Take a photo of a barcode or cover
quattrocento 's review for:
Frankenstein: The 1818 Text
by Mary Shelley
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
What really surprised me is how completely different the source material is from the way Frankensteins monster (lets call him jeff) is portrayed in pop culture. (I assume the depiction as a slow, mute zombie with bolts in his bald head arrives from the 1931 movie and having just read the plot, it almost has nothing to do with Shelley's novel)
But i was pleasantly surprised. Expecting a flat monster story you instead get served a philosophical expression about identity, existentialism, responsibility,..
The book brings up a lot of interesting questions and does a really good job at discussing them through its characters.
The central dynamic between victor and jeff is fleshed out great.
Both are portrayed in a natural manner and their motives, actions and thought processes are all understandable.
That makes their conflict so depressing and leaves you consistently wondering how different things could have been, if different choices were made.
The only issue for me was how slow the book felt.
Partly due to the time of its writing
The (i guess) pretentious writing style and prominent letter framework, but also some of the pacing choices that have been made.
For example the entire study live and creation of jeff has been dealt with in almost the same length as a depiction of swiss landscapes (an active choice, as the story is based upon victor's own subjective narration but still...)
Heavily focusing on the backstories of victor and jeff was however a good thing, giving a lot of weight to their destiny.
Jeffs monologue about his first sensations and especially about living next to the family was arguably the best part of the book.
But i was pleasantly surprised. Expecting a flat monster story you instead get served a philosophical expression about identity, existentialism, responsibility,..
The book brings up a lot of interesting questions and does a really good job at discussing them through its characters.
The central dynamic between victor and jeff is fleshed out great.
Both are portrayed in a natural manner and their motives, actions and thought processes are all understandable.
That makes their conflict so depressing and leaves you consistently wondering how different things could have been, if different choices were made.
The only issue for me was how slow the book felt.
Partly due to the time of its writing
The (i guess) pretentious writing style and prominent letter framework, but also some of the pacing choices that have been made.
For example the entire study live and creation of jeff has been dealt with in almost the same length as a depiction of swiss landscapes (an active choice, as the story is based upon victor's own subjective narration but still...)
Heavily focusing on the backstories of victor and jeff was however a good thing, giving a lot of weight to their destiny.
Jeffs monologue about his first sensations and especially about living next to the family was arguably the best part of the book.