A Frankensteinian model for adaptation studies, or ‘It lives!’
Adaptive symbiosis and Peake’s Presumption, or the fate of Frankenstein
in Adapting Frankenstein
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

Frankenstein (1818/1823/1831) has a life of its own. It is perhaps our culture’s most adapted text, and also one of our most adaptable metaphors. Its mere mention conjures almost 200 years of versions, images, meanings, cautionary tales, and arguments. Specifically, the Creature has been used as a metaphor for a motherless child, technology run amok, and a vast number of out-of-control Others. And adaptation theory can be added to the metaphoric cultural possibilities of the Frankenstein trope. This chapter argues for the productivity of a Frankensteinian model for adaptation studies, a reading strategy that shifts away from notions of fidelity in order to systematically account for the productive work of intertextuality in the act of adaptation.

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 102 39 4
Full Text Views 33 9 1
PDF Downloads 10 2 0