Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences JAHSS

2018, 4(6): 232-243

PRIMARY RESEARCH

The dilemma of creator and creation: Dr. Frankenstein

vs. the Monster
Banu Erşanlı*
Department of Communication Design, Başkent University, Ankara, Turkey

Keywords Abstract
Dilemma The purpose of this study is to analyze Frankenstein’s monster created in the 18th century with the dilemma of
Creator creator-creation relation, under a gothic perspective. Within this context, gothic literature and gothic cinema will
Creation be mentioned in the 􀅭irst part of the study to describe the style of the novel. In the second part, the historical
Relation dynamics of the period will be explained, and mention the life of Mary Shelley and the process of creating the
novel to help understand the novel better. The third part is dedicated to a historical and a visual analysis based on
Received: 1 October 2018 the samples from book illustrations, caricatures, theatre banners, and comic books, which involved characters of
Accepted: 5 November 2018 the novel throughout the illustration process.
Published: 11 December 2018

© 2018 The Author(s). Published by TAF Publishing.

ON THE CONCEPT OF GOTHIC other hand, emerged as a negative reaction against En-
The concept of Gothic was 􀅭irst used in history, with refer- lightenment, which manifested itself not only politically but
ence to Goth raids against Romans, meaning barbarism and also in science and art. By means of exposing the abstract
primitiveness (Osmanoğ ulları, 2016; Wu, 2017). It iden- against what is tangible, it expressed the inconvenience felt
ti􀅭ied the darkness, overbearingness and vandalism of the for the undermining of humanity’s and society’s certain as-
feudal order both positively and negatively; and it refers pects (Azhar, 2015; Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008). Gothic litera-
to an ongoing war between modern and classic, past and ture is a literary type emerged 􀅭irstly in German, English
present (Tuncer, 2014). The name gothic is assumed to and French literatures during Romantic period, with the ap-
have been given by the Renaissance painter Raphael, who pearance of fantastic elements; and occurred as a type of
was famous for his devotion to classicism; and it is a change- narration that involved horror and mystery, and supernat-
able notion between the concepts of primitivism and civi- ural heroes such as vampires or monsters created in labo-
lization (Osmanoğ ulları, 2016). It is also an aesthetic style ratories (Yılmaz, 2006). By their nature, Gothic novels are
available in different branches of art 3p0; such as painting, observed to not re􀅭lect the characteristic of the period they
cinema, literature, music, architecture, fashion, and theatre. belong to. It is also possible to suggest that they involve a
O􀂭 zkaracalar (2005), on the other hand, asserts that the sense of rebellion due to manifesting an anti-Enlightenment
word gothic is used to identify the period from Visigoth in- structure (Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008).
vasion and collapse of Roman Empire until Renaissance; Gothic literature usually involves a mysterious, scary old
and to apprehend the facts belonging to this age (p: 8). male character who lives in an old, partially ruined castle
The idea that accurate information can be obtained through or mansion surrounded by threatening supernatural crea-
intelligence was the common perspective prevailing in the tures; a vulnerable female character; and a third charac-
18th century Age of Enlightenment. Romanticism, on the ter who is in between good and evil (Osmanoğ ulları, 2016).

* corresponding author: Banu Erşanlı

† email: [email protected]

The Author(s). Published by TAF Publishing. This is an Open Access article distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
233 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

Even though gothic novels seem to give prominence to happen until 1920s. The convention of gothic 􀅭ilm was set-
physical and psychological fear, mystery, supernatural en- tled with the help of gothic novels from 18th and 19th cen-
tities, gloomy places such as abandoned buildings, castles, turies, and movies that used the dark and depressive at-
dungeons etc., secret passages, forests, wild nature, ruined mosphere of German Expressionist 􀅭ilms such as ‘Der mü de
monasteries, torture rooms, darkness, regression, insanity, Tod’ by Fritz Lang and Nosferatu, a Symphony of Horror by
prophecies, and curses; (Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008) the main F. W. Murnau. These movies showed the cinematic power
subject is actually the human and intelligence (Arargü ç, of lighting and set design required to create the dark atmo-
2016). Cruel people, bandits, maniacs, suffering femme fa- sphere of ruined chateaus occupied by bats and witches (p:
tales, wizards, vampires, werewolves, monsters, demons, 88).
ghosts, specters, and skeletons are extraordinary charac- 19th century gothic literature allowed the readers to iden-
ters encountered in these novels (Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008) tify themselves with anti-heroes. This was then followed
. Urgan (2003) de􀅭ined their purpose of gothic novel as by the introduction of these heroes on screen, which turned
“to cause intense excitement and to terrify the audience by them into icons starring in various cinematic adaptation.
means of creating an atmosphere full of horror, mystery
and thrill; as well as using certain supernatural situations MARY SHELLEY AS A NOVELIST
when necessary, such as ghost appearances or utterance of Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (Figure 1), who was born in
prophecies” (p: 109). 1797 as the daughter of William Godwin and Mary Woll-
In gothic novels, the line between the good and evil is blurry stonecraft , married Percy Bysshe Shelley , who was one
(Arargü ç, 2016) and it is also possible to propose that gothic of the six greatest British romantic poets (O􀂭 zdemir, 2004).
novels are in the form of warnings in terms of handling is- Her father William Godwin was a writer known for his rad-
sues; such as privacy invasion or revelation of a forbidden ical political views, while her mother Mary Wollstonecraft
information (Arargü ç, 2016). The 􀅭irst example of gothic lit- was an effective defender of women’s rights (I􀂷smayilov &
erature is the novel named The Castle Of Otranto by Horace Sunal, 2013).
Walpole (Yılmaz, 2006). In 1764, the second edition of the
novel was published after having added the subtitle of “A
gothic story” (O􀂭 zkaracalar, 2005).
With its huge narrative potential, cinema managed to estab-
lish a much stronger bond with novel, when compared with
other branches of art. Almost any story narrated in a novel
can be similarly projected on cinema screen. Although cin-
ema is limited to a shorter period of narration, it has pictor-
ical opportunities based on its visual narrative nature. In
novel, on the other hand, the relationship between the story
and the narrator is based on story materials; such as story
arc, character, plot, and theme (Monaco, 2002). Besides,
gothic cinema is mostly regarded as a subgenre of horror
movies, which nourishes from science 􀅭iction, drama, mys-
tery or adventure movies, too (Osmanoğ ulları, 2016).
According to Kale (2010), the relationship between liter-
ature and cinema, which have been in interaction for cen-
turies, is rather based on the “adaptation of literary works
to movies” (p: 274). Works of several authors; such as FIGURE 1. Mary Shelley’s (1849) portrait, Londra National Por-
trait Gallery (Source: https://urlzs.com/5NFTV)
Ann Radcliffe , Horace Walpole, Matthew Gregory Lewis ,
Mary Shelley, Bram Stoker , and Edgar Allen Poe have been Mounseer Nongtonpaw is the 􀅭irst poem written by Mary
adapted to cinema for so long, which formed the basis for Shelley at the age of 10, which was published in 1807 by
gothic cinema. Kemp (2014) describes the introduction of her father’s publishing house.
gothic genre with cinema as: The 􀅭irst edition of Shelley’s novel Frankenstein or Modern
There were certain attempts to adapt gothic novels to Prometheus, which she wrote at the age of 19, was pub-
movies in the 􀅭irst decades of cinema history, which did not lished anonymously due to living in a time where writing

