medigraphic.com
ISSN 0016-3813 (Print)

2018, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Gac Med Mex 2018; 154 (1)

Del romanticismo y la ficción a la realidad: Dippel, Galvani, Aldini y «el moderno Prometeo». Breve historia del impulso nervioso

López-Valdés JC

Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page: 105-110
PDF size: 139.03 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin, better known as Mary Shelley, and her romantic vision of the world gave life to an endless progeny of literacy stories; also originated the myth of the mortal creator who generate life from science. Unexpectedly the history has been considered as a myth, due to acts grounded in facts of certain “truthful;” such were galvanism and the study of the electrical potential in living beings by the two Italian physicians: Luigi Galvani and Giovanni Aldini. Also, is possible to proclaim direct influence on the work by the European folklore surrounding the theologian, alchemist Johann Konrad Dippel and physician who habited the Frankenstein’s Castle from his birth, and further developing the “life elixir.” The similarities between the novel and the life of the three historical figures suggests that Mary Shelley, belonging to a socially graceful and educated class, was aware of the scientific dispute over the understanding of electricity. Shelley’s creative world, full of gothic and romantic hues, shows direct influence of alchemy speaking of the “spark of life” as well as works published by Galvani and Aldini.


REFERENCES

  1. Pamo-Reyna O. Mary Shelley, Frankenstein y la creación de vida. Disponible en: https://www researchgate net/publication/295092438

  2. Kallman A. Speciesism in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (Short Master’s thesis in English literature). Lund: Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University; 2015.

  3. Mitra Z. A science fiction in a gothic scaffold: a reading of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Rupkatha j. interdiscip. stud. humanit. 2011;3 52-9.

  4. Shelley M. Frankenstein o “el moderno Prometeo”. Barcelona: Ediciones B; 1991.

  5. Miscione GP. Las ranas de Galvani, la pila de Volta y el sueño del doctor Frankenstein. Hipótesis, Apuntes Científicos Uniandinos. 2015;(18).

  6. Aynsley EE, Campbell WA. Johann Konrad Dippel, 1673-1734. Med Hist. 1962;6:281-6.

  7. Kraft A. On the discovery and history of Prussian blue. Bull Hist Chem. 2008;33:62-7.

  8. Mueller M. Frankenstein – the monster’s home? Geschichtsverein Eberstadt/Frankenstein. 2010. Disponible en: http://www.eberstadt- frankenstein.de/content/066_Any_monster_at_home_English_version pdf

  9. De Micheli-Serra A, Iturralde-Torres P, Izaguirre-Ávila R. How electricity was discovered and how it is related to cardiology. Arch Cardiol Mex. 2012;82:252-9.

  10. Bresadola M. Medicine and science in the life of Luigi Galvani (1737- 1798). Brain Research Bulletin. 1998;46:367-80.

  11. Piccolino M. Luigi Galvani’s path to animal electricity. C R Biologies. 2006;329:303-18.

  12. Piccolino M. Visual images in Luigi Galvani’s path to animal electricity. Journal of The History of the Neurosciences. 2008;17:abstract.

  13. Piccolino M. Luigi Galvani and animal electricity: two centuries after the foundation of electrophysiology. Trends Neurosci. 1997;20:443-8.

  14. De Micheli-Serra A. Recordando a Luigi Galvani en el bicentenario de su muerte. Gac Med Mex. 1999;135:323-8.

  15. Gallone P. La rana de Galvani: anuncio de una nueva era. Electrochimica Acta. 1986;31:1485-90.

  16. Stephens E. “Dead eyes open”: the role of experiments in galvanic reanimation in nineteenth-century popular culture. Leonardo. 2015;48:276-7.

  17. Palacios L. Breve historia de la electroencefalografía. Acta Neurol Colomb. 2002;18:104-7.

  18. Griffiths A. Tableaux morts: execution, cinema, and galvanistic fantasies. Republics of letters. Disponible en: http //arcade.stanford.edu/sites/default/ files/article_pdfs/ROFL_v4_Griffiths_03Pass(2)_0 pdf

  19. Parent A. Giovanni Aldini: from animal electricity to human brain stimulation. Can J Neurol Sci. 2004;31:576-84.

  20. De Micheli A. En torno a los primeros estudios de electrofisiología. Arch Cardiol Mex 2011;81:337-42.

  21. King L. Signor Aldini’s notebook. Treasures from the Library 64. Disponible en: http://publishing.rcseng.ac.uk/doi/pdf/10.1308/147363510X505839

  22. Kandel M, Beis J-M, Le Chapelain L, et al. Non-invasive cerebral stimulation for the upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: a review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2012;55:657-80.

  23. Elsenaar A, Scha R. Electric body manipulation as performance art: a historical perspective. Leonardo Music Journal. 2002;12:17-28.

  24. Canavero S, Ren X, Kim CY. HEAVEN: the Frankenstein effect. Surg Neurol Int. 2016; 7. Disponible en: http //surgicalneurologyint.com/surgicalint_articles/ heaven-the-frankenstein-effect/. DOI:10.4103/2152-7806.190472

  25. Rutten WLC. Selective electrical interfaces with the nervous system. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2002;4:407-52.

  26. Huntington G. Transcranial direct current stimulation: a viable therapeutic option for depression. Res Medica. 2015;23:82-5.

  27. Zaghi S, Acar M, Hultgren B, Boggio PS, Fregni F. Noninvasive brain stimulation with low-intensity electrical currents: putative mechanisms of action for direct and alternating current stimulation. The Neuroscientist. 2009;20:1-24.

  28. Steinberg R. Between silence and speech: spectres and images in the aftermath of the Reign of Terror. Acta Academica. 2015; 47:247-65.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com