pubs.acs.

org/jchemeduc Communication

Another Useful Film Clip: Scientific Methodology of the

Frankenstein Monster
Ben Ruekberg*
Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2021, 98, 4101−4103 Read Online

ACCESS Metrics & More Article Recommendations *

sı Supporting Information

ABSTRACT: A 2 min film clip from the classic movie “Son of Frankenstein” is a surprisingly good illustration of, and introduction
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

to, the scientific method as traditionally formulated. It may be useful in introducing the topic to a large variety of audiences. The text
includes a description of the clip’s content, questions to elicit student participation, and an analysis connecting the Monster’s actions
Downloaded via UNIV FED FLUMINENSE on October 24, 2022 at 01:49:08 (UTC).

with the steps of a scientific methodology. The suitability, desirability, and legal issues of using this clip are discussed in the
Supporting Information for this paper.
KEYWORDS: High School/Introductory Chemistry, First-Year Undergraduate/General, General Public, Continuing Education,
Public Understanding/Outreach, Multimedia-Based Learning, Constructivism, Enrichment/Review Materials, Nonmajor Courses

■ INTRODUCTION
Thomas has published an article advocating the use of classic
films to introduce chemical topics.1 His article discusses the
usefulness and legal aspects of including these film clips; the
latter is supplemented here in the Supporting Information. His
informal survey affirming the efficacy of his in-class clip showings
is reinforced by Baggett, who compared structural retention of
the text and a (wordless) movie version of a story and found
recall of the latter significantly better after a week.2 In addition to
topics listed in Thomas’s article,1 instructors may also wish to
show students a short clip from the classic 1939 horror film Son
of Frankenstein when discussing scientific methodology, a topic
normally introduced at the beginning of general and
introductory chemistry courses. It would also serve in high
school classes, nonmajors’ chemistry courses, adult education
courses, and public outreach presentations. While it is common
to refer to “the scientific method”, scientific methodology
actually comprises many methods3−5 and has evolved over many
years. Scientists have attempted to define and refine scientific
methodology. Nonetheless, its traditional approach remains
fundamental and, as most commonly described, is surprisingly
well-illustrated in the Son of Frankenstein film clip.
with hearing impairment who already face multiple barriers in
their science education.9 Clips from movies have been promoted
for teaching.1,10 They are fun.11 This one is fun in that it uses a
monster to demonstrate the application of scientific method-
ology:12 observation, hypothesis formation and (repeated) tests
by experiment, generation of an hypothesis-based prediction
and tests of it, and performance of a control experiment. The clip
can help the students recognize these steps in the application of
scientific methodology.
Sesame Street has used monsters for educational purposes
from 1969 until the present. Demons, too, have contributed to
the development and explanation of scientific theories.13 While
other movies have had direct input from scientists,14,15 Son of
Frankenstein shows no evidence of such input. It is nonetheless
interesting that the works of real scientists may have contributed
to the creation of Mary Shelley’s book16−18 which spawned the
many Frankenstein movies. Despite the tragic nature of the
Monster’s fate,19−22 the incongruity of the expected stereotypical
exemplar of the incisive application of the scientif ic method turning
out to be this classic monster may be considered humorous.
Instructors should not be shy away from their audience’s
possible perception of humor in this unexpected incongruity.
(See Supporting Information.)

