Navya chopra Mind tree school 10 A. Product was delivered good.. Prem Kishore Certified Buyer. Very neat and clean pages. Sampurna Das Certified Buyer , Jagadishpur. Perfectly packed, page quality is very good Maple Classics. But the price is misleading.. But in book its So please update the printed price and show the discount What amazes you most is the grammer and syntax. Homagni Ray Certified Buyer , Habra. Awesome packaging by flipkart! Good book with very good English.
It take very much time to delivery. Khushi Rai Certified Buyer , Varanasi. Flipkart Customer Certified Buyer , Jamshedpur. Questions and Answers. Q: Is this written in simple English? Can I understand it, I m just a beginner English reader. A: yes u will understand it.. Nirab Borah. Report Abuse.
Q: what is the theme of this book? A: Victor , a scientist creates a monster and instills life in it after gaining scientific knowledge of life. However, his ambition of creating life and echoing his own creation fails.
Shreyasi Singha. Q: Plz tell me it is a novel paperback poster or what I am unable to understand. In this reading, the book would be in favor of a balance between the irrational and the scientific. Elizabeth and Henry, the "good" characters, both help others, while Victor, who is a dick, does nothing.
This is surprising and not entirely in line with the Romantic-individualist spirit. Universalism stays winning. In this reading, the monster could perhaps be viewed as her lost child, a creation born off the fantasy of bringing back the lost.
Some of the more hair-raising aspects come in small detail — that the crew of the original ship sees the creature and unknowingly let it pass is bone-chilling; that Justine is not only prosecuted and killed for the crimes of the monster, but hated by her whole family, is absolutely horrific.
All of these elements to the novel are interesting. But what makes the horror of Frankenstein so compelling is this: we are not combating a mindless horror, but a tragic figure, unnamed but still deeply human. A less imaginative writer would have reduced Frankenstein to a one-note character, yet Shelley refuses this route with her characters.
The creature does not lack in the fundamental humanity of us; he uses long words and is shockingly articulate; he acts on both instinctual thought and logical thought.
In fact, his one desire is a mate, companionship of his own, to not remain unloved and alone and to find human connection of his own. This forms the character of the monster into a sympathetic character, despite his flaws; it turns the story into one of the failure of human compassion, rather than one of an evil monster. I am so sorry this was so long winded but I absolutely refuse not to use at least some of my prowess and writing from this very heavily researched term paper. Yet perhaps more importantly, she has created a long-discussed work in every genre from horror to sci-fi and on every theme from feminism to Romanticism.
And just as it has remained a prime subject of criticism, it has remained a fantastically enjoyable book for reading. Blog Goodreads Twitter Instagram Youtube View all 17 comments. Jun 30, Kevin Kuhn rated it it was amazing Shelves: horror , science-fiction. Mary Shelley won to put it mildly by creating one of the earlier gothic horror novels. Gas lighting was only recently improved and deployed in many cities in Europe. Luddites were destroying machines in Britain over concerns about losing their jobs.
Antarctica had yet to be discovered. It was a tumultuous time of war and discovery. Obviously, the work has inspired countless movies, plays, and television series. The Frankenstein monster remains as one of the most familiar images in horror. The story has its flaws. The various narrators Victor Frankenstein, the monster, etc. If all you know about Frankenstein is based on movies and TV shows, this original novel will likely surprise you.
I easily give it five stars not only for its cultural impact, but also for the pioneering exploration which allowed future horror and science fiction to progress. If you are a horror or science fiction fan and you've never read it, you must! An re-read with a review worth posting once again. The novel opens with a set of letters by Captain Robert Walton to his sister back in England. Captain Walton is travelling through the Arctic to further his scientific appetite.
The captain and crew notice a large creature travell An re-read with a review worth posting once again. The captain and crew notice a large creature travelling over the ice and eventually stumble upon a nearly frozen Victor Frankenstein, who tells the story of his scientific struggles and tries to dissuade Walton from any such pursuits.
Armed with the knowledge of the ancient natural philosophers, he takes this passion with him to university in Germany, where he is introduced to more modern ways of thinking. Creating a being in secret, Frankenstein soon sees that it has gone horribly wrong, both the physical appearance of this eight-foot behemoth tempered with translucent skin and pulsing veins and the decision to play God.
