Scan barcode
keryno's review against another edition
4.0
Fascinating. Just absolutely fascinating. Frankenstein is one of my absolute favourite books, so when I saw this I just knew I had to read it. Such a beautiful mix of historical fact, interwoven with the story of what made Mary Shelley the writer she was.
sjgrodsky's review against another edition
5.0
Did Mary ever regret eloping with Percy Shelley? Did she understand, finally, that the story he told her, when she was a free-thinking 16 year old (“my wife doesn’t understand me”) was the story he would tell his many lovers when she, not Harriet, was the wife?
We don’t ever get a definitive answer to these questions, but Fiona Sampson, a poet and intellectual herself, led this reader to a conclusion that rings true: Mary wanted a creative and intellectual life. She got that from Shelley, along with the other shit that she somehow accepted.
Not the choice I would have made. But I wasn’t the daughter of two free thinkers, I didn’t have a brutal cold father, I didn’t grow up in a house dominated by an unsentimental stepmother, and I didn’t write a brilliant novel when I was just 18 years old.
Maybe those of us who read and enjoy the products of creative imaginations should just be grateful that there are people out there who can write the poetry and prose we so enjoy. And maybe we should refrain from criticizing their actions and life choices, even if we would have made “smarter choices.”
As Anna Revesz (my long-departed friend) would say “Love the art, not the artist.”
We don’t ever get a definitive answer to these questions, but Fiona Sampson, a poet and intellectual herself, led this reader to a conclusion that rings true: Mary wanted a creative and intellectual life. She got that from Shelley, along with the other shit that she somehow accepted.
Not the choice I would have made. But I wasn’t the daughter of two free thinkers, I didn’t have a brutal cold father, I didn’t grow up in a house dominated by an unsentimental stepmother, and I didn’t write a brilliant novel when I was just 18 years old.
Maybe those of us who read and enjoy the products of creative imaginations should just be grateful that there are people out there who can write the poetry and prose we so enjoy. And maybe we should refrain from criticizing their actions and life choices, even if we would have made “smarter choices.”
As Anna Revesz (my long-departed friend) would say “Love the art, not the artist.”
aimeesbookishlife's review against another edition
3.0
The information about Mary Shelley was great, but I really struggled with the writing style.
The present tense narration felt strange for a non-fiction book, and the author romanticises her subject rather than presenting an unbiased view. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, it's just that I was expecting a more impartial biography and this reads more like very well researched historical fiction, albeit without much of a story line. It does allow Sampson to explore Mary's thoughts and feelings, which made the book a little less dry, but she jumps to conclusions based on the most spurious bits of evidence.
For example, there's a chapter about Mary's early years that talks about what nursery songs she would have known based on the rhymes that were popular at the time. We have no way of knowing if Mary even knew of these rhymes (just because they were popular doesn't mean everyone had heard them) yet the author seems to think they were fundamental to building Mary's later character.
Sampson also paints herself as an omnipotent narrator, able to tell us exactly what the infant Mary was scared of:
Sometimes, like every child her age, she must be afraid of things she doesn't understand. (...) On winter nights, even in the nursery, the leaping shadows cast by the fire seem more substantial than the candlelight. Things get lost in their obscurity. Every night her papa disappears in the darkness of downstairs. Even her sister, whose breathing she can hear in the other cot, seems vast distances away.
Now I agree that most children are scared of the dark, but it's a bit of a leap to say that Mary 'must be afraid' and to imagine how far away she felt from her father and sister. I'm not sure it adds anything to our understanding of Mary Shelley - after all, plenty of children have nightmares and don't go on to write widely-acclaimed horror stories.
If you want a romanticised idea of Mary Shelley interspersed with details about her life then this book will suit you, but for pedants like me you'll get more hard facts from her Wikipedia page.
The present tense narration felt strange for a non-fiction book, and the author romanticises her subject rather than presenting an unbiased view. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, it's just that I was expecting a more impartial biography and this reads more like very well researched historical fiction, albeit without much of a story line. It does allow Sampson to explore Mary's thoughts and feelings, which made the book a little less dry, but she jumps to conclusions based on the most spurious bits of evidence.
For example, there's a chapter about Mary's early years that talks about what nursery songs she would have known based on the rhymes that were popular at the time. We have no way of knowing if Mary even knew of these rhymes (just because they were popular doesn't mean everyone had heard them) yet the author seems to think they were fundamental to building Mary's later character.
Sampson also paints herself as an omnipotent narrator, able to tell us exactly what the infant Mary was scared of:
Sometimes, like every child her age, she must be afraid of things she doesn't understand. (...) On winter nights, even in the nursery, the leaping shadows cast by the fire seem more substantial than the candlelight. Things get lost in their obscurity. Every night her papa disappears in the darkness of downstairs. Even her sister, whose breathing she can hear in the other cot, seems vast distances away.
