What do you think?
Rate this book
The Mortal Immortal
Mary Shelley (née Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin, often known as Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley) was a British novelist, short story writer, dramatist, essayist, biographer, travel writer, and editor of the works of her husband, Romantic poet and philosopher Percy Bysshe Shelley. She was the daughter of the political philosopher William Godwin and the writer, philosopher, and feminist Mary Wollstonecraft. Mary Shelley was taken seriously as a writer in her own lifetime, though reviewers often missed the political edge to her novels. After her death, however, she was chiefly remembered only as the wife of Percy Bysshe Shelley and as the author of Frankenstein. It was not until 1989, when Emily Sunstein published her prizewinning biography Mary Romance and Reality, that a full-length scholarly biography analyzing all of Shelley's letters, journals, and works within their historical context was published. The well-meaning attempts of Mary Shelley's son and daughter-in-law to "Victorianise" her memory through the censoring of letters and biographical material contributed to a perception of Mary Shelley as a more conventional, less reformist figure than her works suggest. Her own timid omissions from Percy Shelley's works and her quiet avoidance of public controversy in the later years of her life added to this impression. The eclipse of Mary Shelley's reputation as a novelist and biographer meant that, until the last thirty years, most of her works remained out of print, obstructing a larger view of her achievement. She was seen as a one-novel author, if that. In recent decades, however, the republication of almost all her writings has stimulated a new recognition of its value. Her voracious reading habits and intensive study, revealed in her journals and letters and reflected in her works, is now better appreciated. Shelley's recognition of herself as an author has also been recognized; after Percy's death, she wrote about her authorial "I think that I can maintain myself, and there is something inspiriting in the idea". Scholars now consider Mary Shelley to be a major Romantic figure, significant for her literary achievement and her political voice as a woman and a liberal.
34 pages, Paperback
Published July 13, 2015
35 people want to read
About the author
Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley
2,349 books8,605 followersMary Shelley (née Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin, often known as Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley) was an English novelist, short story writer, dramatist, essayist, biographer, travel writer, and editor of the works of her husband, Romantic poet and philosopher Percy Bysshe Shelley. She was the daughter of the political philosopher William Godwin and the writer, philosopher, and feminist Mary Wollstonecraft.
Mary Shelley was taken seriously as a writer in her own lifetime, though reviewers often missed the political edge to her novels. After her death, however, she was chiefly remembered only as the wife of Percy Bysshe Shelley and as the author of Frankenstein. It was not until 1989, when Emily Sunstein published her prizewinning biography Mary Shelley: Romance and Reality, that a full-length scholarly biography analyzing all of Shelley's letters, journals, and works within their historical context was published.
The well-meaning attempts of Mary Shelley's son and daughter-in-law to "Victorianise" her memory through the censoring of letters and biographical material contributed to a perception of Mary Shelley as a more conventional, less reformist figure than her works suggest. Her own timid omissions from Percy Shelley's works and her quiet avoidance of public controversy in the later years of her life added to this impression.
The eclipse of Mary Shelley's reputation as a novelist and biographer meant that, until the last thirty years, most of her works remained out of print, obstructing a larger view of her achievement. She was seen as a one-novel author, if that. In recent decades, however, the republication of almost all her writings has stimulated a new recognition of its value. Her voracious reading habits and intensive study, revealed in her journals and letters and reflected in her works, is now better appreciated. Shelley's recognition of herself as an author has also been recognized; after Percy's death, she wrote about her authorial ambitions: "I think that I can maintain myself, and there is something inspiriting in the idea". Scholars now consider Mary Shelley to be a major Romantic figure, significant for her literary achievement and her political voice as a woman and a liberal.
Mary Shelley was taken seriously as a writer in her own lifetime, though reviewers often missed the political edge to her novels. After her death, however, she was chiefly remembered only as the wife of Percy Bysshe Shelley and as the author of Frankenstein. It was not until 1989, when Emily Sunstein published her prizewinning biography Mary Shelley: Romance and Reality, that a full-length scholarly biography analyzing all of Shelley's letters, journals, and works within their historical context was published.