Frankenstein rages against his creation and flees for the city, only to return and see that the being has fled the confines of his flat. Frankenstein becomes ill and recuperates over a four-month period before returning to his native Geneva.
Upon his arrival, he discovers that his younger brother has been killed. Frankenstein sees the tell-tale signs of his creation having strangled the young boy, though the crime is saddled upon a nanny and she is executed by hanging.
The creature tells of how he learned the nuances of language and speech, the complexities of emotion as well as discovering of his hideous appearance. The creature vows to ruin the life of his creator unless he is gifted with a female companion. Frankenstein ponders this and promises to make one, having been threatened with more personal anguish if he fails. Frankenstein travels to the far reaches of Scotland to begin his work, eyed by the creature from afar.
When Frankenstein has a final epiphany that his hands can create nothing but increased terror, he disposes with his experiment, knowing the consequences. More agony befalls Frankenstein, who seeks to destroy his creation once and for all. A brilliant piece that is full of social commentary and much foreboding as it relates to science. A wonderful read for those who like a good challenge. The themes that emanate from the story at hand are numerous and thought provoking.
The reader can easily get lost in the narrative and its linguistic nuances, but it is the characters and their messages that permeate the text. Victor Frankenstein and his creature prove to be two very interesting and yet contrasting characters, developed primarily through their individual narratives.
Frankenstein is the bright-eyed scientific mind who seeks to alter the path of events by imbuing something of his own making with life, only to discover that thought and reality do not mesh. The plethora of other characters develop and support these two, with Captain Walton playing an interesting, yet seemingly background, role in the entire narrative. This is a piece of social commentary that prefers to scare in its foreboding and provides a much more academic approach than might be suspected by the unknowing reader.
I was pleased with the novel and all it had to offer. I am sure it will provide a wonderful soapbox for those who wish to open a discussion on the matter. I would welcome it. Kudos, Madam Shelley, for this wonderful piece. That you started it at the ripe age of eighteen baffles and impresses me. I will be adding this to my annual late October reading list! View all 13 comments.
Beware; for I am fearless, and therefore powerful. Well, finally I read the original novel after watching infinite film adaptations, variations of the theme and even odd approaches to the topic.
I was sure that I would enjoy a lot the novel but sadly, compelled to write an honest review, I have to say that barely I was able to give it a 3-star rating, that I think it's the fairest rating that I can give to the book.
The original premise is astonishing, the following impact in popular culture is Beware; for I am fearless, and therefore powerful. The original premise is astonishing, the following impact in popular culture is priceless and certainly the story "behind-of-the-scenes" of the creation of the novel is fascinating. However, the actual writing of the book is tedious, the narration style is odd and the rhythm of the story is too slow.
The socio-cultural impact of this novel has been monumental in all kind of media. And the winners are The rookies!!! Since while Percy Shelley and Lord Byron were acomplished writers, they weren't able to come up with something to compete against Polidori's The Vampyre and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Also, there is the tale of how Mary Shelley came up with the basic idea of the book. She claimed that she had a dream showing the lab with the mad scientist giving life to a hideous creature through the power of a lightning.
I won't question her version. I only want to point out the existence of an actual Frankenstein's Castle, located in a town of Germany where, besides several paranormal stories about it, there is a local rumour, that a fellow with the name of Johann Conrad Dippel was a supposed alchemist that created a monster using a bolf of lightning Where did I heard something just like this?
Try to came up with a cooler legend! However, Mary always declared that she wasn't aware of that castle and the legends tied to it. Let's take out the part of the step-mother and the Grimm Brothers. It's virtually impossible to believe that Mary Shelley never heard, in some way, about the existence of Frankenstein's Castle and the particular tale of Dippel. Without irrespecting the memory of Mary Shelley, this is just like the story of Diablo Cody, winner of an Oscar for Best "Original" Screenplay for the film Juno of The main theme of this film is about a teen pregancy.
However, in , there was a South Korean film titled Jenny, Juno that it was a romantic dramedy movie about teen pregnancy too. Diablo Cody declared that she never heard before of that South Korean film. Sure, because Juno is such a common name in America that it was an innocent coincidence.
By the way, Juno is the name's boyfriend in the South Korean's movie, instead of the female Juno performed by Ellen Page. American Juno and South Korean Jenny, Juno have totally different stories, different approaches to the subject and even different reactions to the event along with different endings.
