am 12. Juni 2000
"Frankenstein" is a typical novel from the romantic period. The story is based on the conflict of a scientist with the results of his work. But Frankenstein is far more than that: It is the story of two individuals (Frankenstein and his "monster") and their acceptance and behavior in society, and of course, the novel contains a lot of latent psychological information (what would Freud have said about that?). However, it is typical for the age of romanticism that the feelings and thoughts of the individuum are at the center of the plot (see e.g. the works by Byron or by the German authors Eichendorff and Novalis). This holds as well for the music composed during that time (Schubert, Schumann, Chopin, ...). Mary Shelley describes in great detail the innermost feelings of Frankenstein and his "wretch" and how they changed from one minute to the other, and what made them change their moods, and why and how, and who was around etc. This actually - because presented through the entire book - makes the reading of the highly interesting story rather tedious. Story: 5 stars, Fun: 1 star
am 3. Mai 2000
Despite many strengths, Frankenstein has fatal flaws. Coleridge wrote that readers must approach a novel with "a willing suspension of disbelief," a willingness in turn nurtured by the novelist. Such suspension is required of readers because they must understand that a novelist cannot represent everything. Part of the novelist's art lies in the simulation of reality through selective withholding and revealing of various information. Conversely, novelists lose readers when they ask them to suspend disbelief too often, or to accept details or events that just do not logically seem to make sense. Such is the case of Mary Shelley and her creation, Victor Frankenstein.
Unlike its portrayal in the movies, which involves an assistant (Igor), various trips to the cemetery for body parts, and a lightning-filled climax in a laboratory, creation of Frankenstein's monster is anti-climactic. Shelley dispatches the entire incident in about three paragraphs. Just as quickly, Frankenstein is repulsed by his creation. The creature opens his eyes, Frankenstein sees its ugliness, and flees - all in the space of two or three sentences. Thus begins a slippery slope of disbelief.
Readers are expected to believe that the creature could evolve into a perfect example of cultured, Enlightened, rational thinking simply by observing a simple family and reading a handful of books. The monster's inner being is too perfect. It is inconceivable that his rhetoric, designed to make the reader sympathetic, cannot also appeal to Frankenstein. And Frankenstein himself is too blind. Once he is finally rebuked, the monster vows to avenge himself upon Frankenstein. He systematically murders members of Frankenstein's family and friends. The entire object of the murders is to make Frankenstein suffer as the monster has suffered. Thus, it is impossible that when the monster promises to be with Frankenstein on his wedding night, that Frankenstein takes extreme measures to protect himself while not even for a moment looking to his wife's safety. It's simply too much to believe.
am 27. Juli 2000
This book is absolutely amazing. The only thing I didn't like is how she made the book third person (its really told by the sailor Robert Walton, and not Victor Frankenstein, which people seem to misunderstand.) Besides that, the book is very well paced, and I found it very easy to understand. For you readers out there who said they had diffuculty in understanding the book you should pick up Cliff Notes or go to sparknotes.com to help you aid your understanding of this book, instead of declaring its "garbage" because you have failed to understand this brilliant womans messsage. Anyways the book is about how the monster represents a modern Adam and how mankind in general faces the dilemma of how to cope with our existence. This book left me heart-broken and in tears at the end. I felt horribly sorry for the monster who was more human this his juvenile and ignorant (yes, despite all the masters brilliance, he was ignorant) creator Victor Frankenstein. Definitely read this, the book is exquisite :)
am 17. April 1998
!Correction! Frankenstein is the name of the scientist - the monster that he creates is nameless and is referred to usually as a "demon" Moving onwards....
If you have ever sat down to watch a horror movie from anything dating back to the 80s or earlier, it is usually for the purpose of getting a few laughs (those are special effects?!?),but the horror in the book is quite tangible. The most fascinating aspect of the novel is the transformation of the monster - initially the reader is repulsed at the creature, and then as they learn the monster's biography, humanitarian feelings of pity and of sympathy is all that the monster deserves. Hatred towards Frankenstein grows - due to his selfish thirst for knowledge, the downfall of him, his family, and his creation is inevitable. Easy to read, Shelley's descriptive language and moving plot keep the reader continually turning the pages to discover the next twist. Told in frames, Frankenstein is a classic - the origin of all horror.
am 30. August 1997
What does God owe us, his Creation? What are the responsibilities of parents towards their children? How should society treat its homeless, creations of its own policies? What happens when scientists (or even entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, politicians) pursue a single-minded goal of glory and wonder without stopping to think on the consequences?