The well-meaning attempts of Mary Shelley's son and daughter-in-law to "Victorianise" her memory through the censoring of letters and biographical material contributed to a perception of Mary Shelley as a more conventional, less reformist figure than her works suggest. Her own timid omissions from Percy Shelley's works and her quiet avoidance of public controversy in the later years of her life added to this impression.
The eclipse of Mary Shelley's reputation as a novelist and biographer meant that, until the last thirty years, most of her works remained out of print, obstructing a larger view of her achievement. She was seen as a one-novel author, if that. In recent decades, however, the republication of almost all her writings has stimulated a new recognition of its value. Her voracious reading habits and intensive study, revealed in her journals and letters and reflected in her works, is now better appreciated. Shelley's recognition of herself as an author has also been recognized; after Percy's death, she wrote about her authorial ambitions: "I think that I can maintain myself, and there is something inspiriting in the idea". Scholars now consider Mary Shelley to be a major Romantic figure, significant for her literary achievement and her political voice as a woman and a liberal.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
May 26, 2024
The English version can be found below.
-----------
German version:
Inhalt: Eine düstere Erzählung über einen verrückten Wissenschaftler namens Cornelius Agrippa, der unsterblich werden will und das Ganze dann doch nicht wie geplant verläuft und ein großes Missverständnis zu einem ungewollten 'Ende' führt.
'The Mortal Immortal'/ 'Der Sterbliche Unsterbliche' (1833) ist interessant zu lesen, aber sicher nicht das beste Werk von Mary Shelley und kommt auch nicht annähernd an 'Frankenstein' heran. Es ist weniger innovativ und hat auch verhältnismäßig für seine kurze Form, bis auf die eine zentrale Wendung, keine wirklich nennenswerten weiteren Wendungen. Allerdings macht die Erzählung auch nicht den Eindruck als wolle sie hier Spannung erzeugen, sondern behandelt eher die innersten moralisch-fragwürdigen Wünsche von Menschen.
„His science was simply human; and human science (...) could never conquer nature‘s law so far as to imprison the soul for ever within its carnal habitation.“/ dt.: „Seine Wissenschaft war lediglich menschlich; und eine menschliche Wissenschaft (...) kann niemals das Gesetz der Natur insoweit übertreten, als eine Seele ewiglich innerhalb ihrer eigenen fleischlichen Hülle einzukerkern.“ (meine Übersetzung) (The Mortal Immortal – Mary Shelley)
Mary Shelley beleuchtet hier nochmals andere Aspekte der menschlichen Eingriffe in die Natur als bei ‚Frankenstein‘, was in dieser Hinsicht eine schöne Ergänzung ist. Auch in Frankenstein wurde bereits auf Agrippa eingegangen, dessen Lektüre seiner Werke die ganze alchemistische Besessenheit von Frankenstein auslöste. Diese Figuren des Agrippa beruhen interessanterweise auf einer realen Person. Agrippa war ein deutscher Arzt, Theologe und Philosoph, beschäftigte sich intensiv mit Magie und lebte von 1486-1535. Demnach kann man, wenn er bereits bei Shelley in einem zweiten Text eine zentrale Rolle spielt, davon ausgehen, dass sein Werk auch bei ihr einen bleibenden Eindruck hinterlassen zu haben scheint.
Der Herausgeber der Anthologie ‚Promethean Horrors‘ Xavier Aldana Reyes bezeichnet die Erzählung zudem als eine „moralistic tale about the dangers of altering the natural course of live“/ dt.: „ moralistische Erzählung von den Gefahren den natürlichen Lauf des Lebens zu ändern“ (meine Übersetzung). Das heißt eine moralisch fragwürdige Idee wird hier in der dafür konstruierten Konstellation der Geschichte auf die Spitze getrieben, um die Moral überdeutlich herauszuarbeiten. Diese Idee, die in die Natur eingreift, ist die Unsterblichkeit. Die Thematik der Unsterblichkeit wird im Text dahingehend genauer hinterfragt und ihre Konsequenzen dargestellt, also was es tatsächlich heißt, unsterblich zu sein. Dabei wird diese Frage wirklich facettenreich und eingängig ausgeführt und bildet somit den eigentlichen Kern der Erzählung. Dem Ganzen wird zudem noch das leicht unheimliche Element der Wunder und Bedrohlichkeit der Alchemie zugesetzt, was definitiv zu einer runderen Erzählung beiträgt.
