Published in 2017, Never Let Me Go is a book by Kazuo Ishiguro. It is set in England’s 1990 dystopian period. Generally, the lives of human beings are prolonged by cloning. And the clones are known as students, and they are taken care of in a specialized institution. The clones are hidden from the real world, and as they grow up, they donate vital organs. Published in 2012, Frankenstein is a book by Mary Shelley, which generally illustrates what happens if a person attempts to play the role of God. The story is about a talented scientist, Victor Frankenstein, who develops a creature and successfully gives it life. However, the creation is a monster that seeks revenge after being rejected by Victor Frankenstein and humankind in general. All in all, through an extensive illustration, this paper critically compares these two books concerning the authors’ presentation of warnings about the future, which are illustrated efficiently.
If you’re to live decent lives, you have to know who you are and what lies ahead of you, every one of you (Ishiguro, 2017). These are Miss Lucy’s statements in Never Let Me Go as she describes how to live; especially, when people are waiting for their death. The donation program of the students means that they will die after their vital body parts are extracted. However, their caregivers tend to hide that fact as much as possible. In Miss Lucy’s statements above, she does not agree with the fact that the students do not know their fate since the institution has been hiding the truth concerning their future. Also, Miss Lucy is not happy with the secrets since most of the students are hopeful of a better life. In this case, the author presents warnings about the future effectively. From the author’s viewpoint, there is no need to have hoped or live in lies when you are bound to die. And this is what Lucy thought when she revealed the donation secret.
Concerning Frankenstein, the future is presented through casual dependency. In that, the structure of blame points out specific events that change the trajectory of the future. In one instance, in chapter one, Frankenstein doubts that he would have undertaken the creation of Frankenstein if his father had not scoffed at his son’s interest in alchemy and the like (Shelley, 2012). Similarly, Victor Frankenstein’s monster blames him for the deformed craftsmanship, neglect, and lousy life. In other words, both the characters are making assumptions that their future, which is the present life, could have been better if their creators made specific decisions. In this scenario, the author presents warning about the future after illustrating what the future entails then relating it to the regrettable present. That aside, the fact that Frankenstein created a creature adds a lot of value to science.
Victor Frankenstein was a very talented scientist, and in as much as the creature that he created did not meet his expectations, he created a living creature. In this scenario, the author is indicating that the future of human beings and the living creature will depend on science. Besides, science is already playing a vital role in the lives of people. Thus, by presenting a scientist who attempts to create a living organism, the author is illustrating that science will develop extensively to a point where it could support life. After an extensive illustration of a few scenarios, both authors’ presentations of warnings about the future are illustrated satisfactorily.