from Abroad, Translations and Fragments. London: Moxon. http://archive.org/stream/essayslettersfro01shelrich#page/n35/mode/2up

Frederick, Norman (1944) (Ed.) The Letters of Mary W. Shelley. University of Oklahoma Press.

Mary Shelley' s Journal. Ed. Frederick L. Jones University of Oklahoma Press, 1947

Smiles, Samuel. (1891). A Publisher and His Friends. Memoirs and Correspondence of the Late John Murray. London: J. Murray.

Thoman, Charles J. (1998). “Sir Humphry Davy and Frankenstein.” Chemical Education 75.4 (1998): 495. DOI: 10.1021/ed075p495 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed075p495

Yousef, Nancy. (2002) “The Monster in the Dark Room: Frankenstein, Feminism and Philosophy.” MLQ: Modern Language Quarterly 63.2 (June 2002): 197-226 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00267929-63-2-197

Weber, Max. (1919) Wissenchaft als Beruf. München und Leipzig: Verlag von Duncker & Humblot.

Welburn, Andrew J & Heinzen, Thomas (1986). Power and Self-Consciousness in the Poetry of Shelley. London: MacMillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18278-7