Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Mary Shelley - Frankenstein

"Legendary science-fiction and science fact author Dr. Isaac Asimov often wrote that Mary Wollenstonecraft Shelley's 'Frankenstein' (1818) was one of the most influential books of science fiction written. The equally legendary horror and fantasy author Stephen King also urges his readers to read 'Frankenstein' in order to get a good grounding for how to write.

Why? I have no idea. If any writer today turned in a manuscript like this, they'd gather enough rejection slips to paper the walls with.

But if you are looking to read a science fiction book, horror book or even a good book, then pass it by. This is one book that breaks the usual rule of being better than the movie adaptation. Skip this book and watch Mel Brooks' 'Young Frankenstein' (1974) instead. Granted, 'Frankenstein' was groundbreaking in its day ... However, modern readers will be sorely disappointed with 'Frankenstein.' This reviewer couldn't tolerate reading the whole thing (my life is too short to be spent reading bad books) and skimmed the last fourth of the novel. Not that I didn't know what was going to happen, anyway."

"After the upteenth tremble/jerk/gasp/faint/start from our mad scientist Victor Frankenstein, I could only sign in relief that he wasn't a Rabbi about to perform a bris circumcism - oy vey!"

"Warning!: Buttload of sarcasm incoming!!!

Oh yes, that's just brilliant...Let's tell the story in a second-hand past tense. That'll get us right into the action! And I love how this second-hand story-teller is able to relate in very fine detail dialogue exchanges between the monster and people he met years ago via a third person account from the dying Dr. Frankenstein. I mean honestly, what were you thinking Mary?!"

"he only description of the monster you ever get is that it is so ugly that words cannot describe it. WHAT THE FUCK KIND OF DESCRIPTION IS THAT?????"

"In most cases the book is more enjoyable than the movie. However, in this case I much rather preferred the many movie versions versus the book. This book had so many big words and confusing sentence structure that I couldn't enjoy it."

"Shelley is not only a terrible author, she is also an ignorant and prejudiced one. Her novel, hailed as a classic for two centuries, is infantile dross and lacks any imagination or creativity. Mary Shelley was the Stephanie Meyer of her generation, and her novel should be shelved with the chic-lit vampire romances and other such fare read avidly by teenage girls."

"The whole concept Mary Shelley was talking about also, that too much science is bad, was completely stupid. I found, through this book, that my opinion of the romantic era has been reduced to almost zilch. It appears to me that the romantics were a bunch of hippies who believed in strolling around breathing [not that I don't enjoy that] and letting themselves die because they wouldn't take medicine, believing that the science that discovered it was unnatural and unhealthy."

"This book added absolutely zero to my intelletual inner landscape."

"This is a story that we ALL know by heart. We've seen it time and time again in movie after movie. Yet, if you read the book all those details that make Frankenstein, well, Frankenstein, are not there. No dark castle on the top of a hill. Dr. Frankenstein is not a crazed old man, but a university student (whaaaaat?!?!). The coolest part where Dr. Frankenstein goes around to grave sites and morgues collecting pieces for the monster...not even mentioned!!!"

"I thought that Frankenstein was a mad scientist who lived in a castle. A man who loved his monster and shouted out "It's alive" when it opened it's eyes. Where was Egor? And I thought it was the villagers that wanted the monster dead and broke into the castle with fire and pitchforks to try and kill him.
None of this happened ... It's worth avoiding this and just sticking to what you thought the story of Frankenstein was..."

No comments:

Post a Comment