Frankenstein Day: How Mary Shelley’s Fiction Anticipated Modern Medical Science

August 30, 2025 – Today marks Frankenstein Day, celebrated on the birthday of Mary Shelley, whose 1818 novel Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus continues to spark conversations about science, medicine, and ethics. While the tale of Victor Frankenstein and his creation is fictional, it was rooted in real scientific experiments of the early 19th century, many of which paved the way for advances in modern medicine.

The Novel that Bridged Imagination and Science

Mary Shelley was only 18 when she began writing Frankenstein, published in 1818. The story follows Victor Frankenstein, a young scientist who becomes obsessed with the idea of creating life. Using his knowledge of anatomy and experiments with electricity, he assembles a living being from parts of dead bodies. Instead of triumph, Frankenstein faces horror and regret when his creation, intelligent yet rejected by society, turns into a source of tragedy.

Shelley’s novel is considered the first major work of science fiction. At its heart lies the question: What happens when scientific ambition outpaces responsibility? The idea of “reanimating the dead” may have been fiction, but it reflected real scientific interests of her time—particularly the study of electricity and the mystery of life.

The Spark of Inspiration: Electricity and Life

Shelley drew inspiration from the experiments of Luigi Galvani, who discovered in the 1780s that frog legs twitched when struck by an electric current. This phenomenon, known as galvanism, suggested a link between electricity and vital life processes.¹

Galvani’s nephew, Giovanni Aldini, extended these demonstrations by applying electric currents to human cadavers, making muscles move in dramatic ways.² These events were widely reported in Europe and gave Shelley the scientific foundation for Frankenstein’s “spark of life.”

From Fiction to Lifesaving Technology

Although Victor Frankenstein’s experiment was imagined, the concept of electricity’s power over life has influenced real medical breakthroughs:

• Defibrillators and Pacemakers: Just as Frankenstein used electricity to bring motion to lifeless tissue, modern defibrillators apply controlled electric shocks to restart a stopped heart.³ Pacemakers keep irregular rhythms steady, demonstrating how electricity can regulate vital functions.

• Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT): Electricity is used in controlled settings to alter brain activity in severe psychiatric conditions, echoing Shelley’s link between the nervous system and electrical stimulation.⁴

• Neuromodulation: Techniques like deep brain stimulation, now used for Parkinson’s disease and epilepsy, represent the safe, therapeutic side of applying current to human physiology.⁵

Dr. Joseph Murray, who performed the first successful kidney transplant in 1954, once acknowledged in an interview that Shelley’s Frankenstein embodied the public’s anxieties about “playing God” with body parts. ⁸ While he did not claim it as inspiration, he admitted the shadow of Frankenstein often hovered over transplant science.

Anatomy, Dissection, and Organ Transplants

In Shelley’s time, anatomy studies relied heavily on dissection, often involving grave robbing to secure cadavers for teaching. This cultural background shaped her depiction of Victor Frankenstein constructing a being from separate body parts.

Modern medicine, however, has transformed the idea of “assembling” life:

• Organ Transplantation: Since the first successful kidney transplant in 1954, organ transplantation has given countless patients a second chance at life.⁶

• Xenotransplantation and 3D Bioprinting: Researchers today experiment with genetically modified pig organs and bioprinted tissues, echoing the fictional assembly of a body from different parts, but with precise scientific methods.⁷

Lessons for Modern Science

The novel also serves as a reminder that discovery must be balanced with responsibility. Victor Frankenstein’s downfall came not from science itself, but from his refusal to consider the ethical consequences of his actions. This cautionary element continues to guide debates on gene editing, artificial intelligence in medicine, and synthetic biology.

Nobel Prize–winning geneticist Paul Berg, who helped develop recombinant DNA technology in the 1970s, once mentioned that Frankenstein was on his mind when scientists debated whether splicing genes was “creating monsters.” ⁹ The term “Frankenstein science” became shorthand in debates about biotechnology and bioethics.

Bridging Fiction and Medicine

Frankenstein remains more than a gothic tale—it is a story that helps us reflect on where medicine has been and where it might go. On Frankenstein Day, Shelley’s work reminds us that many medical technologies we now take for granted—like restarting a heart with electricity or transplanting organs—once belonged only to the realm of imagination.

References

1. Bresadola, Marco. “Medicine and Science in the Life of Luigi Galvani (1737–1798).” Brain Research Bulletin 46, no. 5 (1998): 367–380.

2. Parent, André. “Giovanni Aldini: From Animal Electricity to Human Brain Stimulation.” Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 31, no. 4 (2004): 576–584.

3. Zipes, Douglas P. “The Development of the Cardiac Defibrillator.” Texas Heart Institute Journal 36, no. 2 (2009): 114–118.

4. Andrade, Chittaranjan, and Rajiv Radhakrishnan. “Electroconvulsive Therapy for Depression: 80 Years of Progress.” Indian Journal of Psychiatry 61, no. 3 (2019): 301–304.

5. Lozano, Andres M., et al. “Deep Brain Stimulation: Current Challenges and Future Directions.” Nature Reviews Neurology 15, no. 3 (2019): 148–160.

6. Merrill, John P., et al. “Successful Homotransplantation of the Human Kidney Between Identical Twins.” Journal of the American Medical Association 160, no. 4 (1956): 277–282.

7. Cooper, David K. C., et al. “Xenotransplantation: Recent Progress and Current Perspectives.” Nature Reviews Nephrology 17, no. 12 (2021): 746–760.

8. Murray, Joseph E. “Reflections on the First Successful Kidney Transplant.” Transplantation Proceedings 23, no. 1 (1991): 1–2.

   Fink, Max. Electroshock: Healing Mental Illness. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

9. Berg, Paul. “Reflections on the Recombinant DNA Controversy.” Nature Medicine 10, no. 12 (2004): 1161–1165