The only dang similarity is that both are about teen pregnancies. I am not accusing Diablo Cody of plagiarism. That's not the point. I only say that was so hard for her to admit that she watched or heard about the South Korean film and that gave her an inspiration for her own screenplay? In the same way, was so hard for Mary Shelley to admit that she got in contact in some way with the legend of Dippel and the Frankenstein's Castle and she used it as inspiration for her own original book?
At least that will make harder to make the connections and even making a more plausible deniability!!!
I could not understand why men who knew all about good and evil could hate and kill each other. THE BAD The writing of the book is tedious, or to be more accurate is a too slow burner that it took too much to get into the real story and even worse, once the "action" started, you have again intervals of tedium. It's indeed a roller coaster but in a bad sense, since you took too much time in the tedious way up and the moments of intensity are like split-seconds on the way down.
The narration style is odd since the book begins with some letters written by a ship's captain, and the first four letters are boring filler stuff non-relevant to the actual story, and until the fifth letter the story really started.
However, later of that, the narration changed to the "voice" of Dr. Victor Frankenstein, but again, our good mad scientist takes too much time to get to the point telling a lot of non-relevant boring details, even worse, it's told in the most tedious "tone of voice" that you can imagine.
Without emotion or trying to entertain to the reader. The chapters of the Creature are more entertained but also, sometimes you wonder how possible is that this monster so submitted to rage and murder is able to articule so well his part of the story. So, between that the novel is slow burner, and the moments of real horror with awful deaths are so scarce and presented so quick that you can't even develop the proper emotion on that moments, I wasn't able to enjoy this book as I expected that I would.
However, I can't deny the relevant place that this novel has in the history of literature and its impact in multiple ways of the spectrum.
Accursed creator! Why did you form a monster so hideous that even you turned from me in disgust? View all 52 comments. He is ugly and humanity does like to punish the ugly - this is a universal truth about us that in itself is also fairly ugly. The other thing I liked was that standard ploy of gothic novels — the multiple Chinese whisper narration.
In this the story is all written in a series of letters and then continuous prose to the sister of a sea captain who hears the story on a journey to the North Pole from Frankenstein himself, even though much of the story is also told to Frankenstein by his monster.
I do like stories like this -that are like Russian Dolls — where it is hard to tell who is telling the story and just how reliable they could be as a narrator. I'm not sure I would trust anything an adventurer sea captain told me about anything - and in the end he is the only source. Unfortunately, that is about all that I did like. I would have said I know this story well before I read the book.
There have been endless films made of this story — so there are elements to the story that are etched into our collective memories. It comes then as a bit of a shock that many most of these elements are not in the story at all. I guess that is yet another example of the power of images.
The other difference is that in films the monster is a slow moving automaton, whereas in the book he is much swifter, stronger and agile than people. Frankenstein may not have made a very good looking monster, but in every other respect he did a much better job than God did. Frankenstein is a very fast learner - he learns to speak in less than a year. And given the poverty of instruction Chomsky would really be proud! Coincidences rarely work in fiction — and while they bring delight when they happen in life, in fiction they tend to stop us in our wilful suspension of disbelief.
The problem is that this story seems to go out of its way to make us do tutting noises at the improbabilities and constantly strained plotting twists. You know, hint - if telling me something silly isn't going to improve the story, don't tell me something silly. I thought there were some interesting comments about the obligations Gods have to their creations.
He spends most of his time swooning — it seemed the slightest problem has him rushing to his bed for months on end. A friend dies and he is almost at death's door himself. About the only things he never did was tear at either his hair or his clothes — but that is hardly high praise. If it is horror you want, Stephen King is much more frightening, never tells you how scared you are supposed to feel at any given moment in the story and is basically a better writer.
But this is a seminal horror story, so I guess for that reason alone… View all 50 comments. I loved it! Before reading this book I had heard the story we all know about Frankestein. A suffered no-human being and blah blah blah. However, the story, how is written in general is amazing. The description of Viktor, what he suffered to build that monster , how obsessed he was about that. And then, well, no need to describe how much this poor little creature suffered.
One can say "that life is suffered, but many lives are About the details in the book, I will keep it for myself and I will just share them with someone who wants to talk to me about this book. I don't like to spoil much.
I totally recommend it. Click here to watch a video review of this book on my channel, From Beginning to Bookend. A sorrowful tale of lost love and self-loathing conveyed with divine prose. With an anxiety that almost amounted to agony, I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet. There is an elegant symmetry to this.
