overlaylink

The New York Times Is Wrong About Science Fiction

Harrison Cook
November 21, 2024 | 4 min read

Even though it’s four years old now, the 2021 New York Times article claiming H.G. Wells invented the genre of science fiction still makes the rounds on social media, sparking outrage, push-back, and splitting literary hairs.

You know the literary type: we’re well-read and love citing sources and, well, being right. I’m speaking from experience here. And that’s why I’m confident telling you that The New York Times forgot about this little book called Frankenstein.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus fused elements of romanticism and the gothic to create a tale many call gothic horror. But her fascination with the technology of the day (like electricity that ran through tesla coils) pushed her imagination and her writing to create a future devoid of death. Her seminal novel examines how this complicates the mortal coil.

What if anyone could reanimate a loved one or create an amalgam of dead body parts? What soul occupies the new body? What does it say about the consciousness of the scientist who pursues such endeavors?

That is pure science fiction.

Check out the inspiration behind Frankenstein and the biographical details that paint a clearer picture of Mary Shelley, the true pioneer of science fiction!

You know the literary type: we’re well-read and love citing sources and, well, being right. I’m speaking from experience here. And that’s why I’m confident telling you that The New York Times forgot about this little book called Frankenstein.

Mary Shelley Had an Interesting Childhood

Mary Shelley was raised by her father, a political journalist and philosopher, and was often encouraged to write despite not receiving a formal education. Her father often kept the company of leading intellectuals of the day, which inspired Shelley’s storytelling.

While there is a lot of Mary Shelley lore, which is hard to separate from the truth at times, Shelley’s life was as dark, gothic, and passion-filled as the horror she wrote.

Let’s address the elephant in the room — yes, it’s more than likely that Mary Shelley lost her V-card with her soon-to-be husband, Percy Shelley, at her mother’s grave. There’s a lot to unpack there.

Percy was a poet, so it was almost expected of him to do overtly crazy things, and Mary did lose her mom ten days after being born, so maybe she gets a pass too.

However, the parallel between Mary Shelley and her fictional Victor Frankenstein is clear, given that in the novel, Dr. Frankenstein often supplements his anatomy and chemistry lessons by digging up graves and comparing their parts.

In every fiction, there is something real, and in everything real, there is some fiction.

The Science That Made Frankenstein’s Monster

Eighteenth and ninteenth-century scientific theory is wild but also held some surprising truths. Galvanism, a leading scientific branch at the time, suggested the body’s electrical framework could be flipped back “on” when a current was reintroduced into the body’s chemicals — which led to the belief you could reanimate the body under the right conditions and with the right materials.

Mary and Percy Shelley would see a scientific demonstration of this principle in a traveling symposium — an event wonderfully stylized in the bioflick Mary Shelley starring Elle Fanning. Here, the scientists would supercharge a metal rod and then press it on the skin of a dead frog, which would “magically” kick back to life.

A modern reader, of course, knows this is simply an electric current causing the corpse’s muscles to contract. But place yourself in the audience of this symposium and imagine seeing a dead frog kick — it would be the stuff of mad science, the stuff of novels!

There was a greater dialogue between the arts and sciences back then, too, which often painted the heralds of discovery as equal parts fervent passion and fearful power. This clearly serves as a blueprint for the doctor himself.

In the novel, Dr. Frankenstein references Benjamin Franklin’s famous key-and-kite experiment to test the path of lightning currents. There’s even some speculation on the two figures sharing the same five letters in their last name.

There was a greater dialogue between the arts and sciences back then, too, which often painted the heralds of discovery as equal parts fervent passion and fearful power.

The Writing Sleepover

Another legendary setting: the sleepover-turned-writing-contest that produced The Modern Prometheus. Lord Byron; John Polidori, Byron's personal physician; and Percy and Mary Shelley tasked one another with writing a ghost story while escaping the summer rain in Switzerland.

Mary would initially write a short story version of Frankenstein, which would later be developed and edited by Percy Shelley. Lord Byron wrote the beginnings of a vampire short story and Polidori expanded that into a novel called The Vampyre. It’s thought that Percy started a short story about his childhood but abandoned it to work on a collection of poems.

While several literary works were produced on that trip, only one truly stands the test of time through countless reimaginations and adaptations. Think of the depressed teens making the “perfect” boyfriend in Lisa Frankenstein, and experiments in learning what it means to be human-like, as in Poor Things.

The relationship between the creator and what’s created, an archetype used to create the science fiction genre by Mary Shelley, never fails to disappoint.

In Conclusion

We should probably give an overworked NYT writer and editor a break. Maybe.

Here’s the rub: while Wells certainly helped shape the genre of science fiction, the article breezed past one key pioneer of sci-fi, Mary Shelley. By the time H.G. Wells was born in 1866, Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus had been published for 48 years.

It’s high time we stop erasing the contributions of women writers from our collective literary history. Period.

