TRACING THE LEGACY: COMPARING MARY SHELLEY’S FRANKENSTEIN TO JENNIFER MCMAHON’S THE CHILDREN ON THE HILL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26740/elitejournal.v3n4.p1-6Keywords:
monster, revenge, source, inspiration, compare and contrastAbstract
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has become a prominent predecessor for abundant adaptations in popular culture. Although the novel was published more than two hundred years ago, numerous writers have made it their most reference and inspiration. This article aims to investigate the traces Frankenstein has left on Jennifer McMahon’s The Children on the Hill under the argument that the former has served as the source for the latter. Therefore, this research belongs to the literary influence study. Drawing the analysis under the compare and contrast method, this study results in some parts of Frankenstein that are recreated in The Children on the Hill. Those parts include the description of the creator’s life, the trigger of the creation, the creation’s process, and its horrible consequences. The result also shows that McMahon’s book presents the recreated parts in a more horrifying way, especially about the details of the experiment and the shocking ending when the monster kidnaps many female adolescents to turn them into monsters like her. This study concludes that a monster does not always come in a hideous appearance like what Victor created. However, the monster can also lie dormant within a human’s personality, which can bring about terrible destruction when it comes out.
References
Cambra-Badii, I., Guardiola, E., & Baños, J. E. (2020). The Ethical Interest of Frankenstein; Or, the Modern Prometheus: A Literature Review 200 Years After Its Publication. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(5), 2791–2808. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11948-020-00229-X/METRICS
Crook, N. (2018). Foreword. In C. M. Davison & M. Mulvey-Roberts (Eds.), Global Frankenstein. Palgrave Macmillan.
Daryl, M. (2022). Interview with an author: Jennifer McMahon. Los Angeles Public Library. https://www.lapl.org/collections-resources/blogs/lapl/interview-author-jennifer-mcmahon
Ghazi, M. R. (2023). The Frankenstein network: A study of transtextuality in selected postmodernist novels [University of Baghdad]. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10472.44806
Guston, D. H., Finn, E., & Robert, J. S. (2017). Editors’ preface. In D. H. Guston, E. Finn, & J. S. Robert (Eds.), Frankenstein: Annotated for Scientists, Engineers, and Creators of All Kinds. The MIT Press.
Hosseini, S., Hajizadeh, M., & Valizadeh, H. (2020). Frequency of events transposition in Frankenstein in Baghdad by Ahmed Saadawi and Frankenstein by Mary Shelley: Comparative perspective. Arabic Literature Bulletin, 10(21), 125–150. https://doi.org/10.29252/JALC.2022.101970
Jost, F. (1974). Introduction to comparative literature. Pegasus.
Kourie, N. (2023). Frankenstein unmasked: A critical analysis of “otherness” in Frankenstein and its significance for establishing an anti-oppressive education. Stockholm University.
Lisica, F. (2022). Frankenstein. In V. P. Glăveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0
Mahdi, G. S. (2022). Colonial dogmas in Frankenstein. Texas Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 7(April), 39–46. https://zienjournals.com/index.php/tjm/article/view/1188
Mahmood, K. A. (2021). Evolution of Creation from Mythology to Reality: A Multidisciplinary Study into the Roots of Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ahmed Sa’adawi’s Frankenstein in Baghdad. AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3802962
Mahmood, K. A. (2022). Authentic marginal voice in Iraq: Saadawi’s Frankenstein in Baghdad compared with Shelley’s Frankenstein. In M. Kaličanin & S. Šnircová (Eds.), Representations of the Local in the Postmillennial Novel: New Voices from the Margins. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Mahmood, K. A. (2023). A study of Ahmed Saadawi’s Frankenstein in Baghdad in light of appropriation of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein through translation and adaptation studies [Universitat Jaume I]. https://doi.org/10.6035/14110.2023.807399
Maleki, F., & Shohani, A. R. (2022). The monster’s journey from England to Baghdad: A comparative critique of Frankenstein and Frankenstein in Baghdad with a gothic perspective based on Robert Hariss’ theories. 27(2), 923–953. https://doi.org/10.22059/jor.2021.315206.2086
Maleki, F., & Shohani, A. R. (2023). Monster journey from England to Baghdad: A comparative critique of Frankenstein and Frankenstein’s monster in Baghdad from a gothic perspective. Research in Contemporary World Literature, 27(2), 923–953. https://doi.org/10.22059/JOR.2021.315206.2086
McCormack-Clark, J. (2022). The Frankenstein myth echoes of Frankenstein, technological anxieties, and the monstrous posthuman in twenty-first century science fiction film. Auckland University of Technology.
McMahon, J. (2021). The children on the hill. Scout Press.
Mogea, T. (2023). Revenge as seen in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. CENDEKIA: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Bahasa Dan Pendidikan, 3(2), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.55606/CENDIKIA.V3I2.987
Nasr, R. R. (2019). Between legacy and revival: A postmodern reading of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ahmed Saadawi’s Frankenstein in Baghdad. مجلة البحث العلمي في الآداب, 20(Issue 4), 745–772. https://doi.org/10.21608/JSSA.2019.56143
Patowary, U. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: A Comparative Analysis of Creation, Morality and Responsibility. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4544608
Shamsi, A. Al. (2021). Reimagining Frankenstein: Otherness, responsibility, and visions of future technologies in Ahmed Saadawi’s Frankenstein in Baghdad and Jeanette Winterson’s Frankissstein. Screen Bodies, 6(2), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.3167/SCREEN.2021.060206
Shelley, M. (2017). Frankenstein: Annotated for scientists, engineers, and creators of all kinds (D. H. Guston, E. Finn, & J. S. Robert (eds.)). The MIT Press.
Sinha, M. (2021). Literary influence: A pivotal aspect in the domain of comparative literature. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology, 18(4), 5267–5272. https://archives.palarch.nl/index.php/jae/article/view/7117
Waham, J. J. (2023). The art of gothic literature: An analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. International Linguistics Research, 6(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.30560/ILR.V6N2P1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sufi Ikrima Sa'adah, Maulidya Rochmah, Ramadhina Ulfa Nuristama
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
License and Copyright Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal. Please also carrefully read ELite Journal's Posting Your Article Policy at editorial policy
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with ELite Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licensing for Data Publication
ELite Journal use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:
- Open Data Commons Attribution License, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ (default)
- Creative Commons CC-Zero Waiver, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
- Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/
Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.
Open Data and Software Publishing and Sharing
The journal strives to maximize the replicability of the research published in it. Authors are thus required to share all data, code or protocols underlying the research reported in their articles. Exceptions are permitted, but have to be justified in a written public statement accompanying the article.
Datasets and software should be deposited and permanently archived in appropriate, trusted, general, or domain-specific repositories (please consult http://service.re3data.org and/or software repositories such as GitHub, GitLab, Bioinformatics.org, or equivalent). The associated persistent identifiers (e.g. DOI, or others) of the dataset(s) must be included in the data or software resources section of the article. Reference(s) to datasets and software should also be included in the reference list of the article with DOIs (where available). Where no domain-specific data repository exists, authors should deposit their datasets in a general repository such as ZENODO,Dryad, Dataverse, or others.
Small data may also be published as data files or packages supplementary to a research article, however, the authors should prefer in all cases a deposition in data repositories.
Abstract views: 41
,
PDF Downloads: 23
