Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein continues to captivate audiences centuries after its publication, but not all adaptations emphasize the same ethical questions. Matthew and returning guest AK dive into both the original novel and Guillermo del Toro’s recent film adaptation—not to catalog their differences, but to explore how each medium handles the story’s core moral dilemmas and which approach proves more compelling.
How Does the Film Emphasize “The Other” Differently?
While both the book and film explore themes of parentage, responsibility, and scientific hubris, they emphasize different ethical questions. AK notes that the novel places stronger emphasis on the responsibilities of individuals in medicine and parenting, particularly through the lens of abandonment. The film, however, foregrounds questions about the grotesque other, the monstrous other, and how appearance shapes moral judgment. The visual decisions in del Toro’s adaptation—juxtaposing the creature against beautiful backdrops that shift with emotional moments—underscore this emphasis.
How Does the Shift from Abandonment to Abuse Change Victor’s Responsibility?
One of the most striking differences between the book and film lies in Victor Frankenstein’s initial interaction with his creation. In Shelley’s novel, Victor creates the monster, goes to bed, wakes up, and immediately flees—abandoning the creature with almost no interaction. Del Toro’s film takes a dramatically different approach: Victor spends considerable time with the creature, engaging with it in ways impossible in the book. This changes the fundamental ethical question. Does Victor bear responsibility for abandonment and neglect, or for intentional, directed abuse? The film’s choice to show an extended period of interaction—where Victor treats the creature as an object rather than a being—shifts the moral weight of his culpability.
Why Does the Composite Body Matter More Now Than Ever?
Victor’s method of selecting “optimal” body parts from different corpses to create his creature resonates uncomfortably with contemporary debates about human enhancement and biotechnology. The discussion explores how Victor’s approach—viewing the creature as an optimization project rather than a living being—connects to modern questions about CRISPR, genetic modification, and who decides what constitutes an “optimal” human body. These questions inevitably involve ableism and the commodification of bodies. The film’s emphasis on Victor literally selecting bodies at prisons raises urgent parallels to current concerns: Who becomes test subjects for experimental procedures like Neuralink? Are they being viewed as humans or as subjects for experimentation?
Other Topics Covered:
The conversation reveals how both Shelley’s novel and del Toro’s film use the Frankenstein story to explore timeless questions through different emphases—one focusing on neglect and parental failure, the other on abuse and the othering of those who don’t meet conventional standards of beauty or normalcy.
**************************************************************************
This episode is a production of Superhero Ethics, a The Ethical Panda Podcast and part of the TruStory FM Entertainment Podcast Network. Check our our website to find out more about this and our sister podcast Star Wars Generations.
We want to hear from you! You can keep up with our latest news, and send us feedback, questions, or comments via social media or email.
Want to get access to even more content while supporting the podcast? Become a member! For $5 a month, or $55 a year you get access to bonus episodes and bonus content at the end of most episodes. Sign up on the podcast’s main page. You can even give membership as a gift!
You can also support our podcasts through our sponsors:
