Frankenstein: A Digital Edition

For Further Reading

These resources were compiled by the class in the course of our research on Frankenstein. You can find another, live version of this list in our Zotero group, as well. 

 
Abbott, Joe. “The ‘Monster’ Reconsidered: Blade Runner’s Replicant as Romantic Hero.” Extrapolation (Kent State University Press), vol. 34, no. 4, Winter 1993, pp. 340–50.
Almen, English. An Analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or, the Modern Prometheus, Using Horace Walpole’s The Castle of Otranto as an Example of Male Discourse about Women. p. 77.
Belt, Henk van den. “Frankenstein Lives On.” Science, vol. 359, no. 6372, Jan. 2018, pp. 137–137. science.sciencemag.org, doi:10.1126/science.aas9167.
Benford, Criscillia. “‘Listen to My Tale’: Multilevel Structure, Narrative Sense Making, and the Inassimilable in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Narrative, vol. 18, no. 3, Oct. 2010, pp. 324–46.
Bernatchez, Josh. “Monstrosity, Suffering, Subjectivity, and Sympathetic Community in Frankenstein and ‘The Structure of Torture.’” Science Fiction Studies, vol. 36, no. 2, July 2009, pp. 205–16.
Bugg, John. “‘Master of Their Language’: Education and Exile in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Huntington Library Quarterly, vol. 68, no. 4, 2005, pp. 655–66. JSTOR, doi:10.1525/hlq.2005.68.4.655.
Buzzoni, Marco. “Is Frankenstein’s Creature a Machine or Artificially Created Human Life? Intentionality Between Searle and Turing.” La Creatura Di Frankenstein è Una Macchina o è Vita Umana Creata Artificialmente? L’intenzionalità Fra Searle e Turing., vol. 36, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 37–53.
Caldwell, Tracy M. “Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus.’” Literary Contexts in Novels: Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” Mar. 2006, pp. 1–8.
Copeland, Molly, et al. “Different Kinds of Lonely: Dimensions of Isolation and Substance Use in Adolescence.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 47, no. 8, 2018, pp. 1755–70. PubMed, doi:10.1007/s10964-018-0860-3.
Daffron, Eric. “Male Bonding: Sympathy and Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Nineteenth-Century Contexts, vol. 21, no. 3, Jan. 1999, pp. 415–35. Taylor and Francis+NEJM, doi:10.1080/08905499908583485.
D’Amato, Barbara. “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: An Orphaned Author’s Dream and Journey toward Integration.” Modern Psychoanalysis, vol. 34, no. 1, Jan. 2009, pp. 117–35.
Dunn, Richard J. “Narrative Distance in ‘Frankenstein’’.’” Studies in the Novel, vol. 6, no. 4, winter 1974, pp. 408–17.
Fifty Ways to Leave Your Monster from Monstrous Progeny: A History of the Frankenstein Narratives on JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1cx3tkb.10#metadata_info_tab_contents. Accessed 27 Nov. 2018.
Gans, Eric. “Frankenstein and Scientific Revelation  Frankenstein and the Problem of Modern Science (Part 2 of 3).” Anthropoetics, 4 June 2016, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1301/1301frank2/.
Goldberg, M. A. “Moral and Myth in Mrs. Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein.’” Keats-Shelley Journal, vol. 8, 1959, pp. 27–38.
Goldbort, Robert C. “‘How Dare You Sport Thus with Life?’: Frankensteinian Fictions as Case Studies in Scientific Ethics.” The Journal of Medical Humanities, vol. 16, no. 2, 1995, pp. 79–91.
Gómez, Claudia Rozas. “Strangers and Orphans: Knowledge and Mutuality in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Educational Philosophy & Theory, vol. 45, no. 4, Apr. 2013, pp. 360–70. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00131857.2012.718152.
Guinan, Patrick. “Bioterrorism, Embryonic Stem Cells, and Frankenstein.” Journal of Religion and Health, vol. 41, no. 2, 2002, pp. 305–09.