Now I agree that most children are scared of the dark, but it's a bit of a leap to say that Mary 'must be afraid' and to imagine how far away she felt from her father and sister. I'm not sure it adds anything to our understanding of Mary Shelley - after all, plenty of children have nightmares and don't go on to write widely-acclaimed horror stories.
If you want a romanticised idea of Mary Shelley interspersed with details about her life then this book will suit you, but for pedants like me you'll get more hard facts from her Wikipedia page.
hecman111's review against another edition
3.0
Finally finished two months later! Definitely don’t mean this as an insult, but I used this one to help me fall asleep every night. It’s a bit dense, but a good read for any fan of Shelley. This book has lots of excerpts from Shelley’s journals/letters as well as those around her. Most fascinating for me, however, were the first chapters on Shelley’s parents, Mary Wollstonecraft and William Godwin. Nonetheless, Shelley’s story is complicated and full of tragedy (strangely, a common theme in books I tend to like), but I appreciated getting a glimpse into the relationships and experiences that shaped her and impacted her writing and legacy.
alessiasbooks's review against another edition
3.0
Uno sguardo sufficientemente approfondito sulla vita di Mary Shelley, ma avrei voluto di più.
kelamity_reads's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
2.0
Fun Fact: Mary lived for decades after Percy died, but this book barely mentions her life after his death.
This book does cover much of Mary's history, strongly focusing on her years with Percy Shelley, but the chronology of the book is bizarre and not linear and the author constantly assigns motivations to people without having any supporting cause for such and assumption like a letter or documented conversation.
This book does cover much of Mary's history, strongly focusing on her years with Percy Shelley, but the chronology of the book is bizarre and not linear and the author constantly assigns motivations to people without having any supporting cause for such and assumption like a letter or documented conversation.
novelesque_life's review against another edition
3.0
RATING: 3 STARS
(Review Not on Blog)
I first read Frankenstein in a college Romance Period English course. It was not a book I really looked forward to reading, but I am so happy I did. This novel is more than the parodies and movies out there. (The show Penny Dreadful does a good job with Victor and the Creature). Then I found out that she was the daughter of Mary Wollstonecraft who also made an impact on me during my college days. I have been wanting to read biographies on them and so when [b:Romantic Outlaws: The Extraordinary Lives of Mary Wollstonecraft and Her Daughter Mary Shelley|22294061|Romantic Outlaws The Extraordinary Lives of Mary Wollstonecraft and Her Daughter Mary Shelley|Charlotte Gordon|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1401077142s/22294061.jpg|41681472] came out I jumped on it. It was a brilliant biography that was well researched and also told a good story. I was excited to read this biography based solely on Shelley. While it was well-researched I found the book a bit dry. It was written more like a textbook. And, maybe had I not read this second I would have liked it a bit more.
(Review Not on Blog)
I first read Frankenstein in a college Romance Period English course. It was not a book I really looked forward to reading, but I am so happy I did. This novel is more than the parodies and movies out there. (The show Penny Dreadful does a good job with Victor and the Creature). Then I found out that she was the daughter of Mary Wollstonecraft who also made an impact on me during my college days. I have been wanting to read biographies on them and so when [b:Romantic Outlaws: The Extraordinary Lives of Mary Wollstonecraft and Her Daughter Mary Shelley|22294061|Romantic Outlaws The Extraordinary Lives of Mary Wollstonecraft and Her Daughter Mary Shelley|Charlotte Gordon|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1401077142s/22294061.jpg|41681472] came out I jumped on it. It was a brilliant biography that was well researched and also told a good story. I was excited to read this biography based solely on Shelley. While it was well-researched I found the book a bit dry. It was written more like a textbook. And, maybe had I not read this second I would have liked it a bit more.
bookbelle5_17's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Review of In Search of Mary Shelley
By: Fiona Sampson
My knowledge of Mary Shelley was limited to knowing her as the author of Frankenstein, but it improved with Booktube and watching Booktuber, Jennifer Brooks’ channel. This biography covers Mary’s childhood to her widowhood after her husband Percy Shelley’s death. She was her father William Godwin’s favorite and he imagined she would be her mother’s daughter. Her father did remarry, but Mary’s stepmother, Mary-Jane, put her own daughter first, which is to be expected. When Mary ran off with Percy, her father disowned her not approving of the elopement, but Mary blamed her stepmother for his reaction. She brings Claire her stepsister to Italy with her and her stepmother goes after them for own daughter’s sake. This biography made me hate Percy and resent how he treated Mary, as well as his previous wife, Harriet. Of course, Mary isn’t innocent, because she took another woman’s husband, though she was led to believe Harriet wasn’t great. Ironically, the last lover we’re read about that Percy had been with before his death spread rumors that Mary was a bad wife. She suffers several miscarriages and had only one surviving child, Percy Florence, but after Percy dies her father in-law tries to take her son from her. Despite her complicated marriage with Percy and being abandoned by their circle of friends, Mary remained strong, and she proved to be a great writer as well as outliving Percy. This is a great deep dive into who Mary Shelley is as a person and what she did for literature.