What do you think?
Rate this book
Mary
Millainen oli seikkailu, joka synnytti Frankensteinin hirviön?
Vuonna 1816 vain 18-vuotias Mary Shelley kirjoittaa ikonisen tarinan Frankensteinin hirviöstä. Samana kesänä Mary ja hänen rakastajansa Percy Shelley vierailevat lordi Byronin ja John Polidorin luona Genevenjärvellä. Ystävät viettävät pitkiä iltoja nuotiolla, juovat oopiumilla maustettua viiniä ja lukevat toisilleen kummitusjuttuja. Eräänä iltana lordi Byron ehdottaa, että he kaikki kirjoittaisivat omat kauhutarinansa.
Mary matkustaa muistoissaan Skotlantiin, missä hän oli neljä vuotta aiemmin viettänyt kesän ja tavannut Isabella Baxterin. Kun Mary rakastuu Isabellaan, he sukeltavat arvoitukselliseen seikkailuun, jossa todellisuutta on vaikea erottaa kuvitelmasta. Tästä muistosta syntyy hänen tarinansa Frankensteinin hirviöstä.
Mary Shelley oli feministi ennen kuin sanaa oli keksitty, nuori äiti ja kiehtova kirjailija. Anne Eekhout herättää hänet henkiin tässä omaperäisessä romaanissa.
Vuonna 1816 vain 18-vuotias Mary Shelley kirjoittaa ikonisen tarinan Frankensteinin hirviöstä. Samana kesänä Mary ja hänen rakastajansa Percy Shelley vierailevat lordi Byronin ja John Polidorin luona Genevenjärvellä. Ystävät viettävät pitkiä iltoja nuotiolla, juovat oopiumilla maustettua viiniä ja lukevat toisilleen kummitusjuttuja. Eräänä iltana lordi Byron ehdottaa, että he kaikki kirjoittaisivat omat kauhutarinansa.
Mary matkustaa muistoissaan Skotlantiin, missä hän oli neljä vuotta aiemmin viettänyt kesän ja tavannut Isabella Baxterin. Kun Mary rakastuu Isabellaan, he sukeltavat arvoitukselliseen seikkailuun, jossa todellisuutta on vaikea erottaa kuvitelmasta. Tästä muistosta syntyy hänen tarinansa Frankensteinin hirviöstä.
Mary Shelley oli feministi ennen kuin sanaa oli keksitty, nuori äiti ja kiehtova kirjailija. Anne Eekhout herättää hänet henkiin tässä omaperäisessä romaanissa.
375 pages, Hardcover
First published November 17, 2021
219 people are currently reading
12040 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 584 reviews
July 31, 2023
This story reimagines the young life of Mary Shelley at the time leading to the creation of her literary masterpiece, Frankenstein.
It alternates between two timelines set apart by four years.
1816: Mary, with others, visits Lord Byron at Lake Geneva. It’s a circle of writers and poets that spend the evenings exchanging ghost stories. One night, Byron suggests that each writes a ghost story. While Mary muses over her tale, it reminds her of another summer, when she was fourteen.
1814: Mary is sent by her family from London to Dundee, Scotland, where she stays at Baxter family. She quickly becomes friends with Isabella Baxter, the younger of two daughters. They spend hours together wandering through the nature and conjuring stories about mythical creatures.
Baxter family has tradition of story night every second Friday of the month. There is a regular visitor to those evenings. It’s Mr. Booth, who is Isabella’s brother-in-law. From the first encounter, Mary notices something strange about him. At first impression, he looks handsome, but as she looks longer at him, it’s like his face takes another form. One evening, Mr. Booth tells a story of demonstration he saw years earlier when a corpse was more or less brought to life by electrical stimuli.
I enjoyed the character of Mary more in the timeline when she is fourteen, still innocent and discovering the world around her. However, there are quite a few scenes insinuating a sapphic involvement between two young girls, which I don’t know if it’s based on some facts or is fiction. I didn’t find those moments as engrossing part of the story.
In the later timeline, Mary already feels old and sounds older than her age and is grieved by the loss of her child. I found this timeline more dramatic and didn’t connect as strongly as with the earlier timeline.
The first half of the story has a faster pace as there are interesting facts being revealed. In the second half, there seems to be some repetition. Thus, there is not much moving the story forward.
Overall, it is an interesting story and written by a talented writer.
Source: ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
It alternates between two timelines set apart by four years.
1816: Mary, with others, visits Lord Byron at Lake Geneva. It’s a circle of writers and poets that spend the evenings exchanging ghost stories. One night, Byron suggests that each writes a ghost story. While Mary muses over her tale, it reminds her of another summer, when she was fourteen.
1814: Mary is sent by her family from London to Dundee, Scotland, where she stays at Baxter family. She quickly becomes friends with Isabella Baxter, the younger of two daughters. They spend hours together wandering through the nature and conjuring stories about mythical creatures.
Baxter family has tradition of story night every second Friday of the month. There is a regular visitor to those evenings. It’s Mr. Booth, who is Isabella’s brother-in-law. From the first encounter, Mary notices something strange about him. At first impression, he looks handsome, but as she looks longer at him, it’s like his face takes another form. One evening, Mr. Booth tells a story of demonstration he saw years earlier when a corpse was more or less brought to life by electrical stimuli.
I enjoyed the character of Mary more in the timeline when she is fourteen, still innocent and discovering the world around her. However, there are quite a few scenes insinuating a sapphic involvement between two young girls, which I don’t know if it’s based on some facts or is fiction. I didn’t find those moments as engrossing part of the story.
In the later timeline, Mary already feels old and sounds older than her age and is grieved by the loss of her child. I found this timeline more dramatic and didn’t connect as strongly as with the earlier timeline.
The first half of the story has a faster pace as there are interesting facts being revealed. In the second half, there seems to be some repetition. Thus, there is not much moving the story forward.
