Frankenstein (1818)

Considering that Mary Shelley's Frankenstine is considered one of hte most important novels in the English literary canon, I found it rather underwhelming. Not, of course, from its lack of story or ingenuity (at the time it was considered utterly unique), but because I found the protagonist, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, to be completely infuriating and idiotic. For someone blessed with a seemingly brilliant scientific mind, Frankenstein exhibits a number of sociopathic tendencies, rooted ina self-centred narcissism and disassociation with the consequences of reality. Clearly some of his behavioural traits are inspired by concurrent literary trends (the Sorrows of Young Werther, for one) and the overly dramatic and romantic tendencies of the men Mary Shelley kept company with, but none of that redeems Frankenstein's attrocious behaviour in my eyes, In essence, the novel is a portrait of a man acting badly, even when he is given every chance of redemption, so I feel no sympathy towards the miserable circumstances in which he finds himself at the finale. All that I hope is that after the final confrontation between the monster and his deceased creator is that he manages to find his place in the world - even if it is in the reaches of the far North and away from the company of humanity. People are totally over-rated after all! ( )

Not nearly what I expected from years of Frankenstein-osmosis, but never really wowed me either. It's solid. ( )

A lonely English sea captain sets sail for the North Pole from his base in Russia. As he grows closer to his destination, his crew rescues an emaciated form from the icy waters. Their mysterious guest slowly recovers his strength, then relates (to the captain, at least) an incredible story: he is chasing a monster - a demon - of his own creation, with a mixture of fear, vengeance, and determination.

I was surprised to find a frame story; though why, I'm not sure - quite a few novels from this time period are constructed thus. There is a hint of Dracula as well, with the epistolary style of this frame. But of course the meat of the work is in the 23 chapters between these letters, one in which Victor Frankenstein confronts quite a few existential questions around the idea of what it means to play god.

This is quite a compelling tale, not the least reason being that its written in such a manner as to suggest that Frankenstein is insane, and has been for most of his adult life. The fact that he falls into illness the very same night that he gives his horrible creation life, and continues to have these spells of illness any time he has a 'confrontation' with the creature, gives pay to that idea. The fact that he, alone, is aware of the creature's existence and is the only one who ever speaks with him is another reason for thinking thus. I spent most of the book trying to decide if this was some sort of phantom delusion or if his personality had somehow split into two conscious entities. Either way, the idea that he was blaming himself for his monster's crimes from the start, and pursuing him to the literal ends of the earth, makes the idea of him literally chasing himself into craziness all the more likely.

I'm no great critic of literature, so I suppose no matter how you interpret it, there are still lots of thought-provoking ideas and questions here. What does it mean to create another sentient being? Do you have a charge to care for it? Can you really close Pandora's box after opening it? What does it mean to be an outcast on the basis of qualities you can't control? Does a complete absence of love or support lead to a life of evil and vengeance? There's certainly lots to chew on.

I never read this book when I was a kid, and have grown up with the popular culture ideas of Frankenstein('s monster). I'm not sure I would have truly appreciated it without a bit of life experience behind me, so I'm glad I'm reading it for the first time as an adult. ( )

Dunno, just didn't really work for me. I know it's an important book but I didn't enjoy it. Seemed very similar in style to Dracula, but missing whatever hooked me to that book.

on the plus side, the copy I read had all of my wife's university highlights, underlinings and margin notes in it. Which was wonderfully interesting to see :) ( )

Just as with Dracula most of us are familiar with the story of Frankenstein and his creation, even if popular culture often refers to the monster by that name. It probably suffers a little because so many of us think we know the story, why should we read something that we already know about. But it is worth a read.

Framed by the letters of an Arctic explorer to his sister, the main body of the novel is made up of Frankenstein relating his past to Capt. Walton. Frankenstein urges Walton to listen to him, and to learn from his mistakes, to not let his passion take over his life. It may be the end of him, as Frankenstein’s has destroyed his. He tells of his childhood in Geneva, of growing up a happy child, of heading off to college in Germany where his ambition first surfaces. He believes he knows how to create life. And so, of course, he sets his mind to doing just that, only for this passion and enthusiasm to ruin his life.

I had read Frankenstein as a teenager, but I’ll admit to remembering very little of it, and reading it this time around I just couldn’t get over how selfish the good doctor is.

I know, it is a first person story, so obviously we are going to get his point of view, his thoughts and emotions. But he never even tries to put anyone else first. At more than one point in the story he mentions that another character is sad, or tormented, but each time he follows up by saying that if only this character knew how bad he himself were feeling they would be put to shame. No one could possibly *feel* as much as Frankenstein.

And never once does he take responsibility for his own actions. He created the “monster” and promptly abandons him, yet, while he acknowledges guilt (although that may just be him putting himself at the centre of the entire world) he later says that he is blameless. Blameless!

Despite Frankenstein’s flaws this is a great read. Or possibly because of his annoyances, they certainly make him more of a character, its just a pity that there is no one else in the novel to balance him out. Yes, the monster gets to tell his tale, and you can’t help but pity him, despite his actions, but he isn’t enough to truly balance out Viktor’s influence. ( )