Frankenstein Discussion

[Elizabeth]

Laurele, what chapters in the 1831 edition can be read by March 26? And, will we then read to the end of the book? Thanks.

[Laurel]

Elizabeth wrote: "Laurele, what chapters in the 1831 edition can be read by March 26? And, will we then read to the end of the book? Thanks."

Chapters 9-17, Elizabeth. Week three will be chapters 18-24 of the 1831 edition.

http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/Indexe...

[Razi]

John wrote: "This is the only reading of the 1818 edition that I can find - and, frankly, I'm not a great fan of this reader. If anyone knows of any other recordings of the earlier edition, please do let me kno..."

I started listening to this one today:

http://www.audible.com/pd/Classics/Fr...

[Laurel]

Simon Vance is good, Razi. It's the 1831 edition.

[Everyman]

At least we have an idea what profession VF may be qualified for in future.

[Lily]

Somehow, this struck me as perhaps applicable to Mary Shelley and her writing of Frankenstein:

"For it is the function of consciousness, not only to recognize and assimilate the external world through the gateway of the senses, but to translate into visible reality the world within us."

Attributed to Jung.

The very story she created continues to roam the world, shape-shifting as it travels. Is it legitimate to ask to what extent is Mary accountable?

[David]

Kathy wrote: "Many authors submit early drafts to a trusted editor, and subsequent revisions depend upon the guidance and the pen of that editor. In this case, the editor happened to be the author's husband and a major literary figure."

Very good point, Kathy. The Original Frankenstein (Vintage Classics) showcases the 1818 draft with PBS's edits and without. I thought the following footnote was worthwhile noting.

"PBS cancelled MWS’s phrasing, pencilled in his suggested revisions, some but not all of which MWS inked over to accept. In effect, MWS edited PBS’s prose after he edited her prose."

[Lily]

Philip wrote: "Hello. I am afraid I am rather late in joining the discussion. I had mentioned, elsewhere, that I thought I should read Frankenstein. Everyman saw that and kindly sent me a message, some months ..."

Philip -- Thx for joining the discussion! Look forward to your comments. As I said when we were considering this, Frankenstein has never had a hold on my attention, but I knew Laurele would get us to have fun with it.

[Everyman]

Philip wrote: "Hello. I am afraid I am rather late in joining the discussion. I had mentioned, elsewhere, that I thought I should read Frankenstein. Everyman saw that and kindly sent me a message, some months ..."

Glad you got to it in time to join us. My experience is the same as yours, that it is much different from what I expected, and much more interesting. Like Lily, I was persuaded to vote for it because of Laurel's recommendation. As always, "when Laurel talks, people most definitely should listen." [The oldsters among us will recognize the source; the younger might not.

If you don't, try this.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=w...

[Bobbi]

As a family law attorney in Las Vegas Nevada, there are some dialectics in this book that made me chuckle, because we often see these in court cases. So I made a little tongue-in-cheek poll titled "The Frankenstein Parenting Project" on my blog, the Literati Lawyer. If you could be so kind as to vote, the link is here:
http://theliteratilawyer.wordpress.co...

[Lily]

Bobbi wrote: "As a family law attorney in Las Vegas Nevada, there are some dialectics in this book that made me chuckle, because we often see these in court cases. So I made a little tongue-in-cheek poll titled..."

How about some more choices, Bobbi? As a family law attorney, certainly you well know that the real world provides them, from familial, state, or charitable support to continuing to provide, but without the overhang of guilt or shame. Prior to birth, other options exist subject to current U.S. and state legal statutes and regulations.

[Bobbi]

It was built around the choices made in the novel, Lily. But I'm happy to incorporate some suggestions. Thanks.

[Lily]

Bobbi wrote: "It was built around the choices made in the novel, Lily. But I'm happy to incorporate some suggestions. Thanks."

It's your quiz, Bobbi! However, I looked at it and said "I can't vote on this one." I have no idea how others reacted. (I somewhat express some thoughts further in the Frankenstein discussion.)

[Bobbi]

Well, unfortunately I didn't read the novel where the Monster had disability payments and VF was compelled to pay child support with a visitation schedule. I read the one where VF "recoiled with horror" and the monster spent volume III blaming his father for his crimes.

