Frankenstein is More Horrific Than You Might Think | Monstrum
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 жов 2019
- PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/DonateStoried
↓ More info below ↓
Check out Sound Field! bit.ly/2N37fpt
Don’t miss future episodes of Monstrum, subscribe! bit.ly/pbsstoried_sub
Did you know the original Frankenstein’s Creature is a highly intelligent vegetarian who hates the idea of harming another living creature? Or that the author Mary Shelley came up with the idea for the original novel in a dream while on a holiday with her married lover? The “mad scientist” Frankenstein isn’t even really a doctor!
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was revolutionary text that pioneered the sci-fi genre. On the surface, it’s a novel about a scary monster, but Shelley’s sympathetic description of a soulful Creature makes us rethink who we label as the “monster”-an important question made increasingly relevant by the advances in technology and science we see today. Watch this episode to learn about the original novel, why it was created, and how (and why) popular culture continues to perpetuate the story hundreds of years later. #frankenstein #monster #maryshelley #MonstrumPBS
Written and Hosted by: Dr. Emily Zarka
Director: David Schulte
Executive Producer: Amanda Fox
Producer: Stephanie Noone
Illustrator: Samuel Allen
Editor: Dano Johnson
Produced by Spotzen for PBS Digital Studios.
Follow us on Instagram:
/ monstrumpbs
-----------
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Aldini, Giovani. Essai théorique et expérimental sur le galvanisme (1804)
Gordon, Charlotte. Romantic Outlaws: The Extraordinary Lives of Mary Wollstonecraft & Mary Shelley. New York: Random House, 2015.
Linthicum, Kent. “How a Volcano Helped Inspired Frankenstein.” Slate, 22 June 2016.
Mellor, Anne. Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. Routledge, 1990.
Montillo, Roseanne. The Lady and Her Monsters: A Tale of Dissections, Real-Life Dr. Frankensteins, and the Creation of Mary Shelley's Masterpiece. Reissue ed., William Morrow, 2013.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein (editions 1818, 1823, and 1831)
St. Clair, William. The Godwins and the Shelleys: A Biography of a Family. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991.
Todd, Janet. Mary Wollstonecraft: A Revolutionary Life. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2000.
van den Belt, Hank. “Playing god in Frankenstein's footsteps: Synthetic biology and the meaning of life” Nanoethics, 3(3), 257-268 (2009).
How does that saying go? “Knowledge is knowing that Frankenstein is not the monster. Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein IS the monster.”
Exactly, everything that happened to him and his family was of his own doing; his hubris in challenging the line between life and death and thinking he could control the exact outcome of his experiment, his recklessness in diving into an experiment he wasn't even qualified to truly understand yet, and his disgust and abandonment of a being he himself brought into this world. He was arrogant, impulsive and irresponsible, and he only truly realized how badly he fucked up when it was long beyond too late.
A real monster.
@@hypnodance That's actually a pretty good idea; Frankenstein was *definitely* toying around with powers and concepts he didn't fully understand (guy was still just a student, wasn't even qualified to be delving half as deep into his experiment as he did), which other than arrogantly tampering with the fine line between life and death can also be symbolism of a man getting into a careless fling and unintentionally having a child, the result of not fully thinking through or processing the potential responsibility and consequences.
@@mrreyes5004 But that does not make him a monster.
They were both assholes.
@@douglasphillips5870 Frankenstein's creation is nice. Or he/it was.
After making his creature, Frankenstein went out to the store for cigarettes and never came back
basically, i mean a irresponsible college kid made a 7 foot tall goth baby and dipped.
He was not intended to make it. He had success and he was on autopilot. When he seen his final product he thought it was beautiful then horifiying and he ran giving up science.
*finally decides to come back
Frankenstein: Ayyyy, he's gone
Wait... my father
Is Frankenstein?
Black dad be like
"Just wants to be loved and accepted by another being." ... *Mood*
Joshua Spector r/im14andthisisdeep
I remember in the novel the creature wanted Victor to create him a mate so that he will have happiness and love with her. He almost did so but didn't bring her to life. This made the creature hell bent on revenge.
You know what I kind of agree with her on the be careful of making a fully aware machine but I disagree with the fact that she is sort of kind of claiming that someone who's made person can't be a person if they show empathy to me that's all that they need to become human
@@Bossmano still deep
Same here....
Imagine being the other participants in that dare who had to read their story after Shelley's.
Lord Byron wrote the beginnings of a vampire story which eventually became John Polidori's "The Vampyre".
The depths of depression that group must have been in. It's genius they chaneled those emotions into books.
Two of the participants were among the greatest poets of the time but it was two others that were productive that night.
She took a hot minute to write her book, they weren't read at the same time
@Snoi Med well it is known that Percy actually contributed to Frankenstein more than Merry and the rest were the two that created the Vampire
Vegetarian?
So, an undead creature who craves grains?
Graaaaains!
