Mary Shelleys' 'Frankenstein'.

Statius

Really Experienced
Joined
May 23, 2023
Posts
176
Can I just say I'm tired of this book being interpreted as a warning against the the dangers of science? What if it's about the creators abandonment of his (intentional for many reasons) creation? Be it god or man? I can't be the only one. I'll stop here and see what happens.
 
I've never read the story, so I can't say for sure, but your interpretation seems on tract.

It's like how everyone just assumes that the moral of the tortoise and the hare is that slow and steady wins the race. When really the moral is, it doesn't matter how talented you are, if you don't take it seriously then the guy with no talent but lots of dedication is going to get the job done while you fail to finish.
 
Can I just say I'm tired of this book being interpreted as a warning against the the dangers of science? What if it's about the creators abandonment of his (intentional for many reasons) creation? Be it god or man? I can't be the only one. I'll stop here and see what happens.
The thing about Literature is: read it how you want to.

e.g.

Marxist: It's how the wealthy play with the bodies of the proletariat, then deny responsibility.

Feminist: Men are jealous of women's ability to bring forth life. As usual, when the men get bored of their toys, it's the women who suffer the most.

New Historicist view: It's about a nineteen year old girl trying to beat the big literary boys in a ghost story contest. Arguably, she wins.

Freudian: When confronted with what we most desire, most people will deny it and will go to great pains to do so.
 
The thing about Literature is: read it how you want to.

e.g.

Marxist: It's how the wealthy play with the bodies of the proletariat, then deny responsibility.

Feminist: Men are jealous of women's ability to bring forth life. As usual, when the men get bored of their toys, it's the women who suffer the most.

New Historicist view: It's about a nineteen year old girl trying to beat the big literary boys in a ghost story contest. Arguably, she wins.

Freudian: When confronted with what we most desire, most people will deny it and will go to great pains to do so.
Monster porn: Well do I have to spell it out?
 
I saw it more as the warning for man not to play God, even though I don't believe in God, most do, especially back then.

Sometimes I try not to overanalyze everything, its a great book written by a woman in a time where many men didn't think they should be able to read-which was part of why it was initially published anonymously in 1818 before she put her name to it in 1831. It's more than a book, it's iconic for many reasons.

Just look at this thread, 200 years later and still being discussed.

BTW AI is our Frankenstein, and it will kill all of us.

Have a great Sunday!
 
Can I just say I'm tired of this book being interpreted as a warning against the the dangers of science? What if it's about the creators abandonment of his (intentional for many reasons) creation? Be it god or man? I can't be the only one. I'll stop here and see what happens.
Um, I'm guessing you didn't realize that those two things are not mutually exclusive and that the book is about both and a little more. Throw in unchecked ambition and the subsequent isolation and you get the complete picture. Good call out though. And @onehitwanda, can I have a medium Frosty, please?
 
Um, I'm guessing you didn't realize that those two things are not mutually exclusive and that the book is about both and a little more. Throw in unchecked ambition and the subsequent isolation and you get the complete picture. Good call out though. And @onehitwanda, can I have a medium Frosty, please?
Ever dip your fries in a frosty? Num!

Back to the main thread:

In modern terms, and from my personal opinion, Shelly could probably have used a better editor with a handy stock of red pens/ink. That story could have been told in a much, much more concise form. But - I don't know enough of 1800s literature to have an opinion on how it was received at that point - clearly it was more of a hit than many of its contemporary works.

Then again, we tend to have the attention span of gnats. One of the downsides of info overloads. 1800 had somewhere under a hundred novels published in the UK according to Goog, whereas 2020 had somewhere over 180,000. We could be said to be drowning in content.
 
The book explores the consequences of humanity's ambition and the pursuit of knowledge without considering the ethical implications. It's about hubris.
While Frankenstein is often seen as a critique of science, it's more accurate to describe it as a critique of the scientist. Shelley isn't against scientific discovery itself but rather the irresponsible application of it. Victor's pursuit of knowledge is obsessive and solitary, lacking any ethical or social consideration. He doesn't consult others, nor does he think about the potential consequences of his actions. His ultimate failure is not a failure of science but a failure of morality and responsibility. The novel warns that when scientists become detached from their humanity and their creations, the results can be catastrophic. It's a critique of the mindset of the person wielding the scientific power, not the power itself. It's a timeless warning that the pursuit of knowledge must be tempered with compassion and responsibility.
 
There has to be a way to make an erotic horror version where someone wakes up in a body of sewn-together bits of other people’s bodies.

I had always wished for a bigger cock. I never dreamed that I might one day be sporting a cock that once belonged to an actual porn star - or that the hand I stroked it with might be the hand of the surgeon who performed heart surgery on me three years before I awoke with a swimmer’s chest and the heart of a mountain biker. Everything about me was an offence against Nature, but my cock was hard and throbbing with implacable urgency.
 
The book explores the consequences of humanity's ambition and the pursuit of knowledge without considering the ethical implications. It's about hubris.
While Frankenstein is often seen as a critique of science, it's more accurate to describe it as a critique of the scientist. Shelley isn't against scientific discovery itself but rather the irresponsible application of it. Victor's pursuit of knowledge is obsessive and solitary, lacking any ethical or social consideration. He doesn't consult others, nor does he think about the potential consequences of his actions. His ultimate failure is not a failure of science but a failure of morality and responsibility. The novel warns that when scientists become detached from their humanity and their creations, the results can be catastrophic. It's a critique of the mindset of the person wielding the scientific power, not the power itself. It's a timeless warning that the pursuit of knowledge must be tempered with compassion and responsibility.

 
There has to be a way to make an erotic horror version where someone wakes up in a body of sewn-together bits of other people’s bodies.

Sounds kinda like Adam, the constructed being from Buffy the Vampire Slayer TV series.

Adam "Scout's Honor!"
(I forget which protagonist) "You're a Boy Scout?"
Adam "Well, parts of me."

So - a rigger's hand, a masseur's eye, a masochist's back, a pegging aficionado's butt, a spice connoisseur's digestive tract.... Lots of options!
 
Um, I'm guessing you didn't realize that those two things are not mutually exclusive and that the book is about both and a little more. Throw in unchecked ambition and the subsequent isolation and you get the complete picture. Good call out though. And @onehitwanda, can I have a medium Frosty, please?
I didn't finish my thoughts on my reasoning on purpose. One to get others thoughts, two I didn't want to go down rabbit holes right off the bat. I was simply referring to the overall theme of abandonment in the book, and the possibility, probability, that that is what Shelly felt throughout her life.
 
There still remains the problem of "Shelly", though, right..?

I mean: if we're not going to show ourselves up as genuine morons...
 
Back
Top