Gesamt: 3,4🌟
----------
English version:
Synopsis: A dark tale about a mad scientist named Cornelius Agrippa who wants to become immortal but the whole thing doesn't go as planned and a big misunderstanding leads to an unintended 'end'.
'The Mortal Immortal' (1833) is interesting to read, but certainly not Mary Shelley's best work and doesn't even come close to 'Frankenstein'. It is less innovative and – relatively for its short form – has no really noteworthy further twists apart from the one central twist. However, the story does not give the impression that it is trying to create suspense, but rather deals with the innermost morally questionable desires of human beings.
„His science was simply human; and human science (...) could never conquer nature‘s law so far as to imprison the soul for ever within its carnal habitation.“ (The Mortal Immortal – Mary Shelley)
Mary Shelley once again sheds light on other aspects of human manipulation of nature than in 'Frankenstein', which is a nice addition in this respect. Agrippa has also already been mentioned in Frankenstein. The reading of his works triggered the whole alchemical obsession of Frankenstein. Interestingly, these figures of Agrippa are based on a real person. Agrippa was a German physician, theologian and philosopher, was intensively researching magic and lived from 1486-1535. Accordingly, if he already plays a central role in a second text by Shelley, we can assume that his work also seems to have left a lasting impression on her.
The editor of the anthology 'Promethean Horrors', Xavier Aldana Reyes, also describes the story as a “moralistic tale about the dangers of altering the natural course of life”. In other words, a morally questionable idea is taken to extremes here in the constellation of the story constructed for this purpose in order to make the morality abundantly clear. This idea, which interferes with nature, is immortality. The topic of immortality is questioned in more detail in the text and its consequences are presented, i.e. what it actually means to be immortal. This question is addressed in a really multifaceted and catchy way and thus forms the actual core of the story. The slightly eerie element of the wonder and menace of alchemy is also added to the story, which definitely contributes to a more balanced narrative.
Overall: 3.4🌟
-----------
German version:
Inhalt: Eine düstere Erzählung über einen verrückten Wissenschaftler namens Cornelius Agrippa, der unsterblich werden will und das Ganze dann doch nicht wie geplant verläuft und ein großes Missverständnis zu einem ungewollten 'Ende' führt.
'The Mortal Immortal'/ 'Der Sterbliche Unsterbliche' (1833) ist interessant zu lesen, aber sicher nicht das beste Werk von Mary Shelley und kommt auch nicht annähernd an 'Frankenstein' heran. Es ist weniger innovativ und hat auch verhältnismäßig für seine kurze Form, bis auf die eine zentrale Wendung, keine wirklich nennenswerten weiteren Wendungen. Allerdings macht die Erzählung auch nicht den Eindruck als wolle sie hier Spannung erzeugen, sondern behandelt eher die innersten moralisch-fragwürdigen Wünsche von Menschen.
„His science was simply human; and human science (...) could never conquer nature‘s law so far as to imprison the soul for ever within its carnal habitation.“/ dt.: „Seine Wissenschaft war lediglich menschlich; und eine menschliche Wissenschaft (...) kann niemals das Gesetz der Natur insoweit übertreten, als eine Seele ewiglich innerhalb ihrer eigenen fleischlichen Hülle einzukerkern.“ (meine Übersetzung) (The Mortal Immortal – Mary Shelley)
Mary Shelley beleuchtet hier nochmals andere Aspekte der menschlichen Eingriffe in die Natur als bei ‚Frankenstein‘, was in dieser Hinsicht eine schöne Ergänzung ist. Auch in Frankenstein wurde bereits auf Agrippa eingegangen, dessen Lektüre seiner Werke die ganze alchemistische Besessenheit von Frankenstein auslöste. Diese Figuren des Agrippa beruhen interessanterweise auf einer realen Person. Agrippa war ein deutscher Arzt, Theologe und Philosoph, beschäftigte sich intensiv mit Magie und lebte von 1486-1535. Demnach kann man, wenn er bereits bei Shelley in einem zweiten Text eine zentrale Rolle spielt, davon ausgehen, dass sein Werk auch bei ihr einen bleibenden Eindruck hinterlassen zu haben scheint.
