Mary Shelley: Frankenstein

Columbia Critical Guides

by Berthold Schoene-Harwood (Editor)

Mary Shelley's first novel has established itself as one of modernity's most compelling and ominous myths. Frankenstein poignantly captures the spirit of the early 1800s as an age of transition tragically divided between scientific progress and religious conservatism, revolutionary reform and conformist reaction.

This "Guide" encapsulates the most important critical reactions to a novel that straddles the realms of both "high" literature and popular culture. The selections shed light on "Frankenstein"'s historical and socio-political relevance, its innovative representations of science, gender, and identity, as well as its problematic cultural location between academic critique and creative production. Ranging from the first reviews in 1818 to postmodern readings of the mid-1990s, the "Guide" illuminates one of British literature's most spectacular novels.

Genres: Nonfiction, Horror, Classics

192 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2000

Reviews

[Sistermagpie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Picked this up at the library having recently re-read Frankenstein. It's an overview of different trends in criticism of Mary Shelley's novel, which was really resurrected by feminist critics. For years it was dismissed as a silly Gothic novel whose only good points came from the fact that the woman who wrote it was soaking up the intelligent things her husband and father had said and transmitted it into her text.

The chapters are broken down into different topics like gender and monstrosity. My favorite part was a bit at the end that mentioned essays that talked about modern versions of the Frankenstein myth like Rocky IV, Bladerunner and Terminator. Frankenstein has been a symbol of science run amock for so long it's strange to remember that at the time it was written it was probably more concerned with politics. In fact the word scientist didn't even exist when it was first written.

Go Mary Shelley!

[LiA · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a big fan of the plot, however the book is indeed interesting if seen with a more symbolic and theorical approach. Narration-wise the style is simple and smooth, yet falls a bit on the flat side throughout the entirety of the book.