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
2018 B. Ersanl – The dilemma of creator and creation . . . . 234

was not considered as an appropriate profession for women ni􀅭icant literary works of English literature; and it is consid-
(Figure 2). Danacı (2011) explains the creation of the novel ered a masterpiece in terms of giving the deepest and most
as: In 1816, Lord Byron , Dr. Polidori , Byron’s lover, Mary detailed narrative on how Adam and Eve was expelled from
Shelley and Percy Bysshe Shelley gathered in Geneva, where paradise. Mary Shelley’s quoting from Paradise Lost in her
they told German horror stories to each other. Then, they own work was no coincidence. At this point, interpretation
decided to organize a story contest, which resulted in emer- of these two works in the context of intertextuality will be
gence of different stories. Lord Byron wrote a story that he useful. In Frankenstein or Modern Prometheus, the mon-
added to the end of his poem Mazeppa ; while Polidori wrote ster with a tragic story, reveals similarities both with Adam
The Vampire which would become a classic in the following and Devil. Expulsion of Adam from paradise and his dis-
years. Among these, Shelley’s novel was the only one to be missal by God is actually in parallel with the monster being
completed and turned into a novel in history (p: 52). dismissed by its creator.
Moreover, in the part where the monster talks to Dr.
Frankenstein about the books he reads, he explains the re-
lation between him and Adam & Devil in Paradise Lost, with
the following sentences: … Like Adam, I was apparently
united by no link to any other being in existence; but his
state was far different from mine in every other respect.
He had come forth from the hands of God a perfect crea-
ture, happy and prosperous, guarded by the especial care
of his Creator; he was allowed to converse with and ac-
quire knowledge from beings of a superior nature, but I was
wretched, helpless, and alone. Many times I considered Sa-
tan as the 􀅭itter emblem of my condition, for often, like him,
when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of
envy rose within me (Shelley, 2008).
According to Demirci (2006), revolting against the creator is
an important indicator of revolting against God in religious
context; against the father in family context; and against the
degenerated so-called selfdom in social context (p: 62). Ac-
cording to this, the monster’s feelings for its creator refer to
an attempt of taking him as a father, which is regarded as
God by the monster. Simultaneously, the monster becomes
FIGURE 2. Frankenstein or the modern prometheus novel’s 􀅭irst
print (Source: https://urlzs.com/rGamV) the child or the servant for its creator. Likewise, the strug-
gle of the monster and Adam for being “good” is another
On the front page of the book, we can see a quote from the similarity between these two characters. The similarity be-
10th book of Paradise Lost by John Milton , from the pages tween the monster and devil, on the other hand, can be sug-
743-745 (Figure 3): “Did I request thee. Maker, from my gested given their desire to take revenge from their creators.
clay/To mould me Man, did I solicit thee/From darkness to However, both of them have the feeling of regret that comes
promote me?” after revenge.
When both stories are handled as a whole, the parallelism
in the axis of common points and the story can be inferred
easily: Both Paradise Lost by Milton and Frankenstein or
Modern Prometheus by Shelley are stories of creation.
It is possible to see further references to Milton’s Paradise
Lost throughout the story. In the part where the things hap-
pened to the monster after running away from Franken-
FIGURE 3. Section from Frankenstein or the modern prometheus
stein’s house is told, the hut found by the monster while
novel’s 􀅭irst print (Source: https://urlzs.com/rGamV)
wandering around is described as: But I was enchanted by
Written in free verse, Paradise Lost is one of the most sig- the appearance of the hut; here the snow and rain could not

