my favorite part of Frankenstein is when the monster is like "I'm gonna kill what you love the most." and Frankenstein is all scared for himself and then the monster is like "dude, I meant your fiancee. yeesh."
Although it was remarkably stupid, I don't think that was self-absorption. After all, the reason he sends Elizabeth away is because he fears for her. He just expects the monster to confront its creator rather than murder an innocent.
In a way Frankenstein is the monster.........He created the monster, and the monster wouldn't of killed all those people if Frankenstein didn't leave him.
I never really understood why Dr. Frankenstein was so revolted when the monster was brought to life. He knew what it was going to look like; he pieced it together himself, for fuck's sake. So why was he so shocked by what it would look like? Is there something I'm missing here?
It was the sudden realization that he spent his whole life exiled from happiness and warmth to create something that is against not only nature but to himself. He was so occupied in his work that, even though he felt mildly revolted during the process, he had the strong urge to keep going because this is what he was meant for. However, at the end after his job was "done", his thoughts on himself and others struck him hard to the point of illness.
I think these interpretations might simplify the narrative a bit too much. When I read the book, I thought it was made very clear that the creature was initially an extremely good and pure being. There is a very explicitly described abundance of joy and beauty and compassion in his heart. It is the doctor's repeated vicious rebuffs, in addition to the horrific treatment at the hands of the other people of the world, that twist the creature, that makes his empathy shrink to effectively nothing. The creature even observes this process happening within himself, and analyzes it thoroughly, but finds himself helpless to do anything about it. When Frankenstein rejects the monster, he doesn't do it by thinking about it and coming to a rational conclusion. Upon seeing the creature for the first time, he feels an instinctive revulsion, and reacts only to that. The creature tried to plead with him often, in articulate, heartfelt language, that he wanted Victor to try to empathize with him, try to see him for the pure and loving being he was. It was heartbreaking to read about this *person* who had such passion for life become so warped. I think the heavily implied narrative here is that Victor Frankenstein created the creature's body.. and also created the creature's mind. He brought life into the world and treated it abusively, and so that life became bitter and full of pain and anger. The truth is that the monster *was* a person. There was nothing but humanity within him. And the humanity that was twisted in him is the same humanity that we all share.
Geoffery Wiggleworth The thing is the Monster isn't uneducated, far from it. It was a sentient being, yet it did not belong in the world of men. It read books and learned from what it saw, yet out of anger and frustration went against what he learned to get what he wanted. It was an abomination of life, part of the reason Frankenstein didn't create a female so they could reproduce.
Great analysis and well said. The monster doesn't turn to violence until he is rejected (or physically attacked) by literally every person he encounters, including his creator. The lesson here isn't 'don't reanimate corpses' it's 'if you're going to reanimate a corpse, give the creature you create half a chance.'
***** True, depending on how you define monster. You could define it as simply "The Other" which has an ambiguous association that could mean good or bad. I like to think of it this way as the creature was monstrous in his wonderful strangeness, but human in his rage and fear.
+Harry Hammett that wisdom of knowing the real monster is Frankenstein is the most basic knowledge to those who have studied the novel. But I like what you did there.
At some parts of the book, I was definitely agreeing with and hoping the best for Frank Ocean (the name I gave the monster). The saddest moment for me is when after learning to read & write and trying to make friends with the only people he cared about, the cabin family, he comes in at the wrong time, is beaten, and runs away broken hearted. Poor Frank Ocean. :(
I read this book when I was in in school suspension for a week. I didn't expect the monster to be the real humanitarian of this novel and I didn't expect how closely I could relate to him.
Such a great book I only wish they made a movie completely true to the novel. People think it would be boring but that book was interesting and dramatic (sad) as hell. With some artistic sin city-esqu influence and very little changing if the script it would be amazing
vince gredo god yes...and with a book accurate version of the monster, too, please! No neck bolts or anything, gimme the glowy cataracted eyes, the yellowing corpsified skin, and the long black hair that the monster really had!
i had a different reading of frankenstein when i read it, i found i liked the monster more than victor. when victor makes his creation he is but a child, innocent to the world and his first sights are those of his creator fleeing in horror, he follows and victor continues to shun him, he leaves and is shunned by everyone he meets (worse he is actively attacked, driven out for no misdeed of his own) he tries to make the best of himself, he reads and learns to become someone his father could be proud of and he is still scorned for no reason, he asks his father to make him someone he can love and who will love him, to have for himself the joy he has read about in book but which has been forever denied to him for no good reason. and his father still denies him, still scorns him and denies him this one chance at happiness. can it be any surprise then that he would take extreme measures, they are all he has. i read it not as a cautionary tale of playing god or science gone bad but of the dangers of intolerance and prejudice. if victor had just accepted his creation as his son this story need not have been a tragedy. if people had treated him with kindness and compassion he might have gotten the happiness he so desired.
I'll back you up on that 100%. The monster ended up being extremely well versed in the arts, and loved knowledge. The only "issue" was the difference of look, if people would have looked past that there would have been no real problems. Book.. cover.. judgement.. ect
the way i understood it was "you can play god, but when your adam awakens and looks at you with puppy eyes surrounded by rotten flesh, take care of him, raise him, as he comes from you and you are part of him"
This is exactly how I interpreted. I don't know what book Greene was reading when he came up with that summary, but it certainly wasn't Frankenstein. Maybe the shortened Wikipedia version of Frankenstein.
