Scan barcode
A review by lisyda
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
It's October, so a classic horror story fits perfectly. Plus, this was the book of the month for a book club as well.
I've never read Frankenstein before, though I did know going in that Frankenstein is very much the name of the scientist, not the monster. But that was more or less all I knew before I started reading and ... I've taken two weeks to come to the conclusion that overall, I personally felt kind of "meh" about the book due to its pacing.
Yes, as always, I understand that at the time of publishing, this book probably made people feel fear or dread of some sort. But, as the case tends to be with a lot of classics, it doesn't have the same effect for modern sensibilities. Instead of horror, I'd say this book mostly leans into its philosophical aspects, which were definitely well-written.
And something that surprised me or, more accurately, made me realise that the movie adaptations of Frankenstein have cemented more than just the name error in how people perceive this story, was how the creature's creation was described. I think most of us immediately think of the creature with bolts screwed in his neck and how he was brought to life by harnessing the power of lightning – yeah, not at all how it happens in the book.
Also, Victor could've used a couple of reality checks, especially every single time he was trying to pretend that maybe everything's fine and he doesn't need to go and deal with the consequences of his actions.
Overall though, I was able to appreciate the story for what it was at the time and for what it's done within the genre, but I'll also freely admit that for my personal taste, it was a bit too slow-paced in general. I'm still glad I read it and can check off another classic from my list.
I've never read Frankenstein before, though I did know going in that Frankenstein is very much the name of the scientist, not the monster. But that was more or less all I knew before I started reading and ... I've taken two weeks to come to the conclusion that overall, I personally felt kind of "meh" about the book due to its pacing.
Yes, as always, I understand that at the time of publishing, this book probably made people feel fear or dread of some sort. But, as the case tends to be with a lot of classics, it doesn't have the same effect for modern sensibilities. Instead of horror, I'd say this book mostly leans into its philosophical aspects, which were definitely well-written.
And something that surprised me or, more accurately, made me realise that the movie adaptations of Frankenstein have cemented more than just the name error in how people perceive this story, was how the creature's creation was described. I think most of us immediately think of the creature with bolts screwed in his neck and how he was brought to life by harnessing the power of lightning – yeah, not at all how it happens in the book.
Also, Victor could've used a couple of reality checks, especially every single time he was trying to pretend that maybe everything's fine and he doesn't need to go and deal with the consequences of his actions.
Overall though, I was able to appreciate the story for what it was at the time and for what it's done within the genre, but I'll also freely admit that for my personal taste, it was a bit too slow-paced in general. I'm still glad I read it and can check off another classic from my list.