Look Back \\ Frankenstein by Mary Shelley

Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley was about eighteen years old when she wrote the timeless classic Frankenstein. The horrific tale has lasted nearly 200 years, and when I recently re-read it for a college class I'm taking, I couldn't help but wonder why. Why was the story of Frankenstein so intriguing to people when it was first published, and why is the tale so intriguing to people now, me included?

Frankenstein is the story of decisions and consequences. When Victor Frankenstein discovers the recipe for life, he spends months in seclusion to sculpt a creature of human form. When the creature lives, Victor is remorseful. The creature is ugly, and Victor doesn't want anything to do with him. As Victor flees from the creature, the creature finds respite in the country where, hidden, he learns to talk and read and write. The thing he wants most is a companion, but Victor will not create one for him. The creature falls into a murderous rage, and both men live out their days in remorse and madness.

Frankenstein could simply be a mysterious, horrific, amazing piece of literature meant to wow audiences. And it does do all that. But it also has several themes, however, that encourage further consideration. (Below are just a small few.)

One of the most interesting aspects of Frankenstein is the difficulty in finding the line between good and evil. You could say Victor Frankenstein is the good guy in this story, but on second thought, is he? He played God, he created life, and then he abandoned that life. And though the creature seems like an awfully bad guy, is he simply a victim? Well, he did kill a few people, so I wouldn't say he is entirely victimized. While I was reading I had a hard time deciding who to feel sorry for, and I spent most of the time feeling sorry for both.

Can man (and woman) go too far? There's a big theme for you, one that is still up for debate today. Was Victor in the wrong for, after finding the secret to life, creating life? Can one person have too much knowledge? Or is it less about the amount of knowledge and more about what a person does with that knowledge? And isn't it interesting to compare this scenario to various ones today, like assisted suicides, abortions, and IVF? Where should we stop?

Here's another big one for you: nature versus nurture. I learned a lot about this in a psychology class I took last semester, and the question of whether you were born that way or learned it from your environment is forever present. Is Shelley promoting the nurture side of things as she weaves together the creature's story? Was it because of his abuse that he turned mad, or was he "born" that way? Some people obviously take issue with this depending on what side of the debate they are on regarding original sin/total depravity and homosexuality (to name just two).

Maybe the thing that gets me about Frankenstein's ability to stay popular through so many years is that, when you think about it, we never really change. We have the same questions, the same desires, the same likes. Maybe our hairstyles change, our clothes get upgrades, and our music gets revamped, but, on the whole, we humans aren't much different than we were a hundred years ago. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, I wonder?

Frankenstein is definitely one of my favorite books. I love it because of its writing and intriguing story, and I love it because it makes me think. This is my second time to read it, but I can already anticipate a third time around.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Frankenstein.

Some other interesting reviews I dug up about Frankenstein:
Into the Book
Challenging Destiny (also includes very honest reviews of movies
and books based off of the original tale)

Classic Spotlight: Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

I just had to do it. Amid the other books I had planned to read, I picked up an audio version of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 from the library. The version I listened to was read by Christopher Hurt, and his reading, in my opinion, made listening to this book so enjoyable.

Fahrenheit 451 was published in the 1950s as a futuristic, science fiction tale of what could happen to our society . . . and our books. Common life in this fictional world is to zip around at top speeds, to sit in a living room watching a full-wall television, and to digest and regurgitate anything the government says. (It doesn't sound that fictional to me, does it to you?)

In that day, firemen are not firefighters. Actually, they do nothing to stop fires; their specialty is starting fires. And what do they burn? They burn houses, books, and thinking people who have no place in this society.

But, of course, a few people in this world are still thinking for themselves -- thus the need for firemen. And one of these firemen, Guy Montag, is starting to wonder what the books he has been burning actually say, and why these thinking people seem to love them so much. Montag begins to sneak a few books here and there. Then, he begins to read them.

Ray Bradbury's tale is engaging and thought-provoking, a true classic. His writing style is descriptive and edgy, which made listening to this book easy. My only criticism is the overkill with hells and damns, but it was not enough to detract from the overall story, and it was easy enough to ignore while listening. I like Ray Bradbury's thinking in this novel, and, though over fifty years old, the relevance is uncanny.

Though I don't usually enjoy afterwords in novels, Ray Bradbury's is further eye-opening as he discusses the ways that we, in essence, burn books today. Don't skip it.

"We need not to be let alone. We need to be really bothered once in a while. How long is it since you were really bothered? About something important, about something real?"

-- From Fahrenheit 451