Overall, it is an interesting story and written by a talented writer.
Source: ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
Read
October 30, 2023Fans of Frankenstein and of Mary Shelley, rejoice! Dutch author Anne Eekhout has created a mystifying, dark, claustrophobic gothic novel that paints a vivid picture of Shelley’s teenage years in the lead-up to her first draft of Frankenstein, and all of it has been translated with depth and consideration by Laura Watkinson.
Mary and the Birth of Frankenstein is divided into two tales: the infamous summer of 1816 in which Shelley vacationed with her husband, child, stepsister, and the poet Lord Byron, and there they told scary stories around the fire; and a summer four years early spent in Dundee, Scotland.
My full thoughts: https://booksandbao.com/essential-got...
Mary and the Birth of Frankenstein is divided into two tales: the infamous summer of 1816 in which Shelley vacationed with her husband, child, stepsister, and the poet Lord Byron, and there they told scary stories around the fire; and a summer four years early spent in Dundee, Scotland.
My full thoughts: https://booksandbao.com/essential-got...
April 8, 2024
https://www.instagram.com/p/C29_m66Lv...
A dark, sensual imagining of the creation of one of horror’s most universal masterpieces. Filled with atmospheric gothic imagery and the growing sense of displacement, grief, this novel is a compelling interpretation of the life and desires of Mary Shelley, the constraints against which she fought to express herself through her work, to explain the horrors within and around her. Winding through a path of ambition, longing, otherness, envy, the parallels to Frankenstein are a welcome examination of the ways in which we are pushed to the brink for the pursuit of creation, and the ways in which our own creations reveal our inner selves. Beautifully written and illuminating a new depth to the mother of monsters.
A dark, sensual imagining of the creation of one of horror’s most universal masterpieces. Filled with atmospheric gothic imagery and the growing sense of displacement, grief, this novel is a compelling interpretation of the life and desires of Mary Shelley, the constraints against which she fought to express herself through her work, to explain the horrors within and around her. Winding through a path of ambition, longing, otherness, envy, the parallels to Frankenstein are a welcome examination of the ways in which we are pushed to the brink for the pursuit of creation, and the ways in which our own creations reveal our inner selves. Beautifully written and illuminating a new depth to the mother of monsters.
Read
January 4, 2022Wat een frustrerend boek. Prachtig geschreven hoor, en ik genoot van de diepe en haast filosofische passages. Maar wat een frustrerend boek.
December 11, 2024
way more nipples than I'd bargained for
December 28, 2023
Mary tells the story of a very young Mary Shelley in the years prior to her writing of Frankenstein.
The story flits between 1812, when Mary is 14 years old and spends time in Scotland with the Baxters. Here, she finds herself falling in love with Isabella Baxter and I found the telling of their relationship extremely touching. She also learns of witches and mythical beasts, and discovers that real monsters do exist, though not in the form of the stories we are told.
The other half of the story is set in 1816, when Mary lives on Lake Geneva with her lover, Percy. They have a somewhat fraught relationship due to his infidelities and the death of their daughter. This period of the story is filled with friends who are writers and poets, including the inimitable Lord Byron. One evening, as storms rage and they are under the effects of alcohol and laudunum, Lord Byron challenges them to tell a ghost story. Immediately, it becomes clear that Mary has a mind for storytelling of a grotesque but captivating nature.
If I didn't already know that Mary was a translation from Dutch, I never would have guessed. Anne Eekhout's writing reads like an English classic and I fell heart first into the life of Mary. Anne's passion for her subject shines through on every page. It is both deeply emotional and vividly atmospheric of all of Mary's varied surroundings.
I will add one caveat that I have never read Frankenstein (yes, I know!) and know very little of Mary Shelley's life, but I found Mary to be just so deeply captivating of a young woman's life. A woman trying to find her way in a world where she is surrounded by men, as so very often was the case in the 19th century. Perhaps this goes some way towards explaining why Mary became so quickly captivated by Isabella Baxter.
Of course, no book review would be complete without giving praise to the translator, Laura Watkinson. Thank you to Puskin Press for providing a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review. And I honestly loved it!
The story flits between 1812, when Mary is 14 years old and spends time in Scotland with the Baxters. Here, she finds herself falling in love with Isabella Baxter and I found the telling of their relationship extremely touching. She also learns of witches and mythical beasts, and discovers that real monsters do exist, though not in the form of the stories we are told.
The other half of the story is set in 1816, when Mary lives on Lake Geneva with her lover, Percy. They have a somewhat fraught relationship due to his infidelities and the death of their daughter. This period of the story is filled with friends who are writers and poets, including the inimitable Lord Byron. One evening, as storms rage and they are under the effects of alcohol and laudunum, Lord Byron challenges them to tell a ghost story. Immediately, it becomes clear that Mary has a mind for storytelling of a grotesque but captivating nature.
If I didn't already know that Mary was a translation from Dutch, I never would have guessed. Anne Eekhout's writing reads like an English classic and I fell heart first into the life of Mary. Anne's passion for her subject shines through on every page. It is both deeply emotional and vividly atmospheric of all of Mary's varied surroundings.
I will add one caveat that I have never read Frankenstein (yes, I know!) and know very little of Mary Shelley's life, but I found Mary to be just so deeply captivating of a young woman's life. A woman trying to find her way in a world where she is surrounded by men, as so very often was the case in the 19th century. Perhaps this goes some way towards explaining why Mary became so quickly captivated by Isabella Baxter.
Of course, no book review would be complete without giving praise to the translator, Laura Watkinson. Thank you to Puskin Press for providing a copy of the book in exchange for an honest review. And I honestly loved it!
January 20, 2024
This was a torture to read.
