October/Horror Reading: Frankenstein

[Scheherazade]

In October we will be reading Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.

Please post your comments and questions here.

Online copy. (http://www.online-literature.com/shelley_mary/frankenstein/)

[Janine]

For once I am the first one to vote. I read this book twice now and I always recommend it to my friends. I think it's a great read. It really keeps ones attention throughout and even though written by a young woman, it's amazing how wonderfully talented she was with such a vivid imagination. Our culture, by this century, has been infiltrated with Hollywood images of the creature and these are so unlike the actual creature encountered in Mary Shelley's exquisitely written novel. Also, we forget how creative this novel was at the time it was written, since we now have tons of creative and fantastic tales and books along the same lines. Still I think this book is unique....the modern Prometheus..and to imagine it was written and conceived by a 18 yr old woman; finished only when she reached 19 yrs of age.

Frankenstein;
or, the Modern Prometheus

Illustration from the frontispiece of the 1831 edition by Theodor von Holst[1]
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/Authors/461px-Frontispiece_to_Frankenstein_.jpg

Draft of Frankenstein ("It was on a dreary night of November that I beheld my man completed ..."

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/Authors/398px-FrankensteinDraft.jpg

I always think book illustrations/etchings and photos of the actual manuscripts are interesting. Hope you do, too.

[rimbaud]

i wanted to read this, so will read it now, and then join the discussion :)

[r0land]

I already got my copy and I'm quite excited to join the Book Club for the first time .. ;)

[eyemaker]

Jan, I find "original" manuscript pictures interesting as well. Nice to see the posted part of Frankenstein. :)
Anyways, I'll just be here with my copy if anyone's willing to discuss.

[Lady19thC]

I actually just reread this novel in September. I try to read it every year. I find it such a timely piece. How far is too far in the things we create? How far is too far in the name of science? Cloning, experiments on fetuses, etc. Where do we finally draw the line and put humanity back into it? When do we take full responsibility for our actions and the things we create or the objects we experiment with? It is amazing that out of a stormy weekend and a haunting dream this very young lady created a masterpiece for all times. It boggles the mind!

My favourite part is actually when the monster is hiding out in the hovel attached to the cottage and learning. You feel so much more for him than anyone else in the novel. Wonderful, wonderful book.

[papayahed]

I wrote a paper on this book for a mythology class, however I never finished the book. I remember getting an A but now I'm wondering how good could it have been?? Anyways, I'm hoping to finish this time around.

[Gladys]

When do we take full responsibility for...the objects we experiment with?

Does Victor take any?

[eustacia6]

Its a fascinating novel, and especially relevant today!
The background to the book is also interesting. The Shelleys and Byron´s little holiday by Lake Geneva and Byron´s idea one wet night that they should all write a supernatural story.

[CARRIERI ANNA]

I read the book last year and found it quite different from the classic horror stories and for this reason more exciting. Where's the difference? It's probably in the way Mary Shelley manages to give life to a character like that of the monster, so human in passion, understanding and cruelty. He is the real innovative character in the novel, the only who allows the modern reader to discover his/her inner true self.

[Gladys]

..Mary Shelley manages to give life to a character like that of the monster, so human in passion, understanding and cruelty.

I found myself asking, "Who is human, and who the monster?"

[Janine]

I wrote a paper on this book for a mythology class, however I never finished the book. I remember getting an A but now I'm wondering how good could it have been?? Anyways, I'm hoping to finish this time around.

hahaha...sorry to go off topic, but your new avy is a riot and a half! OMG!!! :lol:

Yes, Frankenstein does pose that question, Gladys, and it's what makes the book a true masterpiece in this genre. Personally, I keep being newly fascinated with the characters. I don't think I could read this one enough times and not feel incredibly pensive after; always questioning that aspect of the novel.

[lewis17]

Having just read Frakenstein for my A Level English Literature course, i would like to add my opinion. The structure of the novel itself allows the reader to become lost in the differing imaginations and thoughts of the characters through the use of the embedded text. This is the first book that i have read in a while that managed to keep me engaged throughout. It has given me a new found love for the gothic genre. The dark surroundings that Shelley gives along with supposed brutality of the monster was interesting. It really makes you assess human nature and our obsession with beauty over character. The real hero of the novel for me was the monster itself. I found myself able to empathise with it more than any other character.

[Lady19thC]

I found myself asking, "Who is human, and who the monster?"

I agree. I don't think Victor ever takes responsibility, except maybe at the end when he is trying to catch and kill him. But how on earth did he expect to do that? His creation was too strong, fast and large for him to handle. If they reached the Arctic they probably would have gone round the world, over and over again, until Frankenstein perished.

[Scheherazade]

I agree. I don't think Victor ever takes responsibility, except maybe at the end when he is trying to catch and kill him. But how on earth did he expect to do that? His creation was too strong, fast and large for him to handle. If they reached the Arctic they probably would have gone round the world, over and over again, until Frankenstein perished.Isn't this ironic, though, that a "creator" does not know/realise what he has actually created until it is too late and his only solution to the problem is trying to kill his "creation".

Very irresponsible of him, I think, which diminishes his power and status as a "creator".

[Lady19thC]

Isn't this ironic, though, that a "creator" does not know/realise what he has actually created until it is too late and his only solution to the problem is trying to kill his "creation".

Very irresponsible of him, I think, which diminishes his power and status as a "creator".

I agree. You certainly don't come away from the novel with much respect for Frankenstein, nor any of his ambitions. Wouldn't it be fun if an excellent author took this story and gave it a happy ending? If Frankenstein embraced his creature, taught him, took responsibility as creator and father. Hmmm!

What do you think of the "monster's" deal about taking his created wife and disappearing into the wilds of South America? Very out of Eden like, isn't it? Do you think they would have procreated? Do you think he would have kept his word? I seemed to trust him more than Frankenstein.

[Gladys]

If Frankenstein embraced his creature, taught him, took responsibility as creator and father. Hmmm!

But it's not just Victor. What of Felix and Agatha De Lacey and his love, Safie? The novel is full of beautiful people and, of course, one monster.

Hmmm! A second, more enduring, Eden may be warranted.

[Janine]

Victor also is a victim here, because he is trapped inside his own obession to explore and create life. When he rejects his creation he is appalled and he attempts to ignore it's existence. It had run off. There are no all bad/evil characters here. We gain sympathy for the creation at times; but we also come to realise that he is capable of unspeakable acts of violence. He is rejected by the family out of fear; the old man is the only one to accept him, because he is blind and can't fully comprehend his outward horrid appearance, which on first encounter scares the daylights out of all who encounter him. The kind old man is blind and there is the irony. The blind man looks into the soul of the creation; he sees the actual being; because he sees the goodness that is possible inside this sad being. At first, the creation is good, or innocent as a baby/child would be; but all the rejection heaps up on him and he chooses the path of utter destruction and tragedy. He tries again, when confronting Victor later on in the story to save himself through the appeal for a mate; he questions him about his state and identity; he reveals things about his time since his creation and the treatment he has recieved. Then, Victor briefly sympathises with his creation; but is quickly drawn back into his own obessions, which he abhors by now. Victor is a 'driven' man and in some ways the creation (which is never named) becomes driven in his quest for revenge on Victor, through violent acts on his loved ones and family. Neither Victor, nor the creation are all bad or all good...they both are human; and even though the creation is a creation made by man and not God, he also has human traits and features. This, I believe is what makes the book so good and one that is pondered, long after you turn the last page. Also, the whole premise of the story is so appropriate today, in that man is able to clone certain animals and we wonder what next? Will a human someday be created in the same way or in a test tube and if so, will it be a better creation, than the one what Victor so crudely constructed; also will the creator embrace his creation or abhor it? This book's ideas were far beyond it's author's tender years and also far beyond the time it was written. Truly prophetic piece of literature.

[mtpspur]

I have read the novel at least twice over the past 40 years or so. The overall dreary sense of doom and despair casts its shadow throughout. To this day the hanging of Justine and murder of Elizabeth are the losses that impressed me the most. If I may submit a slightly different idea about Frankenstein I have had for some time now is that I think Shelley may have been protraying Victor as an ineffective God/Creator who rejects his creation, abandons it and then withholds blessings (the creation of the mate) and the Wretch (which seems to be his favorite name for him) is man feeling abandoned and strking bakc at God. Just a thought that his may be allegory of God rejecting his creation/creation rejectng the Creator.

[Lady19thC]

I have read the novel at least twice over the past 40 years or so. The overall dreary sense of doom and despair casts its shadow throughout. To this day the hanging of Justine and murder of Elizabeth are the losses that impressed me the most. If I may submit a slightly different idea about Frankenstein I have had for some time now is that I think Shelley may have been protraying Victor as an ineffective God/Creator who rejects his creation, abandons it and then withholds blessings (the creation of the mate) and the Wretch (which seems to be his favorite name for him) is man feeling abandoned and strking bakc at God. Just a thought that his may be allegory of God rejecting his creation/creation rejectng the Creator.

Nicely put. We certainly get the feeling of a twisted Adam and Eve, cast out of Eden feel to the novel. But yes, Victor succeeds as a scientist in the sense that he created what he had set out to create, but immediately as it comes to life he abhors his work. Where was his mind in the throes of creative passion? What did he think it would look like, being body parts of all sorts of people, rotting, sewn together, etc. His goal was really twisted! His utter abandonment is unthinkable. As a creator/father figure he fails altogether. And what took him so long to figure out what the "monster" was going to do on his wedding night? After tearing apart the monster's future wife/companion it seemed obvious his next victim would be Elizabeth.

[Gladys]

But yes, Victor succeeds as a scientist in the sense that he created what he had set out to create, but immediately as it comes to life he abhors his work.

And more interestingly, he seems to blame his "monster".

[sadparadise]

I hate the part where Justine is condemned to death. She confesses her guilt out of her fear of excommunication from the church. What a black spot on humanity! It is all too indicative of our own historical past. This should be embarrassing to any real compassionate god. A "wretched mockery of justice"..

[Janine]

I hate the part where the young Justine is condemned to death. She confesses her guilt out of her fear of excommunication from the church. What a black spot on humanity! It is all too indicative of our own historical past. This should be embarrassing to any real compassionate god. A "wretched mockery of justice"..

That part bugged me, too. I am glad you brought it up. Do you think the frustration one feels when reading that she confessed leads to a more tragic effect to the novel and story? At the time I read it I did. I didn't like the child being killed either, but it truly saddened me when Frankenstein's friend was killed in setting out across the water leaving Frankenstein on the island. Let's face it all the deaths were pretty horrendous. Good point though about Justine and the idea of her losing her soul had she not confessed. That certainly did make a strong statement.

[LLItaly]

Those of you who love this book might like American poet Laurie Sheck's new
book....a mix of poetry and fiction, called A Monster's Notes, inspired by Guess who? Much acclaimed by The New Yorker and others

[sadparadise]

First of all thanks to Janine for commenting on my post!
Yes, I did find Justine's response frustrating. I wanted her to plead her innocence but she relents so passively. I could see her confession before I read it. I find the name Justine suits ( Justice..perhaps )? A tragic justice, a result of Frankenstein's monstrosity.

[Janine]

First of all thanks to Janine for commenting on my post!
Yes, I did find Justine's response frustrating. I wanted her to plead her innocence but she relents so passively. I could see her confession before I read it. I find the name Justine suits ( Justice..perhaps )? A tragic justice, a result of Frankenstein's monstrosity.

sadparadse, I wasn't sure what I wrote really made any sense; but you are welcome in response to your thanking me for my post. Yes, what a good observation. Justine is such a suitable name. I hadn't thought of that before. Also she comes under a lot of verbal abuse from her own mother prior to her arrest. I think she gets the worst end of the whole thing. First off she seemed to be a little in love for Victor, too; but she was gracious enough and sweet enough to wish Elizabeth well and hope for their happiness. Justine is very much the underdog and she gets treated the worse, if you think about it; even by her own mother she is belittled. The other deaths happen quickly and there is little or no warning; whereas Justice is imprisoned and must suffer the waiting of the final verdict and then be taken to the gallows - how horrible for her. She is probably one victim who is the most tragic and sad.

[papayahed]

First of all thanks to Janine for commenting on my post!
Yes, I did find Justine's response frustrating. I wanted her to plead her innocence but she relents so passively. I could see her confession before I read it. I find the name Justine suits ( Justice..perhaps )? A tragic justice, a result of Frankenstein's monstrosity.


Doh! Just as passively as Victor not speaking up.

Victor is really irritating me at the moment. I realize the being horrified by his creation but really he leaves his apartment and *hopes* it's gone??? How completely irresponsible. Did he wonder what happened to it?

[Gladys]

I wanted her to plead her innocence but she relents so passively. ... A tragic justice, a result of Frankenstein's monstrosity.

Isn't there a beautiful innocence in Justine's appointment with destiny? So also with the murdered little William in the woods, the orphan Elizabeth Lavenza, and the faithful Henry Clerval. Even the survivors - De Lacey's, Safie, Captain Robert Walton and even Victor Frankenstein, himself - are guileless and beautiful.

Just one ugly malefactor in all creation. Hmm.

[dfloyd]

it has been since Mary Shelley wrote it. She should have written Young Frankenstein instead ...Ah! Sweet mystery of life.