😂
That's was too cute
THIRD encounter so far with You.... still though, it took much longer to see You again this time.... Your Not exactly as everywhere as I previously stated. . .
Genius: when it's obvious after the fact but nobody thought of it first.
Ofc, it's already 2019 even frankenstein's monster has to adjust in order not to offend anyone.
Some say Frankenstein's Monster is a zombie with a soul. I always saw him as a Golem made of Flesh.
"Let them fight"...
I think Dungeon and Dragons goes that way, because they have a creature called a "Flesh Golem"
Resurrected corpse. Forever Living...
Homunculus, artificial human
I say Homunculus, an artificial being made of flesh with a facsimile of a soul, a spark.
Also, he has a mind of his own, as opposed to a walking security system that most golems tend to be.
"...teeth of a pearly whiteness..." at least he had great oral hygiene.
Yes, this is noteworthy, and even a little unexpected. But did the monster have bad breath? That is the question that we need to be asking.
Mary says the white teeth emphasized the wrongness when in contrast with the rest of the monster.
when you eat vege thats what happens. look at cows
Are you really gonna give you creation bad teeth tho?
Alkaline soil behind the gallows is good for your teeth.
One moment in the novel that always sticks in my head:
The creature (I'll call him Adam, since he compares himself to the Biblical Adam at one point) convinces Frankenstein to create an Eve for him. He says he'll then go with her to the Amazon and never bother anyone ever again. At first, Frankenstein goes along with this, but when he's almost done creating her, he has second thoughts. Some are BS, but the two that stand out in my mind are "What if she doesn't like Adam? What if she doesn't WANT to go to South America?" The contrast between his second thoughts about creating Eve against his sheer thoughtlessness in creating Adam is, to me, a major part of the the book's whole outlook.
Does he owe Adam the companionship of an Eve? Is it fair to bring Eve into a life defined from the start by her lack if choice in the matter? Does Adam really have the right to ask (much less demand) that of Frankenstein?
His creator is so selfish that he doesen't even dare to look at his creation and even listen to him. Adam didn't have any purpose on the world instead of hatred and killing thats why he wanted somebody as ugly as he to accept him, but NO that that ignorant bastard decided to cast him away again and again. That s why Frankenstein is the true monster. Like Disney's Hunckback of Notre Dame
That is a really good thought, that many didn't consider.
Adam is a miserable moster at Frakensteins creation. So would it be the right choice to create another miserable monster whose only purpose is to ease the pain of the first one?
Also, if you can't find someone to accept you, is it the right choice to simply create someone that fits the bill? Even if that someone is then most certainly doomed to live a miserable life?
@@marcomarco6834 to be fair, Frankenstein didn't forget that the monster already murdered a child, and caused another young woman to executed, sooo..
@@bungersinyourarea this still changes nothing. Didn't u get my Point?
@@marcomarco6834 I'd argue that killing innocent people just to torment one guy makes the monster more of an actual monster than Frankenstein. At least Frankenstein was genuinely tormented by the fact that people got hurt as a result of his actions, and learned to think about the consequences of his actions.
Frankenstein's monster deserved better.
He shouldn't have been in the first place.
It's a sin to reawaken the dead. He's an abomination.
I'd hit a blunt with that G, he deserved better
@@ShawntiaKnott so what its the doctor who did it remember that
@@ShawntiaKnott the zombie with a soul was gentle and has a good heart
I never thought of Frankenstein as a book about science. I'm more saw it as a book about society and cost of ostracizing people from it.
It has a lot of interesting themes and social commentary. That’s one of the reasons it’s so brilliant in my opinion!
Well and succinctly said!
The author says explicitly that she thinks that her horror story is better because it is based in actual science, and actually possible.
That is why it is widely regarded as the first science fiction.
@@davidwuhrer6704 ...actually possible for the science at the time, one should state. With that stipulated, I've seen well-reasoned arguments that the Odyssey is the first science fiction story. That particular argument was strengthened by the discovery that dinosaur bones had been ignored at the archaeological sites of classical civilizations' temples, and that the Cyclops in particular might have been derived from the perceived structure of mammoths related bones into a giant man with one eye. There was even a record of a reburial, although that record I believe was just of a giant and not of a cyclops. But I forgot what channel I was replying to and you all probably know all this from other documentaries already.
It was introduced as a book about science and nature and the danger that looms over those who seek knowledge (or that's how interpreted the first part), but as the story progresses, the theme of knowledge was switched to the theme of family and love, loneliness and isolation, among others.
I may be wrong but yeah, that's how I look at it.
The book is one of the most depressing works of fiction I’ve ever read.
E naw.
E That one is more hopeless than sad, really
Read books by Jean Ryas or slave narratives. They are more depressing.
Inspires by Greek tragedies
Me too... I was weeping for the creature, and how horribly humanity has treated him. So horrible and monstrous that it resulted with him committing such murders... Like even his own creator hated him, just for how he looks... Truly sad.