What on earth was this about? A monster? Shelley's fantasy? Her way of coping with her unfaithful husband? I couldn't care less for this book. The writing style was as if the author wanted to make this story 'artistic' and in-depth, but it was just miserable to read imo - it left me with a 'wtf-am-I-reading' frown as soon as I read the first page.
Also, what's up with the explicit and weird s*xual scenes? I felt as if I was force fed this narrative that Mary Shelley was bisexual. And even if she was; it didn't contribute anything to the story!
I'm aware that I'm rather harsh for this book. I've noticed that many like it (which is great), but words cannot describe how much I dislike it, personally.
I wasn't invested in it at all, so I was glad when I finally finished it. I believe these things, as well as the fact that the border between fantasy and reality were obscured, hindered me in appreciating this book for what it is.
What on earth was this about? A monster? Shelley's fantasy? Her way of coping with her unfaithful husband? I couldn't care less for this book. The writing style was as if the author wanted to make this story 'artistic' and in-depth, but it was just miserable to read imo - it left me with a 'wtf-am-I-reading' frown as soon as I read the first page.
Also, what's up with the explicit and weird s*xual scenes? I felt as if I was force fed this narrative that Mary Shelley was bisexual. And even if she was; it didn't contribute anything to the story!
I'm aware that I'm rather harsh for this book. I've noticed that many like it (which is great), but words cannot describe how much I dislike it, personally.
I wasn't invested in it at all, so I was glad when I finally finished it. I believe these things, as well as the fact that the border between fantasy and reality were obscured, hindered me in appreciating this book for what it is.
January 17, 2024
3-4 star rating (???)
i am one to police others’ writings, but this book truly felt like a violation against mary shelley’s life. if it had not been about her — if it had not claimed to be about her — this would fall far easier under a four star rating. but it does, unfortunately, try to be a reimagining of two moments in shelley’s life, and it made me deeply uncomfortable.
to imagine up a scenario where a 14/15 year old shelley is in love with a girl, where she imagines them having sex (even when i was 15 i did not want to read about 15 year olds having sex, and as an adult i am only more disgusted by it), where she imagines herself being vaguely sexually assaulted in a way that is unclear if it actually happened or not (a scene which is never again brought up despite her and her friend jerking off a very prominent character to the plot), all of it feels violating. im not a mary shelley expert, nor am i a historian, but whether or not anything that happened in this book is actually true (i sincerely believe the narrative following her as a 14 year old is pure fiction), i still find it incredibly off-putting to write about it. does that make sense? shelley is not a fictional character. she is a real woman whose childhood is being written about in an extremely odd way.
speaking of, shelley might as well have been a fictional character! this isn’t shelley at all! mary was, for a lack of better words, a freak. she was unapologetically fucking weird, and that’s fine! that’s a genuinely interesting personality type for a character! the mary in this book is sad and pensive and depressive and a copy paste of every single literary fiction female protagonist in the last 10 years. i am so fucking sick of reading books about sad women who hate their lives and who are surrounded by awful men. i do not want to read another novel where the author projects all of her fears and emotions onto a historical woman. shelley is a weird little freak who should be written about as a weird little freak. i am not at all interested in her being a sad tumblr girl.
anyway, i am very confused on this book. i genuinely enjoyed this despite the fact that i absolutely hate the sad girl trope it portrays. it was morbidly interesting and i couldn’t put it down at all. it’s a good book! it was also frustrating and uncomfortable and sometimes that’s just how it is. i don’t know how to rate this, which is why i’ve given it a vague 3 stars.
i am one to police others’ writings, but this book truly felt like a violation against mary shelley’s life. if it had not been about her — if it had not claimed to be about her — this would fall far easier under a four star rating. but it does, unfortunately, try to be a reimagining of two moments in shelley’s life, and it made me deeply uncomfortable.
to imagine up a scenario where a 14/15 year old shelley is in love with a girl, where she imagines them having sex (even when i was 15 i did not want to read about 15 year olds having sex, and as an adult i am only more disgusted by it), where she imagines herself being vaguely sexually assaulted in a way that is unclear if it actually happened or not (a scene which is never again brought up despite her and her friend jerking off a very prominent character to the plot), all of it feels violating. im not a mary shelley expert, nor am i a historian, but whether or not anything that happened in this book is actually true (i sincerely believe the narrative following her as a 14 year old is pure fiction), i still find it incredibly off-putting to write about it. does that make sense? shelley is not a fictional character. she is a real woman whose childhood is being written about in an extremely odd way.
speaking of, shelley might as well have been a fictional character! this isn’t shelley at all! mary was, for a lack of better words, a freak. she was unapologetically fucking weird, and that’s fine! that’s a genuinely interesting personality type for a character! the mary in this book is sad and pensive and depressive and a copy paste of every single literary fiction female protagonist in the last 10 years. i am so fucking sick of reading books about sad women who hate their lives and who are surrounded by awful men. i do not want to read another novel where the author projects all of her fears and emotions onto a historical woman. shelley is a weird little freak who should be written about as a weird little freak. i am not at all interested in her being a sad tumblr girl.
anyway, i am very confused on this book. i genuinely enjoyed this despite the fact that i absolutely hate the sad girl trope it portrays. it was morbidly interesting and i couldn’t put it down at all. it’s a good book! it was also frustrating and uncomfortable and sometimes that’s just how it is. i don’t know how to rate this, which is why i’ve given it a vague 3 stars.
October 26, 2023
Frankenstein is a title I have long adored, even more so after a course studying it at university. None of my studies ever allowed me insights to and an understanding of the author's life quite like this fictional reimaging did, however.
The timeline was ever shifting throughout but the cuts from scene-to-scene felt very fitting with the emotional nature of the text, both here and in Mary's own writing. These sudden movements to, and removals from, certain scenes allowed the reader an easy insight into how they factored in to other later or earlier sufferings in the author's life. And, then, how all these were reawakened in her gothic writing.