This is a visage that is ubiquitous every October, found in movies, on television, and selling Halloween candy. Frankly, this was probably the only fun I had, as Frankenstein , for all its bursts of creativity, its sudden flashes of discrete violence, is a bit of a wordy drag.
It is fully a piece from the Romantic era, from the overwrought emotional excesses of its characters, to the gorgeous, travelogue-like descriptions of the Alps. According to Shelley — in an forward to the revised text — Frankenstein had its genesis in a spontaneous parlor game between famed wordsmiths, of which she took part.
Byron apparently suggested they each write a ghost story, since the weather was too lousy to do much else. The short story she began in a cold and dispiriting Switzerland eventually became a full-length novel that is currently enjoying a two-hundred year afterlife.
There is free love, unfounded suggestions that Percy penned Frankenstein , and tragedy aplenty. Initially, I was entirely uncertain what these missives had to do with Frankenstein and his monster. As a result, the novel started extremely slow for me, as I found myself reading only a couple pages at a time before losing interest, never really finding the hook.
Ultimately — as you can see — I pushed through, but it was only much later, when the letters reappear at the end, that everything clicked into place and I went back and reread the opening gambit. Once this prelude is out of the way, we begin the main part of the narrative, which is told in the first-person by the emotionally labile Frankenstein. For reasons put down to obsession, young Frankenstein is preoccupied with creating new life. Working alone and in fanatical devotion to his goal, Frankenstein begins assembling his thing : I collected bones from charnel-houses; and disturbed, with profane fingers, the tremendous secrets of the human frame.
In a solitary chamber, or rather cell, at the top of the house, and separated from all the other apartments by a gallery and staircase, I kept my workshop of filthy creation: my eye-balls were starting from their sockets in attending to the details of my employment. The dissecting room and the slaughterhouse furnished many of my materials; and often did my human nature turn with loathing from my occupation, whilst, still urged on by an eagerness which perpetually increased, I brought my work near to a conclusion.
It does not — should not — spoil anything to say that Frankenstein is successful in his endeavors, at least up to a point. Frankenstein and his monster engage in a globetrotting game of cat-and-mouse, which might have been exciting, if not written in the overly formal, cluttered style of the early nineteenth century. Shelley tells this story broadly, seldom taking any time to build a scene, ratchet up suspense, or pay off a plot arc. It says something that the high point of Frankenstein is a story-within-a-story in true Conradian fashion told by the monster itself.
Honestly, I have a predisposition against books written in the archaic-feeling style of Frankenstein. Alas, it has been two decades since high school, and my bias against writers who use thee and thy still abides.
I also did not hate it, not by any means. The story works better in summary than in execution, and it requires close attention, but it is a genuine triumph of imagination. Certain books have meanings beyond the composition of sentences and the contours of a storyline.
Shelley created something in Frankenstein that has endured for a couple centuries, and will likely live on forever, as long as people read. View all 7 comments. Oct 29, J. If you have not read the book, then you do not know Frankenstein or his monster. Certainly, there is a creature in our modern mythology which bears that name, but he bears strikingly little resemblance to the original. It is the opposite with Dracula , where, if you have seen the films, you know the story.
Indeed, there is a striking similarity between nearly all the Dracula films, the same story being told over and over again: Harker, bug-eating Renfield, doting Mina, the seduction of Lucy, Dr. V If you have not read the book, then you do not know Frankenstein or his monster.
Van Helsing, the sea voyage from Varna, the great decaying estate--it's all there, in both book and cultural myth. Even the lines tend to recur, as almost every retelling has some version of the famed "I never drink--wine. The first puzzlement comes when the story begins on a swift ship in the arctic, told in letters between the captain and his beloved sister.
The structure of the story as it follows is, in many ways, not ideal. It is not streamlined, focused, or particularly believable. It seems that every picturesque cabin in the woods is inhabited by fallen nobility, that every criminal trial is undertaken on false pretenses to destroy some innocent person, that an eight-foot-tall monstrosity can live in your woodshed for a year without being noticed, and that that same monstrosity can learn to be fluent and even eloquent in both speaking and reading an unknown language merely by watching its use.
The style itself is ponderous and florid, as Shelley ever is, which is fine when she has some interesting idea to communicate, but bothersome when she finds herself vacillating--which is often, since our hero, the good doctor, is constantly sitting about, thinking about what he might do next, and usually, avoiding actually doing anything.
