Frankenstein
Ratings1,265
Average rating3.8
I read this book after watching the video by John Green in his CrashCourse channel. I wanted to read this book critically as the JG pointed out. I wanted to feel what characters are feeling and get the essence of the book. But I think I couldn't empathize with any character in this book. I hated the Victor for his cowardice and lack of taking responsibility of his own acts. He should been sympathetic to his own creation, like mom loves her child however ugly s/he is. I hated the monster for killing so many innocent and Walton for helping Victor. I couldn't understand the meaning of this book; what author wanted to say. If it is that human should not play with nature then this message comes only in passing. In the end I felt nothing. Just happy that it was ended.
Victor Frankenstein: Human Disaster.
But seriously, read this as a black comedy and (other than any time the Monster is speaking and being Sad™) you'll have a good time.
2,5 stars
J'apprécie les éléments avant-gardistes qui ont été apportés dans l'univers littéraire grâce à la publication de ce livre et qui sont maintenant des éléments courant utilisés dans la litterature. Mais côté appréciation de ma lecture, je n'ai pas particulierement apprécier le moment passé à lire ce livre.
Le personnage principal est insupportable et je n'ai aucune compassion pour lui et j'ai trouvé que l'histoire avait beaucoup de longueurs(il est vrai que je lis très peu de classiques et/ou livres qui ont été publié dans un siècle différent de celui dans lequel nous sommes).
Les points positifs:
Ce livre est un excellent “conversation starter” et il ouvre la porte à de nombreux débats et discussion sur divers sujets. Pour cette raison il est encore très actuel au niveau des sujets abordés(c'est pourquoi je comprends son statut de classique).
Apprendre à quoi ressemble la version originale du monstre de Frankenstein vs ce que la culture populaire a conservé du texte original était très intéressant et ça m'a fait me poser des questions sur d'autres histoires et/ou personnages dont je crois connaître l'apparence ou les caractéristiques et qui pourraient s'avérer bien differents dans leur version originale.
L'ambiance gothique était également excellente.
increíble como dijo alexa ha trascendido el tiempo y se aprende mucho sobre lo q significa ser humano
When I run over the frightful catalogue of my sins, I cannot believe that I am the same creature whose thoughts were once filled with sublime and transcendent visions of the beauty and the majesty of goodness. But it is even so; the fallen angel becomes a malignant devil. Yet even that enemy of God and man had friends and associates in his desolation; I am alone.
I'll be honest, I went in with rather low expectations. The story of Frankenstein has never been one that particularly interested me and I had a feeling this book would probably not carry the same weight today as it did when it was first released. Not because its themes aren't relevant anymore, but because its themes are something that has been explored a ton throughout art by now and isn't as novel anymore. I wasn't sure if this book actually dug deep enough to wow a reader in the 21st century.
I was curious to see if I'd be surprised though and I like the backstory of how Mary Shelley came to create this story after all.
I agree that Frankenstein opens up some great moments about existential themes, the relationship and obligations between a creator and its creation, the concept of innocence and blank slates, the fear of the strange, the burden of consciousness. The creature's suffering was definitely the most intriguing part of this book for me. Victor Frankenstein himself was pretty awful as a character.
In general, the way people throughout the story react to and treat the creature is very over the top and ridiculous in a way that I don't think aged well. Victor's own inner struggle is also often hard to empathize with, in my opinion.
And of course, there are things like the way the creature learns to travel all across Europe and learns to speak sophisticated language so quickly is a bit odd even in the context of this story.
I also can't really say if I find it strange and corny or really innovative that the story is told through all these different accounts from different characters. I mean, at some point we're reading letters in which someone describes the story of someone listening to someone else tell their story in which they listened to someone else tell their story. The layering in this is ridiculous sometimes.
The prose can be a bit repetitive and dull at parts too. Mary Shelley loves to get distracted by describing landscapes for a couple of pages at a time. But there are moments of great prose with really powerful and effective words as well. The final speech by the creature actually hit me a bit.
Overall, I enjoyed this though. It's not a terrible read and it had some engaging and interesting moments. I don't think I'm ever gonna be a big fan of the Frankenstein concept though and that's more because of my personal preferences and less because of the quality of this text.
My heart is heavy. In a good way, but still...
This is actually my third time reading this book. I've never read the 1831 version that used to be so popular (should really do that sometime), because this was the edition my professor specified in the first class for which I ever had to read this book. I read it again for a different class a couple of years later, and finally I picked it up yesterday to read it again, this time simply for myself.
It is such an ugly story, told with such a beautiful voice. This is a tragedy and a horror related to us by a voice that has not inured itself to tragedy and horror. Any scene of happiness that comes along in the narrative is given to us with such joy and wonder and sincerity that it is obvious that this is the state that the narrator would always stay in, given the opportunity. It is like reading the thoughts of an elf, so at home in beauty and yet never bored of it, always struck with delight at the sights, sounds, feelings that surround it.