Think of it this way: Frankenstein’s monster ran (or lumbered) so Wells's Martians could plan their earthly invasion.

Think of it this way: Frankenstein’s monster ran (or lumbered) so Wells's Martians could plan their earthly invasion.

--

Resources

Audrey Shafer, MD. “Why Issues Raised in Frankenstein Still Matter 200 Years Later.” Stanford Medicine Magazine, 1 Feb. 2024, stanmed.stanford.edu/why-issues-raised-in-frankenstein-still-matter-200-years-later.
Reef, Catherine. Mary Shelley: The Strange, True Tale of Frankenstein’s Creator. Clarion Books, 2018.
“The Story of Mary Shelley.” The Queen’s Reading Room, 10 Nov. 2023, thequeensreadingroom.co.uk/the-story-of-mary-shelley.
January 09, 2026 2 min read

A new year means a whole new crop of work is entering the public domain. And that means endless opportunities for retellings, spoofs, adaptations, and fan fiction.

December 30, 2025 3 min read

It’s Freewrite’s favorite time of year. When dictionaries around the world examine language use of the previous year and select a “Word of the Year.”

Of course, there are many different dictionaries in use in the English language, and they all have different ideas about what word was the most influential or saw the most growth in the previous year. They individually review new slang and culturally relevant vocabulary, examine spikes or dips in usage, and pour over internet trend data.

Let’s see what some of the biggest dictionaries decided for 2025. And read to the end for a chance to submit your own Word of the Year — and win a Freewrite gift card.

[SUBMIT YOUR WORD OF THE YEAR]


Merriam-Webster: "slop"

Merriam-Webster chose "slop" as its Word of the Year for 2025 to describe "all that stuff dumped on our screens, captured in just four letters."

The dictionary lists "absurd videos, off-kilter advertising images, cheesy propaganda, fake news that looks pretty real, junky AI-written books, 'workslop' reports that waste coworkers’ time … and lots of talking cats" as examples of slop.

The original sense of the word "slop" from the 1700s was “soft mud” and eventually evolved to mean "food waste" and "rubbish." 2025 linked the term to AI, and the rest is history.

Honorable mentions: conclave, gerrymander, touch grass, performative, tariff, 67.

Dictionary.com: "67"

The team at Dictionary.com likes to pick a word that serves as “a linguistic time capsule, reflecting social trends and global events that defined the year.”

For 2025, they decided that “word” was actually a number. Or two numbers, to be exact.

If you’re an old, like me, and don’t know many school-age children, you may not have heard “67” in use. (Note that this is not “sixty-seven,” but “six, seven.”)

Dictionary.com claims the origin of “67” is a song called “Doot Doot (6 7)” by Skrilla, quickly made infamous by viral TikTok videos, most notably featuring a child who will for the rest of his life be known as the “6-7 Kid.” But according to my nine-year-old cousin, the origins of something so mystical can’t ever truly be known.

(My third grade expert also demonstrated the accompanying signature hand gesture, where you place both hands palms up and alternately move up and down.)

And if you happen to find yourself in a fourth-grade classroom, watch your mouth, because there’s a good chance this term has been banned for the teacher’s sanity.

Annoyed yet? Don’t be. As Dictionary.com points out, 6-7 is a rather delightful example at how fast language can develop as a new generation joins the conversation.

Dictionary.com honorable mentions: agentic, aura farming, broligarchy, clanker, Gen Z stare, kiss cam, overtourism, tariff, tradwife.

Oxford Dictionary: "rage bait"

With input from more than 30,000 users and expert analysis, Oxford Dictionary chose "rage bait" for their word of the year.

Specifically, the dictionary pointed to 2025’s news cycle, online manipulation tactics, and growing awareness of where we spend our time and attention online.

While closely paralleling its etymological cousin "clickbait," rage bait more specifically denotes content that evokes anger, discord, or polarization.

Oxford's experts report that use of the term has tripled in the last 12 months.

Oxford Dictionary's honorable mentions:aura farming, biohack.

Cambridge Dictionary: "parasocial"

The Cambridge Dictionary examined a sustained trend of increased searches to choose "parasocial" as its Word of the Year.

Believe it or not, this term was coined by sociologists in 1956, combining “social” with the Greek-derived prefix para-, which in this case means “similar to or parallel to, but separate from.”

But interest in and use of the term exploded this year, finally moving from a mainly academic context to the mainstream.

Cambridge Dictionary's honorable mentions: slop, delulu, skibidi, tradwife

Freewrite: TBD

This year, the Freewrite Fam is picking our own Word of the Year.

Click below to submit what you think the Word of 2025 should be, and we'll pick one submission to receive a Freewrite gift card.

[SUBMIT HERE] 

--

Sources

December 18, 2025 7 min read

What can Jane Austen's personal letters teach writers of today?