All of these interesting and relevant issues are raised in this plodding, poorly written work. The standards of interesting writing may have changed in the last hundreds of years, but some writers and poets are skilled enough with language that their work still endures. Don't be misled by the hype; Mary Shelley should not be remembered for her literary skill. I hope that no schoolchildren actually have to read this. There are enough great works that are enjoyable to read. Frankenstein should be classified as a work of philosophy, not one of literature.
am 4. April 2000
Unlike The Scarlet Letter, which some may find difficult to partake of, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein comes eas to any reader while maintaining the feel of a magnificent work of art. Shelley's story of a man set upon creating a being of his own is undaunting and horrifying, suspenseful and emotional. There is no doubt that this novel has received many praises by countless amounts of people, praises for its incorporation of naturistic and societal themes, the emotions of Victor Frankenstein and his creation, and a storyline that never stops moving. One will not soon forget its words after reading it, which marks this novel as a great literary achievement.
am 17. August 2015
Nicht immer muss ein Protagonist sympathisch sein oder ich mich als Leser mit ihm identifizieren können, es ist aber hilfreich und erleichtert den Zugang zum Buch. Wenn jedoch die Handlung schlüssig und interessant ist, kann ich mich auch mit einem negativen Helden arrangieren. Die Geschichte des Romans „Frankenstein“ ist zwar gut erzählt und transportiert einige wichtige zeitlose Botschaften, jedoch verhält sich der Titelheld dermaßen abstoßend, dass ich das Buch mit steigendem Unwillen las. Immer wieder versuchte ich mir vorzusagen, dass es nicht umsonst ein Klassiker geworden ist und erkannte auch seine Bedeutung, aber niemand kann aus seiner Haut und ich mich nicht mit Frankenstein anfreunden. Er jammerte sich durchs Buch, dass selbst mein mitfühlendes Herz am Ende kapitulierte und die verbleibenden Seiten zu zählen begann. Nicht jeder hat die Stärke, Fehler zu erkennen und zu diesen zu stehen, aber wenn ein Held so gar keine Entwicklung in einer Geschichte durchlebt und alles und jeden nur nicht sich selbst für seine ach so verfahrene Situation verantwortlich macht, da steigt mein Adrenalinspiegel extrem. Ziel dieses Romans ist es vielleicht sogar, gerade solche Gedanken und Gefühle beim Leser zu erzeugen, aber für meinen Geschmack fiel Frankenstein einmal zu viel in Ohnmacht oder stahl sich in eine Fieberattacke. Ich bin einfach nur froh, dass ich das Buch beendet habe. Klassiker hin oder her – es gibt ganz sicher bessere Bücher und von mir keine Leseempfehlung.
am 11. Januar 1999
All right, I agree, Frankenstein is a very tedious book to read. It's repetitive, rambling and very often, boring. The term "miserable wretch" can be found practically every two pages, Shelley likes to have her characters write marathon-length letters to each other and the good Dr. Frankenstein has a tendency to go staring at mountains for chapters at a time. If you can ignore all these imperfections, Frankenstein truly is a rare gem indeed. It has withstood the test of time by infecting many-a-generation with the vision of a solitary, man-made creature and his tortured creator. More movies and books have been created around Shelley's idea's than I have fingers. A tour down a local CVS during Halloween will yield you with at least five different "Frankenstein" costumes to pick from. Frankenstein is a part of our culture. Media and commercialism aside, Frankenstein also has a lot to say about our science as well. I honestly can't think of any other fiction book that expressed the same concern for the state of bio-technology and ethics than this novel. Worried about test-tube babies? Human testing? Cloning? This book has it all. And to add more icing to the cake, this book was one of the first to worry about it. Sure, the text might be unrefined. But the idea itself is worth the 233 pages, and enough to make me give this book a 3.5 on the rating scale.. Read this book when you have the spare time, you'll be pleasantly surprised!
am 19. Mai 1999
Mary Shelley's classic book has often been regarded as the first science fiction novel. Brian Aldiss has referred to it as the first novel of the Scientific Revolution. It should be required reading of any college or college-bound student. The version I read was the original 1818 edition. In 1831, Mary Shelley made a number of changes (but, nothing of great import; for example, in the 1831 version Elizabeth is no longer Victor's cousin). I did read the author's new introduction to the 1831 edition however. This introduction is well done. In this novel, written in the epistolary form, a young (age 21) student at the University of Ingolstadt, Victor Frankenstein, discovers the method of imparting life to inanimate tissue. He uses his skills to construct a creature and to give it life. The creature's and Victor's lives are intertwined and the reader can detect much of Mary Shelley's early life as well. Her mother (i.e., her creator) died a few days after her birth. The female act of creation and its results is an aspect of this novel. Others have pointed out that this is a true female novel. Although, the monster "inspires loathing" in all who see him, I came to the conclusion that the real villian in this story was Victor Frankenstein. He allows his own creation to control him.
am 24. April 2014
Dieses Buch gehört wohl zu den Klassikern der englischen Literatur. Es ist die Geschichte von Dr. Frankenstein und dem von ihm aus Leichenteilen erschaffenen Monster das zum Leben erweckt wird. Das Buch selbst ist in 3 volumes eingeteilt, die in sich nochmal durch Kapitel gegliedert sind. Die 3 Teile entsprechen den Sichtweisen einer Person auf das selbe Geschehen. Dadurch gewinnt die Handlung meiner Meinung nach auch an Tiefe, weil es sie viel deutlicher hervorhebt. Ich mag diese Ausgabe wegen der ausführlichen Einleitung. Sie versorgt den Leser mit Hintergrundinformationen rund um Mary Shelley, ihr Leben, ihre Werke und wie es dazu kam, dass sie dieses Buch geschrieben hat. Für jeden, der an mehr, als der Geschichte von Dr. Frankenstein und seinem Monster interessiert ist, kann ich eine definitive Kaufempfehlung aussprechen.