Character Comparison “Never Let me Go” and “Frankenstein”

Introduction

“Never Let Me Go” and “Frankenstein” both belong to the sci-fi category, yet are virtually entirely different. While Kazuo Ishiguro's "Never Let Me Go," published in 2004, examines a dystopian future shaped by ethical dilemmas surrounding cloning, Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein," written in 1818, delves into the Gothic exploration of unchecked ambition and its catastrophic consequences. Kathy, the narrator of the novel, is a clone who has been created through scientific research. On the other hand, Victor Frankenstein, whose tale is being told by Robert Walton, is a researcher who has created a creature through his study.

Despite their differences, both novels - “Never Let Me Go” and “Frankenstein,” have similar conventions, including the sensation of mystery, dread, and impending doom, which permeates the

Frankenstein

By definition, the genre of Gothic fiction tends to convey an impression of looming disaster. In “The Female Gothic: The Monster’s Mother,” Ellen Moers asserts that when Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein, her “emphasis was not on what precedes birth, but on birth itself and what follows it: the trauma of the afterbirth” (319). This analysis highlights Shelley’s focus on the aftermath of creation, reflecting the deep psychological and emotional consequences. A passage from Frankenstein demonstrates this when, after years of research, Victor Frankenstein finally breathes life into a creature. The creature is described as having “yellow skin scarcely covering the work of muscles and arteries beneath” (Frankenstein, 49), which is starkly contrasted with his eyes. Shelley continues to detail “his shriveled complexion, and straight black lips” (49). These grotesque descriptions emphasize the physical horror of Victor’s creation, foreshadowing the devastation the creature will bring. Even though birth is generally regarded as a joyous occasion, Shelley portrays it in a manner suggestive of impending catastrophe, perhaps one instigated by the creature. This foreboding tone culminates in the tragic destruction of Frankenstein’s family, driven by the monster he brought to life.

Never Let Me Go

“Never Let Me Go” can precisely be referred to as a dystopia. In “A Reference of Literary Terms,” Abrams defines dystopia as a work of fiction that represents a future where “our present social, political, and technological order are projected into a disastrous future culmination” (417). The “disastrous future outcome” in Never Let Me Go is the ethical dilemma prompted by the production of clones to generate a supply of organs, in order to meet the demands of the general population. Ishiguro writes Never Let Me Go from the perspective of Kathy, who is a clone herself. This narrative choice allows readers to deeply empathize with her plight, making the ethical consequences of cloning more personal and poignant. It is shown that the clones spend much of their childhood not realizing their purpose, but this objective is finally disclosed to them by Miss Lucy. She tells the children that “before you’re old, before you’re even middle-aged, you’ll start to donate your vital organs” (Never Let Me Go, 128).

The contrast between Ishiguro's "Never Let Me Go" and Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" lies in how both works approach themes of creation and destruction. While Frankenstein presents the horror of a single creation gone awry, Never Let Me Go illustrates the systemic exploitation of an entire group of clones. Slowly, the clones will watch their friends die one by one, having fulfilled their purpose to society. As Kathy explains, the clones undergo rounds of donations, after each of which they are cared for by a “carer,” also a clone, who could potentially be a childhood friend, such as Kathy looking after Ruth and Tommy. These cycles, which serve as the backbone of their existence, are marked by a haunting inevitability. These donation cycles continue until the donor dies, usually before the fourth cycle. This ethical conflict mirrors broader societal debates about exploitation and dehumanization, positioning the clones as symbols of moral compromise.

The central ethical conflict of Never Let Me Go lies in the treatment of clones. Despite the book being published in 2005, it is set in a post-World War II Britain where a state-funded program for organ donation through cloning was active. When Kathy and Tommy visit Madame, her conversation with Miss Emily reveals that Kathy and her peers at Hailsham were treated rather well compared to other clones; they were treated wonderfully, as humans rather than clones. In contrast to Frankenstein’s monster, who rebels against his creator, the clones in Ishiguro’s work accept their fate, adding to the poignancy of their narrative. However, with Hailsham’s closure, we are led to anticipate another impending disaster – the treatment of clones across the country. The rights of clones are at risk following Hailsham’s closure, and there is not much that can be done.

Premonition of Disaster

In Never Let Me Go, there are two major instances of the convention of foreshadowing doom. These instances are the impending death of all the clones and the treatment of duplicates throughout Great Britain following the closure of programs such as Hailsham. This sense of inevitability mirrors the Gothic undertones found in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, where foreshadowing is intricately tied to the creation of the monster. In Frankenstein, the significant clue to imminent doom is the scene where the monster is created. The use of this convention by Ishiguro is similar to the way Shelley employs it, using it as a form of introduction. Shelley does so with the introduction of a new character, while Ishiguro uses it when revealing new information.