Der Herausgeber der Anthologie ‚Promethean Horrors‘ Xavier Aldana Reyes bezeichnet die Erzählung zudem als eine „moralistic tale about the dangers of altering the natural course of live“/ dt.: „ moralistische Erzählung von den Gefahren den natürlichen Lauf des Lebens zu ändern“ (meine Übersetzung). Das heißt eine moralisch fragwürdige Idee wird hier in der dafür konstruierten Konstellation der Geschichte auf die Spitze getrieben, um die Moral überdeutlich herauszuarbeiten. Diese Idee, die in die Natur eingreift, ist die Unsterblichkeit. Die Thematik der Unsterblichkeit wird im Text dahingehend genauer hinterfragt und ihre Konsequenzen dargestellt, also was es tatsächlich heißt, unsterblich zu sein. Dabei wird diese Frage wirklich facettenreich und eingängig ausgeführt und bildet somit den eigentlichen Kern der Erzählung. Dem Ganzen wird zudem noch das leicht unheimliche Element der Wunder und Bedrohlichkeit der Alchemie zugesetzt, was definitiv zu einer runderen Erzählung beiträgt.
Gesamt: 3,4🌟
----------
English version:
Synopsis: A dark tale about a mad scientist named Cornelius Agrippa who wants to become immortal but the whole thing doesn't go as planned and a big misunderstanding leads to an unintended 'end'.
'The Mortal Immortal' (1833) is interesting to read, but certainly not Mary Shelley's best work and doesn't even come close to 'Frankenstein'. It is less innovative and – relatively for its short form – has no really noteworthy further twists apart from the one central twist. However, the story does not give the impression that it is trying to create suspense, but rather deals with the innermost morally questionable desires of human beings.
„His science was simply human; and human science (...) could never conquer nature‘s law so far as to imprison the soul for ever within its carnal habitation.“ (The Mortal Immortal – Mary Shelley)
Mary Shelley once again sheds light on other aspects of human manipulation of nature than in 'Frankenstein', which is a nice addition in this respect. Agrippa has also already been mentioned in Frankenstein. The reading of his works triggered the whole alchemical obsession of Frankenstein. Interestingly, these figures of Agrippa are based on a real person. Agrippa was a German physician, theologian and philosopher, was intensively researching magic and lived from 1486-1535. Accordingly, if he already plays a central role in a second text by Shelley, we can assume that his work also seems to have left a lasting impression on her.
The editor of the anthology 'Promethean Horrors', Xavier Aldana Reyes, also describes the story as a “moralistic tale about the dangers of altering the natural course of life”. In other words, a morally questionable idea is taken to extremes here in the constellation of the story constructed for this purpose in order to make the morality abundantly clear. This idea, which interferes with nature, is immortality. The topic of immortality is questioned in more detail in the text and its consequences are presented, i.e. what it actually means to be immortal. This question is addressed in a really multifaceted and catchy way and thus forms the actual core of the story. The slightly eerie element of the wonder and menace of alchemy is also added to the story, which definitely contributes to a more balanced narrative.
Overall: 3.4🌟
June 8, 2025
"The Mortal Immortal" is a short, supernatural tale about a young man's confrontation with the perils of immortality and the limits of love. As with Frankenstein, Mary Shelley investigates the boundaries of science (alchemy) and the fearful consequences of experimentation. She attempts to find the line where knowledge challenges the natural order, interferes with what is moral or human, and becomes a blessing and a curse. The irony being that in seeking longer life, one becomes removed from normal life. While inventive and engaging, Shelley develops no radical or startling response to these themes as in her other work. As a fairy tale this would fall into the "be careful what you wish for" category. Notably, this Gothic story has a contemporary setting with an emphasis on the psychological. [3★]
August 25, 2025
Well written, but Mary let me down with her female character who is nothing more than vain, fickle, and jealous.
