TW: Very brief mention of suicide
Having been a horror fan since as long as I can remember, I have always been familiar with characters like Frankenstein and his monster, that is, the Hollywood, pop culture, century-later adaptation of these characters. The zombie-like Karloff creation and the raving “it’s Alive” Dr.
But, I hadn’t dived into the original Shelley text from the 1800s. Perhaps due to ignorance of the classics, provoked by mundane high school English readings and tedious lessons. That is, until now.
Daunting at first, the prose becomes quite effortless to read after the first couple of chapters. Yet again, through school, I envisioned literature as being full of thou’s and thee’s, and outdated lingo, which undeniably is found in Frankenstein, but not nearly to the extent I thought.
What was more shocking was the difference between the novel and the film(s).
In the Karloff version, the monster is portrayed as more child-like, innocent, a victim of his cruel environment, and the only people he kills are those who threaten him directly or, in a harrowing scene, a little girl by accident. By contrast, the books monster, through his rejection by humanity, becomes a more vicious killer – killing those close to his creator, Dr Frankenstein. In addition, he is much more intelligent and imposing, with a significant portion of the text comprised of the monsters tale.
A version of his story would later appear in Bride of Frankenstein (1935) where he befriends a kindly, blind old man who he stumbles into the cottage of, before being chased out by those hunting him, however, in the novel, it holds more significance, as burrowing near the cottage of the blind old man, and his family, the monster learns about language and the world, amongst other things. And being rejected from these people when he makes himself known is what turns him against humanity for good.
Both are captivating characters in similar, yet different ways; and, as many have noted, could act as a metaphor for societies rejection of those who are outside the norm, particularly queer people, with Frankenstein’s creation of his monster perhaps being a fulfilment of repressed gay desires, or society shunning the monster for his difference and outsiderness being an experience similar to many queer people have had, especially when the book was written in the Victorian era.
In the novel, Frankenstein creates his monster in the attic above his boarding house in Ingolstadt, rather than in the film’s laboratory in the Frankenstein Castle — which has become synonymous with the character in popular culture. While the film is set between one village and the castle, the book spans Europe with Frankenstein pursuing his monster even to the Arctic. In the film, the monster’s fate is left open; in the book he resolves to end himself after Dr Frankenstein’s death.
So, now having read the original Frankenstein, I’ve learned two things, one) classic literature might actually rule and two) how an iconic story can morph from what it was originally into something arguably even more iconic.
Featured Image Credit: Kerry Gammill and El Garing
He/Him
Arts Editor 24/25
Press email: arts@brignews.com
