So I finally finished Frankenstein. Trying to argue that it’s any better or worse then Dracula is not something that’ll be very rewarding. Once again you have that crazy Victorian language which grates on me. And everything is told in the first person in the form of a letter, tho thankfully not nearly as dedicated to the format.
But I am glad I read it. (I think.) Now I’ll just have to check out the movies to see how much they changed. I know that the “classic” movie monster version is already totally wrong. Frank was quite articulate with his speech. Not the “Fire, Bad!” we’ve all come to expect.
The book I’ve gotten out of the library has a bunch of essays included as well and I’ve just started reading them. I’m only about half way through the first one and so far it’s fine example of how to read too much into something. Apparently Frankenstein, the novel, mostly deals with men’s fear of women’s sexuality.
What?
I hope they get better. But I am reminded of something I heard in school (Junior High? High School?). We were reading “Shane“, the cowboy novel, and going on and on about all the different themes and symbolism and whatnot. What I had heard, at some point – I can’t remember, is that the author never actually put the stuff our teachers kept testing us on. He just wanted to write a cowboy novel.
I’ve never really trusted English teachers (and by extension anyone who would write critical essays about someone else’s writing…) when they start pretending how smart they are.
Maybe Frank is just suppose to be scary.