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
235 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

penetrate; the ground was dry; and it presented to me then

as exquisite and divine a retreat as Pandemonium appeared
to the demons of hell after their sufferings in the lake of 􀅭ire
(Shelley, 2008).
The Pandomenium mentioned here was used in John Mil-
ton’s Paradise Lost to refer to the capital of hell. Throughout
the book, Shelley establishes further intertextual relations
between other books and works. It is possible to see occa-
sional references or quotes from these works: Samuel Tay-
lor Coleridge ’s The Rime of the Ancyent Marinere (1834),
Oliver Goldsmith ’s The Vicar of Wake􀅭ield (1776), Lord By-
ron’s Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage (1816), Costantin François
de Chasseboeuf, Volney Comte’s The Ruins (1791), Plu- FIGURE 4. Illustration of the frog experiment performed by Luigi
tarkhos ’s Demosthenes Cicero, Goethe ’s Die Leiden des Galvani (Source: https://urlzs.com/hvQif)
Jungen Werthers (1774), Percy Bysshe Shelley’s Mutability There are several scientists known to have conducted stud-
(1816) and Alastor (1816) poems, William Wordsworth ’s ies on similar contexts in that period. Andrew Ure was one
Tintern Abbey (Tintern Manastırı, 1798) and Ksenophon ’s of these scientists who stood out with his experiments. En-
Anabaisis. actment of the Murder Act in England in 1751 paved the way
For that matter, it can be suggested that the 􀅭irst intertex- for experiments to be conducted on dead bodies. Thanks
tuality about the novel is embodied within the novel itself. to this law, Ure also carried out various studies on corpses
The novel is based on the struggle of an anonymous mon- and bodies and tried to resuscitate them through electricity
ster for socializing, who identi􀅭ies as a human rather than (Figure 5).
a creature and thinks like one; as well as its isolation from
other people as a social entity (Danacı, 2011). It continues
with the story mentioned in Robert Walton’s letters, which
he wrote after running into Dr. Victor Frankenstein dur-
ing a trip, and things happened to the doctor. According
to Franco Moretti (2017), the monster is completely a man-
made, collective and arti􀅭icial creature which is not existent
in nature (p: 108). The story where the con􀅭lict between
Frankenstein, the creator who is an inventor-scientist, and
the explorer-scientist Walton is narrated, is carried to a dif-
ferent temporal dimension when Victor Frankenstein starts
to tell his childhood memories; and sometimes focuses on FIGURE 5. Illustration of the electrical experiment performed
Walton’s perspective and narration. by Adrew Ure on Matthew Clydesdale (Source:
https://urlzs.com/DCDP8)
Although the story was developed out of Shelley’s imagina-
tion, it is possible to suggest that the experiments on bio- Creating a living creature out of nothing is an obvious at-
electricity and Calvinism (Danacı, 2011) formed the funda- tempt to emulate God and involves a challenge; while the
mental ground of the novel. It is assumed that Giovanni Al- monster’s superhuman powers refer to the transcendental
dini and Luigi Galvani are the names Shelley was inspired by. aspect of the novel (Osmanoğ ulları, 2016). According to
In 1780, Galvani made studies about moving the muscles of Ozer (1989), emulating God is regarded as a sin in terms
a dead frog through electricity with an aim to move them of religion; while it is re􀅭lected as the primary aesthetic
by impulse and contractions. There are explanations and and ethical value in romantic literature (p: 37). Atayman
illustrations from this experiment available in his book en- (2006), on the other hand, makes the following comment
titled De Virbus Electricitatis In Motu Musculari Commen- about the ending of the story: Any arti􀅭icial or scienti􀅭ic
tarus which was published in 1792 (Figure 4). Luigi Gal- attempt to create a human has been regarded as a sinful
vani’s cousin Giovanni Aldini, on the other hand, took these crime since Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, in terms of inter-
experiments further and used steer and bull heads as exper- fering with God’s work and attempting to create a second
imental subjects. world; to such an extent that both the creator and the crea-

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
2018 B. Ersanl – The dilemma of creator and creation . . . . 236

ture could not get away from its consequences at the end The archive also contains the works of Percy Bysshe,
(p: 137). The novel projects an anti-Enlightenment view in William Godwin, and Mary Wollstonecraft, who are known
terms of illustrating the unrestrained development of sci- to be the 􀅭irst author family of England, accessible on
ence triggered by French Revolution and Industrial Revo- https://urlzs.com/eRqfS Although Mary Shelley became fa-
lution (Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008). Being described as the fear mous with Frankenstein or Modern Prometheus, she wrote
of bourgeois civilization by Moretti (2017), Frankenstein is other literary works, as well. Some of them are: Valperga
a freak concerning that the future will be as scary as him- (1823), The Last Man (1826), The Fortunes of Perkin War-
self (p: 105-106). According to Yü cesoy (2007), what cre- beck (1830), Lodore (1835), Falkner, A Novel (1837).
ated the monster of Frankenstein was neither a curse from
the past nor an inexplicable supernatural entity as in 18th Book Illustrations
century gothic stories; but the bourgeoisie itself where peo- Each community has their own myths and adventures
ple attempt to create similar beings in the light of scienti􀅭ic within them (Burkus, 2015). Being presented in a nar-
developments (p: 17). In the novel, we see that Shelley rative form in literary texts, these adventures are some-
does not comply with the consistency standards of Enlight- times accompanied by visual communication elements
enment and prefers to write without rules by means of step- such as sketches, illustrations or pictures. According to
ping out of the style, in order to reinforce the notion of free- Mendelsund (2015), while reading an illustrated book, the
dom (Yavuz & Geçikli, 2008). Being positioned right in the images help the reader to shape the things they see within
middle of English Romanticism, Shelley experienced vari- their heads. Such an opportunity offer a different kind of ex-
ous personal losses and identi􀅭ied herself with the feelings perience and may direct the reader (p: 199). This is because
of loneliness and alienation. Within this context, it is possi- that books are capable of offering a certain kind of freedom.
ble to regard the loneliness and alienation of Frankenstein’s While reading, the person is free to be mentally active; while
monster as a metaphor representing the author’s feelings. at the same time gets involved in the creation of a narrative,
Today, it is estimated that there are only 500 accessi- in any way possible (Mendelsund, 2015). However, read-
ble copies of the 􀅭irst edition of Frankenstein or Modern ers mostly like the changeability and unpredictability of-
Prometheus. In 2013, Mary Shelley’s manuscripts were fered by the book and do not want to see things to be shown
transferred on a digital platform in cooperation with New (Mendelsund, 2015).
York Public Library, Bodleian Library, Maryland Institute Although this is the case for readers, some novels and liter-
for Technology in Humanities, British Library, Huntington ary works are much more suitable for illustration as a re-
Library, Art Collection and Botanical Gardens, and Victoria sult of their sophisticated descriptions and the opportuni-
& Albert Museum. ties they offer. Despite the fact that there are various limita-
tions – technical, personal, social - in the process of illustrat-
ing a text, all the drawings made for Frankenstein or Mod-
ern Prometheus facilitated the nourishment of the novel, as
well as the enhancement of its intertextuality.
13 years after the anonymous publication of Frankenstein
or Modern Prometheus, Mary Shelley’s name as the au-
thor was included in the republishing in 1831; where var-
ious illustration, imaging, and visualizations were used in
different editions in order to support the story visually.
As Frankenstein’s monster became an icon throughout the
years, different artists produced different works on the de-
piction of this monster.