That is what makes this different from any other horror/science fiction novel I have ever read. It feels so violating, so impure, because the voice describing these monstrosities feels more suited for poetry, the kind of poetry that makes someone happy to be alive and moving about in the world. To go with this voice as it is driven deeper and deeper into despair... It made my heart sink, and I finished the book only to stare at the ceiling, trying to collect myself. Yes, you can get the story from watching an adaptation, whether it be for stage or screen, but this, this experience, you can only get by reading the book. Make sure you're emotionally ready, but once you are: I cannot recommend this book enough. Genuinely one of my favorites.
Frankenstein es sin duda el clásico más sobrevalorado que he leido. ¿De dónde se le ocurrió a Mary Shelly que poner una puta descripcón de un paisaje cada dos parrafos durante toda la novela era buena idea?
The entire novel was fantastic, especially with the annotations made by the editors of my book which tied certain aspects of Shelley's writing with her life experience giving me a better understanding thematically. The characters were usually well-written, even if I didn't see much of a “passionate romance” (quote from my book's back summary which calls the book a horror novel, philosophical and a romance novel) between Victor and Elizabeth. I actually appreciated the simplicity of Elizabeth's character considering the role she would play but I wouldn't have minded her fleshed out a tiny bit more. Considering my feeling that this book leans towards horror and philosophical more than romance, the focus on the character of the creature and Victor was sensical. I also found that there was more of a complex musing on the thematic issues than I expected there to be. Neither Victor or the Creature are portrayed as being 100% wrong in one view so that was refreshing.
I did not like this novel. The language was way too flowery, making the book cumbersome and tiring. The plot is great and there's so much to analyze which makes me deliriously happy as a literary nerd, but it comes with the cost of having to read through paragraphs of absolute word vomit.
After my last run in with a renowned classic (ahem, [b:The Scarlet Letter 12296 The Scarlet Letter Nathaniel Hawthorne https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1404810944s/12296.jpg 4925227]), I was a little worried about this one. However, I loved this book. I practically read it in a single day and could hardly put it down through the last 100 pages- which was over half of the book. This book kept me on edge and was so wonderfully well-written. I would certainly consider re-reading this.The characters are splendid. As the novel's main point, they had to be splendid. I felt things for both Frankenstein and his monster and I commend the author for eliciting sympathy from both sides of the combat. In addition, the relationships present in the novel are strong and enduring- they never felt cheesy nor insubstantial. Each character was fascinating in its own way; however I do wish there was a bit more individuality from the female characters. Each woman seemed very similar, which was incredibly disappointing since this novel was written by the daughter of a known feminist of the time. With that said, that was my only complaint with the novel.The emotions this novel evokes are heart-wrenching and true. I recommend this book to anyone interested in classics and, truly, to all people, for it explores humanity in a brilliant manner.
If you like tragedies, books that explore philosophical questions, or descriptive prose, this might be for you.
If you want to read a monster/horror story involving a mad scientist screaming “It's aliiiive!” then you'll probably be bored by this story.
Frankenstein is told through the frame of Captain Robert Walton's letters home to his sister. He relates his encounter with Frankenstein and the story of Frankenstein's past through these letters.
The prose is fairly descriptive, and if you read the original text, a little archaic. There's a bunch of phrases along the lines of: “I quitted the place,” said he. This can take a bit of getting used to but the writing flows smoothly after a while.
Once again, this is not a fast-paced or plot-heavy story.
A young Victor Frankenstein is fascinated by scientific texts, especially those involving chemistry and alchemy. Throughout his studies, he eventually learns the secret of creating life. He considers testing this knowledge on small creatures, like insects or worms, but his ambition and ego cause him to immediately attempt to give life something human.
When he succeeds, he is horrified by what he creates and abandons the creature. Unable to join society due to its hideous looks, the creature vows vengeance against its creator.
What follows is a story that's almost 100% different than most people's idea of Frankenstein. There's no lightning, no mad scientist (arguably), and no angry mob with torches. Instead, the plot is more introspective and examines the morality of Frankenstein's actions.
The story takes place mostly in Europe, sometime during the 18th century. We get to see a little of the arctic, a little of a university, and a little of the European countryside.
Frankenstein takes place in a world pretty much identical to our own, with the exception being that reanimation of the dead is possible. In a sense, you could consider this more soft sci fi than fantasy.
I liked this book a lot more than I thought I would. A lot of people read it in high school or maybe even a college course, but I wasn't so lucky.
The prose in this novel is awesome. I love the way Shelley describes the loneliness of Frankenstein's creation, and also how she describes the mountains. The prose is simply mesmerizing.
The themes of the book are easy to spot, and that's probably why it's a high school read. She pretty much writes that going after glory without regard to consequence is a bad thing. There's also a great anti-discrimination theme that is still timely today (and probably into the future).
I am just amazed that the author was so young when she wrote this. It's such a short book that I recommend it for anyone (and no, it's not like most of the movies).