Artic explorer: "If you hated him why do you weep so?"
The creation: "Because he was my father". 🤧
Is this a quote from the book?
@@sylph8005 If I remember correctly it is. I recomand it, the book is amazing. No movie does it justice.
Excuse you, his name was Robert!
@@klinikam.9135 , what i wouldn't give for a movie adaptation of 'frankenstein' that is _entirely_ true to the book
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this line is from the Robert DeNiro movie and it's not in the book.
I first read 'Frankenstein' when I was 13 years old. It broke my heart for the 'creature', because he was abandoned immediately upon resurrection. My adolescent anger toward Victor Frankenstein made me feel he got everything coming to him, for not taking any responsibility for what he had done. And, as an adult; the lack of responsibility of certain scientists still concerns me. As you said, 'Just because we can, doesn't mean we should'. Remember the thoughts of Oppenheimer upon sight of the first atomic blast? 'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds'.
True but without Oppenhienmer we would have things like nuclear power and chemotherapy.
@@nicholsjoshua15 I agree, and I'm not trying to single out Oppenheimer for criticism. It's just that we humans seem so eager to act on new discoveries before we ever consider the possible consequences.
The Frankenstein monster reminds of the moral act of having children.
@@rob20ist Certainly - the creature was created by Victor Frankenstein - who promptly abandoned that which he had created. What 'child' wouldn't be hurt and angry, if a 'father' looked in horror at them, then ran away? Victor renounced his responsibility as 'parent' of this creature, just as some parents renounce their roles and responsibilities to their children. And, the moral is that there are consequences to our actions - or sometimes, our failures to act.
s p actually I think you missed my point our I wrote it wrong. the story shows more on why creating life in general is selfish and immoral. This why there is no such thing as good parents because being a parent is not selfless but selfish. This is why I admire our look up to people who actually have ether the courage our will power to not have children and feel disgusted with people who do at least when it comes to biological kids. Adoption is much different as you as a person is not forcing a sentient life form into being but helping one out.
I always felt that the creature wasn't born a monster, but humanity turned him into one. It really shows us that humanity are the true monsters of this world.
...that was the whole point
humanity may have pissed him off but it was his choice to go on a murder spree
@@johnnyskinwalker4095 It was his revenge for his father not only denying him a companion, but declaring his regret of ever having created him and his intent of disassembling him.
@@davidwuhrer6704 still he was pretty extreme in his revenge. lol
IQ 300 bro
the fact that mary shelley, percy shelley and lord byron were basically the traumatised by depression squad, no wonder their writings are so heart wrenching
"Frankenstein and his whole family are dead"
Ernest : am I a joke to you?
FINALLY SOMEONE REMEMBERED HIM! i was confused when victor leave from geneva to follow his creation to north and i was like hey what about your brother
Thank you! I was just wondering if he’s been killed off in some throwaway line that I’d forgotten
@@erinyes3943 Ernest Survived but… we don’t know his fate later. Maybe he make another being taking Victor notes.
Ah yes, his mother dies, then his brother is strangled, then his friend Justine is executed, then his "cousin" is strangled, then his dad dies, and finally his brother goes insane and wanders off into the wilderness never to be seen in Geneva again.
You got to love the irony
Book Frankenstein: Just because it appears to be monstrous doesn't make it any less human.
Pop Culture Frankenstein: SCIENCE BAD!!! MONSTER BAD!!!
It honestly would funny if it wasn't so sad.
As soon as I saw the movie Frankenstein as a kid in the 70's all my siblings and I felt sorry for the monster and assumed that the movie intended us to feel that way.
The same with King Kong.
@@tsopmocful1958 Same here. And Rodan was very sad as well.
Except the 31 Monster was a sympathetic character? And the film warned about abusing science instead of getting rid of it? Did we even watch the same film?
Let's not forget - SNL Frankenstein: FIRE BAD!!!
And just because it appears to be human, doesn't make it any less monstrous.
"Actually, Frankenstein was the name of the doctor. I, the person correcting you, am the monster." - a tweet I read
They make fun of this misconception in Hotel Transylvania 2 as well.
He was not actually a doctor.
@@davidwuhrer6704
people: frankenstein was the name of the doctor
me, an intellectual: frankenstein wasn't even a doctor
@@starcxtcher he was just a b-#$^# named Victor Frankenstein
The monster is the child of the Dr. Parents give children their last name.
It's such a shame that Frankenstein's creation was seen as a monster when most people nowadays would probably see him as kinda hot (by contemporary standards)! Despite how he looked, the creature was also extremely smart, very well-read, sensitive, and could speak various languages. If Frankenstein could've taken responsibility better, who knows if the creature could've been seen as another influential and gifted man during the Enlightenment Era.
If Frnakenstein's monster was alive today, he'd have his own reality show.