Monster in Political Cartoons

While the notion of caricature is de􀅭ined as “thought-
provoking and amusing picture which is processed steeply
and based on any matter about humans and society” ,
FIGURE 6. A page of Mary Sheley’s handwriting from
its most common and basic de􀅭inition is “humor through
Frankenstein or the modern prometheus (Source: sketches”. The term comes from the verb “caricare” which
https://urlzs.com/KusLG)
ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
237 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

means to attack (Senyapili, 2003). Arargü ç (2016), who is pending on the place, time, conditions, and people (Turan,
a caricaturist, gives a comprehensive explanation for the 2012).
term by saying “Caricature is an art of humor which cap- With reference to the novel Frankenstein or Modern
tures the aspects of events, emotions and thoughts that are Prometheus, where emergence of the working class against
funny and contradict with what is natural and usual; and bourgeoisie as an opposing force (Yü cesoy, 2007), and
turns them into a humorous narratives through exagger- the political concerns about a possible revolution are re-
ated drawings accompanied by texts” (Aygü n, 2007). Ac- 􀅭lected; the 19th century characters Doctor Frankenstein
cording to Selçuk (1979), on the other hand, caricature has and the monster are observed to have been emblematized
become a strong branch of art due to certain reasons. Cari- and used in political caricatures. According to Moretti
cature is a common art, facing the public at any moment via (2017), the monster struggles to move the social con􀅭lict
press, cinema, television, posters and exhibitions. It con- and the violence outside the society and this con􀅭lict is be-
veys its message in the shortest and most striking way pos- tween the “demon race” and “human race” (s: 106). Ac-
sible, without any trouble (Ozer, 1989). Within this context, cording to this, the monster is now a part of the society,
it can be suggested that caricature has turned into an effec- and the horror elements which were distant and not in-
tive type of narrative which can be used socially or politi- cluded until gothic literature is now situated right in the
cally, revealing the characteristics of its time. middle of the society, as a part of them. Besides, refer-
In parallel with the reproduction of newspapers and jour- ring to monster’s demands from Doctor Frankenstein as
nals, and their transformation into an effective mass rather innocent, Moretti (2017) states that there is a “re-
medium; the art of caricature also diverged from the art formist/chartist” attitude in these demands (s: 109). In the
of painting and expanded, although they shared common novel the monster, who dreamt of blending in the society
stylistic grounds. The works of William Hogarth , the British and admired the happy and peaceful life of neighbors, left
painter and engraving master who is regarded as the pi- each individual relationship with disappointment and iso-
oneer of contemporary caricature, can be accepted as the lation; and therefore, tried to solve this problem by asking
􀅭irst step in the process of recognition and widespread of for a partner from its creator. However, the monster’s de-
caricature (Bayram, 2009). Emergence of humor papers, on mand was declined due to its scary image and all the harm it
the other hand, were 􀅭irst triggered by the Fischietto which had caused. As seen in Table 1, direct re􀅭lection of such an
was a paper published in Italy. There is no doubt that the attitude by the monster inspired different artists to draw
developments occurring in printing techniques were also Frankenstein-themed caricatures in different papers and
affective on the widespread of caricature. The inseparable journals between 1833-1893, in an attempt to criticize and
relation between the art of caricature and politics varies de- satirize the social and political movements of the time.

