Frankenstein in Easley Library Bookworms

Mar 21, 2008 Werner rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: books-i-own, science-fiction, classics

Note, Jan. 27, 2016 --I edited this just now to correct a minor typo.

While "Frankenstein" is a household word today --no mean achievement for the author, especially when one considers that she wrote this novel, her first, as an 18-year-old girl-- it would be fair to say that most people know the story through the 1930s black-and-white movie adaptation with Boris Karloff, which doesn't follow the book very closely. (And they usually associate the name with the Creature, although it's actually the Note, Jan. 27, 2016 --I edited this just now to correct a minor typo.

While "Frankenstein" is a household word today --no mean achievement for the author, especially when one considers that she wrote this novel, her first, as an 18-year-old girl-- it would be fair to say that most people know the story through the 1930s black-and-white movie adaptation with Boris Karloff, which doesn't follow the book very closely. (And they usually associate the name with the Creature, although it's actually the name of his creator, Victor Frankenstein.) The book itself isn't as widely known, and a lot of its aspects aren't particularly congenial to many modern readers. These would include the epistolary format, the elaborate and wordy 19th-century diction, and the relatively low amount of the text that's actually involved with "horror"-type action. Those aren't particular problems for me personally, but I still bucked the trend with my three-star rating; in my friend circle, most people's ratings were in the 4-5 star range. In my case, the lower rating was a reaction to the very dark plot of the book; I don't want to share specific spoilers, but I can say that this is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a feel-good read. Mary Shelley was definitely a writer of the Romantic school, aiming to appeal primarily to the reader's emotions; and the emotions she principally evokes here are pity, grief and horror --not my favorite ones. :-( I've read this novel twice (1996 is the date of the second read) only because I had to reread it for a graduate correspondence course on the history of science fiction that I was taking. That said, though, the measure of my subjective enjoyment isn't a measure of the quality of the literary craftsmanship; that's actually of a very high order, and (if you aren't put off by the ornate prose) packs a great deal of brooding suspense and emotional power. The book holds its status as a classic for a reason --actually, quite a few reasons!

One of the latter is that it's a serious novel of ideas. The writer isn't simply trying to tell a scary story, but to prompt us to think; she has messages behind the tale. These are not, however, the obvious "Science shouldn't presume to try to create sentient life!" Shelley herself didn't believe that was a real-life possibility, as she stated in her preface to the 1818 edition. What then, might be her messages? A lot could be (and has been) written about that question. She invites readers to think by not spelling out her own ideas in textbook fashion; instead, they're woven into the structure of the novel, and often embodied in symbolism (though the symbolism isn't carried to the point of full-fledged allegory). I don't claim to have the last word on the subject. But I do have thoughts.

Victor is first and foremost a creator who abandons his creation, with disastrous results. Many of the intellectuals of that day embraced Deism, with its Creator who supposedly wound up His creation like a watch and abandoned it to run according to "natural law" discoverable by "Reason" --and although the full-blown horrors of the Industrial Revolution (brought to you by "Reason") were still future in 1817, the outlines of things to come were already there. I don't think it too much of a stretch to see Frankenstein as at least partly an indictment of the "Watchmaker God." On a more earthly level, Victor's behavior has something to say about the responsibilities of fathers to their children; in a sense, Victor abandons his "child." And how many real-life males, then and now, irresponsibly abandon and neglect their kids? (The author didn't have to look far for examples; her own older half-sister was sired and abandoned by the creep who impregnated and jilted their mother, and while Mary was born in wedlock, her own father was emotionally distant, neglectful and indifferent to her.) The role of nature vs. nurture in producing behavior is another theme that the novel explores. Shelley argues by example for the importance of nurture --of love, and acceptance, and wholesome teaching-- in producing good attitudes and behavior. I agree with some other readers in preferring to call Victor's creation the Creature, rather than "the monster;" I don't think he was inherently a monster. Yes, he makes choices --and very bad, vicious ones, as do some people. But he might have been influenced to make better ones, given a less prejudiced and hostile reception by humans unfairly appalled just by his ugly looks. Part of the author's intended lesson here, IMO, is the fallacy of automatically equating physical with moral deformity, and a reminder of the effects cruel and prejudiced and dehumanizing treatment can have on its targets. We also have an object lesson about vainglorious ambition, and neglect of human relationships to pursue that ambition, and where that leads. Victor --and the explorer Walton, whom he recognizes as having a kindred ambition-- aren't the only humans who need that lesson; a business or a career, for instance (or even creative art; Shelley knew about that temptation) can evoke the same idolatrous ambition as science or exploration. There's even a bit of a feminist message here (not surprisingly, coming from Mary Wollestonecraft's daughter).

In conclusion, I'd never rank this as a favorite read. But there's a lot to repay a read of it, nonetheless, and it's well worth reading at least once. So far, it's the only novel by the author that I've read (I've also read a couple of her short stories); but I hope to read more of her work eventually. ...more

38 likes · Like · see review

Apr 13, 2010 Crystal rated it it was amazing

Shelves: fiction

Read the book, it's not what you think. Even though at times, some of this plot is a bit sensational and contrived, the writing is glorious. Mary Shelley is truly a master.

Sadly, Hollywood has reduced this splendid, gothic work to a sloppy horror story about a monster that creeps around with his arms stretched forward trying to scare anyone who crosses his path. Mary Shelley had the good fortune to be involved with a highly cerebral group of poets and writers who sought to explore the deeper, so Read the book, it's not what you think. Even though at times, some of this plot is a bit sensational and contrived, the writing is glorious. Mary Shelley is truly a master.

Sadly, Hollywood has reduced this splendid, gothic work to a sloppy horror story about a monster that creeps around with his arms stretched forward trying to scare anyone who crosses his path. Mary Shelley had the good fortune to be involved with a highly cerebral group of poets and writers who sought to explore the deeper, sometimes deviant, capacities hidden in the human soul and intellect. Shelley writes her story embedded within a story and introduces Victor Frankenstein, a brilliant young scientist/scholar who received the opportunity to study with the greats minds in science. He immerses himself in his research and soon stumbles upon some hidden, illicit knowledge that allows him to put human tissues together and infuse them with life. Thus, Frankenstein’s monster is “born.” Not long afterward Victor realizes that he cannot control what he has created and abhors its existence wishing it dead. The monster flees and as a way of lashing back for his rejection, he begins to calculatingly threaten and murder those who are important to Victor. Victor swears that he will pursue and undo what he has done but when given the chance; he is unable to kill that which he brought to life.
The monster begs for a companion and reasons with Victor that he should create another so that the monster will not have to bear his life alone. Victor is convinced and begins the project but then abandons it. The monster creates further havoc and Victor abandons all that is precious to him in order to seek out and destroy the monster. His illusive quest takes him across the Alps into the frozen Arctic.
While this tale was denounced when it was published because it supposedly contained no moral lesson, readers would need to re-evaluate how this work relates to contemporary society more than 200 years later. This masterpiece tackles themes of duty, responsibility, justice, alienation, and, ultimately, man’s quest to see himself as God.

...more

2 likes · Like · see review