I've noticed that a lot of people in the Frankenstein fandom find him beautiful and utterly adorable.
@@KoshVader so glad someone mentioned the fandom. We love him to bits
Nah they wouldn’t find him hot at all. He’s made from dead body parts,that means his body is decayed and most likely smells
@@cd448 tell that to the fandom 😁 he's a handsum boy (I'd assume after hes alive the dead tissue would heal itself, no?)
I’ve always felt bad for the monster. He’s such a miss understood man.
The monster is the creator for bringing him in this world
We shouldn’t call him a monster but “the creature” instead 😂 god AP lit. Makes you hate everything in the world because English is so wrong
Paul Hensley
I don’t, not after he killed Victors brother and framed that girl. I know humans and abandonment made him turn that way but he still had a choice. So for that. I don’t feel bad.
Sorex Lozen- Exactly how I feel. In the beginning, he was misunderstood. Then he proceeded to purposefully murder and frame multiple people, which is inexcusable. He is still a monster. We don't give serial killers a reduced sentence because they had a poor upbringing. And I would give credit to Dr Frankenstein when he refused to create another monster, since the likely hood of that solving any problems was low
@@imthedarknight-8755
I agree but the doc was wrong not to create the second creature. You said "what would that solve?" Well then Frankenstein would've got what he wanted and wouldn't have sought to bring ruin to the docs life. Also I find it more cruel to create this thing, abondon it, then say you'll create a companion, then change your mind. Doc was playing God for far too long. The ending would be completely different had he created the second.
Please can Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde be next
How can I like a comment multiple times
@@hildcit ^
@@hildcit Create multiple accounts
AAASSSS
George W So many people think that Jekyll was not conscious when Hyde was up and about and it drives me crazy!
If the relationship between Dr Frankenstein and his monster was that of father and son, then surely the monster was also a Frankenstein
Technically true.
Some fans refers to him as 'Adam Frankenstein', due to the fact he reads the story of Adam and God in the novel.
@@samtepal3892 Mary Shelley referred to the Creature as Adam in one of her letters.
No, their relationship was parallel to that of a father-son one, but Frankenstein was never biologically related to the monster, thus your statement is false
@@tanyanikolaevagizdova6571 "I ought to be thy Adam; but I am rather the fallen angel"
Mary was inspired by a demonstration of electricity "reanimating" a corpse. That's why the electricity is an integral part of the life-giving process.
The book's actually extremely vague about how the creature is brought to life.
@@greedycapitalist8590 Certainly Galvani's experiments in electrical stimulation of dead frogs influenced her imagination in some way.
There is an interesting historical connection with AI/cybernetics, though: The Shelleys moved in the same circles as Lord Byron (who, iirc, was at that famous gathering). One of Byron's illegitimate children was Ada Lovelace, who became a mathematician, and later worked with Charles Babbage on his "Analytical Engine" - making her the first computer programmer.
Wasn't she also on opium when she wrote it? I seem to remember reading that or seeing it in some documentary.
She was inspired by hommunculus and the sorcerer stone as stated in the book. He created a elixer of life.
@@greedycapitalist8590 yea there's no electricity in the book
"He was soon borne away by the waves, and lost in darkness and distance...as he drifted away he yelled back, "Just call ME Frankenstein, it's easier."
“Dr. Frankenstein?”
“It’s Franken-steen”
“You’re putting me on!”
"Actually its pronounced E-gore."
You're both wrong it's Steve
L's Successor shrimpansi, stevuh, shrimpansi, stevuh, shrimpan* shove! Stevuh!!
I heard an explanation of Frankenstein that was essentially "dr. F wanted his monster to be beautiful so he only took the most attractive pieces from each of his cadavers, but all the pieces stitched together looked horrifying" which is poetic in its own right.
To quote Professor Krempe: "You fool, Victor Frankenstein of Geneva, how could you know what you had unleashed? How was it pieced together? Bits of thieves? Bits of murderers? Evil stitched to evil stitched to evil. God help your loved ones."
That wasn't in the book but I did like that film version.
@@KoshVader I have seen so many versions of Frankenstein but I thought that quote was well-fitting.
I can relate to Frankenstein's creation, that I have high functioning autism, how I was bullied because of my awkwardness and disabilities, well read and intelligent, and often have violent outbursts. This story helps me relate and sympathize with my life and the creation.
The story of Frankenstein's Monster should be a reminder to current and future humans to show respect and appreciation for sentient computers. If we treat them humanely, then we won't force our fears upon them and thus avoid bringing those fears to life.
Its crazy that humans are willing to give consideration to AI whike giving absolutely no consideration towards animals...
Moritz yes but you can’t eat a computer
@@boerepompie8244 you are defining sentient beings worth over what the best use of them for you could be. More objectification is not possible.
One cannot control what is sentient, if it is self-aware and has self-determination, it could even be trying to fulfill its own idea of "The Greater Good", and decimate humanity. Watch "I, Robot", the Will Smith movie, for an idea of what I'm saying.