The writing here was mesmerising in its beauty. Each sentence was crisply executed and no emotion was spared the reader as Mary's life was fictionalised for our entertainment. It made me bond all the more with this historical figure and provided a greater appreciation for her creations.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Thank you to the author, Anne Eekhout, and the publisher, Pushkin Press, for this opportunity.
The timeline was ever shifting throughout but the cuts from scene-to-scene felt very fitting with the emotional nature of the text, both here and in Mary's own writing. These sudden movements to, and removals from, certain scenes allowed the reader an easy insight into how they factored in to other later or earlier sufferings in the author's life. And, then, how all these were reawakened in her gothic writing.
The writing here was mesmerising in its beauty. Each sentence was crisply executed and no emotion was spared the reader as Mary's life was fictionalised for our entertainment. It made me bond all the more with this historical figure and provided a greater appreciation for her creations.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Thank you to the author, Anne Eekhout, and the publisher, Pushkin Press, for this opportunity.
November 9, 2023
the trifecta of gorgeous prose, unreliable narration and obsessive sapphic romance 💯
November 17, 2023
On my blog.
Rep: sapphic mc
Galley provided by publisher
Mary was, in all honesty, a pretty unmemorable book for me. I don’t often get on with books about real people, so I really should have seen this one coming. It wasn’t embarrassing in the way I sometimes find books like that (The Rose Code springs to mind), but neither was it that compelling.
The story splits between the “present” day, where Mary Shelley is on the verge of writing the first drafts of Frankenstein and the past when she was a ward of the Baxters before her marriage with Percy Bysshe Shelley, during which time she falls for their daughter. There’s more that happens too but I kind of only have a vague recollection of it. A creepy brother in law? Maybe? But anyway.
This is what I mean by it’s sort of an unmemorable book. Even with characters such as both Shelleys and Lord Tennyson, it didn’t stick out for me. Again, perhaps this is something I could have seen coming since I’m not that interested in reading about that particular period of history, let alone individuals within it. So most of what I struggled with about this book can probably simply be put down to being the wrong reader for it.
Honestly, it was such a strongly-only-okay read that I don’t really have anything more to say about it. While I can’t say there was anything I truly disliked about it, neither was there anything I can point to as having liked. It was an okay reading experience. It didn’t excite me but it didn’t piss me off immeasurably. Just. Okay.
However, as ever, everyone’s a different reader! What I didn’t love here might be right up another person’s alley so, if this book appeals to you, give it a go.
Rep: sapphic mc
Galley provided by publisher
Mary was, in all honesty, a pretty unmemorable book for me. I don’t often get on with books about real people, so I really should have seen this one coming. It wasn’t embarrassing in the way I sometimes find books like that (The Rose Code springs to mind), but neither was it that compelling.
The story splits between the “present” day, where Mary Shelley is on the verge of writing the first drafts of Frankenstein and the past when she was a ward of the Baxters before her marriage with Percy Bysshe Shelley, during which time she falls for their daughter. There’s more that happens too but I kind of only have a vague recollection of it. A creepy brother in law? Maybe? But anyway.
This is what I mean by it’s sort of an unmemorable book. Even with characters such as both Shelleys and Lord Tennyson, it didn’t stick out for me. Again, perhaps this is something I could have seen coming since I’m not that interested in reading about that particular period of history, let alone individuals within it. So most of what I struggled with about this book can probably simply be put down to being the wrong reader for it.
Honestly, it was such a strongly-only-okay read that I don’t really have anything more to say about it. While I can’t say there was anything I truly disliked about it, neither was there anything I can point to as having liked. It was an okay reading experience. It didn’t excite me but it didn’t piss me off immeasurably. Just. Okay.
However, as ever, everyone’s a different reader! What I didn’t love here might be right up another person’s alley so, if this book appeals to you, give it a go.
November 1, 2023
The title is a liebit of a stretch
December 24, 2023
all day every day: F**** PERCY SHELLEY!!!!! the practice of free love historically benefits men and harms women (also @-ing beauvoir and sartre here). shelley was a dumpster fire and mary deserved better.
during senior year of hs, i was first intro’d to mary thru frankenstein and i felt so much kinship w her! i was convinced we were connected and maybe i was her in a past life. after reading this, i am still convinced i am mary reincarnated <3333
onto the lit crit:
the 3rd person perspective was def inspired by mary shelley’s own diaries, but i still struggled w the back-and-forth between first and 3rd. lovedddd that it was also a book in translation (from the dutch)
really lovely bits of language
loved the recurring motifs of motherhood/breast-feeding/writing and children as connected entities that evoke similar emotions
the typeface is the same typeface used for the first pub of frankenstein! tres cool
couldn’t tell if the monster stuff was overdone, but love the incorporation of scottish mythology
the octopus line w isabella in the pond made me wretch uncontrollably. yuck, not a fan
rich use of gothic influence; witchcraft, “a man is not as he seems”, sapphic undertones etc
during senior year of hs, i was first intro’d to mary thru frankenstein and i felt so much kinship w her! i was convinced we were connected and maybe i was her in a past life. after reading this, i am still convinced i am mary reincarnated <3333
onto the lit crit:
the 3rd person perspective was def inspired by mary shelley’s own diaries, but i still struggled w the back-and-forth between first and 3rd. lovedddd that it was also a book in translation (from the dutch)
really lovely bits of language
loved the recurring motifs of motherhood/breast-feeding/writing and children as connected entities that evoke similar emotions
the typeface is the same typeface used for the first pub of frankenstein! tres cool
couldn’t tell if the monster stuff was overdone, but love the incorporation of scottish mythology
the octopus line w isabella in the pond made me wretch uncontrollably. yuck, not a fan
rich use of gothic influence; witchcraft, “a man is not as he seems”, sapphic undertones etc
July 31, 2023
sapphic & spooky and so beautifully written i literally could not put this down. one of the best historical fictions i’ve possibly ever read & a stunning depiction of the innate darknesses of girlhood.