November 21, 2024
The Mortal Immortal
Intriguing and somewhat beguiling. I love the premise as an inversion of our fear of death, only to highlight the darker side of living eternally. ****
My favourite lines are:
“.. she often visited the cottage of my father, and when forbidden to go thither, she would stray toward the neighboring wood, and meet me beside its shady fountain.” (p33)
Also:
“Death! mysterious, ill-visaged friend of weak humanity! Why alone of all mortals have you cast me from your sheltering fold? Oh, for the peace of the grave! the deep silence of the iron-bound tomb! that thought would cease to work in my brain, and my heart beat no more with emotions varied only by new forms of sadness!”
“And the more I live, the more I dread death, even while I abhor life. Such an enigma is man -- born to perish -- when he wars, as I do, against the established laws of his nature.”
“(...) but, oh! the weight of never-ending time—the tedious passage of the still-succeeding hours!”
“Sometimes I fancy age advancing upon me. One grey hair I have found. Fool! do I lament? Yes, the fear of age and death often creeps coldly into my heart; and the more I live, the more I dread death, even while I abhor life.”
The story opens with:
JULY 16, 1833. --This is a memorable anniversary for me; on it I complete my three hundred and twenty-third year!
The Wandering Jew?--certainly not. More than eighteen centuries have passed over his head. In comparison with him, I am a very young Immortal.
Am I, then, immortal? This is a question which I have asked myself, by day and night, for now three hundred and three years, and yet cannot answer it.
I detected a gray hair amidst my brown locks this very day-- that surely signifies decay. Yet it may have remained concealed there for three hundred years--for some persons have become entirely white headed before twenty years of age.
I will tell my story, and my reader shall judge for me. I will tell my story, and so contrive to pass some few hours of a long eternity, become so wearisome to me. For ever! Can it be? to live for ever!
….............................
Intriguing and somewhat beguiling. I love the premise as an inversion of our fear of death, only to highlight the darker side of living eternally. ****
My favourite lines are:
“.. she often visited the cottage of my father, and when forbidden to go thither, she would stray toward the neighboring wood, and meet me beside its shady fountain.” (p33)
Also:
“Death! mysterious, ill-visaged friend of weak humanity! Why alone of all mortals have you cast me from your sheltering fold? Oh, for the peace of the grave! the deep silence of the iron-bound tomb! that thought would cease to work in my brain, and my heart beat no more with emotions varied only by new forms of sadness!”
“And the more I live, the more I dread death, even while I abhor life. Such an enigma is man -- born to perish -- when he wars, as I do, against the established laws of his nature.”
“(...) but, oh! the weight of never-ending time—the tedious passage of the still-succeeding hours!”
“Sometimes I fancy age advancing upon me. One grey hair I have found. Fool! do I lament? Yes, the fear of age and death often creeps coldly into my heart; and the more I live, the more I dread death, even while I abhor life.”
The story opens with:
JULY 16, 1833. --This is a memorable anniversary for me; on it I complete my three hundred and twenty-third year!
The Wandering Jew?--certainly not. More than eighteen centuries have passed over his head. In comparison with him, I am a very young Immortal.
Am I, then, immortal? This is a question which I have asked myself, by day and night, for now three hundred and three years, and yet cannot answer it.
I detected a gray hair amidst my brown locks this very day-- that surely signifies decay. Yet it may have remained concealed there for three hundred years--for some persons have become entirely white headed before twenty years of age.
I will tell my story, and my reader shall judge for me. I will tell my story, and so contrive to pass some few hours of a long eternity, become so wearisome to me. For ever! Can it be? to live for ever!
….............................
January 19, 2026
An enjoyable little story.
What makes the story interesting is that our protagonist Winzy, (what a name), doesn't actually know if he Immortal, or if he is just going to life a very, long and extended life. Or even a short long life.
It thus raises an interesting philosophical question for Winzy. If you know your time on Earth is limited, even if it going to be a long time on Earth, your life choices, are going to be difficult when it comes to personal relationships.