@@suckmyballzgameplays7172 humans are animals too.
I never thought of the monster that way...makes me want to go and reread it. But I can say that story is one of the few I have ever read to make the hair on my neck shiver.
Take another look at the novel. I promise it will be worth it.
@@pbsstoried will do!
@@mamabear_books1417 its always a great idea to look into Mary Shelley background, or watch/read more deep analysis of the novels, because her inspirations and the books the monster reads give a lot of meaning to the story.
Actually the movie where DeNiro played the monster is a good homage to the book. So if you want a quick refresher on the main points, you can watch that movie. It isn't EXACT but it's pretty freakin' close.
There’s a podcast called Craft Lit that intersperses chapters with some discussion from the woman running the podcast, who was an English teacher for ten years, and she occasionally brings on other people. She helped me understand some subtleties I’d previously missed. The first episode with Frankenstein, maybe the first two, are kind of chunky and harder to get through, but it’s a good podcast. She does a lot of other classics as well. It’s almost like a book club or something. If you’re artsy at all it may be fun to listen while you do your thing!
Once again I find myself in a sea of monster sympathizers. I've read the novel twice, once by myself and once for a class, and neither time have I found myself feeling a great deal of sympathy for the monster. I understand feeling sorry for the way the monster was treated, but any sympathy for the monster as an individual dies along with the doctor's innocent family members who the monster literally murders in cold blood. They were both awful. Nobody in that story is a sympathetic hero.
The creature became a monster because he was created without a heavenly soul. Dr Frankenstein after agreeing to make him a mate, went back on his word and destroyed the mate because he thought they would procreate a line of soulless beings of pure evil.
Thus he led the Creature, who followed him in rage, to the Arctic where he hoped to destroy him also.
As someone who has dealt with bullying through her whole schooling experience and has had to put up with lots of other bs honestly I can’t blame the monster, the difference is that I had some support from family, friends and therapists and developed good habits that helped me cope and become a good citizen despite all of that. I don’t think murder is ever okay and I don’t think any sane person would say “ah but Frankenstein started it!!!”, it’s just depressing that the creature was put into a terrible situation after another, created by a selfish person and immediately abandoned, shunned and betrayed by everyone he met. I feel compassion for the creature because I believe it didn’t have to become a monster, all it needed was love and support, not from everyone at large, just a support network to cope and retain its innocence.
You bring up good points, however I can see how people could sympathize with the monster... maybe they can relate to his solitude, him being hated on, bullied by others, his need to be accepted and loved.
My favorite adaptation is the 2012 movie Frankenweenie. It depicts that Victor's love for his dog Sparky is stronger than death. I also like the adaptation Young Frankenstein starring Gene Wilder.
You might like to check out, "Frankenstein:The True Story", a 1973 two part story that shows the creature starting off as a successful experiment before degrading and becoming a monster. Different from the book in the overall story (except the end), but very true to the themes Mary Shelley wanted to convey.
I’ve heard that the book may have also been based off galvanism, which is trying to resurrect a human body with electricity. I also used to live near Mary Shelley’s house.
Galvanism definitely influenced Shelley. I am VERY jealous you got to live near where she did!
But the body was not resurrected. Frankenstein wanted to cure death by building a better human body.
An Interesting point is that Victor Frankenstein; who in his youth followed the philosophies of the ancients: found in University a more modern scientific methodology. And thus shamed he supposedly left the old ways behind him. But the vague technique used in creating life by harnessing the elemental forces of nature(although neither lightning or some galvanic principle unknown was named)suggested that he never entirely abandoned the ways of the alchemist. Regardless; Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus, is rightfully considered by many to be the first Science Fiction story.
-and as a result, still frightening because Frankenstein is based on science rather than superstiton.
@@richardranke7878 Nevertheless, the notion of bringing dead tissue to life, and thus creating a new living being out of dead tissue, is hardly more founded in real science than the notion of turning lead into gold. One might even say that the two concepts stem from the same metaphysical fantasy, to purify base material into something divine through human will.
Cornelius Agrippa definitely gave him that sauce tho.
I love how neither the doctor or the monster is fully in the wrong. They were both completely mislead and misunderstood the other. The doctor was afraid of the monster because their first real encounter was when the monster killed his brother. As for the monster he gets angry at the doctor for all the neglect that paints him as a selfish deadbeat.
This story is so similar to having a Family when you aint ready yet
No... No it's not. Even an unwanted child whose father bails out still has a mother and isn't punished with a disfigured appearance. The child also doesn't habe the powers of a monster.
@@7shinta7 i think you're missing the point.
Whoa, that last comment "Just because we can, doesn't mean we should" reminds me of the Ian Malcolm quote. So, does that mean Jurassic Park is another version of Frankenstein...?
"These are agressive living things that have no idea what century they're in and they'll defend themselves, violently, if necessary." Ellie Sadler
You could definitely interpret the movie that way!