Halpern, Megan K., et al. “Stitching Together Creativity and Responsibility: Interpreting Frankenstein Across Disciplines.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, vol. 36, no. 1, Feb. 2016, pp. 49–57. SAGE Journals, doi:10.1177/0270467616646637.
Harkup, Kathryn. “How to Make a Monster: What’s the Science behind Shelley’s Frankenstein?” The Guardian, 22 Feb. 2018. www.theguardian.com, https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2018/feb/22/how-to-make-a-monster-whats-the-science-behind-shelleys-frankenstein.
Harrison, Gary, and William L. Gannon. “Victor Frankenstein’s Institutional Review Board Proposal, 1790.” Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 21, no. 5, Oct. 2015, pp. 1139–57. PubMed, doi:10.1007/s11948-014-9588-y.
Hisamori, Kazuko. “Facing a Portrait of the ‘Lover’: Frankenstein’s Monster and the Heroines of Sense and Sensibility- and Pride and Prejudice.” Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal On-Line, vol. 32, no. 1, 2011 Winter 2011.
Holmes, Richard. “Science Fiction: The Science That Fed Frankenstein.” Nature, vol. 535, July 2016, pp. 490–92. www.nature.com, doi:10.1038/535490a.
Homans, “Bearing Demons.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/homans.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Huber, R. John, et al. “Frankenstein: An Adlerian Odyssey.” Individual Psychology: The Journal of Adlerian Theory, Research & Practice, vol. 45, no. 3, Sept. 1989, p. 267.
Jeray, Celina. “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus: Friendship, Monstrosity, and Radical Otherness.” Anglica: An International Journal of English Studies, vol. 25, no. 1, 2016, pp. 59–71.
Johnson, “My Monster/My Self.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/johnson.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Kamran, Fatima. “Are Siblings Different as ‘Day and Night’? Parents’ Perceptions of Nature vs. Nurture.” Journal of Behavioural Sciences, vol. 26, no. 2, Dec. 2016, pp. 95–115.
Kearns, Jonathan, et al. “FOREWORD: Empire of the Imagination: Women and Speculative Fiction.” Frankenstein 200, Indiana University Press, 2018, pp. ix–xiv. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/j.ctt22p7j32.3.
Korbøl Torgersen, Anne Mari. “A Longitudinal Study of Twins from Birth to Adulthood.” Norsk Epidemiologi, vol. 26, no. 1/2, Sept. 2016, pp. 107–16. EBSCOhost, doi:10.5324/nje.v26i1-2.2023.
Kroeber, “Science Fiction vs. Fantasy.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/kroeber.html. Accessed 29 Nov. 2018.
Lehman, Steven. “The Motherless Child in Science Fiction: Frankenstein and Moreau.” Science Fiction Studies, vol. 19, no. 1 [56], Mar. 1992, pp. 49–58.
Lemley, Allison. Frankenstein and “The Labours of Men of Genius”: Science and Medical Ethics in the Early 19th Century. 2015, p. 41.
---. “Frankenstein and ‘The Labours of Men of Genius’: Science and Medical Ethics in the Early 19th Century.” Grand Valley Journal of History, vol. 4, no. 2, Jan. 2018, https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/gvjh/vol4/iss2/5.
Literature Criticism Online - Document - Unbinding Frankenstein: The Science Fiction Criticism of Brian Aldiss. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=LCO&u=ohlnk162&id=GALE|LFNGUD462786553&v=2.1&it=r&sid=LCO&asid=96b77de2. Accessed 29 Nov. 2018.
Lustig, Andrew. “The Lessons of Frankenstein: Nature, Nurture, and What Lies Between.” Commonweal, vol. 131, no. 14, Aug. 2004, pp. 8–9.
Mangano. “Infernal Fraternity; or, Alienated Readers in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Fictions of Friendship in the Eiteenth-Century Novel, Palgrave MacMillan, 2017.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Science Fiction at 200.: Literary Reference Center - Powered by EBSCOhost. http://web.a.ebscohost.com/lrc/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=2d053556-564c-4c6f-9e2b-5286665df2b1%40sessionmgr4009. Accessed 3 Dec. 2018.
