Frankenstein (review) PDF Print E-mail
Written by Administrator   
Sunday, 30 December 2012 00:00

I thought I knew this one. Jacob’s ladders with crackling electricity. Lighting flashing around dark turrets. Hunch-backed assistants. Stumbling, rambling, helpless monsters. And, of course, “IT’S ALLIIVVVEEE!”


My niece got me to read this, as detailed HERE. Never read it but if a kid demands you read a classic, you really need to follow up.

Okay, first misconception – that the monster is named “Frankenstein”. Actually, that I knew but most people don’t (technically, he might adapt the Victor Frankenstein’s surname, but I rather doubt it. Demon. Monster. Those are more appropriate).

So the book starts with letters from a whaler captain nosing through the northern ice. I read this for a bit then flipped back to the cover to check. Am I reading Moby Dick? Then, the mysterious dogsled pursuit, the passion-racked man recovered off a flow. How strange. How very, very strange.

And then the story wrenches into overdrive and nothing is the same.

The movie idea of Doctor Victor building his monster in his laboratory is a cliché. The book’s image of medical student Victor doing something not quite described in a loft at Ingolstadt, something in inanimate tissue, with chemicals and traces of alchemy, that is a thought that will stay with me. Image stepping through his door, the reek of chemicals, the arrangements of molded flesh, the harried, half-crazed student. You get the picture (I sure did).

And then the thing he builds, how ugly it is. And when he flees the laboratory when it flickers alive. And how it shambles after him in the moonlight; ugh, ugh, ugh. He escapes into the street and when he finally returns, the thing is gone.

Oh, we wish.

It isn’t gone. No, it’s out there, out in the woods, shambling around, lonely, rejected, and learning. Imagine an Alien that can read, one that can comprehend its human isolation, one that feels not only hunger but loneliness and denial. A creature fast and strong and hideous, who can track with equal ability through wastelands and urban areas, who cannot be shaken and cannot be denied.

And what does Victor do when the demand is for a companion, a mate?

The fact that this monster kills to make its point, slaying those Victor cares for (as well as an occasional innocent) has caused two long arguments between myself and my niece and my friend, long discussions of the justification of killing and the rejection of self. Me? I think the monster was just that, a creature of vast strength and vindictiveness that chose the atrocities it committed, and in that, is responsible for them. In the multiple wakes of all our deranged shootings, how can one justify the killing of innocents as a rage against isolation?

But that’s just my take on it. You should see what yours is. But for God’s sake (and for Victor’s, and his poor, abandoned monster) read this book. A real eye-popper.



Last Updated on Friday, 28 December 2012 22:33


0 #1 Michael Krzos 2013-01-02 08:52
We hashed over this via email and I still hold to my take that the creature to me represents a source of pity. I think the creature himself summed it up best when he asked why should have more sympathy on mankind than mankind has for him. Yes, he commited vile acts of murder yet is this not the same response the creature receives? The creature's actions are not justified but I certainly think they are explained.

What I am most impressed with is the fact that your teenage niece loved this book. There is hope for their generation after all.

I am equally impressed by the author. The fact that Shelly wrote this book at the age of 18 makes me wish I could go back in time to meet her.
0 #2 admin 2013-01-04 20:34
And the discussion continues...

I still hold that agonized loners don't get a pass for random killing. Especially after what happened at VA Tech.

Still, loved it.

Add comment

Security code