December 7, 2025
3.5, rounded down.
First off, even though I've had this quite awhile before getting to it, my thanks to Netgalley and HarperVia for the ARC.
I'm doing a mini-deep-dive into novels about Mary W.G. Shelley and her creation of her classic novel, prior to watching del Toro's new film version and a reread of Frankenstein: The 1818 Text itself. This is the second such book, after having just read 'Love, Sex and Frankenstein', and prior to 'Gothic'.
It's quite an unusual take on the tale, dividing its two timelines into alternating chapters - the first, obvs., during the 1816 'Haunted Summer' when Shelley wrote her masterpiece, and the other in 1812, when Mary was sent to Dundee, Scotland to house with friends of her father, the Baxters, in hopes the weather would help cure a skin ailment. In the previous book that was presented as a precursor to the modern psychological ailment of 'cutting', since that book took a more feminist view of the proceedings, but here it's presented as a form of eczema.
The first timeframe presents the story as it has pretty much been established, but it's that other one in Scotland that proves a bit controversial and problematic - since it presents Mary falling in love with the daughter Isabella, also fourteen-years-old, and forming a quite explicit lesbian attachment to her. As far as I know there is no real basis of this in fact, and it uses that relationship, and Mary's attendant descent into a realm of imaginary horror that leads to her subsequent novel.
Although the prose, even in translation is quite good, I find the entire premise a bit anachronistic, since Mary's total devotion to Shelley IS well-documented, even through his betrayal with her stepsister Claire. The book drags a bit in places also, with some repetitious sections that could have been truncated to speed things up.
Regardless, an interesting take on the tale, and am happy to have read it.
First off, even though I've had this quite awhile before getting to it, my thanks to Netgalley and HarperVia for the ARC.
I'm doing a mini-deep-dive into novels about Mary W.G. Shelley and her creation of her classic novel, prior to watching del Toro's new film version and a reread of Frankenstein: The 1818 Text itself. This is the second such book, after having just read 'Love, Sex and Frankenstein', and prior to 'Gothic'.
It's quite an unusual take on the tale, dividing its two timelines into alternating chapters - the first, obvs., during the 1816 'Haunted Summer' when Shelley wrote her masterpiece, and the other in 1812, when Mary was sent to Dundee, Scotland to house with friends of her father, the Baxters, in hopes the weather would help cure a skin ailment. In the previous book that was presented as a precursor to the modern psychological ailment of 'cutting', since that book took a more feminist view of the proceedings, but here it's presented as a form of eczema.
The first timeframe presents the story as it has pretty much been established, but it's that other one in Scotland that proves a bit controversial and problematic - since it presents Mary falling in love with the daughter Isabella, also fourteen-years-old, and forming a quite explicit lesbian attachment to her. As far as I know there is no real basis of this in fact, and it uses that relationship, and Mary's attendant descent into a realm of imaginary horror that leads to her subsequent novel.
Although the prose, even in translation is quite good, I find the entire premise a bit anachronistic, since Mary's total devotion to Shelley IS well-documented, even through his betrayal with her stepsister Claire. The book drags a bit in places also, with some repetitious sections that could have been truncated to speed things up.
Regardless, an interesting take on the tale, and am happy to have read it.
December 10, 2022
Mary Shelley gehört für mich zu den interessantesten Autorinnen der Literaturgeschichte. Sie war eine unglaublich begabte Schriftstellerin, die die Welt der Literatur für immer verändert hat und das, als sie jünger war als ich gerade. Ich freue mich immer, wenn ich mehr über sie lernen kann. Deswegen habe ich mich auch gefreut, als ich in der Verlagsvorschau gesehen habe, dass dieses Jahr eine neue Romanbiographie über sie erscheint. Klar, Romanbiographien halten sich nicht zu hundert Prozent an die historischen Begebenheiten, aber sie sind dafür oft einfacher zugänglich als Biografien und oft auch einfach unterhaltsamer. Deswegen habe auch ich mich dazu entschieden, diesem Buch eine Chance zu geben.
Zuerst möchte ich den poetischen Schreibstil loben, der mir sehr zugesagt hat. Die Autorin und die Übersetzerin oder der Übersetzer haben hier wirklich gute Arbeit geleistet und konnten mich fesseln. Diese Lektüre war definitiv nicht einfach, trotzdem habe ich mich mit diesem Buch durchaus wohlgefühlt.
Interessant fand ich auch, dass hier der Fokus auf der Kindheit von Mary Shelley liegt. Den größten Teil dieses Buchs ist sie nur so um die 15 Jahre alt. Damals wurde sie aus gesundheitlichen Gründen zu einer Familie nach Schottland geschickt und lebte bei der Familie Baxter, die in der Realität aber wohl sehr anders war als hier dargestellt. So wurde die Familie in diesem Roman stark verkleinert - in der Realität hatte Baxter nämlich meines Wissens nach vier Töchter, hier sind es nur zwei. Allerdings weiß ich nicht besonders viel über Mary Shelleys Kindheit und kann so auch vieles, das hier in diesem Buch beschrieben wird, weder bestätigen noch bestreiten.