I understand the deep conflict within him, but it might have been more effective to actually see him act on some of his momentary urges before switching instead of letting it all play out in his head. But then, it's hard to think of him as the hero, anyways, since his activities tend to be so destructive to everyone around him.
Sure, he is aware of this tendency--hyper-aware, really--and constantly blames himself, but he doesn't come across as especially sympathetic. The monster, on the other hand, is truly naive and hopeless, unable to change his fate though he often tries to do so, while the doctor tends to avoid doing anything that might improve the situation.
There is a very Greek sense of tragedy at hand, in that we have a man who, though combined action and inaction, drives himself inevitably to utter ruin. As Edith Hamilton defines it, tragedy is a terrible event befalling someone who has such deep capacity for emotion that they are able to recognize and feel every awful moment, and Dr. Frankenstein certainly has this capacity. In fact, he seems to have an overabundance of such feeling, to the point that he spends most of his time wallowing and declaring his woe--which is not always endearing.
But the tragedy remains the most interesting and engaging part of the book, overcoming the sometimes repetitive details of the story. It is an entwined tragedy, a double tragedy between the man and his creation, and it's never quite clear who is at fault, who is the villain, and who is the wretch.
The roles are often traded from moment to moment, and there is no simple answer to wrap up the conflict. Of course, the classic reading of this is an exploration of the relationship between man and his universe often personified by 'god'. As human beings, we see our lives as a narrative, ourselves as the hero, and we look for villains to blame for our short-comings. Looking at the tale as it is presented, it is easy to read Dr. Frankenstein as the figure of 'god', the creator and authority, the author of life.
We see the monster's pain and suffering and on one hand, it is all the result of his being created in the first place, and of his creator not planning well enough. But beyond that, there are also the actions and choices the monster makes that make him a monster--his own will. But I began to look at it in the opposite way: the doctor creates a monster for which he can blame all of his problems, a force which dictates every moment of his life, which causes all of his pains, which haunts him, powerful and unseen, at every moment.
Frankenstein has created a god. He has made a force which can lord over him, a god which resembles man, only more powerful, indestructible, inescapable, terrible. In the end, who is the real 'modern Prometheus'? For almost the entire book, the only person who ever sees the monster is the doctor himself, and since the doctor is present for all of the killings, it isn't hard to interpret this story as the self-justification of a madman: the doctor, himself, could be doing all of the killings, causing all of the malice, and then explaining it away as the acts of a horrific creature that only he can see, that only he can speak to.
However, I am not willing to carry this 'unreliable narrator' reading to its bitter end, since the story itself does not quite support it--but the fact that the monster can almost be read this way intensifies to the degree to which it is a story of two intertwined egos, each one blaming the other, like so many toxic relationships between people, or even between one half of a troubled mind and the other.
But for all that the core idea of the story is strong and thought-provoking, it is still long-winded, unfocused, and repetitive. It is certainly impressive for the first novel of a nineteen-year-old, and demonstrates splendid imagination, but it does not benefit from her literary affectations.
However, her style is still thoughtful and refined, unlike the halting half-measures of Stoker's small-minded Dracula , there is a great expanse here, a wide vista which well-reflects the Victorian artist's obsession with the horror of 'the sublime'.
Feb 26, Peter rated it really liked it Shelves: horror , literary-fiction , around-the-world. Certainly one of the greatest monster stories of all time and credited for creating the mad scientist and being the first science fiction story. The story starts with several letters written by Robert Walton to his sister Margaret telling of his exploration, his ambition in the frozen Arctic circle, and the glory he could acclaim with illustrious recognition.
The following day they come across another man travelling in the same direction but needing rescuing as he has lost his pack of dogs and his sledge. This stranger needs care, and during his rehabilitation, he tells Robert his life story and why he was chasing the man from the previous day. We know the main story of Victor Frankenstein, the scientist that played God and undertook his scientific research to create a living individual, only to realise he created a monster.
For this, I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation, but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.
Interestingly, different readers will find context and meaning running as deeper themes, and I applaud Mary Shelley for adding depth to a story beyond horror, which illustrates her intuitive talent.