And this difficult question is an important question for Winzy. How should he approach his relationship with Bertha, the woman he is passionately in love with. And who is passionately in love with him also. And also, his love of Bertha is the main reason why Winzy drank The Elixir of Immortality in the first place.
This becomes the main point of the story which Mary Shelley chooses to focus on. The other details of Winzy long life are brushed over as minor details, much to the chagrin of many readers.
And the story thus focuses on the changing relationship between two people who are still, it appears, in love with each other, but are dealing with the different physical and esthetic changes happening to Bertha, but not to Winzy.
In the end the story is about Winzy's feelings of isolation and loneliness, and his ambivalent feelings about having quaffed The Elixir of Immortality. And his sense of having lost to love of his life, and maybe even her love also.
A good story that makes you think.
Also, I thought the visual descriptions of The Elixir of Immortality were kind of cool.
What makes the story interesting is that our protagonist Winzy, (what a name), doesn't actually know if he Immortal, or if he is just going to life a very, long and extended life. Or even a short long life.
It thus raises an interesting philosophical question for Winzy. If you know your time on Earth is limited, even if it going to be a long time on Earth, your life choices, are going to be difficult when it comes to personal relationships.
And this difficult question is an important question for Winzy. How should he approach his relationship with Bertha, the woman he is passionately in love with. And who is passionately in love with him also. And also, his love of Bertha is the main reason why Winzy drank The Elixir of Immortality in the first place.
This becomes the main point of the story which Mary Shelley chooses to focus on. The other details of Winzy long life are brushed over as minor details, much to the chagrin of many readers.
And the story thus focuses on the changing relationship between two people who are still, it appears, in love with each other, but are dealing with the different physical and esthetic changes happening to Bertha, but not to Winzy.
In the end the story is about Winzy's feelings of isolation and loneliness, and his ambivalent feelings about having quaffed The Elixir of Immortality. And his sense of having lost to love of his life, and maybe even her love also.
A good story that makes you think.
Also, I thought the visual descriptions of The Elixir of Immortality were kind of cool.
October 26, 2024
Die vier Punkte gelten der Aufmachung. Das dünne Bändchen besteht aus der Erzählung und einem langen Nachwort vom Übersetzer Heiko Postma, dessen Namen auch mit Publikationen zu Karl May und Arno Schmidt verbunden ist.
Winzy, der Erzähler hat aus einem Impuls heraus einen Trank des Achemisten Agrippa, seines Meisters getrunken, weil er die Menschen vom Liebesleiden befreien soll. Winzys Herzensdame Bertha bereitet ihm gerade Kummer. Vom Trank eigentümlich gestärkt schafft er es dann doch, sie zu heiraten. Dann erfährt er, dass der Trank in in Wirklichkeit ewige Jugend schenkt. Das merkt er, er bleibt jung und seine Bertha wird alt und kann sich damit gar nicht abfinden. So wird seine Liebe von Eifersucht und Unleidigkeit ihrerseits bis zum Tod überschattet. Die Unsterblichkeit empfindet er als Fluch, er kann sein Leben nicht richtig genießen und so sucht er letztendlich in einer Großtat entweder den Tod oder die Rechtfertigung seiner Existenz. Die Großtat in Form eine Expedition in den Norden...
Lies sich gut lesen, Shelley schaffte es, mich als Leser auch emotional zu bewegen. Das Nachwort war ebenfalls alles andere als trocken und informativ dazu. So macht klassische Phantastik Spaß.
Winzy, der Erzähler hat aus einem Impuls heraus einen Trank des Achemisten Agrippa, seines Meisters getrunken, weil er die Menschen vom Liebesleiden befreien soll. Winzys Herzensdame Bertha bereitet ihm gerade Kummer. Vom Trank eigentümlich gestärkt schafft er es dann doch, sie zu heiraten. Dann erfährt er, dass der Trank in in Wirklichkeit ewige Jugend schenkt. Das merkt er, er bleibt jung und seine Bertha wird alt und kann sich damit gar nicht abfinden. So wird seine Liebe von Eifersucht und Unleidigkeit ihrerseits bis zum Tod überschattet. Die Unsterblichkeit empfindet er als Fluch, er kann sein Leben nicht richtig genießen und so sucht er letztendlich in einer Großtat entweder den Tod oder die Rechtfertigung seiner Existenz. Die Großtat in Form eine Expedition in den Norden...