Mellor, “Making a Monster.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/mellor2.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Mercer, Anna. “A Life of Learning: Behind the Dominating Presence of Frankenstein, the Richness of Mary Shelley’s Life Is in Danger of Being Lost.” History Today, vol. 68, no. 3, Mar. 2018, pp. 8–11.
Mulvey-Roberts, Marie, editor. “Mary Shelley, Frankenstein and Slavery.” Dangerous Bodies, Manchester University Press, 2016, pp. 52–91. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt18pkdzg.7.
Nagy, Peter, et al. “The Enduring Influence of a Dangerous Narrative: How Scientists Can Mitigate the Frankenstein Myth.” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, vol. 15, no. 2, June 2018, pp. 279–92. PubMed, doi:10.1007/s11673-018-9846-9.
“Nam Cao.” Wikipedia, 9 Nov. 2018. Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nam_Cao&oldid=868026023.
Novelistic Sympathy in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” on JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25602177. Accessed 3 Dec. 2018.
Padley, Jonathan. “Frankenstein and (Sublime) Creation.” Romanticism: The Journal of Romantic Culture and Criticism, vol. 9, no. 2, 2003 2003, pp. 196–212.
PARENT-CHILD TENSIONS IN “FRANKENSTEIN: THE SEARCH FOR COMMUNION” on JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/29532322. Accessed 3 Dec. 2018.
Randel, “The Intertextuality of Mountains.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/randel.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Renger, Daniela, et al. “When Less Equal Is Less Human: Intragroup (Dis)Respect and the Experience of Being Human.” Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 156, no. 5, Oct. 2016, pp. 553–63. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00224545.2015.1135865.
Rubenstein, “My Accursed Origin.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/rubenst.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Schmid, Thomas H. “Addiction and Isolation in Frankenstein: A Case of Terminal Uniqueness.” Gothic Studies, vol. 11, no. 2, Nov. 2009, pp. 19–29.
Sherwin, Paul. “Frankenstein: Creation as Catastrophe.” The Sublime, edited by Harold Bloom and Blake Hobby, Bloom’s Literary Criticism, 2010, pp. 65–87.
Sim, Stuart, editor. “Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus and Artificial Life.” The Eighteenth-Century Novel and Contemporary Social Issues, Edinburgh University Press, 2008, pp. 147–60. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g0b3mt.15.
Smith, Stephen W. “Dogs and Monsters: Moral Status Claims in the Fiction of Dean Koontz.” Journal of Medical Humanities, vol. 37, no. 1, Mar. 2016, pp. 35–51.
Stitching Together Creativity and Responsibility: Interpreting Frankenstein Across Disciplines - Megan K. Halpern, Jathan Sadowski, Joey Eschrich, Ed Finn, David H. Guston, 2016. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467616646637. Accessed 26 Nov. 2018.
Teaching ‘Frankenstein’ With The New York Times - The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/15/learning/lesson-plans/teaching-frankenstein-with-the-new-york-times.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
The Mixed-Up Brothers of Bogotá - The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/magazine/the-mixed-up-brothers-of-bogota.html. Accessed 29 Nov. 2018.
“The Specter of Frankenstein Still Haunts Science 200 Years Later.” Science | AAAS, 8 Jan. 2018, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/specter-frankenstein-still-haunts-science-200-years-later.
van den Belt, Henk. “Playing God in Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Synthetic Biology and the Meaning of Life.” NanoEthics, vol. 3, no. 3, Dec. 2009, pp. 257–68. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s11569-009-0079-6.
Vargish, Thomas. “Technology and Impotence in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” War, Literature & the Arts: An International Journal of the Humanities, vol. 21, no. 1/2, Nov. 2009, pp. 322–37.
What Are Patterns in the Humanities?: Interdisciplinary Science Reviews: Vol 43, No 1. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03080188.2017.1296265. Accessed 29 Nov. 2018.
Youngquist, “The Mother, the Daughter, and the Monster.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/youngq.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.
Zonana, “Safie’s Letters as the Feminist Core.” http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Articles/zonana.html. Accessed 20 Nov. 2018.

This page has paths: