FOTMP: This was different than what I expected

[Anne]

This was the first time I read Frankenstein and I didn't notice until now how little I knew about the actual story. I haven't seen any of the movie adaptations, so my knowledge was all popular tropes and - as we say in German - "dangerous half-knowledge".

I was mostly surprised as to how quickly the actual experiment was over. It felt like "And then everything worked and holy sh*t, what a monster, f*ck it, dude, I'm outta here". I was prepared for a detailed description and a lot of building up what I thought was one of the most important scenes of the book and then it was over so fast.

All in all there were a lot of things that were different than I expected and that made me realize how present the Frankenstein story is in modern culture, but at the same time how widely it diverges from the actual book.

Anyone else had similar (or completely different) thoughts while reading the book? Were you aware of what the story was before or what were the things that surprised you about the original story?

[Shad]

I had very similar reactions the first time I read the book a few years ago. I've since read Dracula and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Both of those books are also very present in pop culture, but the pop culture version of the tale is significantly different.

[Phillip]

The biggest surprise to me was how intelligent and observant the monster is. He’s the hero of the story. I also agree about the anticlimactic creation scene.

[Tina]

Anne wrote: "...I was mostly surprised as to how quickly the actual experiment was over. It felt like "And then everything worked and holy sh*t, what a monster, f*ck it, dude, I'm outta here". I was prepared for a detailed description and a lot of building up what I thought was one of the most important scenes of the book and then it was over so fast.

That's a great description! I'm "re-reading" this in the audio version (having read it a long time ago) and I'd forgotten how fast that went by - I had to replay it to make sure I hadn't missed something!

[Sean]

Phillip wrote: "The biggest surprise to me was how intelligent and observant the monster is. He’s the hero of the story. I also agree about the anticlimactic creation scene."

I'd hardly call the monster the hero - he is the only character with a body count, after all. But I will admit that he does have a sympathetic background, and he's the main driving force of the novel.

I read this back in junior year of high school for AP English, and I can't remember if I was really surprised or not at how different it was from the pop-culture version. However, I will say that it was one of the few books I had to read for that class that I enjoyed.

[Rob]

Sean wrote: "I'd hardly call the monster the hero - he is the only character with a body count, after all.."

I don't think we'd call him heroic, but he's (and Victor too) definitely a Byronic hero, at least in his original context.

[Trike]

Rob Secundus wrote: "Sean wrote: "I'd hardly call the monster the hero - he is the only character with a body count, after all.."

I don't think we'd call him heroic, but he's (and Victor too) definitely a Byronic hero..."

“It’s a death row pardon two minutes too late
Isn’t it Byronic don’t you think?
It’s like raaiiinnn on your creation day...”

Byronic heroes were all the rage when Shelley wrote Frank, so yeah.

[John (Taloni)]

It's the Fraaaaankenstein, monster stealing your name.

[Trike]

Nice. ^5

[Bruce]

Shad wrote: "I had very similar reactions the first time I read the book a few years ago. I've since read Dracula ..."

I remember reading Dracula as a young dude, and the pop culture caricature didn't compare to the version that Bram Stoker produced. Especially now with Twilight and urban fantasy.

[Tassie Dave, S&L Historian]

Bruce wrote: "I remember reading Dracula as a young dude, and the pop culture caricature didn't compare to the version that Bram Stoker produced. Especially now with Twilight and urban fantasy. "

The Count from Sesame Street is more culturally comparable to Dracula than Twilight is.

[Shad]

Tassie Dave wrote: "The Count from Sesame Street is more culturally comparable to Dracula than Twilight is."
Sad, but true.

[Michele]

Trike wrote: "Byronic heroes were all the rage when Shelley wrote Frank, so yeah."

Byron himself was all the rage - he was one of the party who challenged each other to see who could write the best horror novel, which is when she got the idea.

[Trike]

Bruce wrote: "I remember reading Dracula as a young dude, and the pop culture caricature didn't compare to the version that Bram Stoker produced. Especially now with Twilight and urban fantasy.
."

I think Twilight’s main vamp is pretty close to Dracula. They can both walk in daylight and they’re both old guys creeping on young girls.

A lot of the stuff we commonly associate with vampires actually comes from the silent movie Nosferatu, which was much more visually appealing by virtue of the medium.

[Iain]

The BBC has an interesting radio show on the various incarnations of Frankenstein for the 200th anniversary. Frankenstein Lives!

[Joseph]

I'm starting to think that the portrayal of the creature that comes closest to the one from the book is the one we see in the TV series Penny Dreadful.

[Trike]

There are a couple TV movies which hewed closer to the book. One starred Carrie Fisher. Both are available on YouTube for free.

They’re not very good, particularly cinematically, but fairly accurate.

[Phillip]

Joseph wrote: "I'm starting to think that the portrayal of the creature that comes closest to the one from the book is the one we see in the TV series Penny Dreadful."

I agree, but I haven’t seen too much material to compare.

[John (Nevets)]

Trike is one of those the one where Robert DeNiro played the monster? I don’t remember much about the movie, but I remember thinking the ending was pretty close to the book.

[Trike]

John (Nevets) wrote: "Trike is one of those the one where Robert DeNiro played the monster? I don’t remember much about the movie, but I remember thinking the ending was pretty close to the book."

No, the TV ones are older. 1970s and 80s.

[Ruth (tilltab) Ashworth]

I had a similar reaction to the op, even though I knew a fair amount about the novel going in. I read it at uni, so I think there was even a lecture or two before I read the book, so I knew I wouldn't be seeing electricity zipping through bolts or any such thing. All the same, the sympathy for the monster, and the intellect he displayed, was surprising to me.

I think the biggest reason for the difference is that the book, as it is, just isn't very cinematic. The closest attempts to film the book as is have been dreadful, because it really is a story that works best on paper, a slow discovery of who this creature is, and what motivates him. That just doesn't translate to a visual media.

[Rob]

Trike wrote: "I think Twilight's main vamp is pretty close to dracula."

Don't forget the Three Sisters-- stoker's vamps that sparkle!

[Sean]

Rob Secundus wrote: "Don't forget the Three Sisters-- stoker's vamps that sparkle!"

Fun fact: We all know that Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein after Lord Byron proposed a ghost story contest while she and Percy were staying with him. Byron and Percy ultimately flaked out on the contest, but there was a fourth participant, Byron's personal physician, Dr. Polidori. Polidori's novella The Vampyre is a parody of Lord Byron as a vampiric gentleman, and set the model for subsequent vampires in English and French literature.

There's a company called Black Coat Press which has been translating French horror novels, including a whole series of Polidori immitations, though my favorite is Paul Feval's Vampire City, in which vamps are actually robot puppets.

[Fresno Bob]

My version had a "Filmography" section, and while I had seen the original and Bride of Frankenstein, I did not realize how much of my Frankenstein image is built up by the 1973 color version where they end up in the ice, 1974's "Young Frankenstein" and 1975's "Rocky Horror Picture Show"

[Trike]

Fresno Bob wrote: "My version had a "Filmography" section, and while I had seen the original and Bride of Frankenstein, I did not realize how much of my Frankenstein image is built up by the 1973 color version where ..."

The 1973 film was my first exposure to the story, which my babysitter let me stay up to watch while my parents went bowling. (Benefits of having a teenage guy as your sitter.)

Last week Den of Geek did an interesting article about Son of Frankenstein, which is the film Mel Brooks parodied with Young Frankenstein.

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/so...

[Rob]

Sean wrote: "There's a company called Black Coat Press which has been translating French horror novels, including a whole series of Polidori immitations, though my favorite is Paul Feval's Vampire City, in which vamps are actually robot puppets. "

Sean, I do not know if ever before I have read a goodreads comment which has filled me with such sheer joy

[Alex]

I’m in the same boat. This was my first time reading Frankenstein and I had no idea we’d have like family drama and a crime mystery and trials and everything in it! I always thought it was about Frankenstein building and bringing a monster to life but, as you said, that’s over in literally a few sentences. So definitely a surprise for me.