TABLE 1. List of Frankenstein themed caricatures published between 1833-1893

Name Year Artist Newspaper/Magazine
1. Frankenstein Creating Peers 1832 Robert Seymour McLean’s Monthly Sheet of
Caricatures
2. Reform Bill’s First Step Amongst his Political Frankensteins 1833 James Parry -
3. A New Illustration of the Story of Frankenstein 1843 John Doyle -
4. The Irish Frankenstein 1843 Joseph Kenny Meadow Punch, or the London Chari-
vari
5. The Russian Frankenstein and his Monster 1854 John Leech Punch, or the London Chari-
vari
6. The New Frankenstein 1862 Henry Louis Stephans Vanity Fair
7. The Brummagem Frankenstein 1866 John Tenniel Punch, or the London Chari-
vari
8. The Irish Frankenstein 1869 Matt Morgan The Tomahawk: A Saturday
Journal of Satire
9. The American Frankenstein 1873 Frank Bellew New York Daily Graphic
10. The American Frankenstein 1874 Frank Bellew New York Daily Graphic
11. The Irish Frankenstein 1882 John Tenniel Punch, or the London Chari-
vari
12. The Frankenstein of Hat􀅭ield and his Handiwork 1893 Thomas Fitzpatrick Weekly Freeman

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
2018 B. Ersanl – The dilemma of creator and creation . . . . 238

As classic literary texts became political myths, charac- a British newspaper of the time, mentioned the play Pre-
ters appearing in stories started to be included in cari- sumption! and Thomas Potter Cooke’s performance as:
catures in order to criticize the current political system. A romance of peculiar interest… The efforts to relieve the
In order to represent unrestrained power and people, the serious action of the piece by mirth and music were gener-
word “Frankenstein”, and thereby the monster metaphor ally successful, and the labours of Mr. Watson the composer
was used in rewritten texts (Deniz, 2017). we often loudly applauded. The acting was very grand. Wal-
lack, as Frankenstein, displayed great feelinng an animation.
Monster on Scene T. P. Cooke as was tremendously appealing (Kabatchnik,
Presumption! is the 􀅭irst theatre adaptation of Franken- 2017).
stein, which was adapted by Peake in 1823, from Shelley’s It must be also noted that the success of Presumption! en-
novel. The play was staged for the 􀅭irst time at British Opera abled the republication of Mary Shelley’s novel by her fa-
House in London on July 28 1823, and was played for a to- ther William Godwin in 1823, as well as its illustration by
tal of 37 times. However, the starring actor Cooke played the more than one artist. The success of Cooke’s performance
monster more than 350 times in different adaptations . This as Frankenstein’s monster in different plays led to the cre-
way, Cooke went down in history as the 􀅭irst actor to play ation of an iconized image of this monster, even in the movie
the monster. Shelley was also one of the audience to watch shot by Universal Studios in 1931 where the monster’s im-
the play in London and left the hall quite pleased (Danacı, age would become famous as a classic.
2011). In its 29 July 1823 issue The London Morning Post,

TABLE 2. List of Frankenstein themed theatres staged between 1823-1887

Name Date Writer Place
1. Presumption; or, the Fate of 28 July 1823 Richard Brinsley Peake English Opera House, London,
Frankenstein Great Britain
2. Frankenstein; or, The Demon of 18 August 1823 Henry M. Milner Royal Coburg Theatre, London,
Switzerland Great Britain
3. Humgumption; or, Dr. Franken- 1 September 1823 - New Surrey Theatre, London,
stein and the Hobgoblin of Hox- Great Britain
ton
4. Presumption; or, the Blue De- 1 September 1823 - Davis's Amphitheatre, London,
mon Great Britain
5. Another Piece of Presumption 20 October 1823 Richard Brinsley Peake Adelphi Theatre, London, Great
Britain
6. Frank-in-Steam; or the Modern 13 December 1824 - Olympic Theatre, London, Great
Promise to Pay Britain
7. Le Monstre et le Magicien 10 June 1826 John Kerr Theatre de la Porte Saint-
Martin, Paris, France
8. The Man and the Monster; or, 3 July 1826 Henry M. Milner Royal Coburg Theatre, London,
The Fate of Frankenstein Great Britain
9. Les Filets de Vulcain; ou, La 5 July 1826 Nicolas Brazier, Guil- Theatre des Varietes, Paris,
Venus de Neuilly laume Dumersan, France
Gabriel-Jules-Joseph
de Lurien
10. Le Petit Monstre et l'escamoteur 7 July 1826 Jules-Henri Vernoy de Theatre de la Gaite, Paris,
Saint-Georges, Antoine- France
Jean-Baptiste Simonnin
11 La Peche de Vulcain; ou, l'ile des July 1826 Claude-Louis-Marie Theatre du Vaudeville, Paris,
􀅭leuves de Rochefort-Lucay, France
Esperance-Hippolyte
Lassagne, Mathurin-
Joseph Brisset
12. Le Presomteueux 11 July 1826 - Theatre de M. Comte, Paris,
France
13. Les Filets de Vulcain; ou, le 15 July 1826 P. Carmouche Theatre de la Porte Saint-
lendemain d'un success Martin, Paris, France

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
239 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

TABLE 2. Continue..
Name Date Writer Place
14. Le Monstre et le physicien 3 August 1826 - -
15. The Monster and Magician; or, 9 October 1826 John Kerr New Royal West London The-
The Fate of Frankenstein atre, London, Great Britain
16. Frankenstein; or, The Model 26 December 1849 William ve Robert Adelphi Theatre, London, Great
Man Brough Britain
17. Le Monstre et le magicien 1851 - Theatre de l'Ambigu Comique,
Paris, France
18. Le Monstre et le magicien 22 June 1861 Ferdinand Dugue Theatre de l'Ambigu Comique,
Paris, France
19. Frankenstein; or, The Vampire's 24 December 1887 Richard Henry Gaiety Theatre, Dublin, Ireland
Victim

