Creating a Mutable Organism
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a timeless work of fiction that holds meaning and continues evolving even today through remediation. In addition to being a work that builds on a number of previous works, Frankenstein has inspired and contributed to literature significantly beyond its own time, such as the film Adaptation, by Spike Jonze.
When Mary Shelley published Frankenstein in 1818, I imagine a number of people interpreted it to be a warning about the perils of hasty scientific advancement, but after reading her 1831 introduction, I saw Victor Frankenstein’s creation of a monster in the novel as a parallel to Mary Shelly’s creation of the novel itself. It would seem, if this train of thought were to be followed, that Shelley is implying that once written, a piece becomes its own entity, with a life of its own.
Mary Shelley, in the introduction to Frankenstein, refers to her writing as her “hideous progeny”, describing it as her own “monster” let loose upon the world. She describes the conception of the idea to write the novel, and tells of it using the same voice that she gives the character of Frankenstein. Shelley writes “My imagination, unbidden, possessed and guided me, gifting the successive images that arose in my mind with a vividness far beyond the usual bounds of reverie,” describing how the ideas controlled her mind with the same passion that Frankenstein has when he himself is controlled by the idea to give life to a creation. The first time I read this passage, I hadn’t read Shelley’s 1831 introduction, and Frankenstein appeared to be merely an archetypal mad scientist. After rereading this passage in the context of Shelley’s introduction, I’ve noted that Frankenstein’s creative fervor could represent the inspiration of a writer, which would support the idea that the creature represents a literary work.
One of the most interesting parts of Mary Shelley’s introduction is when she describes the novel as “the offspring of happy days, when death and grief were but words”, clearly referencing the fact that her husband, Percy Shelley, died between the writing of the novel and the addition of the introduction. She goes on to elaborate that for her, the novel keeps the memory of her husband alive. This is particularly true considering that within the text of the novel Mary Shelley used an excerpt from one of her husband’s poems, “Mutability”. Just as Frankenstein’s creation reminded him of the past and outlived his loved ones, Mary Shelley’s novel does the same to her.
The elaborate construction of the novel, with multiple stories contained within other stories, further elaborates this idea. In Frankenstein, there are a number of different narratives embedded in other narratives. The frame of the primary narrative is the letters of Robert Walton, where Walton describes his voyage and his chance encounter with Frankenstein. The rest of the narrative is Frankenstein’s horrified account of his experience. Within the narrative framed by Walton’s letters is another narrative, describing the experiences of Victor Frankenstein’s creation of a monster. Within the creature’s narrative, the creature tells his own story, as well as the story of a family he watches. During this time the creature explains that he began reading other works, such as Milton’s Paradise Lost. The interconnectivity of each of the narratives in Frankenstein, as well as the connection to outside works can be interpreted in the context of Mary Shelley’s metaphor of literature, where it can be inferred that Shelley is referencing the relationships between written works, and the accumulation of recurring ideas through literature.
Adaptation, a film directed by Spike Jonze, also uses this format of narratives within narratives. Charlie Kaufman, the writer of Adaptation, adapts Susan Orlean’s book, The Orchid Thief, which is about an orchid poacher, John Laroche. The film revolves around the semi-fictional character of Charlie Kaufman, who writes an adaptation of The Orchid Thief. The idea of Charlie Kaufman (the real one) incorporating himself into the work is similar to how Mary Shelley creates the character of Victor Frankenstein to represent herself or any writer, and the life a work has on its own once released. Shelley includes Victor’s creation of a monster to represent the creation of any literary work. Through the fictional Charlie Kaufman, the real Charlie Kaufman tells the story of the fictional Susan Orlean, who tells the story of the fictional John Laroche. The narrative of the film also tells the story of the fictional Donald Kaufman, Charlie’s twin brother. This bears a strong resemblance to the way Mary Shelly tells the story of Victor Frankenstein, who tells of his creation, who tells of a family he observed. The interconnectivity of each of the narratives in Frankenstein, as well as the connection to outside works can be interpreted in the context of Mary Shelley’s metaphor of literature, where it can be inferred that Shelley is referencing the relationships between written works and the accumulation of recurring ideas through literature. The connection between the film, Adaptation, and the creation in the film, the screenplay, serves the same purpose, but in a way that is not only more direct, but appears to have a more broad meaning in terms of literature, as it includes film.
