Frankenstein in Reading the Classics

Apr 20, 2012 Andrea rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: read-sorted, list-1001-books, fiction-scifi, fiction-horror

2017: Excellent moral dilemmas are discussed through the conflict between an irresponsible creator and his misunderstood creature. Also, it mentions my hometown, which is the first time I encounter such an occurrence in fiction. It's a sci-fi book written by a woman in the age when only men were supposed to be creative and smart enough to spew words on paper. I'm only taking a star away because the novel should be re-titled Frankenstein, or Where Characters Complain A Lot. ...more

9 likes · Like · see review

Sep 01, 2010 Bogdan rated it liked it

Shelves: brits

Hollywood distorted greatly the original book and the well known image of Frankenstein is not at all similar with the author's original intent. Victor Frankenstein is the scientist that creates the monster. The monster has no name and it is largely not adapted to the world and the world not ready for him. This is basically the drama of this novel that leads to the monster destroying his creator and his family or friends.
Anyhow, the novel is of obvious romantic influence and the author does not c ...more

2 likes · Like · see review

Sep 01, 2011 Kathleen Valentine rated it really liked it

The book, written by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, the young wife of the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, is incredibly different from the movies made over a century later. The writing style is typically old-fashioned but tends to be a bit over-burdened at times which is why I give it 4-stars instead of 5, but the story is heart-breaking.

Young Victor Frankenstein is a son of privilege. He has a loving father, two charming brothers, and a beautiful cousin that the family hopes he will one day marry. Whi The book, written by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, the young wife of the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, is incredibly different from the movies made over a century later. The writing style is typically old-fashioned but tends to be a bit over-burdened at times which is why I give it 4-stars instead of 5, but the story is heart-breaking.

Young Victor Frankenstein is a son of privilege. He has a loving father, two charming brothers, and a beautiful cousin that the family hopes he will one day marry. While studying medicine, Victor becomes obsessed with the concept of creating life and he begins a series of experiments which result in his creation of a "monster" but the minute the monster comes to life Victor is horrified and repulsed by his creation and promptly rejects it. He casts his creation out in to the world with no preparation for life whatsoever and tries to distance himself as far as possible from what he has brought into being. This, of course, does not work.

Victor returns to his studies and to his life but, soon after he finishes his studies, he is called home because his younger brother has been murdered and the foster child his father raised, a lovely but fragile young woman, has been accused and is about to stand trial. Victor hurries home but to no avail. Justine is convicted of murdering the son of the family that raised her and is hanged. Victor, of course, knows she could not have done this and suspects it is the work of his own creation. He sets off into the snow-bound secrets of the Alps and there is met by his creation who tells him his tale.

His is an incredibly sad story. The monster, cast out into the world knows nothing -- he cannot speak or communicate, he does not know how to care for himself, he is utterly alone in the world with no skills at all. The only thing he knows is that he is much bigger and more powerful than other men and that his appearance terrifies them. He eventually finds himself in proximity to a family -- a blind old man and his two grandchildren who care for him. By living hidden but close to them and eavesdropping on their life, the monster learns to speak and also learns about the world. He is the most pitiful of beings, leading a lonely, hidden life. He tries to help the family he lives near by gathering firewood he leaves outside their door along with nuts and berries but he is completely alone. When ultimately he tries to contact the family he is met with hatred, fear and terror and runs away again.

The monster begs Victor to make him a companion. He cannot bear being alone in the world and promises that, if only Victor will create a partner for him, he will go as far away a possible and that they will never be seen again. Victor agrees and goes to an island in the Orkneys with the intention of creating an "Eve" for his "Adam" but is so repulsed by the process, even though he did it once before, that he gathers up his work and deposits it in a lake. The monster, who has followed him, observes this and begins a series of murders out of rage.

This is an incredibly sad story. Victor comes across as an obnoxious, spoiled, insensitive brat who is constantly falling into illness because of his own rash and imprudent behavior. And the monster is the saddest of creations -- alone with nothing in the world to support himself except his incredible strength. By the end of the story one cannot help but ask "who is the real monster here?" The answer is pretty apparent. ...more

1 like · Like · see review

May 27, 2011 Erin WV rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: fiction, on-my-shelves, digital-read, 2010

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Frankenstein is not as awesome a read as its thematic soulmate Dracula, because Dracula has more action. Victor (AKA Dr. Frankenstein) is an incredibly passive character to hang this novel on. Early on, he narrates almost feverishly about the years that he spends studying, researching, experimenting to discover how to recreate the spark of life. Then he does, and his creature lives. He’s terrified of the creature, so he runs away—literally—and when he returns to his house, the creature has disap Frankenstein is not as awesome a read as its thematic soulmate Dracula, because Dracula has more action. Victor (AKA Dr. Frankenstein) is an incredibly passive character to hang this novel on. Early on, he narrates almost feverishly about the years that he spends studying, researching, experimenting to discover how to recreate the spark of life. Then he does, and his creature lives. He’s terrified of the creature, so he runs away—literally—and when he returns to his house, the creature has disappeared. And then a year passes while he tries to forget what he did. Later, after he’s seen the creature again, and the creature has demanded that Victor build him a female companion, Victor agrees. He spends a few months arranging a trip to England to work with some scientists there. He travels there slowly—in a downright leisurely manner–with a friend. Then they spend a few months traveling the English countryside.

From Derby, still journeying northwards, we passed two months in Cumberland and Westmorland. I could now almost fancy myself among the Swiss mountains.

Really, Victor, is that so? GET TO WORK. They’re here and there and Victor keeps describing scenery—mountains and rivers and fields. Look at the men of Dracula comparatively—Seward, Harker, Van Helsing, the other guys—they’re all working, all the time. They’re staying up all night doing blood transfusions on Lucy, then they’re staking out the cemetery, then they’re planning to infiltrate the Count’s house, and they’re jumping on and off trains. They’re dynamos. I’m not saying that Dracula is an inherently better book for that, or those men inherently better characters. Victor’s ambivalence and fretting over what he’s done is complex and interesting. It just makes the book a bit less suspenseful than Stoker’s. Supposedly Mary Shelley originally composed the story to be told around a roaring fire. Maybe she put in all the aimless wandering later.

Philosophically, it’s incredibly interesting—tons of circuitous little routes to follow. The most obvious is the question of the man of science playing God. In high school, which was the first time I read Frankenstein, I wrote a paper about how the debate about technology and ethics was still relevant to the modern world, using the cloning controversy as my example. (Remember Dolly, the first cloned sheep? She was new then.)

This time, I was fascinated by the part where the monster demanded that Frankenstein make him a mate. He basically lays blackmail at Victor's feet—he says, I am unloved so I am unhappy. As long as I’m unhappy, everybody DIES. Make me a girl and you’ll never hear from us again. If you don’t, everybody DIES. I started thinking about the idea of the outcast, the pariah, and what their retaliatory rights actually are. If society disenfranchises a person (or a race, or an ethnic group, or a gender or a class, etc.) does that person/race/group have the right to turn to violence? Or should they turn the other cheek? You could trace a lot of different philosophical perspectives all congregating in this one scene.

I don’t know why Victor doesn’t just kill the monster, though. He has many opportunities; presumably one good shot to the head would do it. Then he DOES decide to kill the monster. But he waits until morning, and then he walks on the beach to think about it, and then he takes a nap. This is maybe the most meandery book I’ve ever read. Still, the hype is true. It’s a masterpiece of the English language. ...more

Like · see review