My take is that Frankenstein is a surname, and, as Victor was the monster’s progenitor, they are both Frankenstein. If the context is clear enough for some pedant to “well, actually”, then it is clear enough to understand which Frankenstein is being discussed.
Maybe we should call the Creature “Frankenstein Jr.”
Now that’s a Frankenstein cast I can get behind.
Personally I think it’s ok to call the monster (or that style of monster) ‘a Frankenstein’ on the basis that it was created by Dr. Frankenstein the same way you’d call a painting by Picasso ‘a Picasso’.
I like this!
Precisely. He considered the doctor to be his father. He likely would have called himself Frankenstein as well.
Frankenstein’s monster doesn’t deserve any sympathy; he’s pure evil. I know this contradicts the opinions of the characters in the book. He does suffer mightily and unfairly despite all efforts at kindness.
The problem is that his solution is to create another to suffer as he has. He even instructs the Doctor to make her hideous like him so that she’ll have no choice but to be his companion. The doctor wonders if this will be enough to stop the “bride” from going rogue.
These are the only two times in the novel anyone considers that the “bride” might have motivation or pathos of her own.
He also refers to his potential bride as the “female” which, well ya know.
Interesting way to look at the story. It certainly is an odd choice for a book written by a woman. A daughter of a notable 19th century feminist no less.
In fairness it’s two men discussing a woman, in her era it makes sense that’s only to ensure she’s subservient to them.
Looks like dark romance isn’t a new phenomenon at all lol.
To be fair, Shelley was on some other shit… She was exceptional. I don’t believe there was anyone at that time writing anything like it. She pretty much spawned entire major genres like horror and science fiction.
Oh, I may have a book (series) for you! The Alchemist’s Daughter by Theodora Goss. It starts with Mary Jekyll—the daughter of Dr. Jekyll—and expands to find Sherlock and Watson, a daughter of Hyde, Justine—the woman made to be Adam Frankenstein’s bride, and other women left in the path of various men who tested the limits of humanity. It even talks about Shelley’s book and why she might have written it as she did. The second book expands into the wife and daughter of Van Helsing.
I’m about 75% of the way through the second book and have been loving them. They’re very post-modern though, with the characters somewhat frequently interrupting the narrator to discuss the way the story is written. I love that sort of thing but know it’s not for everyone!
Funny I avoided that book because of the title, and now I realize how deliberate the choice was.
Deliberate in what way?
What I didn’t like in the title is the erasure of the women’s name in profit if her relation to a (presumed) male: she’s not Amanda, she’s just the alchemist’s daughter. It’s a trend in naming books too. But now I see this whole thing is actually the subject matter of the book, so it makes sense to use this trend.
Ah, interesting callout; I can totally understand why that is a turn-off. My sister recommended the book to me so I didn’t give the title any thought.
The story is definitely about that trope, and mostly turning it on its head. It’s about the women, with the underlying theme that they are what they are because of men but they own who they are and their future.
I hope if you give it a shot that you enjoy it as much as I do!
I mean, I’m good with “Handsome.”
Abby Someone.
“Call me Daddy”
Adam.
Then we would always have to differentiate The Creature from The Creature from The Black Lagoon.
We’ll be okay. We already have The Creature from the Haunted Sea and The She-Creature.
And IMDB tells me there’s a 1950s movie called Creature With the Atom Brain and I have got to see a movie with a title like that.
It must be one stupid creature if it has a brain that tiny.
Hmm, I’ll await your report. I was interpreting it as a creature with a brain made from atoms. In which case it could be a very heartwarming and wholesome tale that appeals to all of us creatures.
Flying Squid, “Look, it’s The Creature!”
Me, “Which one?!?”
It is on YouTube…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3YgbD1ckH4
Here’s the plot description:
Several years earlier gangster Frank Buchanan was deported to his native Italy through the efforts of law enforcement authorities and rival gangsters who inform on him. While in Europe he meets scientist Wilhelm Steigg, who has perfected a method of reanimating dead people and controlling their behavior with oral commands. Buchanan underwrites Steigg’s experiments and uses his technology to wreak revenge on his enemies. Unfortunately radioactive poisoning is a by-product of the process, and authorities use radiation detecting devices like Geiger counters to pinpoint the source of the sinister plot.
Also, Steigg is a Nazi.
And yet I’ve been burned before…
Is my brain not made from atoms?
I would assume your brain is made from a great many atoms. This creature’s brain apparently only has one.
Looks like the creature with the atom brain would make an easy last minute halloween costume. You’d need to have a suit, a sharpie, and some twine
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/9e/18/509e18531112464459963155d7f99adc.jpg
My favorite name he was ever given is Deucalion.
What does that mean?
It’s Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein, not sure how popular that series was… The monster was named Deucalion, he was a good persona if I remember right… and he could teleport around the world.
Yeah, not something I’m familiar with personally, but considering what a huge author he is, I’m sure a lot of people here recognize it.
I’m sorry, did you say a teleporting Frankenstein that does good?!? Sounds amazing lol