[Lily]

Bobbi wrote: "Well, unfortunately I didn't read the novel where the Monster had disability payments and VF was compelled to pay child support with a visitation schedule. I read the one where VF "recoiled with h..."

That's why I said it is your quiz and why I said it was one on which I couldn't vote. Frankenstein as written by Shelley rather leaves a conundrum. The "real life" analogues can be heart breaking, even tragic, ala examples you give elsewhere.

[Everyman]

Lily wrote: "Frankenstein as written by Shelley rather leaves a conundrum."

And I rather think, at least if we're considering what Shelley meant by the novel, that it may not help that much to try to interpret her intentions in terms of modern legal theory and practice.

[Susan from MD]

With tongue firmly in cheek, as you suggested Bobbi, I voted. While the novel poses some very important questions, it is after all a rather outlandish story that can be shaken by the tail a little. I would suggest perhaps an option that I as the creator should be prepared to be killed for the sin of unleashing an ugly being on an unsuspecting and beauty - loving world!

[Bobbi]

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "Frankenstein as written by Shelley rather leaves a conundrum."

And I rather think, at least if we're considering what Shelley meant by the novel, that it may not help that much to try..."

The thing is, as I read Frankenstein, for me it read exactly as a mitigation case in a criminal court. It may be the model, and quite a good one at that!

But I found VF's narrative of constructing a being from robbed graves and charnel house parts, then being suddenly horrified and recoiling at his new "being"'s appearance, as entirely disingenuous. There is of course no analog to that part and that is the mystery of fiction! But the real truth is, and people who deal with many narratives know this: there is no guarantee of a good parent or a good child. That is not a question of modern legal theory and practice. That is learned through experiencing other peoples' lives through their narratives in criminal court, delinquency court, cps court, and divorce / paternity / custody court time after time. The novel begins with quite a lot of time justifying Victor's own family background as good and loving. So how could such a 'good' family raise such a set of bad apples? I don't find VF any more sympathetic than the monster, I suppose.

[Everyman]

Bobbi wrote: "That is not a question of modern legal theory and practice. That is learned through experiencing other peoples' lives through their narratives in criminal court, delinquency court, cps court, and divorce / paternity / custody court time after time."

Well, yes, and as a now retired family law attorney myself I know exactly what you're saying.

But in Mary Shelley's day, the criminal courts were very different from ours today, there were no delinquency courts, no cps court, almost no divorce, minimal paternity, and no custody court (except for Chancery, but as to custody, the father got it if he wanted it and that was that). The church was a much more important arbiter of family law issues than the courts. And the whole concept of family and family duty was quite different from what we know it as today.

The key point, of course, is the parent/creator child/creation relationship, and that we can indeed (and should) talk about, but I suggest maybe more in moral and philosophical terms than in legal terms.

[Laurel]

I think you've made a good analogy, Bobbi, and I enjoyed filling out your survey. Thank you for keeping it short.

[Bobbi]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I wasn't attempting to be abrasive. In terms of the novel, I quite enjoyed it and found relevance to modern times and got quite a lot out of it because parenting, including parenting problems are universal. I greatly enjoyed having people to discuss it with only. Not only is it a mitigation case, but the novel is also very modern in its psychoanalytic approach, even though it was written before modern psychology.

So one of my personal highest kudos to a novelist is that he or she was ahead of her times, such as Shakespeare or Melville. And I think that Shelley was writing well ahead of her times, even if she only set out to write a ghost story. But it's such a good story, with many universal questions. I just found my modern way to use the text. Thank you moderators for a great text.

[Everyman]

Bobbi wrote: "Thanks for the feedback everyone. I wasn't attempting to be abrasive.

I didn't see it that way at all. It opened a good discussion. That's the whole point here.

[Lily]

My local library is moderating a discussion of Frankenstein tonight. While I didn't find the time to re-read it, I do plan to go listen. For the participants use, they made available a number of copies of The Annotated Frankenstein, see link below:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8...

Leonard Wolf was born in Vulcan, Romania, and is also author of The Annotated Dracula.

Some of you may have used it during our read. I was not aware of it. I have browsed it and it has been enjoyable, albeit seemingly a bit repetitive. I do think I will try to use it if I ever do put some serious time into re-reading Frankenstein again.