Interessant fand ich den Fokus auf Marys Kindheit vor allem auch wegen des Klappentexts, der meiner Meinung nach falsche Erwartungen weckt. Der Fokus liegt da doch auf diesem einen unglaublich wichtigen Sommer in Mary Shelleys Leben, in dem sie "Frankenstein" schrieb. Diese Episode aus ihrer Biografie kennen wohl die meisten Menschen und deswegen wurde hier wohl auch damit geworben. Dieses Buch handelt aber nur in einigen wenigen Kapiteln von Marys Erwachsenenleben und in diesen steht das Schreiben nicht im Vordergrund. Wichtiger ist in diesen Abschnitten die Beziehung zwischen Mary und Percy Shelley, Mary und Claire und Mary und den anderen anwesenden Männern. Auch die Trauer um ihre verstorbene Tochter und die Sorge um ihren Sohn spielen eine große Rolle in diesem Text. All diese hier genannten Aspekte wurden auch eine Art eingeführt, bei der ich mir nicht sicher bin, ob ich die Handlung noch verstanden hätte, wenn ich nicht mein Hintergrundwissen über Mary Shelley hätte. Die Entstehung von "Frankenstein" war wiederum nicht ganz so wichtig, was ich persönlich doch eher schwach finde. Mary Shelley ist eine der größten Autorinnen, die meiner Meinung nach je existiert haben, also warum spielt das Schreiben hier nur so eine untergeordnete Rolle? Ich kann deswegen auch nicht ganz nachvollziehen, warum man sich dazu entschieden hat, trotzdem auf diese Art für diesen biografischen Roman zu werben.
Mein Fazit? Ich habe leider etwas ganz anderes erwartet und bin mit diesem Buch deswegen leider nicht ganz zufrieden.
Zuerst möchte ich den poetischen Schreibstil loben, der mir sehr zugesagt hat. Die Autorin und die Übersetzerin oder der Übersetzer haben hier wirklich gute Arbeit geleistet und konnten mich fesseln. Diese Lektüre war definitiv nicht einfach, trotzdem habe ich mich mit diesem Buch durchaus wohlgefühlt.
Interessant fand ich auch, dass hier der Fokus auf der Kindheit von Mary Shelley liegt. Den größten Teil dieses Buchs ist sie nur so um die 15 Jahre alt. Damals wurde sie aus gesundheitlichen Gründen zu einer Familie nach Schottland geschickt und lebte bei der Familie Baxter, die in der Realität aber wohl sehr anders war als hier dargestellt. So wurde die Familie in diesem Roman stark verkleinert - in der Realität hatte Baxter nämlich meines Wissens nach vier Töchter, hier sind es nur zwei. Allerdings weiß ich nicht besonders viel über Mary Shelleys Kindheit und kann so auch vieles, das hier in diesem Buch beschrieben wird, weder bestätigen noch bestreiten.
Interessant fand ich den Fokus auf Marys Kindheit vor allem auch wegen des Klappentexts, der meiner Meinung nach falsche Erwartungen weckt. Der Fokus liegt da doch auf diesem einen unglaublich wichtigen Sommer in Mary Shelleys Leben, in dem sie "Frankenstein" schrieb. Diese Episode aus ihrer Biografie kennen wohl die meisten Menschen und deswegen wurde hier wohl auch damit geworben. Dieses Buch handelt aber nur in einigen wenigen Kapiteln von Marys Erwachsenenleben und in diesen steht das Schreiben nicht im Vordergrund. Wichtiger ist in diesen Abschnitten die Beziehung zwischen Mary und Percy Shelley, Mary und Claire und Mary und den anderen anwesenden Männern. Auch die Trauer um ihre verstorbene Tochter und die Sorge um ihren Sohn spielen eine große Rolle in diesem Text. All diese hier genannten Aspekte wurden auch eine Art eingeführt, bei der ich mir nicht sicher bin, ob ich die Handlung noch verstanden hätte, wenn ich nicht mein Hintergrundwissen über Mary Shelley hätte. Die Entstehung von "Frankenstein" war wiederum nicht ganz so wichtig, was ich persönlich doch eher schwach finde. Mary Shelley ist eine der größten Autorinnen, die meiner Meinung nach je existiert haben, also warum spielt das Schreiben hier nur so eine untergeordnete Rolle? Ich kann deswegen auch nicht ganz nachvollziehen, warum man sich dazu entschieden hat, trotzdem auf diese Art für diesen biografischen Roman zu werben.
Mein Fazit? Ich habe leider etwas ganz anderes erwartet und bin mit diesem Buch deswegen leider nicht ganz zufrieden.
December 5, 2021
Van de gezellige mensen bij De Bezige Bij kreeg ik Mary van Anne Eekhout. Ik heb nog geen eerdere biografieën van Mary Shelley gelezen, alleen haar wikipediapagina, dus voor mij was nog niet alles bekend. Ik begreep dat veel van wat verteld wordt al eerder besproken is in het boek 'In search of Mary Shelley' van Fiona Sampson, maar dat heb ik dus niet gelezen. Ook 'Frankissstein' van Jeanette Winterson heb ik nog niet onder ogen gehad. Voor mijn collega was dit wat minder originele onderwerp een minpunt, mij kon het niet zoveel schelen.
Het boek is, neergezet als een nieuwe gothic novel, right on the nose qua sfeer.
Het eindeloze gebruik van opium en alcohol, de dromen en fantasieën die vervloeken met de werkelijkheid, zodat waarheid en waanzin niet meer van elkaar te onderscheiden zijn, het is goed neergezet. Eekhout versterkt dit door te wisselen van verteller: Mary's herinneringen in Schotland worden vanuit de eerste persoon verteld om de onbetrouwbaarheid van de verteller te benadrukken, waardoor je gewoon eigenlijk niet weet wat er nu precies gebeurt, daar in dat noorden van Engeland.
Het deel van het verhaal dat zich in Genève afspeelt, de eindeloze regenachtige zomer waarin Frankenstein gestalte kreeg, wordt vanuit de derde persoon verteld.
Het boek is daarom ook echt een roman, en zeker geen biografie, en zo moet het ook echt niet gelezen worden.
Het enige dat Eekhout nog even moet leren is dat borstvoeding geven geen pijn doet (tenzij er gebeten wordt) en dat je geen eelt op je tepels kunt krijgen. Nee, echt niet, aldus zij die zeven jaar non stop borstvoeding heeft gegeven.
