In what ways does a comparative study accentuate the distinctive contexts of Frankenstein and Blade Runner? The values and morals of society have dramatically changed throughout the course of history, so too has the knowledge of science, its teachings and influences on the world. As new technologies have been under further experimentation into the production of man-made life forms, the debate between science and religion has continued. It is these issues within an author’s context that influences them and the texts they create. Mary Shelley’s gothic promethean novel, Frankenstein (1818), was released during the industrial revolution as romanticism was thriving, while Ridley Scott’s futuristic sci-fi Blade runner (1992) grew with the dawning of a capitalistic increasingly globalised and technologically driven society.
The films story line is based around the creation of the silent film Nosferatu, and the director Murnau’s lust for modern-day immortality with an underlying conceit of the traditional vampire who is embodied by Max Schreck. The audience when watching the film is led to believe that it is a behind the scenes docu-drama of the filming of Nosferatu. The film is distinctively post-modern in structure as the text itself is a film within a film. It is also fragmented in the sense that it switches from archival scenes in Nosferatu to reconstructed scenes. Another postmodern technique used is the elaborate use of playfulness and reality which twists our perception of truth, forcing the audience to question what they’re watching.
The duality of Victor Frankenstein and its creation is obvious. Almost twenty decades after the first edition of the book was published, several people refer to (or even believe that) the horrendous beast as Frankenstein. Of course this is natural, once that the philosophical concept behind it involves precisely the duality between creator and creature. At this point we have two main keys to understanding the importance of the work: it features two themes that are held in high regard by Romanticism, which are the demiurge attempt of creating things, herein called “prometheanism”, blended to the idea of an ego having a double. More specifically, I draw the subject to the actual device that threads the story together, which is the rejection suffered by the monster by his very creator.
The study of transformations reveals why certain texts are valued. Texts from the past have been adapted to contemporary situations to explore how such texts deal with key issues and present new ways of thinking or evaluating society. While the older text may seem dated on the surface, the new text shows how the same values are still relevant in a modern context. ‘Emma’, an early 19thC English novel written by Jane Austen, and ‘Clueless’ a late 20th C American film directed by Amy Heckerling, on the surface look worlds apart, in fact they are 184 years apart, but the inspiration for both came from similar issues. Both texts are essentially about human relationships and their complications.
As intellectual beings we seek to know the reality of how things appear to be versus how they really are. Historically the question, “what is real?” has been the subject of much philosophical conjecture. In comparing the synopsis from the movie The Matrix, Plato’s The Republic (The Allegory of the Cave), and Descartes, Meditation 1, I find both similarities and differences. While all three deal with the concept of false realities, both the Matrix and The Allegory of the Cave explore more the concept of two worlds, one world that has been created (an illusion) by outside sources, and the real word which is eventually revealed thus destroying the reality of those involved. While in contrast, in Meditation 1 Descartes takes a more introspective approach by analyzing reality with systematic doubt.
Some allusions, however, were harmful to the plot or to the reader, most often by confusing the reader if they did not know the context of the original quotation. These allusions can be better understood if they are examined more closely. The literary allusions in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 essentially can be broken down into two categories: those that helped or those that hurt the reader’s understanding of the novel. There were a number of literary allusions in Fahrenheit 451 that helped the reader’s understanding of the novel. Some of the literary allusions that helped the reader’s understanding of the novel added depth to the characters, provided relatable experiences to the reader, and referenced familiar stories.
There is also speculation about the film’s meaning and what exactly is trying to be said by Banksy, the director and a contributing street artist of the film. However, it is apparent that Banksy taking the role of director seems to be the main concern of skepticism that the entire thing is just some elaborate hoax. Whether or not the movie is a prank does seem to hold relevance in order to properly assess what message is trying to be conveyed. It seems that if it is a prank, then we are more strongly drawn toward seeking a deeper meaning of the link between art and consumerism, due to consumption of the movie itself and how each of us participates in parallel to the way that the people in the film had done. On the other end of the spectrum, if the film is not a prank, then we are drawn more toward what was trying to be said through the actual storyline of the film, instead of possible motives of those involved in creating it.
We view through the film Paradise Road by Bruce Beresford, as the conflict of enduring a war has encompassed during a cultural misunderstanding. We view those who may not at times seem to stand up for themselves. Martin Luther King Jnr presents to us his honour and dignity when faced with conflict. Through the stories of these people we see that conflict can often breed further disagreement and suffering, as it may act in extraordinary ways. We are each led to articulate through responses in conflict, to realize who we truly are.
There are many ways through which an individual can belong to a group or relationship, nevertheless some individuals find it difficult to establish similarities in identity with others, so must suppress their individuality in order to belong or else completely withdraw. This is exemplified through Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible which highlights the notion that belonging is found by identification with a community and a strict ideology, which can also be drawn from the film, ‘The Beautiful Mind’, By Ron Howard. Howard displays the central character; John Nash, challenging the perception of not belonging though vigorous rules of isolation and solitude to achieve genius status, but then receives ultimate salvation from choosing and receiving his sense of belonging through love and connection. Membership of a group may require a conformity that is destructive of individuality. Miller uses the setting of the Salem Witch hunts as a contextual allegory for the McCarthy era communism paranoia.
A comparative study of two texts, written in two different eras’ shows, quite obviously, the literal differences between them. Mary Shelly’s book Frankenstein and Ridley Scott’s film Blade Runner explore the same notions danger of technology and strive for knowledge. However, their messages are developed for their respective audiences at a different time; therefore their content has extreme differences, highlighted when studying the two texts together. The texts also have thematic concerns which aren’t explored equally or at all by each other, which is another blatant difference between the texts. Ultimately, the context of the era and the way the author or director display their message are the factors that when comparatively studying the