■
The understanding of scientific methodology is important to
distinguish its results from those of other methods of PRESENTATION
understanding of the world, such as philosophy, revelation,
The object of the discussion of the clip is to show the Monster’s
authoritarian decree, statute, and mythmaking6 (to which one
actions framed in terms of the scientific method. The
might add conspiracy theories). “Science and skeptical inquiry
phenomenon which the Monster encounters in the clip is not
are one path to belief about the world; ...consulting your guru is
esoteric, and the audience already understands it. The 2 min clip
another.”7 Teaching about the nature of scientific methodology
is a step in combating science denial. (See Supporting
Information.) Scientific methodology is used informally in Received: September 10, 2021
everyday life.8 (See Supporting Information for an example.) Revised: November 4, 2021
Because the clip shows an investigator untrained in scientific Published: November 18, 2021
methodology, it could be termed “everyday”.
The clip from Son of Frankenstein, like Baggett’s film,2 is
wordless. Being wordless, it would not disadvantage students
© 2021 American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00974
4101 J. Chem. Educ. 2021, 98, 4101−4103
Journal of Chemical Education
is short enough to show more than once. In the second showing,
one might stop the film at appropriate times (see boldface type
below) to accommodate comments and analysis of the
Monster’s application of scientific methodology to understand
a new (to the Monster) phenomenon and ask the students,
“What is the Monster doing (or thinking) now?” To put the
scene in the proper perspective, the instructor should emphasize
the Monster’s naiveté.20,21 The instructor might even suggest
that students are taking this class to ameliorate their innocence
of chemical knowledge: the innocence that may lead to errors
when they take a chemistry test. Afterward, the instructor may
ask students to share their experiences applying systematic
analysis or ask something like “How would you figure out what is
wrong if you switch on a table lamp but it doesn’t light?” (For
conversation starters on this question, see Supporting
Information.) This strategy will involve the students in active
learning.
The instructor who is concerned that some in the audience are
not familiar with the Frankenstein mythos can give the gist of the
novel and films to put the scene in context, like the following. A
young science student, Henry Frankenstein, is obsessed with
creating life and to this end fashions a human-like body from
parts of diverse dead humans and animals. As Copernicus wrote,
were one to take “from various places hands, feet, a head, and
other pieces, ...since these fragments would not belong to one
another at all, a monster rather than a man would be put together
from them.”23 When this creation is brought to life, he has
superhuman physical strength but no more understanding of the
world than a newborn. Through no fault of his own, he lacks
moral guidance or understanding of consequences. As he is huge
and appallingly ugly, adults he encounters assume he is a menace
and react aggressively. Prior to the clip, the Monster has made a
refuge for himself in the ruins of the building that housed Henry
Frankenstein’s laboratory. In the laboratory, he encounters Wolf
Frankenstein, the adult son of Henry, and preemptively assaults
Wolf until he recognizes Wolf’s family resemblance. The clip
begins as the Monster starts back to his refuge.
■
CLIP SUMMARY
A summary of the clip, from scene 11 of Son of Frankenstein,
minutes 1:35 to 3:25,24 follows. The Monster (portrayed by the
actor Boris Karloff) lumbers away from Wolf Frankenstein
(portrayed by the actor Basil Rathbone) and catches his left arm
on a vertical cable which causes him to turn and face a previously
unobserved, large rectangular mirror. Startled by what he sees,
he growls and sweeps his right arm in a get-away-from-me
gesture. Although startled, he can still observe. His left arm
accidentally nudges the cable. The Monster observes that the
entity in the rectangle does the same thing he does. He nudges
the rope twice more with the same results. Gazing intently at the
mirror, he moves his arms and observes that the image did what
he did. He grasps one hand in the other and purposely nudges
the rope again. He puts his hands on his chest, moaning, and
moves his right hand to his mouth and then to his cheek;
moaning, he tries to sweep the image away by waving his arm.
The Monster turns to Frankenstein and, vocalizing, extends his
arms as if pleading for help. The Monster approaches
Frankenstein and, grasping him by the front of the shirt, pulls
Frankenstein back to the mirror. The Monster looks at
Frankenstein’s face, which is turned toward him, and then at
what is reflected in the mirror. The Monster moans and shakes
his head “no”. He turns Frankenstein’s head so that Frankenstein
faces the mirror and looks closely at their reflections. The
4102
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Communication
Monster touches his (own) face. He seems to gesture to
Frankenstein “Why [was I made like this]?” He waves his arm as
if to dismiss the experience and walks away. The knowledge of
his grotesque features is destined to provoke deep resentment
and its tragic consequences.
■
CLIP ANALYSIS
The steps of scientific methodology in the clip are highlighted by
boldface type. The Monster sees something that he has never
previously encountered, what appears to be a huge, fearsome
thing facing him. Unaware that the thing is merely his reflection
(an error such as any of us might make on our first encounter
with a mirror), he reacts by trying to warn the thing off, but he
observes that the thing does what he does, such as nudging the
cable, as if it were a real-time image of him. To test this
hypothesis, the Monster intentionally nudges the cable, an
experiment which he repeats, reproducing the results. He
concludes that the thing he sees (in the mirror) likely does do
what he does as he is doing it. On the basis of this hypothesis, he
makes a prediction and does a different test (to test the
prediction) by grasping one hand with the other (and nudging
the rope again for good measure). The confirmation of the
prediction indicates that the hypothesis is more generally
applicable than to cable-nudging only. He soon observes that
the image he sees is unpleasantly ugly. He hopefully
hypothesizes that this ugly appearance might be an artifact of
the mirror and tests this hypothesis with a control experiment,
by seeing what effect the mirror has on another face,
Frankenstein’s. He sees that Frankenstein’s face is reflected
accurately and unuglified. All of the other objects appearing in
the mirror are accurate representations of the objects in the
laboratory. Thus, inductive logic argues that the Monster’s face
is also reflected accurately. The Monster discards the artifact
hypothesis and reluctantly concludes that he (the Monster) is
definitely not pretty. It is, literally, “the slaying of a beautiful
hypothesis by an ugly fact.”25 The scientific method is useful for
approaching the truth, but it is not always supportive of one’s
hopes or beliefs. “To advance knowledge, we must all sometimes
suffer.”26
Instructors may wish to follow the Frankenstein clip with a
corresponding, but more lighthearted, clip27 which I am grateful
to Peter Larson for showing me. Also available, as an optional
theatrical prop, is a graphic book (albeit aimed at grades 3−9):
Frankenstein’s Monster and Scientif ic Methods.28
■
CONCLUSION
This clip shows how the Monster determines how a newly
encountered portion of the world works by observing, forming a
hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, testing a prediction of the
hypothesis, and performing a control experiment. Thus, the
Monster’s actions show a remarkably sophisticated application
of scientific methodology as might be used by any untrained
person in an everyday situation. Using the clip can be a step in
increasing the students’ understanding of the scientific process,
which has become increasingly important in an age of
antiscience activism.
■
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
*
sı Supporting Information
The Supporting Information is available at https://pubs.ac-
s.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00974.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00974
J. Chem. Educ. 2021, 98, 4101−4103
Journal of Chemical Education pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Communication