Comic Books pen; but rather move in different frames and scenes. These
Based on the conveyance of a story through drawings, are drawn in verbal frames, not visual, and then the scenes
comic books are created with the help of both graphic arts, are pieced together by the reader, and these passages
painting, and literature. According to Alsaç; being a story turn into a reasonable narrative collectivity (Mendelsund,
narrative through sketches, comic books have their own 2015).
history consisting of their linear and narrative features Following the Frankenstein story which was published with
(Coşkun, Çikrikci, & Topkaya, 2017), which is completely illustrations under the name Frankenstein Comics in 1940
isolated from sociological relations. Pictures, new struc- was then followed by hundreds of works published with the
tures, themes, dynamic lines, characters, frames, 􀅭iction, same theme. These publications, which were created by dif-
drawing techniques, and speech bubbles (Eğ rı̇bel, 2012) ferent artists, are listed in Table 3 in detail, and then pro-
are basic factors comprising the authentic world of comic vided in a visual catalog prepared. A total of 76 different
books. It draws the strength of media from the ability comic books and comic series published in 1940-2018 were
to shape people’s visions of world, and to be the primary reached, and found that these publications have 318 differ-
source of ideas and opinions (Burton & Fazlası, 2008). Simi- ent issues. Purpose of the visual catalog is to reveal the
lar to the books existing in media industry, comic books also evolution of Frankenstein’s monster in parallel with tech-
establish a bond with its precedents and posteriors, which nologic and social developments throughout the years; as
directly involves intertextuality. well as to identify the impact of the artists on perception
Comic books enable the readers to see while reading the and presentation of the monster.
message, and the characters are not just the strokes of a

TABLE 3. List of Frankenstein themed comic books published between 1940-2018

Name Year Publisher Issue Cover Design
1. Frankenstein Comics 1940-1954 Prize 33 Dick Briefer
2. Classics Illustrated #26 Frankenstein 1945-1971 Classics Illustrated 20 -
3. The Journal of Frankenstein 1959 New World Enterprises 3 -
4. Castle of Frankenstein 1962-1975 Gothic Castle Publishing 25 Larry Ivie (s. 1, 3, 5)
Robert Adranga (s. 2)
Lee Wanagiel (s. 4)
Frank Brunner (s. 15, 17)
Ken Kelly (s. 16, 18)
Maelo Cintron (s. 19, 20)
Marcus Boas (s. 21)
Bhob Stewart (s. 22)
Tom Maher (s. 24)
Russ Jones (s. 25)
5. Frankenstein 1964 Dell 4 Vic Prezio (s. 1)
Tony Tallarico (s. 2, 3, 4)
6. Curse of Frankenstein Horror of Dracula 1964 James Warren 1 -
7. Frankenstein, Jr. and the Impossibles 1966 Gold Key 1 Hanna Barbera
8. Castle of Frankenstein Annual 1967 Gothic Castle 1 Russ Jones
9. Frankenstein Jr Menace of the Heartless Monster 1968 Whitman 1 Hanna Barbera

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
2018 B. Ersanl – The dilemma of creator and creation . . . . 240

TABLE 3. Continue..
Name Year Publisher Issue Cover Design
10. The Monster of Frankenstein 1973-1975 Marvel Comics Group 18 Mike Ploog (s. 1-6)
John Buscema (s.7, 8)
Tom Palmer (s. 9)
Gil Kane (s. 10, 15)
Bob Brown (s.11)
Val Mayerik (s.12, 13, 18)
Ron Wilson (s.14, 16)
Ed Hannigan (s. 17)
11. Das Monster Von Frankenstein 1973 Marvel 1 Gil Kane
12. Frankenstein 1973 Now Age Books 1 Nardo Cruz
13. Frankenstein 1976 Corgi 1 Tom Barling
14. Frankenstein A Portfolio by Berni Wright- 1977 Tyrannosauros Press 3 Berni Wrightson
son
15. Frankenstein Classic 1977 One-Shot comic books 1 -
16. A Story of Dracula the Wolfman and 1979 Marvel 1 Neal Adams
Frankenstein
17. Frankenstein 1983 Marvel Illustrated Novel 1 Bernie Wrightson
18. Frankenstein 1989 Eternity 3 -
19. Frankenstein 1990 Malibu 1 Patrick Olliffe
20. Doctor Frankenstein's House of 3-D 1992 3D Zone 1 Dick Briefer
21. The Lost Frankenstein Pages 1993 Apple Press 1 Bernie Wrightson
22. Universal Monsters Frankenstein 1993 Dark Horse 1 Den Beauvais
23. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus 1994 Caliber Press 1 Charles Yates
24. Frankenstein 1994 Miller Illustrated Novel 1 Bernie Wrightson
25. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein 1994-1995 Topps Comics 8 Rafael Kayanan
Tim Bradstreet
26. Frankenstein Dracula War 1995 Topps Comics 3 Mike Mignola
27. Megaton Man vs. Forbidden Frankenstein 1996 Fiasco 1 -
28. Castle of Frankenstein Yearbook 2000 Druktenis Publishing 1 Larry Ivie
29. Castle of Frankenstein Presents: New Ad- 2001 Druktenis Publishing 11 Rock Spine Mountfort
ventures of Frankenstein
30. Frankenstein Mobster 2003-2004 Image 16 Mark Wheatley (s. 0-7)
Adam Hughes (s. 0)
Mike Wieringo (s. 1)
Micheal Avon Oeming (s. 2)
Jerry Ordway (s. 3)
Scott Morse (s. 4)
Angelo Torres (s. 5)
Alex Nino Cencept (s. 6)
Bernie Wrightson Concept (s. 7)
31. Doc Frankenstein 2004-2007 Burlyman Entertainement 12 Geoff Darrow
Steve Skroce
32. Electric Frankenstein 2004 Dark Horse 1 Sal Canzonieri
33. Essential Monster of Frankenstein 2004 Marvel 1 Boris Vallejo
34. Monster Mayhem Series Frankenstein 2005 Dead Dog Comics 2 Jerry Beck
35. Witchblade vs. Frankenstein Monster War 2005 Top Cow 2 Joyce Chin
Vitor Ishimura
36. Frankenstein 2005 Puf􀅭in Books 1 -
37. Seven Soldiers Frankenstein 2005 Dc Comics 4 Doug Mahnke
38. Frankenstein 2006 Norma Editorial 1 Patrick Olliffe
39. The Shadow of Frankenstein 2006 Dark Horse Novel 1 -
40. Bride of Frankenstein Pandora's Bride 2007 Dark Horse 1 Elizabeth Hand
41. Igor Fixed by Frankensteins 2007 SLG 1 Chris Grine
42. Kolchak Tales Frankenstein Agenda 2007 Moonstone 6 Dave Ulanski (s. 1)
Bob Layton (s. 1, 2)
43. Frankenstein 2008 Classical Comics 1 Jason Cobley
Declan Shalvey
44. Graphic Classics: Frankenstein 2008 Barron’s 1 Penko Gelev
45. Frankenstein 2008 Dark Horse 1 Bernie Wrightson

