Rating: 
Summary: Love it!
Review: Shelley was only 18 when she wrote this?! Incredible! The reason for this being a classic is obvious--a stellar story about a mad scientist and his objectives gone awry. I've learned a lot about the time period, as well, despite the few anachronisms throughout. Shelley did a fabuous job with this novel and I hope it remains in its rightful place in the canons of literature.Word Ninja
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Read
Review: Despite the surpirsing criticism this book has received on the part of the reader reveiwers, I assert that this is one of the best novels ever written. Never before have I been so involved in the characters, as I was with Victor Frankenstein, and his creation, and I have never had such an urge to turn the page when the intelligent and methodical deamon is out to kill Victor's wife, to his complete ignorance. This is a story about ambition, obsession, love, the responsibilites of a creator to his creation, and murder. It is a portrait of the once cheerful life of Dr. Frankenstein and it descent into the most melancholy and destable fate imaginable. It is engadging, thought provoking, and wonderfully written novel that represents the optimoe of it's genora. After comparing my review with those given previous, I had thought, and indeed would have concluded, had I not known better, that they had read an entirely different Frankenstein. I am by no means a big fan of the horror genora, despite having read many among its most reknowned, but I find this to be undisputably the best. In conclusion, I reccomend this book to anyone who enjoys good literature. At only about two hundred pages, not a single moment can be spared. I found the letters in the beggining perhaps a little irrelevant to the overall story, but they come together int he conclusion, and are well written, so I hardly think they should
have little, if any, negative affect on the novel. Perhaps my favourite book, read it and you won't regreat it.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't believe the hype ...
Review: I'm sure that I'll have people wanting my blood for this, but I have to be honest. This book is horrible. Absoulutely horrible from start to finish. The writing is grade-schoolish, the plot moves to slowly and is so far fetched that one can't lose one's suspension of disbelief no matter how hard the reater tries, and frankly the monster itself is sleep-inducing. Don't bother with this book. For that matter, don't bother with the movies either. Frankenstein, the book and all things spawned from this book, is the single most overrated work in literature.
Rating: 
Summary: Drags to much
Review: I've seen other people who have rated this book well, but cannot understand where they see the ingenious in this book. Personally when I started reading this I hoped for a scary book that infered on human behavior. What I got was a drawn of boring story set in 4 parts.
The beginning is somewhat interesting and delves on Frankenstein the scientist learning about life and developing the monster. This part has a somewhat boring start, but once he starts making it it goes faster. Then once hes done with this the monster is made..... and it slows down to a miserable pace.
From here it will have short spurts of something exciting, like for seven pages, then it goes into a fifty page boring streak, prattling on about details you don't care about. If it wants to emphasize that Frankenstein is lonely, it takes 25 pages of examples when five would be sufficient. From about the time Frankensteins monster is born you want it to die and let the story be over with because it is so boring. Not to mention predictable. I could predict the deaths of some of the people fifty pages away! Let me just say leave this book on the shelf and don't start to read it. You'll hate the book, and yet you'll probably make yourself finish it just because you started it. At least thats the way it was with me.
Rating:
Summary: A classic that will remind you of modern problems, etc...
Review: Mary Shelley had no idea when she wrote this that centuries later it would be enjoyed, or that the idea presented in the book would actually be an issue. She presents the issue of "playing" God or creating life. This is the very issue that we are dealing with now as far as cloning goes. What are the consequences of creating a creature? According to Shelley we may be overwhelmed with what we have done, and be unable to control the outcome. Frankenstein is a book that everyone should read and think about long and hard. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction... A great read, don't miss it!
Rating:
Summary: Frankenstien=Good
Review: Read this book, everyone else has! I enjoyed it very much and you will to.
Rating: 
Summary: don't miss this great read!
Review: Shelley's "Frankenstein" is quite a departure when compared to the films based upon the book. The essence of the novel centers on the horrors experienced by Dr. Frankenstein after he disobeys the natural order of things by creating his "monster". Frankenstein recoils in horror at what he has created, and it is his own personal hell that the reader experiences, rather than the terror of the creature himself. Her use of atmosphere is astounding. I could feel the cold forest in which the creature dwells, smell the fresh cut firewood, and picture the cabin in the woods where the creature learns his lessons in humanity. While Frankenstein chases the monster through the Arctic chill, I felt almost physically cold. You can breathe the scent of the pine trees surrounding Frankenstein's residence as well. Beyond the excellent descriptions of places and things, Shelley has gifts when it comes to relating suspenseful horror through the eyes of the monster as well as Frankenstein. The doctor comes across like a desperate, oppressed soul, fleeing from his own creation. The creature is equally desperate in his longing for revenge and his unattainable quest to find peace with the world which rejects him. The story seems to be missing passages and missing information, or at least it reads in parts as if certain scenes were rushed. The creation of the monster is a good example of this, as we follow Frankenstein through his first days in the university until his much-later monster creation, all in the course of a few pages (interestingly, Shelly downplays the part about reanimating corpses, although it is clear that this is how Frankenstein did it). Immediately thereafter, Frankenstein is horrified by what he has done, and his descent into madness over the course of many months is condensed into a few sentences. Shelley, for some reason, has Frankenstein marry his adopted sister, Elizabeth. The book explains that Elizabeth and Victor treat each other as "cousins" growing up, and just for added confusion Shelley adds another adopted brother named William. I'm not clear on whether Shelley was going for an "incest" angle or not (probably not, considering the time this was written), but I couldn't help but crack a smile over the excessive cousin-adoptions-sibling-marriage thing. The storyline involving adoption after adoption seems unnecessary to say the least. Many scenes in which Frankenstein relates the bone-chilling inner torment of having been responsible for the monster who wreaks havoc are over the top and approach camp comedy. As many times as Victor cries out that he is responsible for the death and destruction around him, then backtracks without an explanation for his behavior, you'd think someone in his circle would ask him what the heck he's talking about. This never happens, although Frankenstein is somehow able to convince his family that an innocent has been accused of murder, without giving any real explanation as to why he believes it's a frame-job. This is unintentional comedy at its finest. We also have the bizarre coincidence of the monster finding a bag of books lying in the road, which lead to his very educated and worldly (yet still grotesque and probably smelly) appearance during his first confrontation with the doctor. Shelley also makes the mistake of using first person narrative for THREE different characters in the book. There were times where I wasn't sure who was speaking, in fact it took a page or two before I understood that it was the monster who was speaking in chapter 11. Maybe I was reading too fast, but the awkwardness of having three first-person narratives caught me off guard. Well, I sure did a lot of complaining about a book that earned 4 stars from me. Considering Shelley wrote "Frankenstein" when she was 19 years old in a world where women's education wasn't exactly common, this is high art. For all its flaws, "Frankenstein" was a pleasure to read for the creepy atmosphere and riveting suspense. I didn't know what to expect from the story from page to page, and Shelley paints an exceptionally clear picture of the madness surrounding the life of Frankenstein. This reader no longer has any questions regarding why this book has been popular for 180+ years; read it and you'll understand too.