Vier sterren, want uiteindelijk ben ik gewoon een liefhebber van goede historische romans. Lekkere tip om met een dekentje mee onder de kerstboom te kruipen. ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Het boek is, neergezet als een nieuwe gothic novel, right on the nose qua sfeer.
Het eindeloze gebruik van opium en alcohol, de dromen en fantasieën die vervloeken met de werkelijkheid, zodat waarheid en waanzin niet meer van elkaar te onderscheiden zijn, het is goed neergezet. Eekhout versterkt dit door te wisselen van verteller: Mary's herinneringen in Schotland worden vanuit de eerste persoon verteld om de onbetrouwbaarheid van de verteller te benadrukken, waardoor je gewoon eigenlijk niet weet wat er nu precies gebeurt, daar in dat noorden van Engeland.
Het deel van het verhaal dat zich in Genève afspeelt, de eindeloze regenachtige zomer waarin Frankenstein gestalte kreeg, wordt vanuit de derde persoon verteld.
Het boek is daarom ook echt een roman, en zeker geen biografie, en zo moet het ook echt niet gelezen worden.
Het enige dat Eekhout nog even moet leren is dat borstvoeding geven geen pijn doet (tenzij er gebeten wordt) en dat je geen eelt op je tepels kunt krijgen. Nee, echt niet, aldus zij die zeven jaar non stop borstvoeding heeft gegeven.
Vier sterren, want uiteindelijk ben ik gewoon een liefhebber van goede historische romans. Lekkere tip om met een dekentje mee onder de kerstboom te kruipen. ⭐⭐⭐⭐
January 18, 2022
This is a Dutch book about the life of Mary Shelley, the author of 'Frankenstein'. It alternates between her teenage years and her years as a young adult and a mum. It's interesting to see where the idea for 'Frankenstein' has originated. It also became clear that she had a lot of fantasy, was sensitive and attracted to women or at least Isabella. Her years as a teenager she spend it with a family where her father was friends with and it seems that there she developed her love for writing, for fantasy. The other part is set in Genéva, where she is travelling with Percy Shelley and lord Byron, amongst a few other friends. From what the story is telling, Mary struggled with life and writing, with the 'place' of a woman in this period of time.
As I finished the book, it was clear that the author did a lot of research about Marry Shelley, but still managed to create an interesting story about her young life.
As I finished the book, it was clear that the author did a lot of research about Marry Shelley, but still managed to create an interesting story about her young life.
November 10, 2022
3 stelle
Un mix tra fantasy e romanzo onirico, nel quale l'autrice romanza, eccessivamente, la vita di Mary Shelley.
Due piani temporali per raccontare una Mary Shelley che, quasi sicuramente, esiste solo nella mente di Eekhout.
Personaggi secondari assolutamente in secondo piano.
Buona la scrittura, ma la storia risulta comunque lenta e difficile da leggere.
La recensione completa nel blog
Un mix tra fantasy e romanzo onirico, nel quale l'autrice romanza, eccessivamente, la vita di Mary Shelley.
Due piani temporali per raccontare una Mary Shelley che, quasi sicuramente, esiste solo nella mente di Eekhout.
Personaggi secondari assolutamente in secondo piano.
Buona la scrittura, ma la storia risulta comunque lenta e difficile da leggere.
La recensione completa nel blog
December 10, 2021
Fijn om een paar dagen in Schotland te zijn, tussen de watermonsters en de (vermeende) heksen.
Ik vond het verhaal af en toe ietwat langdradig worden, daarom 3 en geen 4 sterren.
Ik vond het verhaal af en toe ietwat langdradig worden, daarom 3 en geen 4 sterren.
October 22, 2023
Bland, underwritten and overwritten at the same time. Unsophisticated info-dump that manages to only scratch the surface of Mary’s experience. Disappointing, but not at all surprising. Boring.
November 4, 2023
I could have used less pining and more Frankenstein.
January 19, 2022
Mary van Anne Eekhout neemt de lezer mee naar het jaar 1816 in het Zwitserse Cologny bij het Meer van Genève. In Maison Chapuis, vlakbij Villa Diodati, ligt de achttienjarige Mary Shelley iedere nacht wakker. Op dit ‘heksenuur’, wanneer haar verbeelding het sterkst is, wordt Mary herinnerd aan twee grote verliezen. Zo stierf haar moeder, de feministe Mary Wollstonecraft, tijdens haar kraambed en haar dochter aan wiegendood. Samen met haar geliefde Percy Bysshe Shelley, hun zoon William en stiefzus Claire, brengt Mary de zomer door met dichter Lord Byron (‘Albe’) en arts John Polidori. De zomermaanden zijn dat jaar echter verrassend regenachtig, en tijdens een onstuimige avond besluiten de mannen een griezelige verhalenwedstrijd te organiseren. Mary doet ook mee en schrijft het begin van wat later het beroemde horrorverhaal Frankenstein (Or The Modern Prometheus) zal worden.
Wil je mijn volledige recensie lezen? Ga dan naar elineschrijfthier.nl. ↖️🙋🏻♀️
Wil je mijn volledige recensie lezen? Ga dan naar elineschrijfthier.nl. ↖️🙋🏻♀️
March 26, 2024
3.5⭐️
anne eekhout vertelt het verhaal van mary shelley (auteur van frankenstein) op een interessante en originele manier. we volgen mary in twee tijdlijnen. als eerste in 1816, wanneer zij 18 jaar oud is in cologny, zwitserland. en daarna in 1812, wanneer zij 14 jaar oud is in dundee, schotland. beide tijdlijnen zijn ook op een andere manier geschreven. dat was aan het begin even wennen.
het is een gotische roman met horror/fantasy invloeden en het voelde op sommige momenten een beetje aan als een soort fever dream. dit komt denk ik omdat je leest vanuit het perspectief van mary shelley als kind/jonge vrouw die al veel heeft meegemaakt.
ook vind ik de cover echt heel erg mooi!
anne eekhout vertelt het verhaal van mary shelley (auteur van frankenstein) op een interessante en originele manier. we volgen mary in twee tijdlijnen. als eerste in 1816, wanneer zij 18 jaar oud is in cologny, zwitserland. en daarna in 1812, wanneer zij 14 jaar oud is in dundee, schotland. beide tijdlijnen zijn ook op een andere manier geschreven. dat was aan het begin even wennen.
het is een gotische roman met horror/fantasy invloeden en het voelde op sommige momenten een beetje aan als een soort fever dream. dit komt denk ik omdat je leest vanuit het perspectief van mary shelley als kind/jonge vrouw die al veel heeft meegemaakt.
ook vind ik de cover echt heel erg mooi!