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
241 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

TABLE 3. Continue..
Name Year Publisher Issue Cover Design
46. Frankenstein 2008 Stone Arch Books 1 Dennis Calero
47. Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein 2008 Dabel Brothers Production 6 Breeth Booth
Arthur Suydam
48. Jingle Belle Santa Claus vs. Frankenstein 2008 Top Cow 2 Stephanie Gladden
49. Frankenstein Mobster 2009 IDW Publishing 1 Mark Wheatley
50. Frankenstein 2009 Everest Yayınları 2 Marion Mousse
51. Frankenstein's Womb 2009 Warren Ellis 2 Marek Oleksicki
52. Frankenstein 2009 NTV Yayınları 1 Declan Shalvey
53. Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein 2009 Dynamite Entertainement 1 Breeth Booth
54. Angel I 2009 IDW Publishing 1 John Byrne
55. Angel II 2010 IDW Publishing 1 John Byrne
56. Frankenstein 2010 Camp􀅭ire Classic 1 Naresh Kumar
57. Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein 2010 Dynamite Entertainement 5 Breeth Booth (s. 1)
Scott Cohn (s. 2-5)
58. Frankenstein 2010 Classic Pop-Up Tales 1 Anthony Williams
59. Dick Briefer's Frankenstein: The Chilling 2010 IDW Publishing 1 Alex Toth
Archives of Horror Comics
60. Frankenstein Creatures of the Unknown 2011 Flashpoint 3 Doug Mahnke
61. Frankenstein Agent of S.H.A.D.E. 2011-2013 DC Comics 17 Alberto Ponticelli
Wayne Faucher
62. Frankenstein Alive Alive 2012 IDW Publishing 4 Bernie Wrightson
63. Return of the Monsters Phantom Detective 2012 Moonstone 1 Andrew Froedge
vs Frankenstein
64. Criminal Macabre Eyes of Frankenstein 2013 - 4 Michelle Madsen
65. Gris Grimly's Frankenstein 2013 - 1 Gris Grimly
66. Doc Frankenstein 2014 - 1 Steve Skroce
67. Frankenstein Alive Alive 2014 IDW Publishing 1 Bernie Wrightson
68. Madame Frankenstein 2014 Image 8 Megan Levens (s. 1)
Joelle Jones (s. 2-7)
Nick Filardi (s. 2-7)
69. Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein 2015 Dynamite Entertainement 6 Andres Ponce
70. Frankenstein Underground 2015 Dark Horse 6 Dave Stewart (s. 1)
Mike Mignola (s.1-5)
71. Joe Frankenstein 2015 IDW Publishing 8 Graham Nolan
72. Van Helsing vs. Frankenstein 2016 Zenescope Entertainement 20 Richard Ortiz (s. 1a, 3a)
Gregbo Watson (s. 1b)
Andrea Meloni (s. 1c)
Jason Metcalf (s. 1d, 2a, 3b, 4d, 5b)
Mike Mahle (s. 2b)
Michael Dooney (s. 2c)
Noah Salonga (s. 2d)
Jamie Tyndall (s. 3c)
Sami Kivela (s. 3d)
Paolo Pantalena (s. 4a)
David Lorenzo Riveiro (s. 4b)
Joe Pekar (s. 4c)
Manuel Preitano (s. 5a)
Renato Rei (s. 5c)
Leonardo Colapietro (s. 5d)
73. Dracula Marries Frankenstein 2017 Papercutz 1 Jon Buller
74. Sherlock Frankenstein and the Legion of 2017-2018 Dark Horse 8 David Rubin
Evil
75. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus 2017 Caliber Press 1 Charles Yates
Eric Jackson
76. Frankenstein Alive, Alive! 2018 IDW Publishing 1 Bernie Wrightson

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
2018 B. Ersanl – The dilemma of creator and creation . . . . 242

CONCLUSION ation, also involves certain notions; such as creation myths,

Being based on a freak recreated by Victor Frankenstein at existence, and desire to be God, and therefore became a
the risk of withstanding the divine power, which is a rede􀅭- legend and prodigious. The story was narrated based on
inition of humanity’s greatest fear, Frankenstein or Mod- the mutual and opposite relationship between the creator
ern Prometheus is a literary and classic novel preserving Frankenstein and the monster; and it is possible to see that
its popularity even today. Although the novel is attempted Frankenstein actually detests and wants to kill the creature
to be categorized as a work of gothic literature, the num- he created. By creating a monster stronger than him, the
ber of science-􀅭ictional elements embodied within the story doctor actually gives life to a murderer who later becomes
are considerably high. The novel, which is based on a man the reason of his death as well as his beloved ones.
facing the possibility of being destroyed by his own cre-

