Frankenstein

I wasn't expecting to like this book anywhere near as much as I ended up doing! The story as told in the book is much more interesting than the limited image of it that's got in to popular culture, and this was my first encounter with the whole thing. It's so much more about deeply flawed Victor Frankenstein (TLDR: our reading group kept using the term "main character syndrome") than about the mad science process. And while the creature is far from likeable, his portrayal has genuine pathos, even though most of what we hear about him is secondhand through the recounting of someone who hates him.

There are several impressively strong resonances to the modern world, between the general lack of ethics in tech and the current wave of "AI" hype. And of course big self-centred men who think that extreme success in one sphere gives them licence to behave as badly as they like in others.

I read a good biography of Mary Shelley back in April, but had never actually gotten around to reading her famous novel, Frankenstein, until now. I spotted it on a campsite book exchange and thought it really was about time! Frankenstein is such a cultural icon that I assumed I already knew the basic storyline, but it turned out that much of what I thought I knew isn't actually in the novel at all! And much of the novel is far deeper in ideas and tone than many of its recreations would have us believe.

Beginning with letters back home from an arctic explorer, Walton, we learn of his scientific intentions and of his bizarre meeting with a lone man stranded on an ice floe. That lone man is Victor Frankenstein, an obsessive Swiss scientist who had created and animated a monstrous man, but terrified by his creation, had immediately abandoned it. I really didn't like Victor at all. Not only is there his obvious and total lack of responsibility for his own actions and creation, but his incessant 'woe is me' whinging is infuriating. Even as his friends and family start dying off around him, he is still unable to find a backbone!

By contrast, our third narrator, the unnamed monster himself, is surprisingly erudite and eloquent for, essentially, a self-educated vagabond. Of course we only have his own words to support his claim of a kind and gentle disposition prior to the commencement of his murderous spree, but his story of being turned against humanity by people repeatedly recoiling from or even attacking him does ring depressingly true. For a book written practically two hundred years ago, Frankenstein is still remarkably relevant. Denying a person understanding, respect and companionship simply on the basis of their appearance might well result in them becoming an enemy.

Frankenstein, the novel, is written in wonderfully pompous language which dates it but not in a negative way. I don't think I would have been so swept up in the story otherwise. For a violent tale, there is practically nothing graphically described (which I appreciated), but Shelley's build-up of tension and suspense is brilliantly done. She takes her times evoking every scene and landscape so I could always envisage exactly where the characters were. By modern standards, I did think those characters weren't as developed as they could have been. The monster actually comes across as the most human of all and Victor, moving from arrogance to vengeance, simply doesn't learn - I suspect that is the point.

Victor Frankenstein is a student of science, obsessed with discovering the cause of life. One night he bestowed animation upon a lifeless matter and created a monster. He recoils from his hideous creation and the monster is cast out and left tormented by isolation and loneliness. Evil is unleashed and a campaign for vengeance against Frankenstein has begun.

Most people are aware of my passion for Frankenstein, I may not read it every year but I do come close. Picking up this book is like coming home, the joy that sweeps over me as I emerse myself into the text is indescribable. Have you ever had that feeling where a book can bring you so much joy, I even have to buy different versions of this novel just to have on my self. I have some rather handsome editions; a leather-bound copy, an annotated edition and a nice illustrated hardcover released by Dark Horse Comics.

So imagine my shock to discover that the audiobook I was listening to was a little different to the novel I was accustomed to. With a little research I discovered Dan Stevens (the narrator, yes the one from Downton Abbey) was reading from the 1818 edition. Not the heavily revised 1931 version, which is most commonly printed. I didn’t even know there were two different versions; this was an exciting day for me. Not only can I continually read Frankenstein and gain immense pleasure from it, but I can also switch between two different versions of the story.

I was familiarising myself with the text of Frankenstein for a university course, so I had decided to look at the book a little differently. For an older review, one I still think is pretty good click here. I knew a little more about Mary Shelley this time, so I was looking at Frankenstein with some context. Before Shelley wrote Frankenstein she had given birth to a daughter, two months premature. This daughter only lived a few weeks, a year later she gave birth to William Shelley. After the birth of her son she suffered from postpartum depression.

The birth of William happened a few months before the story of Frankenstein was conceived, so it wasn’t too surprising to see William’s name in the novel. William was Victor Frankenstein’s youngest brother, who was strangled to death by the monster. So I have two lines of thought here, one being that Mary Shelley’s depression manifested an urge to strangle William, the second is a little more complex.

I want to skip over the whole parody of creationism within Frankenstein, which would have to be an entirely different blog post (maybe when I read it next time). Life was created (without the need of a female) and then rejected. He has no loving mother; he is born fully grown but still has the intelligence of an infant, he was rejected before he could learn about the world. Again I’m left with two thoughts, is this about growing up without a mother or was this rejection of her child? I’m not really good at forming arguments (something I need to learn) but I wanted to leave you with those thoughts, and one other. In a journal entry in 1915 Mary Shelley wrote about the death of her first child, and being tormented by the idea of it coming back to life.

You know that “never meet your idols” phrase? I never really understood it; sure Mary Shelley wasn’t a ‘nice’ person but who is? She was tormented and complex and from that sprung forth a novel with so many layers that you could write a book on it. This was what made her my literary idol, not being a good person. I know I will keep reading this novel and try to write a review on each different perspective I find. Who knows it could make up and interesting collection of posts. Look for my next Frankenstein post (possible next year), not sure what it would be about; Creationism, Paradise Lost, Feminism, Slavery, Revolution, or something else. If you haven’t experienced the joys of a book so complex and layered, don’t you think it’s time you did so?

This review originally appeared on my blog; literary-exploration.com/2013/12/27/book-review-frankenstein-1818-edition/