December 27, 2023
Review to come.
February 12, 2023
Prachtig, echt prachtig! Dit boek is fantastisch geschreven en zoveel tegelijk. Er is zoveel aandacht en liefde besteed aan Mary en wie ze mogelijk geweest had kunnen zijn. Wat ze dacht, wat ze voelde, wie ze was en waarom. Je leest over haar als ze een paar jaar moeder is en met haar man en vriendengroep reist naar Zwitserland om daar uiteindelijk Frankenstein te schrijven. Waar de onderlinge ingewikkelde relaties tussen de vrienden zorgen voor verdriet en woede, maar ook inspiratie. Wat er ondanks de vooruitstrevende ideeën van deze mensen toch verwacht werd van een vrouw. Hoe dat conflicteerde met elkaar en hoe moeilijk dat was. Je leest ook over een paar jaar ervoor als ze te gast is bij een familie waar ze een innige vriendschap aangaat met de dochter van die familie. Wat voor bizarre dingen ze meemaakt en je je afvraagt wat echt is en wat fantasie. Je leest alles vanuit Mary’s ogen en ze begon zo te leven voor mij dat ik haar niet meer zal vergeten.
November 7, 2022
A mix match of strange people and situations where the border between reality and imagination is kept so unclear that I had a hard time reading it, I found this novel rather disappointing.
The famous competition that took to the writing of "Frankenstein" is barely hinted at, while the author's main concern seems to be on Mary's quasi-lesbian teenage crush and on the open relationship between Mary and Percy Shelley, along with the strangeness of all the people who spent the summer of 1816 in Switzerland with them: a bunch of weirdos (which I knew they were but, personally, I'd rather have read an - though fictional- account of the process that took Mary Shelley to write her masterpiece).
Admittedly, the author writes very well and the reading is fluid, that's why I am giving 2 stars and not 1.
The famous competition that took to the writing of "Frankenstein" is barely hinted at, while the author's main concern seems to be on Mary's quasi-lesbian teenage crush and on the open relationship between Mary and Percy Shelley, along with the strangeness of all the people who spent the summer of 1816 in Switzerland with them: a bunch of weirdos (which I knew they were but, personally, I'd rather have read an - though fictional- account of the process that took Mary Shelley to write her masterpiece).
Admittedly, the author writes very well and the reading is fluid, that's why I am giving 2 stars and not 1.
February 17, 2022
Als ik niet het gros van de tijd zo godvergeten moe en afgeleid was had ik dit boek stukken eerder uit gehad. Ik vond het, ook al las ik te gefragmenteerd en warrig, magisch. Zo goed, qua verhaal maar vooral qua taal. Erg fan! Kan dit verfilmd worden?
January 17, 2022
Meeslepend, soms een beetje voortslepend. Uiteindelijk licht anticlimactisch. 3,5⭐️
July 9, 2024
Mi aspettavo qualcosa di diverso. Sono sempre stata affascinata dalla genesi di Frankenstein e dai fatti di Villa Diodati, e probabilmente Eekhout è riuscita a ricostruire l'atmosfera che si viveva a Ginevra in quell'anno senza estate. Ma il romanzo è troppo onirico, allucinato quasi, incentrato tutto sulle due esperienze che forse segnarono maggiormente Mary Godwin Shelley e che si alternano in queste pagine: quella del 1816 a Ginevra, appunto, quando aveva appena diciannove anni (ma aveva già partorito due figli, di cui la prima, Clara, era morta in fasce), con la sfida a scrivere un racconto dell'orrore lanciata da Byron, che solo lei e John Polidori portarono a compimento; e quella avvenuta quattro anni prima a Dundee, in Scozia, quando, da quindicenne molto influenzabile, strinse amicizia con Isabelle Baxter e frequentò il suo ambiguo e ammaliante cognato, Mr. Booth, vivendo interi pomeriggi i cui ricordi saranno spesso confusi e a volte pressoché sognanti, quasi irreali.
Il "libro" è solo un fatto futuro, Mary lo scrive, sottraendo del tempo prezioso a William, il figlioletto, malgrado le rimostranze del marito. I riferimenti a Frankenstein sono nei racconti di streghe che Mary ascolta in Scozia, nelle sue esperienze di ragazza ipersensibile e suggestionabile, nel dolore per la morte della figlia e nel suo rapporto con Percy Shelley e con la sorellastra Claire Clairmont - una ragazza tutt'altro che semplice - inseguendo l'utopia dell'amore libero, che per Mary è invece inattuabile.
Il "libro" è solo un fatto futuro, Mary lo scrive, sottraendo del tempo prezioso a William, il figlioletto, malgrado le rimostranze del marito. I riferimenti a Frankenstein sono nei racconti di streghe che Mary ascolta in Scozia, nelle sue esperienze di ragazza ipersensibile e suggestionabile, nel dolore per la morte della figlia e nel suo rapporto con Percy Shelley e con la sorellastra Claire Clairmont - una ragazza tutt'altro che semplice - inseguendo l'utopia dell'amore libero, che per Mary è invece inattuabile.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 584 reviews