REFERENCES
Arargü ç, M. F. (2016). Mimari bir tarzdan edebi bir tü re: Gotik. Güzel Sanatlar Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(36), 245-257.
Atayman, V. (2006). Postmodern kurtaricılar. Istanbul, Turkey: Donkisot Guncel Yayinlar.
Aygü n, S. (2007). Anadolu ü niversitesi eğ itim karikatü rleri mü zesi seramikleri. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sanat ve Tasarım
Dergisi, 3(3), 10-23.
Azhar, M. (2015). The concept of religious democracy as a new political philosophy for countries with moslem predominant.
Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 19-28. doi:https://doi.org/10.20474/jahss1.1.3
Bayram, Y. (2009). Tü rkiye'de siyasi karikatü rü n yeri ve 11 nci cumhurbaşkanlığ ı seçimine ı̇lişkin siyasi karikatü rlerin
çö zü mlenmesi. Cumhurbaskanlıgı Secimine, 6(1), 107-123.
Burkus, D. (2015). Yaratıcılık mitleri. Istanbul, Turkey: Nobel Akademik Yayincilik.
Burton, G., & Fazlası, G. (2008). Çev: Ne􀅲in dinç. Istanbul, Turkey: Gö rü nenden Fazlası. Yeni Alan Yayıncılık.
Coşkun, K., Çikrikci, O􀂭 ., & Topkaya, Y. (2017). Is birth order really important in peer relationship? A grounded theory
approach. Cogent Education, 4(1), 45-67. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2017.1296537
Danacı, F. (2011). Korkunun canavarları. Istanbul, Turkey: Kalkedon Yayınları.
Demirci, T. T. (2006). Korku sinemasının psikanalizi. Istanbul, Turkey: Es Yayınları.
Deniz, D. (2017). Politik karikatü rlerde kadının temsili: 1950 seçimleri ve nesneleştirilen kadın. Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal
Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(2), 490-511. doi:https://doi.org/10.14230/joiss476
Eğ rı̇bel, E. (2012). Çizgi roman olayı ve toplum. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 3(3), 1-44.
I􀂷smayilov, E. K., & Sunal, G. (2013). “frankenstein ya da modern prometheus” romanının sinemaya uyarlanması. Çankırı
Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(1), 199-222.
Kabatchnik, A. (2017). Blood on the stage, 1600 to 1800: Milestone plays of murder, mystery, and mayhem. Rome, Italy:
Rowman & Little􀅭ield.
Kale, O􀂭 . (2010). Edebiyat sinema ı̇lişkisi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(14), 266-275.
Kemp, P. (2014). Sinemanın tüm öyküsü. Istanbul, Turkey: Hayalperest Yayınları.
Mendelsund, P. (2015). Okurken ne goruruz. Istanbul, Turkey: Metis.
Monaco, J. (2002). Bir 􀅲ilm nasıl okunur? Sinema, medya ve mültimedya dünyası. Istanbul, Turkey: Oğ lak Yayınları.
Moretti, F. (2017). Mucizevi gostergeler. Istanbul, Turkey: Metis.
Osmanoğ ulları, F. (2016). Gotik 􀅭ilm: Bir çerçeve oluşturma denemesi ve house of usher. Sine Filozo􀅲i, 1(1), 17-37.
O􀂭 zdemir, E. (2004). Frankenstein'ın yazarı" mary shelley'nin romancılığı. Istanbul, Turkey: I􀂷stanbul Bilgi U􀂭 niversitesi Yay.
Ozer, A. (1989). Karikatur sanatı ogretimi. E-Kurgu Journal, 6(6), 175-179.
O􀂭 zkaracalar, K. (2005). Gotik. Istanbul, Turkey: Leyla ile Mecnun Yayıncılık.
Selçuk, M. K. (1979). Analysis, development and testing of a 􀅭ixed tilt solar collector employing reversible vee-trough re􀅭lec-
tors and vacuum tube receivers. Solar Energy, 22(5), 413-426. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092x(79)90170-1
Senyapili, O. (2003). Karikatur. Ankara, Turkey: Odtu.
Shelley, M. (2008). Frankenstein. Cambridge, UK: Oxford University Press.
Tuncer, S. (2014). Gotik ve feminist anlatinin buluşmasi. Litera(15), 125-135.
Turan, M. (2012). Gazetelerde yayinlanan sı̇yası̇ karı̇katü rlerı̇n gö stergebı̇lı̇msel çö zü mlemesı̇: 2011 genel seçı̇mlerı̇ ö rneğ ı̇.
Selcuk Iletisim, 7(2), 121-138.

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1
243 J. adv. humanit. soc. sci. 2018

Urgan, M. (2003). İngiliz edebiyatı tarihi. Ankara, Turkey: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
Wu, A. A. (2017). A study on learning achievement of integrated songs of Chinese history dynasties into Chinese language
teaching at third grade in junior college. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 3(5), 192-196.
doi:https://doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.3.20001-5
Yavuz, M. E., & Geçikli, K. (2008). Gotı̇k romanda aydinlanma karşitliğ i. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 32(1), 171-188.
Yılmaz, M. (2006). Modernizmden postmodernizme sanat. Istanbul, Turkey: U􀂭 topya.
Yü cesoy, V. O􀂭 . (2007). Korku edebiyatı (gotik edebiyat) ve türk romanındaki örnekleri (Unpublished master thesis). Istanbul
University, Fatih, Turkey.

ISSN: 2414-3111
DOI: 10.20474/jahss-4.6.1