by
Scientists can often be characterized as mad. This stereotype stems from more than just their innate curiosity. In fact, the “mad-scientist” stereotype can be traced back to Mary Shelley’s depiction of Victor Frankenstein, as her storytelling abilities established the contemporary perception of any science revolutionary to also be of the “mad-scientist” persona.
In Mary Shelley’s science-fiction novel Frankenstein, a scientist’s greatest experiment turns into his greatest fear. The scientist, Victor Frankenstein, is scrutinized by the reader throughout the novel as one questions his morality, scientific goodness and overall character. From this close examination, perceptions of Frankenstein as a “mad-scientist” have emerged.
The “mad-scientist” stereotype is most often a “wild-haired, goggle-eyed maniac pacing around a laboratory” working on some revolutionary contraption that by society’s standards is deemed immoral or too progressive. Traditional scientists are on the quest for reasonable and imaginable knowledge, contrasting the insanity filled, out of this work like images that fill your head when asked what a mad-scientist looks like.
Images of this ridicule are our first thoughts because it has become commonly accepted that a mad-scientist is a scientist whose experiments and ideas have pushed too far to be accepted within reason. The curiosity of these scientists is beyond what society is able to comprehend as a moral practice at that time.
Frankenstein, the first science-fiction novel ever published, also depicts the first contemporary mad-scientist as Victor Frankenstein. Frankenstein, perceived by one of his closest friends as “so thin and pale” and deprived “of rest and health” was due to his overwhelming obsession of creating a non-human companion (Shelley, 58-61). This creature obsession has only cemented the maniac and unstable image of a mad-scientist, setting precedent for now contemporary stereotypes to take form. Frankenstein’s obsessive and eccentric tendencies displayed during his experimentation are reflected in many modern interpretations of creatures, scientists and villains. From Dr. Evil to Dr. Jekyll, mad-scientist characters embody both Frankenstein’s passion for science and his deviously corrupt motives of discovery. It is impossible to ignore the resemblances of the mad-scientists of today and the original one, Victor Frankenstein.
Shelley’s novel has transformed science for both the better and worse. Her emphasis on the risks of science going too far and the irreversible effects that knowledge can have on humans has permitted for scientific debates to be had regarding ethics. However her story has also stigmatized great discovery and what a scientist should look like. Frankenstein’s toilsome road to the successful completion of the Creature is an extreme of what science is. This laborious depiction is dangerous as Frankenstein hid much of his work from the world which resulted in his ultimate downfall as the monster was too great for him to stop. Frankenstein’s work ethic is commendable and shouldn’t be discounted, but instead his methods should be critiqued.
Shelley’s novel creates another dangerous image of science as it only depicts scientists as males. At the time, Shelley, a young female author, could not represent many women in the science field as many did not exist yet. However with Frankenstein being read by future generations of scientists, her work has great impact in shaping the perceptions of what a good scientist looks like. Shelley’s work captures many of the ethical debates and risks that scientific experimentation pose, and transformed the modern perception of a mad-scientist by paving the way with her hysteric character of Victor Frankenstein. Frankenstein continues to impact as future scientists read the novel and learn how to engage with their own paths toward discovery from it.
Sources:
- Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. London: Penguin, 2003.
- https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/the-enduring-scariness-of-the-mad-scientist/382064/
- https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/06/16/who-gets-to-be-a-mad-scientist/