@@pbsstoried Makes total sense now. The first visitors are stand ins for the Frankenstein family, they even have kids! And despite the amount of science used in the 'monsters' creation and still being an educated man, John Hammond wasn't a doctor either! Certainly beats that theory of him being a necromancer, despite the funny memes :)
Jurassic Park or The modern Frankenstein.
And the Indominus rex from Jurassic World can be considered to be the mutant dinosaur equivalent of Frankenstein's Monster (the Indoraptor, on the other hand, is purely aggressive and sadistic (the closest thing to an evil dinosaur), so he (and yes, the Indoraptor is male) can't be considered similar to Frankenstein's Monster).
I remember the first time I got a copy of the book as a kid. It fascinated me, and gave me the love of horror that continued with Poe and Lovecraft. Thank you so much for uploading this and giving us such an indepth look into it,
I unfortunately never read any of these authors books fully but from what I gathered up it is the only horror, that being existential horror, that speaks to me as the one I like. What I do get more often then not are jump scares and gore.
"entire family dead"
*Sad Ernest Frankenstein noises*
"Just because we can , doesn't mean we should" one of the greatest quote ever .
One of my favorite books!!! For me, the unexpected horror I felt when I first read it came from the idea of making this horrible mistake that you can never undo, and the consequences just keep getting worse and worse and worse with no relief, and the people you love most are the ones who pay the price... God, man, that is pure dread right there.
We all make mistakes in college, they just don't usually ruin our entire lives and curse us to the most wretched existence.
Jurassic Park did this too. “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” - Dr. Malcolm
I always wondered how Frankenstein's "monster" would've turned out had the DeLacey family been more dysfunctional. It's a good book that brings into question nature vs. nurture.
The beat part of the novel is how after Frankenstein creates the creature, he changes his major from pre-med to literature. I would have loved to have heard that conversation with his advisor.
That part shortly after the monster is created is the best part, you can just feel the anxiety Frankenstein is consumed with.
Find it extremely interesting how Mary Shelley was at a ‘show’ of possibly Andrew Ure where he tried to revive the recently dead with electricity. What he was really doing was just applying a current to the still functioning nerve endings and having them constrict and retract; returning them to ‘life’ and that was where Shelley’s nightmare of Frankenstein came from. Not so far fetched to the people who would have read it during that time which made it more terrifying.
My mum has a statue of Frankenstein in our crib, apparently one of the three kings was hard of hearing.
I'm starting to see how Lovecraft was influenced by her.
That's crazy to think about
@@quintincastro7430 just a week ago I read one of his stories about a doctor and his assistant who try resurrecting the dead and end up making these twisted inhuman monsters, and it's pretty clear to me that they're homage to Frankenstein's monster.
@@starwarfan8342 so cool how famous authors influence each other
Especially inside of creative writing
Quintin Castro Yeah it’s absolutely fascinating. If you look up intertextuality you’ll find so many writers give credit to authors whose works influenced them. It’s like giving a shoutout lol
@@MBience3 I just read an old article that says that that work of Lovecraft is his era's exploitation story - allegedly his editor forced him to write a similar story...
3:06 Fun fact. This is also the moment when John Polidori (one of the other friends there) wrote The Vampyre. Which is seen as the first novel about vampires.
Thanks for the shoutout Dr. Z! We have an episode all about horror film music that your viewers will love
"Just because we can, doesn't mean we should", is a lesson I mention almost daily.
When I first read this book decades ago I was blown away by it. It is one of my favorites and very different from what I thought it was going to be. I recommend people read it.
I have to say, Frankenstein has always had an effect on me. The story breaks my heart, and the message touches deeply. Thank you.
Would you consider taking a look at the Bunyip from Australia? I haven't seen it spoke about in many shows like this, and would love to hear your take on it.
One of the best of the best. This story makes me weep almost every time I experience it, whether reading the original or watching one of the many films inspired by it. Even the goofier takes on The Monster still resonate for me - Mel Brooks' Young Frankenstein is one of my life long favorites in fact.
Sound Field, by the way, is AMAZING. I've been following them since the start, and they are well worth your time, folks! Even if you're not a music nerd like me, there's plenty of enjoy and learn, and the music is SUPERB.
I can never be afraid of this so called Monster . This actually makes me wanna cry for him. 😭😭 the story made me realize alot of things.
Wonderful. Will buy again.
Would you feel any different knowing that the Creature killed a young child in cold blood and allowed the housekeeper to be blamed, so as to get back at Victor Frankenstein?
One of my favourite books of all time. I have several copies of the novel, because I buy it and read it again every time I see it anywhere. Recently I got the Bernie Wrightson illustrated version and it is amazing. The art and imagery of Frankenstine's "Monster" is more in line with what you show here.
Why not avoid confusion by calling the monster's creator Victor Frankenstein, the name that Mary Shelley did in fact give him?
I was thinking the same thing. She’s giving way too much credit to Victor by calling him Dr., when in fact he is a college dropout.
@@rileymclellan8953 To be fair, most adaptations of Frankenstein became more famous than the book that spawned them and the most iconic adaptations have Victor as a doctor.
@@rileymclellan8953 Yea ita not like he ever did anything remarkable that could equate him to a doctor...
I love, so much, to learn about the social role of these stories, and how the context of our reality shapes the stories we tell, and the "monsters" we create.
And when time shall have softened your despair, new and dear objects of care will be born to replace those of whom we have so cruelly deprived. - Frankenstein
I have read this book two times since losing my son. I relate to the grief woven in this book. Now I know the history of Mary Shelley makes since why I had such a connection.
I would be terrified of the “monster” but I would try to understand him
If it helps: In the book, everyone who saw him ran away in terror (including his creator). His only friend and confidante was a blind man, who tought him to read and whatnot.
When the creature finally confronted Frankenstein, his creator said that creating him was a mistake, and that he should undo him. So the creature murdered his family.
There is an unofficial sequel called Brittle Innings, which is about baseball. It is only a sequel because one of the players is Frankenstein's creature, who had finally found acceptance by people who didn't care about looks, only about sports.
David Wührer it does help thank you
You the type of guy to pet a rattlesnake
@@Laocoon283 yeah so what
Yeah, Junji Ito's depiction of the monster is still one of my favorites.
Just looked that up. Holy crap that's amazing. The man is a terrifying treasure.
I like your thoughts on this. Its always refreshing to look at something in a different light. Its also very interesting on your research on Mary Shelley which I have not heard before. Thank You for the education.
Good day Dr Zarka. I am still awestruck by Karloff's portrayal of "The Monster", in that he communicated so much emotion with his eyes.
I believe it is the greatest performance in the history of film. Anybody can look good playing the handsome young Hamlet. But take an actor, conceal him under layers of heavy make-up, stiffen his limbs with hardened clothing to limit his range of movement, give him not one word of dialogue, & cast him as the villain of the piece, & then see him create a characterisation which gains the sympathy of millions & becomes a modern cultural icon, & you have seen a miracle of the acting art. No one ever did so much with so little. 💎
I think you guys are forgetting about Lon Chaney. Look at his work during the silent era. He was so expressive even though he wasn’t able to make a sound that would be experienced by audiences upon viewing the films he starred in. Just look at his portrayal of Erik, the Phantom of the Opera. Not only did he create the iconic makeup himself, but he encased the entire essence of the character as well. Also, think of his portrayal of Quasimodo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame. He forced himself into a slouched position and wore a hump on his back while filming. He performed despite the strains it did to his back. The best part of him is that he used the fact that his parents were deaf, his knowledge of sign language, and turned them into some of the best performances to ever be given. Lon Chaney did a lot for his art.
"We do what we must, because we can." - Aperture Science Laboratories
This actually covered the key ideas of the book better than some of my University lectures and seminars. Wish I watched this earlier.
I love how you reference some of the other updated forms of media like Ex Machina and Destroyer- a comic I would never have heard of & now really interested in reading.
The really funny thing is, just a few hours before this video was uploaded, a friend of mine and I were having a conversation about Frankenstein and how the pop culture versions of the story differ so much from the source material. And you post a video perfectly illustrating our discussion! Thank you for that amazing coinsidence!
This is a very comprehensive and insightful analysis and a great guide for people interested in the topic. Only thing I think is missing is to mention the Kenneth Branagh adaptation as well, which in my opinion is closest to Shelley's intentions.
I absolutely love this episode. Thanks for your hard work and time.
Frankenstein was one of my favourite novels that we had to read in school. Closely behind the Picture of Dorian Gray.
AdraicStarks - what school did you attend Harvard High School ? ?
@@nadanada5698 Aren't those fairly typical high school English books? I read them my senior year.
AdraicStarks - Not in Fuckberg (Rexburg) Idaho ! - i have read an entire library due to the fact that ALL BOOKS were censored by the local government,that was overseen by the Mormon Church.they do not separate church and state....
@@nadanada5698 Damn, that sucks. Sorry.
💚💚💚 thank you for covering my favorite monster/favorite novel. not only an essential in any science fiction book list, but also just a great way to begin to understand how romanticism and iluminism clashed and at the same time showed two sides of what was to come; the overwhelming scientifical discoveries and technological advancements, and the angst, fears and anxiety that would surge from a fast-changing world.
wow poor mary shelley i had no idea her real life was so tragic. no wonder frankenstein was one of her best stories. she was speaking from experiences with such death and sorrow. excellent video.
Her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft, was an absolutely extraordinary woman, and well worth looking up.
@@rottensquid
Her father, William Godwin was also a well respected, writer, professor and political philosopher.