The ambiguous ending of the novel, where it is unclear whether or not the monster survives, appears to be a conscious indication of Shelley’s awareness that her creation would continue to live long after her own death, thought it might fade into obscurity. On that point she was correct, as people continue reading the novel today, and just as Victor’s creation is still free to do as he pleases, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is still able to carry a message, and is still constantly adapting and evolving.
Adaptation, directed by Spike Jonze and written by Charlie Kaufman can be read as a remediation of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in the way that it incorporates the idea of intertextuality, and shows how within every story there are countless other stories. One possible thesis for the film would be the idea that every story is a remediation of existing ideas, whether the ideas are real events, a previous work, or merely ideas in the writer’s mind, just as Frankenstein remediates the idea of a creation story (such as in Genesis), some poems by Mary Shelley’s husband, Percy Shelly, and her original ideas. The fact that the film itself is a remediation only further exemplifies the idea that all created works take pieces from other works, and therefore, are intertextual.
The most profound difference between Adaptation and Frankenstein is that Adaptation is a film. While this may seem like a terribly obvious distinction, it has a significant impact on the way the story is told and received. In the film, Laroche explains that he loves plants because “they’re so mutable.” Though this line has nothing to do with the fact that Adaptation is a film, it is a direct reference to Percy Shelley’s “Mutability.” Laroche goes on to mention the name of the film, explaining that “adaptation is a profound process. Means you figure out how to thrive in the world.” Laroche here refers to remediation as a form of mutation enabling a work to adapt to its surrounding and survive. The film took the Frankenstein story, of a creator obsessed with doing something no one has done before, and by making it into a film changed it in a way that the message could still be understood by modern audiences.
One scene that makes a number of points about remediation is the scene where Charlie Kaufman is talking with Valerie Thomas about his adaptation of the film. Valerie Thomas wants to create details of the plot that don’t exist in the original book, such as a romance between Susan Orlean and John Laroche, but Kaufman argues that he wants the screenplay to remain true to the original, without adding Hollywood effects and devices. This statement is ironic, because the film itself bears nearly no resemblance to The Orchid Thief and even less resemblance to Frankenstein in terms of plot. In fact, one scene where Charlie Kaufman discusses the novel with his agent Marty, Kaufman points out that the book has no plot, and takes Marty’s suggestion to just “Make one up.” This situation is significant because it brings to light the fact that a remediation cannot be exactly like the original. This makes sense, because otherwise there would be no purpose in remediating the work. Even though the plot of Adaptation is nothing like that of Frankenstein, it does manage to capture the essence of Frankenstein in its self-referential concepts and framed-narrative style.
The introduction of the film serves a number of purposes. The opening line of the film is Kaufman saying, via voice-over, “Do I have an original thought in my head?” This line, in addition to referencing that the film is a remediation, also calls to mind the creation of the film itself. Nicholas Cage, who says the opening line, obviously did not write the screenplay, and so the line could be referencing the writer, Charlie Kaufman. Also, the visual at the time this line is spoken consists of a black screen with the credits, calling to mind the other people involved in the creation of the film. In film, any idea that may have been original becomes part of a bigger work with hundreds of people involved. Unlike a book, which has only one direct author, a film always involves a large number of people, making film a perfect medium to demonstrate the collaborative effort of creation. While not directly a part of the film, the credits of Adaptation add to the work in other ways as well. In the end credits, a quote is used from the film “The Three”, a nonexistent screenplay written by the fictional Donald Kaufman. The quote begins “We’re all one thing…like cells in a body”, further adding to the idea that each of the stories in the film are all one work, just as any text contains a number of different texts.
Adaptation demonstrates the idea that every work, whether it be a film, text, or any other creation, is an intertextual remediation. Even further, by being an advanced version of a work that has been evolving for almost two centuries, it emphasizes the limitless potential of a work to grow and adapt as time progresses. As the Frankenstein novel continues to adapt, the number of works that become a part of it, such as Adaptation, will only continue to grow, making the text a living creature as unstoppable as Shelley’s monster.
