ellen’s work in the play is based on real-life research; the ‘human genome project’ (HGP)

Ellen is involved in a project that has the potential for both immense good and harmful consequences. The Human Genome Project promises breakthroughs in understanding and curing diseases but also opens up debates about genetic manipulation, eugenics, and the commodification of human life.

Ellen's dilemma resonates with the play's broader questions about the responsibility of scientists: Is there a line that should not be crossed? Should scientific discovery always be pursued, regardless of its potential impact on society? Her work also introduces the idea of control over human identity, paralleling the play's exploration of figurative possession and consumption of people, like Isobel in the 1799 timeline. Just as Isobel's autonomy is threatened by those who want to possess or exploit her, Ellen’s work on the genome suggests a future where human beings could be similarly "possessed" or controlled at a fundamental, biological level. (for more context on isobel’s figurative cannibalism theory view this page: they want to eat you, isobel.)

here are a few problems associated with the human genome project:

• Ethical concerns: Fears of violating the natural order by "playing God" with human genetics. (also may lead to abortions as kate stated in act one scene two. it also poses the question: which is more important, health or life?)
• Privacy issues: Concerns over the misuse of genetic information, such as discrimination by employers or insurers based on a person's genetic makeup.
• Eugenics fears: Worries that knowledge from the HGP could lead to selective breeding, genetic engineering, or attempts to create "designer babies," raising the specter of a new form of eugenics.
• Inequality: Concerns that advances from the HGP could primarily benefit wealthy individuals or countries, exacerbating social and global inequalities.
• Patenting of genetic material: Debate over whether genes could be patented, raising concerns that companies could own parts of the human genome, leading to profit-driven science.
• Commercialization of human life: Fears that the project could lead to the commodification of human DNA, where people's genetic data becomes a marketable product.
• Loss of genetic diversity: Warnings that genetic interventions could reduce the natural diversity of the human species, which could have unforeseen consequences for human adaptability.
• Consent and exploitation: Concerns about consent, particularly in the use of DNA from marginalized populations or developing countries, where people may not fully understand or agree to how their genetic material is used.

“In the age of the Genome, three levels of protection are necessary. The first is to ensure that people have control over the genetic information that is generated about them. The second is to give them control of who has access to that information. The third is to prevent discrimination based on genetic information”. Lori B. Andrews.

“The human genome is the grail. It is the ultimate response to the commandment “know thyself”. Walter Gilbert at the Human Genome Research Centre Los Alamos, March 1986