The original story of science gone berserk: one that changed how far our dreams can stretch. Imagine a human created out of corpses. A monster assembled by a scientist from parts of dead bodies develops a mind of his own as he learns to loathe himself and hate his creator. Who is the monster: this tortured beast, or the man who made him?
Goodread STUDENT Members:
--Janelle: So many great lessons in this book. I felt so many mixed emotions for the monster: pity, understanding, sorrow, love. I read it for school, and fell in love with it. How did you feel towards the monster?
--Eric: I refuse to dub Victor Frankenstein's creation as a "monster". The real "monster" in this book is Victor himself due to rejecting his creation and giving him a mate.
I felt bad that the creature had to endure heartache and rejection due to how …
The original story of science gone berserk: one that changed how far our dreams can stretch. Imagine a human created out of corpses. A monster assembled by a scientist from parts of dead bodies develops a mind of his own as he learns to loathe himself and hate his creator. Who is the monster: this tortured beast, or the man who made him?
Goodread STUDENT Members:
--Janelle: So many great lessons in this book. I felt so many mixed emotions for the monster: pity, understanding, sorrow, love. I read it for school, and fell in love with it. How did you feel towards the monster?
--Eric: I refuse to dub Victor Frankenstein's creation as a "monster". The real "monster" in this book is Victor himself due to rejecting his creation and giving him a mate.
I felt bad that the creature had to endure heartache and rejection due to how he looked. He was actually an intellectual and gentle man, which the films and social media tend to not depict him as.
I too had mixed emotions for the creature. He wanted to be like all of us are--have a loving family, friends and people who appreciated him for himself. It's a shame that the creature was denied all this by Victor.
I'm glad that Mary Shelley's masterpiece still resonates within our society for over the last 200 years. She had the creature tell his side of the story as well, and it isn't an actual horror novel at all--it deals with issues that tend to plague our society even today.
Before watching the films (such as 1931's "Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff), read this book instead. It's one of my all-time favorites that I'll read again and again.
-- Prarthi Mehta: I read it this summer, just for fun. I know what you mean with your mixed emotions - I felt the same way. When the monster came to life, he was not really a monster in any way but appearance. He technically learned how to be a monster (and became violent) from humans. That is why I think the humans are the real monsters in the story.
Cette lecture me laisse un sentiment mitigé. Je suis quelque peu déçu. Je n'ai rien à reprocher à l'écriture et à la forme narrative (épistolaire avec des récits imbriqués). Au contraire même. Ce qui concerne la partie « science-fiction » de l'œuvre est assez courte au final, parce qu'une fois le « monstre » créé, l'œuvre devient un récit quasi classique qui pourrait se résumer à la lutte entre un homme et ses propres démons. Pour ce qui est du récit lui-même, j'ai trouvé qu'il se résume aux lamentations du personnage principal, Frankenstein, et secondairement de sa création (le récit de ce dernier est assez succinct). Frankenstein ne se remet jamais vraiment en question et ne fait que se plaindre de son sort. Je m'excuse pour l'usage de ces expressions (sujettes à polémique), mais certains pourraient y voir de la « victimisation » ou de la « course victimaire ».