Rating:
Summary: Original Sci-Fi at its BEST
Review: Mary Shelley, the author of the first sci-fi novel ever (Frankenstein), led an absolute horror of a life. A short biography is included in the beginning of this text, which gives you a good standard for seeing where this book came from. It is absolutely brilliant, a landmark in Victorian Era novelization, and defined an entire genre with its page-turning horror. Of course, like all great stories, it's nothing like the dull, ignorant movie and TV re-writes, so don't go into it with any precognition. If you read this book, you're going to be in for a treat. It's dark yet promising, full of intelligent twists and horrific action, and will always be THE original science fiction novel.
Rating:
Summary: A masterpiece of savage hopelessness and immaculate prose.
Review: If a reader was to compare the macabre gothic darkness in the novels of Frankenstein, Dracula and The Phantom of the Opera, one would believe that the element of horror and depravity in each book would be on an equal standing. But the reader would be incorrect, for in respects to horror, somberness, trauma, deprivation of love, empathy and respect, Frankenstein towers above the others. It has a hybrid of excessive melancholy despair and disturbing horror. It is a work of literature where the gothic element is pushed to the zenith. Where Dracula is a novel of lust and physical intimacy, at its core, it is still a novel of love-however warped and disturbing it may be. Where the Phantom in Gaston Leroux's novel is a more well-rounded representative of human needs, Frankenstein really isn't. If anything he is a full throttled representation of anger and rage. And that is only one side of human dynamics. His is a living organism, created and plunked into the epicenter of humanity, a walking, thinking experiment that goes terribly awry. Frankenstein is not a creature of God-and perhaps therein is where the problem lies-but a concoction of man's arrogance and man's wickedness for unrepentant self-glorification. One could easily say that he is the genuine embodiment of the true son of Satan, albeit a human one. And that is truely appalling. He is the son of evil who is able to see and feel the horror of his own birth. How ironic! His abomination is both internal and external. Frankenstein obviously addresses numerous contemporary issues: the medical ethics of cloning, the wanton lack of family responsibility and the dangers that arise as a result of it, and lastly-the sometimes subtle, sometimes not-emotional evolution of humans into self-proclaimed gurus or demigods. Is there really a stark difference between Dr. Frankenstein and say, the megalomaniac Reverend Jim Jones of the People's Temple or Marshall Applewhite of Heaven's Gate? Dr. Frankenstein untimately comes to his senses when it is too late, but his desire for historical immortality via creative and scientific recklessness is no different then the hunger of contemporary, psychotic cultist gurus or tyrannical dictators-evil doers who are willing to go at any extreme in order to be remembered. Religion often plays a part in gothic works. The idea of a higher authority isn't always blatantly addressed, but its essence is surely felt. Dracula was at one point a human being who casts God to the side, makes his own decision and evolves into a horror of his own making. The phantom was a deformed being who, because of his skeletal appearance, was cast into the scummy bowls of Paris. But there was something that both of these characters had-and without sounding like a preacher-simply, they had God, a force whom they could turn to for strength and persistence. And what did Frankenstein have? A god, a father, a force who turned his back on him. Frankenstein is an especially sad novel, because the monster is truly alone in every sense of the word. He is a genetic calamity whereby only suicide could be his salvation. Mary Shelly incorporated many possibilities in this novel for the creature to find happiness, numerous inroads for human acceptance; a case-in point would be the various scenes with the creature's 'beloved' cottagers, but just when you think you have the progress of the story 'licked,' you are deceived and led down another road entirely: from hopelessness, to hope, to hopelessness, back to hope. Elegantly written and truly thought-provoking, Frankenstein is a novel that can't be limited in the things it has to say. A true classic.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent tale of good and evil
Review: I believe at the time that this was written, that readers were expected to come away from reading this book with a sense that people should not try to emulate God by creating their own life from scratch. And in such, readers were supposed to empathasize with the monster and shun the doctor. I had the opposite reaction. Initially I had pity for the monster but it slowly disolved as the story wore on. I felt pity for the doctor. I think this is one of the classic stories of good versus evil. And the fact that the interpretation of who is good and who is evil is up to each individual reader. And it's because of this that this is one of my favorite books of all time. I highly recommend it.
|