After Shelley's death, she never remarried and had a fair writing career and raised her son, Percy.
Mary Shelley died in her 50's outside of London.
This channel is amazing! Combination of science, history, and culture! How did I miss this channel!?
i just saw the video, *muscle memory be like CLICK IT NOW*
This episode was so good! I love the book. After I graduated high school I was one of the students selected to help determine the reading list for the following year's AP Literature class. Frankenstein was the book I selected.
The illustrations of the Monster in this video are some of my favorite depictions of him I've ever seen
“The year without a summer” - 2020
Could you cover the Werewolf? And keep up the fantastic work :)
This is so awesome! I just finished reading this for my literature class, definitely a great read and deserving of its place in history.
Wow... I would've never thought that even Frankenstein's monster has daddy issues
I learned some new information about Mary Shelley's creation. Thank you!
I just got around to watching Mothman and you guys released another video , good timing.
It’s spooky season!
@@pbsstoried Boooo
This is my absolute favorite book. I remember reading it for the first time as a preteen and being so utterly broken hearted. The spine on that book is tattered, but it holds such a place in my heart. Although Boris Karloff is cult classic amazing in the older movies, the version of the creature that I felt has been closest to the book is John Clare from Penny Dreadful. He chooses a name!
The Penny Dreadful version is the best adaptation of the creature, definitely!
This is by far my favorite episode... It's actually quite wholesome
Your channel is awesome. So glad I stumbled upon it.
I'm embarrassed to admit that I only just recently read the novel. I had seen a bunch of different adaptations but now I see that it's never really been really faithfully adapted. The part with Justine breaks my heart. I always found the scene with the old blind man in Bride of Frankenstein to have been amazingly tragic, but in the novel it's so much more so. I did shed tears a few times. It's such a beautiful story. I really wasn't expecting going into it that a 200 year old novel would be able move me so deeply. I simultaneously related to both Victor and the Wretch as he's mostly refered to in the book.
In the last 3 years I've experienced the loss of three close family members. One every year. This year was my father. I've also been through a few tragedies in childhood. I also have a deep interest in science. In those respects sometimes I felt I was Victor.
On the other hand, I myself am not a particularily attractive person, growing up I was always treated as the weird kid, the outcast by my peers. My father and I did not get along very well and even in the endtimes, I always questioned whether my father really did love me. In the shared disapproval of our makers, I found myself also relating to the Monster also.
While the James Whale versions will always have a special place in my heart, The novel is by far superior.
Percy's wife supposedly killed herself because he went to Europe with Mary where she heard of Johan Conrad Dippel. But not mention of any of that.
nathan brady to be fair, if that is the case, Mary had it coming with the misfortune. She and Percy reaped what they sowed.
Omg! Your analysis is brilliant! Thanks!
You are spot on in your assertions. Well done.
Awwwww he just wanted to be loved
Now I wanna give him a hug
He's also a serial killer! When will you people get that through your thick skulls!
2:31 I don't think that's entirely correct, Earnest is still alive by the end of the novel.
This is the Frankenstein analysis that I wanted since high school!!! Thank you!!!
Just came across this and loving it. Great work.
I absolutely love the moment of eloquence from the 1994 cinematic Frankenstein's monster, portrayed by Robert De Niro, when the creature stated, "I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other."
That’s also a quote from the book
People : Dr Frankenstein why did u do this??
Dr Frankenstein : Because i can!
The concept of your channel is awesome totally love it!
I really love these videos, wish they were a bit longer. ^^
Historically speaking, frankenstein was written at a time where people believed that they're only a few years away from being able to play god and revive the dead
Remember what God did first, create life, in His own image, after His own likeness. That's how one plays God. Think we can do better? I don't.
Wonko The Sane Honestly, no. Humanity will never never be able to create a sentient creature. It is sheer arrogance to think that we will. What would happen if we did is an interesting intellectual exercise though. We should show compassion and kindness to those different than us. It is easier to wrong and hurt someone who you see as the ‘other’. Pride is often used to justify such evil. I am better than them so I am right to take what is theirs. I am God’s chosen so I will murder them and take their land.
@@rma2110 have you slept on the speed at which ai advances? Sure, current applications have nothing to do with sentient, general ai. But never say never
Major Fallacy No, I haven’t. There is a HUGE difference between a robot that carries out a repetitive task, and a self aware android. I don’t think we can create anything close to the human mind. I could be proven wrong eventually. Who knows?
@@rma2110 yeah that's all I was saying. Never is too strong of a word
Great points. I read the original text recently and found it very moving. The universal film is a classic but it has, sadly, overshadowed the original.
Just found this page today, this is currently my favorite video
That was truly enjoyable and thought provoking.
I usually watch UA-cam videos at 2x speed, but this was so interesting, that I watched it at 'normal' speed to give it the attention it deserves. And I subscribed.
Gonna watch 'em all, just because I can and I think I should.
Happy to hear you are enjoying them.