This character comparison in Never Let Me Go and Frankenstein highlights how both authors utilize foreshadowing to heighten the emotional tension of their narratives. For example, in Frankenstein, Victor senses impending disaster from the moment he brings his creation to life, while in Never Let Me Go, Kathy and her peers remain oblivious to their grim fates for much of their lives. The obliviousness of the clones in Ishiguro’s novel adds a layer of tragedy, as readers are fully aware of the disaster that looms over them, while the clones continue their daily lives unaware of their predetermined ends. In both works, foreshadowing serves to engage the reader, emphasizing the inevitability of tragedy and forcing them to grapple with ethical questions surrounding creation and its consequences.

Difference in Approaches

Even with their similarities, there are several differences between how Ishiguro utilizes this convention and how Shelley does. Shelley implements it in such a way that Victor Frankenstein, the narrator, senses the approaching doom. In contrast, in Never Let Me Go, Kathy and her peers overlook the implications of their fate as organ donors. This stark difference in narrative perspective serves to deepen the emotional impact of each story. Additionally, Frankenstein is aware of the outcome of the impending doom, since his tale is narrated in the past tense. In contrast, Kathy has no insight into her future, as she has not yet met her impending doom. The contrast in narrative voice—Frankenstein’s retrospective account versus Kathy’s first-person present-tense narration—allows readers to experience impending doom in two very different ways.

This difference is significant for readers, who often have more knowledge of the events than the narrators themselves. In Frankenstein, the reader shares Victor’s growing sense of horror, while in Never Let Me Go, the reader is forced to confront the inevitability of the clones' fate alongside Kathy, who remains unaware of the ultimate tragedy until it is too late. Unlike in many narratives, Frankenstein is able to set the tone for potential calamity, leading the reader to anticipate disaster. In Never Let Me Go, the slow unfolding of tragedy creates a different kind of suspense, as the reader knows the clones' fates long before they do.

The convention of foreshadowing doom has evolved over time, due to the evolution of writing itself. Topics have become less taboo, and this is highlighted by Moers in “The Female Gothic”, where she states, “With the advent of Naturalism late in the century, and the lifting of the Victorian taboo against discussing physical sexuality (including pregnancy and labor)…” (319). Technological advancements and historical events have presented authors with new subjects to tackle. For instance, Ishiguro addresses the theme of clones in a post-WWII society, an area that was previously untouched due to cloning being a relatively new concept and WWII beginning in 1939. The technological developments and moral questions raised in Never Let Me Go offer a stark contrast to the more traditional Gothic themes explored in Frankenstein.

The nature of foreshadowing doom has transformed as the types of looming disaster have varied. In Frankenstein, the reader isn’t told about the impending disaster, but the narrator is aware of it. The opposite occurs in Never Let Me Go, where the narrator is oblivious to the future, but a reader can speculate on its outcome. This shift reflects how literature has evolved in its exploration of science fiction and moral dilemmas. While Frankenstein introduces the consequences of scientific ambition through Victor’s retrospective narration, Never Let Me Go builds suspense by presenting the impending doom through Kathy’s naive perspective. Both approaches effectively enhance the theme of inevitability, but they reflect the changing concerns and values of their respective eras.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a shared convention in Never Let Me Go and Frankenstein: Or the Modern Prometheus is the feeling of impending doom. These conventions are employed in various ways; in Never Let Me Go, the narrator does not know the severity of the looming threat, having not encountered it yet. Conversely, in Frankenstein, because the tale is narrated in the past tense, Frankenstein is aware of the severity of the monster’s birth and the repercussions. The comparison between the two novels underscores how foreshadowing doom serves as a central thematic device that enhances the emotional weight of the narrative. Although these two stories differ in many ways, including their themes, they are both categorized as science fiction. This genre accommodates a broad range of themes and even allows for the incorporation of new ones. However, the common element amongst these variations is the concept of projecting impossible scenarios as if they were possible. The exploration of human ambition and its consequences, whether through cloning or scientific experimentation, makes both novels resonate with readers and continue to spark discussions on the ethical implications of scientific progress.

To further explore this subject, I would need to delve into a few areas. Firstly, I would need to investigate other science fiction novels and research how the convention of impending doom is portrayed. Secondly, I would need to identify other themes that fall within the realm of science fiction. Finally, it would be imperative to define ‘science fiction’ comprehensively, a definition that accommodates the inclusion of other themes and remains flexible as writing evolves over time. Since the beginning of this class, I have drawn connections between Frankenstein and Never Let Me Go in terms of their classification as science fiction, and I have also managed to distinguish their shared conventions, and find commonalities, even though they may appear to belong to different sub-genres.

Did you like this example?

384

16