The psychological theme that underpins the main characters is loneliness. Robert Walton, desperate for a friend, Victor Frankenstein separated from his loving family and alone in his work, and the monster, a freak, so fatally different and doomed to isolation. Although we do question who the real monster was. The sense of segregation and seclusion pervades the mood throughout the novel. The prose and structure of the book certainly have a style associated with that period, and I find this a personal choice whether you prefer this over modern language.
The themes often settle on anxious thoughts and dilemmas from Robert or Frankenstein, and in telling the story, I felt this a little laboured at times.
What is additionally quite interesting is the background to Mary Shelley. While she claimed to come across the Frankenstein story by way of a dream, it seems more likely that it was a daydream as she prepared to enter a horror-story competition and pulled on real places and names.
Over the next two years, she gave birth to two children. While there, year-old Mary started Frankenstein, and it was first published anomalously in I would recommend reading this book as one of the classics, but it did drag at times, and the prose was over-elaborate on occasions.
I can't help but feel empathy for Frankenstein's creature, and abhor humankind for its prejudice and malice that drove this creature to murder when all he craved was the warmth of companionship. I will never forgive modern media for making believe that this story was about a mindless, incoherent creature incapab 2nd read: scientists just don't re-animate corpses like they used to it's disappointing 1st read: All this time I thought I didn't like classics; turns out I just hadn't read the right ones.
I, too, relate to his absolute emo vibes; when he says "Hateful day when i received life! Make me happy, and I shall again be virtuous. View 2 comments.
What a great reading experience this was, I loved the story, the writing and vivid descriptions. Completely different from the film that I remember and the audible version with the narration by Dan Stevens Downton Abbey was an added bonus. At once a Gothic thriller, a passionate romance, and a cautionary tale about the dangers of science. I had a copy of this book sitting on my real life shelf for years and never felt drawn to it as I had seen Frankenstein Movies on Tv and felt it was pointless at this stage reading the book as I knew the story and only when I came across an audible version narrated by Dan Stevens did I feel a pull towards this classic.
I read and listened to this one and was totally suprised by how much I Enjoyed this Novel. What an imagination this eighteen year old girl had in the beginning of the s, the setting and the characters are so brilliantly depicted and you feel like you are part of the story as you follow follow Frankenstein on his travels.
I love when a book like this surprises me and while I had to suspend disbelief a little with some elements of the story and the happenings, it was worth it for the entertainment and reward I got from this novel. View all 20 comments. Starting out with childish and irresponsible experimental joy, he is lost until the sorcerer comes home and uses his superior magic to restore order.
Frankenstein, unfortunately, does not have a superior power to rely on when he sets free a creature of his own immature image, and he fails miserably in the second stage of scientific innovation: responsible, reflective and mature behaviour towards the creation. Frankenstein represents a new kind of human creator, acting alone, and driven solely by ambition to surpass other human beings in inventiveness and power, but without the love and affection that is still expressed in the Pygmalion myth that was popular in the 18th century.
Moreau , it tells the story of human hubris and carelessness and its bitter consequences. When did Frankenstein fail as an inventor and human being? When he gave his creature giant proportions? When he failed to educate and nurture it? When he ran away and abandoned it? When he refused to support its need for a companion? Or when he failed to own up to his own part in the erupting violence, and did not act to stop it instead of fainting and hiding in passive, delirious illness?
When he let an innocent girl be executed for a murder he knew to have been committed by his creature? In a way, the creature actually surpassed its creator, for its first steps in the world were filled with optimistic curiosity and love.
It eagerly learned the rules of the world, observed the mechanisms of language and schooled itself with admirable perseverance, to the point of being able to ask the question of the meaning of life, reflecting on the different layers of the human condition through the lens of excellent writers such as Plutarch, Goethe and Milton. Out of control, miserable, lost in eternal ice, the show-down between creator and creation leaves no room for hope, except in the balanced character of the witness Walton, who sets a humane example by sacrificing his scientific ambition and dream of glory for the safety of the sailors that are dependent on him, and whose lives he cannot risk and keep a calm conscience.
Absolutely glorious story! Frankenstein, "Oh, Frankenstein! Generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me. When your monster said these lines in the last, I asked myself also why did you behold the accomplishment of your toil on that dreary night of November!
He repented! See previous books in the day Challenge. Paul is the founder of Iris Reading, the largest provider of speed-reading and memory courses. Who is really good? Who is really evil? You end up with some empathy for the poor monster.
0コメント