[Janine]

Doh! Just as passively as Victor not speaking up.

Victor is really irritating me at the moment. I realize the being horrified by his creation but really he leaves his apartment and *hopes* it's gone??? How completely irresponsible. Did he wonder what happened to it?

I think that is the point. Victor makes a lot of bad choices and is careless and thoughtless once the creation is completed and vanishes. Before that he is driven and he can't stop his obessive actions. He sees one goal and he is totally emersed in that pursuit. It's a selfish pursuit, but it's his personality as an explorer/scientist that is leading him forward. This drive of his is out of control and he knows it; yet he can't stop. He can't pull out and let it go. The the creature is born and he abhors it; more importantly he abhors and disgusts himself. He is in a deep state of denial, when it vanishes and he doesn't actively think on it again. He shuts out his thoughts of the being; I would think doing so out of pure survival instinct. Of course this is not logical but it's the way a human might act when acting in a state of denial. I wonder how this would line up and compare with creation and God. First off, it is similar, in that man is created in the image of God and yet he has a great many serious flaws. Some might feel God has desserted man. Some may feel man has desserted God. I think this book, philoshophically, brings up a lot of deeper questions. It's not just a thriller or horror story in the end. It says more than that. I think this is the magic of the writing and what makes it so timeless a novel. I don't know if anyone can be hated or blamed here. Don't we all suffer from some kind of uncontrollable obession? Look at us here on Litnet. Maybe Litnet or the internet draw us in sometimes, when we know darn well, we should be doing something else. I think that when Victor crosses the line of creating life, he is taking a very dangerous path and entering an unknown zone. He then doesn't have any idea, as to how to contain his creation or control it, or even how to now think of it. This brings up a lot of questions in this day and age, when sheep can be cloned and most likely human beings next. Then what? Do any of us know the consequences to creating life; we being merely human and not divine? It's an interesting book which stays with one long after the last page is turned because it makes us question our own creation and our own faults.

[Raoul Shade]

The world had many Frankensteins: Francois Villon, Milton`s Satan, William Blake, Nietzsche, Van Gogh, King Kong, Kafka's Gregor Samsa, to name a few.

[papayahed]

He is in a deep state of denial, when it vanishes and he doesn't actively think on it again. He shuts out his thoughts of the being; I would think doing so out of pure survival instinct. Of course this is not logical but it's the way a human might act when acting in a state of denial.


It's not the creation of the monster that annoys me, the problem is Victor's behavior afterward. His unwillingness to deal with the problem. Especially since I've reached the point where Justine is executed. Victor knowingly let Justine die just to keep his secret safe, he's pretty mealy.

[Gladys]

Victor knowingly let Justine die just to keep his secret safe, he's pretty mealy.

Rather, Victor realised that Justine would die anyway because no one would be believe his secret and all would think him mad. All the same, he is pretty mealy.

[Jozanny]

Just a note: Shelley's classic is free on the mighty k, so I downloaded it. If I get to it in the not too far future I will review this discussion and add a few comments.

I should not keep editorializing myself on this network, but when has that stopped me?:D However, I am just a freelancing bum, and all the sudden I don't have enough hours in the day! I did not feel like going to library for a title I had read a few years ago, but since it is available at no cost, well.

I hate to add this, but whatever their drawbacks, I think e-readers are worth the trouble. I don't even have mine yet, browsed for less than an hour and spent all of three dollars. [repressed squealing of excitement to be heard]

[Inka]

But in the end he became aware of his mistakes and his only desire was to kill this monster, moreover, I believe he seek death for himself.
Yes, he was mealy, I would even say weakling, but we can't put aside that he confessed everything and it was he who created the monster. Are you sure he was that mealy?
I believe he wanted to forget about this creature and continue to life without those memories, so wouldn't it make him an egoist?

[Tallgren]

As far as I remember, I wasn't exactly thrilled when I read it about a year ago, but many of the comments here have reminded me of some strong parts.

This book surely works on a number of levels, and one can easily see Victor as a father or even a divine creator. Another reading, and an interpretation that kept coming back at me while reading, was that Victor's creating of the monster was an allegory for a writer's creating of a character, or, rather, a story. The obsession of creation works well in the context of an author or artist in general. Interestingly, it is not the continous 'creating' but Victors refusal to face his first creation that creates all the tragedy.

[Inka]

well, of course, it's like with all of us: usually we're just running from our mistakes and try our hardest to forget about it. It's very difficult to confess yourself in your mistakes, moreover face them, especially if because of this everything goes wrong and becomes even worse than you can ever imagine.