November 27

The Frankenstein myth VS. reality

How does your reading of Mary Shelley’s novel challenge your preconception or stereotype of the Frankenstein myth? 

When I read Frankenstein by Mary Shelley I found a few things different to what I believed happened in the novel. However, for most of the story, I did not have any idea of what would happen as I have not seen any of the film or tv adaptions or really thought about what happened in the book. This includes the ending and all of the deaths in the novel. But there were two main things that I had preconceived ideas about, both being about the monster.

 

The first was the monster. Specifically, the look of the monster. I thought that he was a green big monster with bolts on the side of his neck. However, that is not how it was in the book. I also thought that he walked like seen in the gif.

 

 

 

The second was the name of the monster. I thought that the monster was called Frankenstein and the scientist was called Victor. This I discovered to be false and the monster had no name.

Category: HL Literature | LEAVE A COMMENT
November 27

Frankenstein Expectations

My first image of Frankenstein was the green, giant with blots in his head, monster. This was from movies and Halloween costumes, the movies such as hotel Transylvanian. An expectation for the book was that the monster was uneducated and could not communicate to other, but would only groan and make hand gestures. However from reading the book the creation (Frankie Jr.) is as an intelligence and to have emotions. The emotion are chosen when he walk around and people shoot and fight with him. He also begin to get the connection towards a family which is something I did not expect. I believed that Frankie Jr. has a wife but from reading the book he wanted one but Victor did not want to create a female because he was revolted by the second creation. Victor is also different as i though he would crazier but instead is more calm and very smart.

Image result for frankenstein gif green

reality

Image result for frankenstein gif green

Expectation

Category: HL Literature | LEAVE A COMMENT
November 27

The Frankenstein Myth

How does your reading of Mary Shelley’s novel challenge your preconception or stereotype of the Frankenstein myth?  Refer to any forms of popular culture (TV/Film etc.) which familiarized you with Frankenstein’s “monster.” Did you confuse Victor Frankenstein with his creation? Include relevant videos/images to support your post.

~~~~~

Before I read the book I was not aware that Frankenstein wasn’t the monster but in fact the scientist ‘Victor Frankenstein’ which created it. I did know that there was a scientist but I always referenced the monster as Frankenstein. I was also always quite confused to as how the monster was created because in cartoons and shows growing up Frankenstein was always referenced as an evil monster that eats little children’s brains, sort of like a zombie, or instead, a nice Frankenstein as seen in Hotel Transylvania. I had always pictured Frankenstein as a cartoon-like a creature. In fact, the 1st time I saw a movie that represented Frankenstein was when I saw Hotel Transylvania. That adaptation was what I based my knowledge on for the past 15 years until I discovered it was untrue through reading Mary Shelly’s book.

 

Category: HL Literature | 1 Comment on The Frankenstein Myth
November 27

Frankenstein. The myth(s).

The book version of this story by Mary Shelley certainly does challenge the common stereotypes, and also from what we’d expect from Frankenstein. First, the majority of the people who know about Frankenstein, think that this is the name of the creature when it really isn’t. The name refers to Dr. Victor Frankenstein, the main character of the novel. In fact, even some more kid-friendly versions of this story introduce the creature as being called Frankenstein. For example, when I was in Grade 4 I bought a graphic novel version of Frankenstein, which did exactly this, and referred to the creature as being Frankenstein.

The second common stereotype that has been challenged is the appearance of the creature itself. In a lot of movie adaptations of this novel, Frankenstein’s monster has 2 bolts sticking out of his neck. Furthermore, he is also green. This is not true, as I’ve come to realize from reading this novel as he is described as being yellowish. Additionally, he was comprised of normal, dead human body parts meaning that he did not have a flat square head. Finally, the 2 bolts so commonly associated with him, have never been mentioned, or even alluded to.

Finally, the third major stereotype is the creature’s intelligence. In a lot of movie adaptations, and more kid-friendly adaptations also, the creature is seen as ‘stupid’. He is portrayed as a dumb monster when he really isn’t. After fleeing from Victor, the monster goes and hides in the forest where he learns from a small group of humans. He learns how to speak, and in fact he is quite intelligent in the book. In fact, he had over a year to learn the language, and all about humans as he only met Victor Frankenstein after over a year.

Category: Abder, HL Literature | LEAVE A COMMENT
November 27

Frankenstein – The Novel vs. The Myth

Frankenstein – The Novel vs. The Myth

How does your reading of Mary Shelley’s novel challenge your preconception or stereotype of the Frankenstein myth?  Refer to any forms of popular culture (TV/Film etc.) which familiarized you with Frankenstein’s “monster.” Did you confuse Victor Frankenstein with his creation? Include relevant videos/images to support your post.

~

Before sitting down to fully read the novel version of ‘Frankenstein’, I had a very different preconception as to how the characters would be, due to my exposure to other adaptations found in popular culture. Firstly, one of the biggest differences for when I was reading the book, was the changes in name. I was accustomed to calling the monster ‘Frankenstein’, however through reading the book, I discovered that the story followed ‘Frankenstein,’ the scientist who made the monster, and his monster had no name. This was slightly confusing while reading the book, as I sometimes thought Shelley was referring to the monster, while in reality, she was talking about the scientist. Secondly, another difference that I found between the novel and the myth that I knew, was the monster’s appearance. In the book, his description is

‘How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips.’

 

Category: HL Literature | LEAVE A COMMENT