Legal issues of using movie clips, a step in combatting
science denial, the usefulness of humor, and everyday life
application of scientific methodology (“Why Doesn’t This
Lamp Light?”) (PDF, DOCX)
(20) DeVaughn, Z. The Tragic Life of the Frankenstein Monster.
https://universalmonstersuniverse.com/2016/03/30/tragic-life-
frankenstein-monster/ (accessed 2021-11-1).
(21) Hood, M. The Film Canon: Frankenstein 2014. https://

■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
Ben Ruekberg − Chemistry Department, University of Rhode
Island, Kingston, Rhode Island 02881, United States;
orcid.org/0000-0003-1456-7860; Email: bruekberg@
uri.edu
Complete contact information is available at:
https://pubs.acs.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00974
Notes
The author declares no competing financial interest.
theyoungfolks.com/review/355091/the-film-canon-frankenstein-
1931/ (accessed 2021-11-1).
(22) Oates, J. C. Frankenstein’s Fallen Angel. Critical Inquiry 1984, 10
(3), 543−554.
(23) Crowe, M. J. Theories of the World from Antiquity to the
Copernican Revolution; Little, Brown Book Group Limited: London,
1990; p 107.
(24) Son of Frankenstein Scene 11. Frankenstein: The Legacy Edition;
Lee, R. V., director (1939); Universal Studios: Hollywood, 2004; disc 2.
(25) Huxley, T. H. 1870 September 15, Nature, Section: The British
AssociationLiverpool Meeting, 1870; Address of Thomas Henry
Huxley, President, Macmillan and Company, London, p 400, quote p
402, column 1.
(26) Raush, J. Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought;
University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1993; p 10.

■
(27) YouTube, Cat Poses in Mirror. 2013. http://www.youtube.com/
watch?annotation_id=annotation_283280&feature=iv&src_vid=
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xXnaN5U43F4&v=8CxYrv95FLM (accessed 2021-11-1).
The author wishes to thank the editor for his patience and (28) Harbo, C. L. Frankenstein’s Monster and Scientific Methods;
helpfulness and the reviewers for many valuable suggestions and Capstone Press: N. Mankato, MN, 2014.
corrections.

■ REFERENCES
(1) Thomas, N. C. Using Classic Movie Chemistry Scenes to
Introduce Classroom Activities. J. Chem. Educ. 2021, 98 (5), 1814−
1817.
(2) Baggett, P. Structurally Equivalent Stories in Movie and Text and
the Effect of the Medium on Recall. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav.
1979, 18, 333−356.
(3) Brown, R. A.; Kumar, A. The Scientific Method: Reality or Myth?
J. Coll. Sci. Teach 2013, 42 (4), 10−11.
(4) Giunta, C. J. Using History to Teach Scientific Method: The Role
of Errors. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78 (5), 623−627.
(5) Hodson, D. Laboratory work as scientific method: Three decades
of confusion and distortion. J. Curric. Studies 1996, 28, 115−135.
(6) Herreid, C. F. The Scientific Method Ain’t What It Used to Be. J.
Coll. Sci. Teach 2010, 39, 68−72.
(7) Raush, J. Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought;
University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1993; p 8.
(8) Selby, C. C. What Makes It Science? A Modern Look at Scientific
Inquiry. Journal of College Science Teaching 2006, 35, 8−11.
(9) Boerner, L. K. Growing sign language’s scientific vocabulary.
Chem. Eng. News. 2021, 99 (25), 26−32.
(10) Murphy, C. J.; Mogus, M. A.; Crotty, P. M. Using Science Fiction
to Help Teach Chemistry. Chemistry and Science Fiction Stocker;
Stocker, J. H., Ed.; American Chemical Society, 1998; Chapter 16.
(11) Barnett, M. Using Science Fiction Movie Scenes to Support
Critical Analysis of Science. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2007, 36 (4), 31−35.
(12) Copi, I. M.; Cohen, C. Science and Hypothesis. In Introduction to
Logic, 11th ed.; Pearson Education, Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002;
pp 493−531.
(13) Canales, J. Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science;
Princeton University Press: Princeton, 2020.
(14) Kirby, D. A. Lab Coats in Hollywood: Science, Scientists, and
Cinema; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2011.
(15) Schwarz, C. G. The Scientists Behind the Movie Scenes. Science
as Culture 2014, 23 (1), 108−112.
(16) Thoman, C. J. Sir Humphry Davy and Frankenstein. J. Chem.
Educ. 1998, 75 (4), 495−496.
(17) Holmes, R. The science that fed. Nature 2016, 535 (7613), 490−
492.
(18) Ruekberg, B. A Possible Copernicus-Frankenstein Connection.
Notes & Queries 2005, 52 (1), 39.
(19) Britton, R. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: what made the Monster
monstrous? J. Anal. Psychol. 2015, 60 (1), 1−11.

4103 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00974
J. Chem. Educ. 2021, 98, 4101−4103