Lies sich gut lesen, Shelley schaffte es, mich als Leser auch emotional zu bewegen. Das Nachwort war ebenfalls alles andere als trocken und informativ dazu. So macht klassische Phantastik Spaß.
January 10, 2026
Trust me, reading this one felt like encountering a quieter sibling to Frankenstein—less dramatic, but no less profound. Shelley explores immortality not as spectacle, but as endurance, and the effect is haunting.
What struck me most was how gently the horror unfolds. There is no moment of triumph, no grand curse. Immortality arrives almost accidentally, and its cost is revealed slowly, through time rather than terror.
Reading this, I felt Shelley insisting that consequences need not be immediate to be devastating.
The narrator’s voice is calm, reflective, and weary. Immortality does not inflate ego; it erodes it. Love decays not because it fails, but because it cannot keep pace with time. Shelley’s insight here is devastatingly intimate.
What lingered was the story’s refusal to glamorise eternal life. The immortal becomes a witness to loss rather than a participant in living. Shelley reframes death not as an enemy but as a boundary that gives experience shape.
Reading this, I felt Shelley asking whether meaning depends on finitude. Without an ending, desire loses urgency. Love loses symmetry.
The Mortal Immortal stayed with me because it transforms immortality from fantasy into burden—and in doing so, makes mortality feel like grace.
Most recommended.
What struck me most was how gently the horror unfolds. There is no moment of triumph, no grand curse. Immortality arrives almost accidentally, and its cost is revealed slowly, through time rather than terror.
Reading this, I felt Shelley insisting that consequences need not be immediate to be devastating.
The narrator’s voice is calm, reflective, and weary. Immortality does not inflate ego; it erodes it. Love decays not because it fails, but because it cannot keep pace with time. Shelley’s insight here is devastatingly intimate.
What lingered was the story’s refusal to glamorise eternal life. The immortal becomes a witness to loss rather than a participant in living. Shelley reframes death not as an enemy but as a boundary that gives experience shape.
Reading this, I felt Shelley asking whether meaning depends on finitude. Without an ending, desire loses urgency. Love loses symmetry.
The Mortal Immortal stayed with me because it transforms immortality from fantasy into burden—and in doing so, makes mortality feel like grace.
Most recommended.
February 8, 2025
Sveučilišna tiskara
Zagreb, 2022.
Prijevod: Patricija Horvat
Kul kratka priča.
Jezik je dosta jednostavan, nije neč razbarušen i dotjeran. To mi se ne sviđa.
Nedostaje jezične aktualizacije.
Sadržaj je kul, podsjeća na priče njemačkog romantizma, prije svega na velikog E.TA. Hoffmanna.
Hasta luego mis murciélagos!
Zagreb, 2022.
Prijevod: Patricija Horvat
Kul kratka priča.
Jezik je dosta jednostavan, nije neč razbarušen i dotjeran. To mi se ne sviđa.
Nedostaje jezične aktualizacije.
Sadržaj je kul, podsjeća na priče njemačkog romantizma, prije svega na velikog E.TA. Hoffmanna.
Hasta luego mis murciélagos!
November 3, 2025
Intersting concept. Beautiful writing style. Great plot.
Mary Shelley is a master when it comes to writing horror with a great message, one thing that made me not give this five stars is because of the lenght. If it was a bit longer, it would have been an immediate five stars.
Mary Shelley is a master when it comes to writing horror with a great message, one thing that made me not give this five stars is because of the lenght. If it was a bit longer, it would have been an immediate five stars.
March 13, 2024
“Such an enigma is man – – born to perish – – when he wars, as I do, against the established laws of his nature.”
January 11, 2025
Probably still around somewhere
January 12, 2026
Entertained me on the drive to work. Language was a bit flowery for my taste.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews