University of Hawai‘i at Hilo HOHONU 2019 Vol. 17 disease” (F. Zhang). The future is already becoming the Contemporary Science in present: as of November 2018 twins who had been Society: Creating Monsters or genetically modified in their embryonic stages to be HIV resistant were born through Dr. He Jiankui’s use of Superhumans? CRISPR experimentation (Stein). This technology feels futuristic; however, in the Sarah Graves early 1800’s, Shelley was already creating a science As contemporary science evolves, the altering of fiction world where Frankenstein discovers the cause “of DNA coding may become an accessible commodity1. In generation and life” and uses it to create a superhuman, 2015 scientists began editing the genetic code of human while turning himself into a monster (Shelley 40). In embryos (Ball). If scientists continue to experiment, our own reality, Dr. He is already viewed by many as a and the market for genetic editing exaggerates, then monster in the scientific community for experimenting future generations could be created and altered through with human life and for keeping it secret until the birth of science, with no real need for human reproduction. the aforementioned genetically engineered twins. We do Thus, creation could lead to monstrosity through science, not yet know if the twins will be HIV resistant or if they power, and lust for the ideal. Contemporary scientists will have other medical downfalls, but their creation is are beginning to approach a highly controversial path in the first step in a direction toward creating superhumans. modern DNA manipulation; a path which resembles a Therefore, in many ways, Frankenstein should be viewed Frankensteinian future. as a cautionary tale. The fear of future generations becoming less human In the book, Victor immerses himself in the and more human-like sounds dystopian and horrific, “unhallowed arts” of alchemy and chemistry; he is yet at the pace synthetic biology is moving it seems like thoroughly intrigued by them and it’s because of his time a probable reality. One of the first and most notable spent studying that he yearns to “bestow animation upon novels on the creation of human-like entities was Mary lifeless matter’ (Shelley 42). The language surrounding Shelley’s Frankenstein, in which, the main character, Victor and his studies is dark and forewarning. The Victor Frankenstein, a scientist, becomes obsessed with phrase “unhallowed arts” connotes an unholy or immoral the idea of constructing a human being out of dead body practice, which is Shelley’s way of warning her audience parts. He claims that his creation was for the betterment not to delve into experiments similar to Frankenstein’s. of humankind, but it could be argued that Frankenstein’s As of 2018, science has already brought forth cures arrogance was what drove him to take on the god-like for diseases, shots for immunizations, plastic surgery for role of creation. alteration, and in vitro fertilization for procreation. Ethics Much like Frankenstein’s ambition, the drive for is a major point of contention in all the aforementioned creation is still an inherent characteristic of many modern procedures. Independent agencies regularly oversee day scientists. This motivation, combined with society’s research in the scientific community; however, because hunger for perfection, and big industries’ lust for money, embryonic gene manipulation is rather new, there are means that ethical lines have and will continue to be no specific rules to govern it. Thus allowing scientists to blurred. Therefore, we must question if altering life in have almost absolute control with their experimentation. such ways, as through genetic engineering, is taking In fact, some nations are so appalled by this technology away from our natural state of being. and in fear of its potential that they have “banned such The technology behind genome editing is known as work” (Kolata). Because of the lack of regulation on “CRISPR-Cas9” or “clustered regularly interspaced short genome manipulation, and Dr. He’s recent independent palindromic repeats” which, in short, is the irregular work, there has been substantial backlash from the sequence of DNA in some bacterial genomes (S. Zhang). public and the scientific community: “He’s research has This irregularity has potential to cure diseases found in raised serious ethical questions around the transparency plants, animals, and humans. Scientists use CRISPR as of gene editing and sparked calls for a globally binding coding to inform the Cas9 enzyme where to cut, splice code of conduct” (Regan). Thus, as Shelley warned, or remove DNA in a genome (S. Zhang). The technology and as current science is showing us, we must institute itself is innovative and revolutionary by showing guidelines and laws on such procedures before biology “promise in gene therapy” through extracting stem cells, turns Frankensteinian. correcting them and then infusing them “back into the The relationship between present-day synthetic same patient to cure a genetic disease” (Warmflash). biologists and Victor Frankenstein draws a defining The Broad Institute comments that “ [w]ith [CRISPR parallel: both are creating life by manipulating the technology], researchers can permanently modify genes natural world through science. Originally, synthetic in living cells and organisms...at precise locations in biology was devised as a means to manipulate the human genome in order to treat genetic causes of embryonic development, by correcting disease-causing 1 As of November 2018, the first genetically modified babies mutations. However, with social tension already brewing were born. CRISPR/Cas9 was used to remove the CCR5 gene. This around this issue by raising questions about the ethical technology was not yet meant to be marketed or used on humans in boundaries between altering human development, and utero. (Bhattacharya). 19 University of Hawai‘i at Hilo HOHONU 2019 Vol. 17 creating inhuman, and potentially inhumane, individuals public could have the choice, to manipulate embryonic it has turned into a controversy about the power it allows development in order to create superhumans. Through people to have. Although creating life and editing genes Victor’s voice Shelley warns her readers of the potential seem like contemporary innovations, their conception destruction and despair that science, ambition and dates back to the time when Mary Shelley was alive. philosophy culminate to create: During the early nineteenth century the influence of “Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by biologists’ and philosophers’ ideas greatly impacted my example, how dangerous is the acquirement society; it is speculated that Luigi Galvani, a scientist of knowledge, and how much happier that man is and philosopher, contributed to Shelley’s idea of who believes his native town to be the world, than Frankenstein when he wrote, “Perhaps a corpse would he who aspires to become greater than his nature be re-animated… perhaps the component parts of a will allow.” (Shelley 41) creature might be manufactured, brought together, and If synthetic biologists become as obsessed with their endued with vital warmth” (Belt). As we can see, the desires of perfecting life as Victor was with creating it, then ideas of life and creation were speculated upon as much the embryos being manipulated will become constructs then as they are today. In this respect, Shelley is able to of humans and the creators will become monsters driven reflect timeless social issues such as fear of technology, by power, greed and perfection. Knowledge is power, fascination with creation, and ethical controversies and we can use the knowledge we have of biology to (Parker 223-239). benefit humans ethically; however, we must remember Victor and contemporary biologists reflect these fears that there are limits to human power, and those limits by manipulating life with scientific innovations. While are necessary. Frankenstein provides sufficient evidence that there With the power that the scientific community is are limits to human abilities, both Victor and synthetic gaining through genome editing there is great potential biologists are extending them. Scientists are enhancing for unhealthy control and monstrosity to unravel. Not DNA by extracting naturally-made developing embryos only is this an issue of bioethics, but also an ethical to delete, add, and manipulate the sequence of genes; issue of parenthood. Within recent years, and with they are not creating life out of nothing. Similarly, Victor the development of genetic technology, the idea of creates his monster from the limbs of the dead. Many “designer babies” has been questioned and debated. critics argue that Victor and synthetic biologists are taking Designer babies are considered to be genetically on god-like roles because even God created Adam, the modified children or “genetic interventions into pre- first man, from the dust of earth: “If the construction of implantation embryos in the attempt to influence the artificial life forms only deserve to be called creation of traits the resulting children will have” (Steinbock). What life when it is created literally out of nothing (creatio ex this means is that scientists will able to edit the genome nihilo), then we can be pretty sure that this elusive aim of an embryo to the parents’ liking. Scientists have the will never be achieved. But wasn’t Adam formed from capabilities to edit physical, mental, and emotional the dust of the earth?” (Belt). If contemporary scientists traits, in addition to eliminating various mutations and can alter life, similarly to how Frankenstein reinvents it, diseases. Advocates for designer babies say that “[t]here and how God creates it, then it may not be long until will be no disappointments and no surprises—parents we will be able to create life solely through science. If can imagine what they want, and they can get it,” while there is no reason for a God, or for humans to reproduce opponents of the idea call it a violation of human rights sexually, then do scientifically untouched people to turn people into a “manufactured product” (Catalano).