Mary Shelley


I would be interested in anyone caring to discuss anything to do with the writng of Mary Shelley. Recently read through all of her novels. My favorite is Valperga, which I think needs to be moved up several notches in the canon. Would particularly be interested in someone a little knowledgeable in feminist theory, but all comments pro or con welcomed

>>By Dirk   (Tuesday, 11 Apr 2006 00:26)

I just finished "Frankenstein" for an English class. What a potent story! I particularly liked the idea that the creature which Frankenstein created wasn't really the monster after all. At various points in the book I felt sorry for both characters, despite their downfalls. However, I think the book would have been much better if Shelley's husband hadn't gone and edited the whole thing to make it more "academic."

>>By artificial_stupidity   (Friday, 19 May 2006 06:44)

I didn't think anyone would respond anymore...
Don't have but a minute. I read the book several times, but don't know about Percy's editing job. There is an interesting website that ties the book into Mary's father's educational theories, and tries to show that the book is really a puzzle, in which both the monster and the Dr. give clues by which we are to know that they atre lying. I haven't been able to go back yet and work through this. But I will try to find the site and pass it on if you are interested. More later...

>>By Dirk   (Tuesday, 23 May 2006 00:30)

I wanted to get back to your comments. I believe Mary wanted us to feel altertnately sympathetic to both characters. And, yes, the monster is not really the monster...Dr. F. did not take into account that the life he was making would have intelligence, and emotion. His lack of foresight is a standard "moral" to the tale. Yet the monster becomes the monster not from the fact of his having been made but from his rejection by Dr. F....More later

>>By Dirk   (Friday, 26 May 2006 23:38)

I would be interested in that site...I'd like to check that out. Maybe this summer I'll have time to puzzle that out.

I agree that Franky didn't understand what he was doing when he created his creature, but at the same time it's kind of an oxymoron, because he was supposedly very very intelligent while at the university, and he excelled in his field of study, and he was capable of *creating* life -- but at the same time he didn't have a clue what life really was. And he didn't realize it until everyone around him lost their lives - Elizabeth, his brother, his father, the maid (Judith, was it?).

>>By artificial_stupidity   (Sunday, 28 May 2006 04:48)

You are really getting warm, there. Even if materialistic science can set life in motion, life is a whole lot more than that.
Yet, after all the study and work, Dr F rejects his creature very quickly. It seems a purely emotional, aesthetic response.
You might say overwhelmed by horror. Yet, what is there in the creature as we come to know him that merits this response?

>>By Dirk   (Thursday, 6 Jul 2006 23:13)

The site is

>>By Dirk   (Thursday, 6 Jul 2006 23:46)

The discussion board is currently closed.