Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.04 AVERAGE
4.04 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
An interesting take on the classic Frankenstein story
adventurous
dark
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
hat ein bisschen gedauert, bis ich wirklich in die Story reingekommen bin, but I ADORED IT
Besonders als Mary Clarke richtig weggefetzt hat, ich war so so WOAH. Und es hatte es definitiv verdient, erschossen zu werden.
Kuss an das Creature, so eine Mausi, in meinem Kopf ist es wieder zurück nach inverness geschwommen, und ist jetzt das Lich Ness Monster c:
Außerdem, Schottland content!!! yey
adventurous
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Frankenstein if the scientist had empathy and was also in the closet
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
something about me is that i really love frankenstein, in part due to a fascination with mary shelley as a person, but also because i think its an excellent story. that being said, i enjoy picking up other media that references or reimagines the frankenstein story.
this one i really enjoyed. i liked the feminist themes and mary's point of view, and found the story of the creature compelling. mary navigating the male dominated and misogynistic world of science felt true to life even if it was at times very frustrating. she stayed true to herself throughout the story while also growing as a person in a way i found really satisfying.
i will say the blurb obfuscates the fact that the creature in this story is a dinosaur, which wasn't necessarily my favorite once i learned that was the case reading, but i think the way it played out really worked and i'm glad i hadn't known before hand because it may have swayed me off picking this novel up.
it did leave me feeling a little dissatisfied in the end but i put off writing this review too long and unfortunately can no longer recall exactly what didn't work for me.
this one i really enjoyed. i liked the feminist themes and mary's point of view, and found the story of the creature compelling. mary navigating the male dominated and misogynistic world of science felt true to life even if it was at times very frustrating. she stayed true to herself throughout the story while also growing as a person in a way i found really satisfying.
i will say the blurb obfuscates the fact that the creature in this story is a dinosaur, which wasn't necessarily my favorite once i learned that was the case reading, but i think the way it played out really worked and i'm glad i hadn't known before hand because it may have swayed me off picking this novel up.
it did leave me feeling a little dissatisfied in the end but i put off writing this review too long and unfortunately can no longer recall exactly what didn't work for me.
I really wanted to enjoy this as lots of people recommended it to me as a Frankenstein and Mary Shelley lover. Sadly, I found the majority of the book to be dry and uncaptivating.
The scenes about science and research failed to grip me at all and made it a bit of a chore to read, unfortunately. The most interesting parts were the creation scenes, when they were rushing about on the trains, and the dramatic conclusion.
A nice premise and inspiration, but to call it 'a gripping gothic tale' is a stretch, in my opinion.
The scenes about science and research failed to grip me at all and made it a bit of a chore to read, unfortunately. The most interesting parts were the creation scenes, when they were rushing about on the trains, and the dramatic conclusion.
A nice premise and inspiration, but to call it 'a gripping gothic tale' is a stretch, in my opinion.
dark
emotional
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
A conversation I had with Matt immediately upon finishing this last night:
A: This was a Frankenstein retelling.
M: Did she create a monster? (I'm assuming it's a "she.")
A: It is a she, and yes, she did create a monster. Actually, Mary and her husband and this crappy dude were paleontologists and were trying to re-create a prehistoric dinosaur even though they didn't entirely know what it was supposed to look like since they had incomplete fossil records.
M: Did they learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park?!
A: Well considering this was set in the 1850s, it would be another 150 years before Jurassic Park would come out.
M: Michael Crichton could have warned them! They were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't think whether they should!
-----
I had a lot of fun reading this. Was Mary kind of written out of her time frame? Probably. Girl was a pretty radical feminist, and wanted a divorce from her lousy gambling husband in A Time When That Didn't Happen, and also might have been a lesbian, or at the very least bisexual. Did we all see it coming from a mile away that nothing good comes of trying to bring living things back from the dead and there was no way this was going to bring Acclaim on Both Their Houses? Obviously. Did I adore the Creature like Mary did? No, but I could see why she loved it so, as history repeated itself (the original Victor Frankenstein was her great-uncle in this iteration). So ultimately, this was a book I wouldn't have picked up if not for book club, and I ended up being really invested in it.
TW: many internal conversations about the loss of a baby (unclear whether it was a late neonatal loss or a loss just after birth), grief, sexism, racism, a bit of gore related to the assembling of the Creature
A: This was a Frankenstein retelling.
M: Did she create a monster? (I'm assuming it's a "she.")
A: It is a she, and yes, she did create a monster. Actually, Mary and her husband and this crappy dude were paleontologists and were trying to re-create a prehistoric dinosaur even though they didn't entirely know what it was supposed to look like since they had incomplete fossil records.
M: Did they learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park?!
A: Well considering this was set in the 1850s, it would be another 150 years before Jurassic Park would come out.
M: Michael Crichton could have warned them! They were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't think whether they should!
-----
I had a lot of fun reading this. Was Mary kind of written out of her time frame? Probably. Girl was a pretty radical feminist, and wanted a divorce from her lousy gambling husband in A Time When That Didn't Happen, and also might have been a lesbian, or at the very least bisexual. Did we all see it coming from a mile away that nothing good comes of trying to bring living things back from the dead and there was no way this was going to bring Acclaim on Both Their Houses? Obviously. Did I adore the Creature like Mary did? No, but I could see why she loved it so, as history repeated itself (the original Victor Frankenstein was her great-uncle in this iteration). So ultimately, this was a book I wouldn't have picked up if not for book club, and I ended up being really invested in it.
TW: many internal conversations about the loss of a baby (unclear whether it was a late neonatal loss or a loss just after birth), grief, sexism, racism, a bit of gore related to the assembling of the Creature