Part 2 will clearly be about who the monster really is. I don't know what video you guys were watching, but it didn't sound like Hank was making any qualitative judgements to me
The first time I read Frankenstein I was in 7th grade, and it was so tough to get through that I stopped less than halfway through. The second time I read it I was in high school, and at this point I suppose I was more capable of understanding because I loved it. I always felt so much empathy for the monster, especially during the scene in the woods with the little girl... The way I read it, the creature was created of Dr. Frankenstein's will, and then left to be emotionally tortured by just about everyone (except the blind man...or was that scene only in Young Frankenstein? I always mix them up). When all he wants is a companion who won't fear him, the doctor refuses, then continues to outcast his creation. I always read it as "you are what everyone thinks you are". If everyone constantly treats you like a monster, despite your best efforts, you will become a monster. If anyone can see you as more than that, only then do you have a chance.
In the novel, the monster is described as having a tall stature, yellow skin with the arteries and veins and muscle fibers visible underneath, black hair, black lips, and pearly white teeth. He teaches himself how to read and learns English from spying on a family teaching their baby English. He talks like a normal person surprisingly. Not at all how Hollywood portrays him.
"Because this is what happens when you major in Organic Chemistry like my brother, Hank, instead of something healthy and good like film or history or literature." this cracked me up hahahaha
I always thought, in a way, that Frankenstein is a story of science without responsibility. Victor creates the monster then refuses to take responsibility for his creation, and he suffers greatly for it. The monster is the only true innocent, in the beginning, but he is entirely a product of Victor's denial of his creator responsibilities. Makes you think how things would have been different if Victor had accepted his creation as a new being and not shunned it in horror as a monster.
Cony and a man with even a modicum of intelligence will tell you that writers often use subtext rather than coming right out an beating you over or the head with it.
Frankenstein's monster always broke my heart in that he never really did anything to deserve the treatment he received other than be created by an overambitious madman.
In which John Green teaches you about Mary Shelley's novel, Frankenstein. Sure, you know Frankenstein the cultural phenomenon, but how much do you know about the novel that started it all? Don't Reanimate Corpses! Frankenstein Part 1: Crash Course Literature 205
The list has already been decided: The Odyssey by Homer Oedipus Rex by Sophocles Hamlet by Bill Shakespeare Frankenstein by Mary Shelley Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe Beloved by Toni Morrison Better luck next season?
BallotBoxer I know, maybe next time. I have to say though, it confuses the hell out of me why they don't pick it. Probably one of the most influential books of the 20th century.
I loved this book. It's a chilling reminder that both doing everything and doing nothing are bad, especially when you're only thinking about yourself the entire time.
Work Cited for this video: Don't Reanimate Corpses! Frankenstein Part 1: Crash Course Literature 205. Prod. Stan Muller. By Alexis Soloski. Perf. John Green. Crash Course, 2014. RUclips.
I think the moral of the story is that if you create a sentient being, you are responsible for making sure that it is actually raised, not just abandoned. The reason Frankenstein’s monster killed was because he was abandoned and left to fend for himself instead of being raised and taught basic moral principles like “don’t kill people”.
Traditionally wouldn't the creation take his father's surname and so still also be called Frankenstein? Also we studied this in school from a parental responsibility context, I had already read and loved it, but it very much strengthened my belief that the doctor is to blame for the creation's misdeeds. The creature is abandoned at birth but goes off and learns many things, including that he is a social outcast, he loses the one friend he ever made in the blind man and generally leads a sucky, but morally upright life. But when he asks the doctor to help him, having told his story, the doctor says 'your appearance is that of a monster so how can I trust you' the creature then realises that if people expect the worst from him anyway he's got nothing to lose by being awful, so he does, the doctor says 'see? I was right not to trust you!' Thoroughly failing to recognise the most important of his mistakes (repeatedly rejecting his child/ward) and generally being a self-rich sous nitwit
You would be correct in the sense that the creature should also bare the same surname as Victor, however since neither the creature nor Victor have no relation other than he reanimated the corpse, you would have to dive deeper into the story itself. Not once does the creature get bequeathed with a real monicker. He does however find himself being called the creature, monster, demon and many other words along his lonely journey. Also the creature technically is not abandoned. Victor in a frightened state faints (or falls asleep depending on how you view his unreliable narration) and when he awakens the creature is gone. The creature left on his own accord and escaped to the woods where he comes upon the home of the blind man and his two children, where he learns vicariously though the children how to speak and read. He then stumbles across the copy of Milton's Paradise Lost that somehow was left in the middle of the woods. And then takes the viewpoint of almost the fallen angel. Yes both the creature and Victor can be looked at through the viewpoint of a fallen angel. Victor a bright and promising scientist who found the essence of life and created his very own Adam, but then his life becomes nothing but misery and pain. And of course the creature because he is the new evolution in humanity by being more than human. His life starts by being a miraculous scientific break through and then since terrifying his creature flees from his birthplace and isolates himself before coming back and accidentally murdering Victor's younger brother. There are a million and one ways to interpret Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and I am not saying mine is the right way either, but you would have to look at it at many different angles before knowing exactly how Shelley devised such a brilliant piece of literature. The only thing that upsets me when everyone reads the novel is the completely overlook the Oedipus complex underlying the entire story arc. Yes even Oedipus does not have an Oedipus complex but it is worth looking at. Victor clearly has an infatuation with his own mother, she birthed and raised him and then when her unexpected death happens Victor projects those same feelings and emotions towards Elizabeth, since she now becomes his surrogate mother. Unbenounced to Elizabeth, Victor gravitates towards her in search to understand his complex emotions towards his mother. The creature represents Victors deranged psyche but also embodies his father, Victor was attempting to create the father he wanted Elizabeth to see. Which would drive Elizabeth towards Victor so she would not have a relationship with Alphonse. But this is also why Victor hunts down the creature after slaying his own father, since Victor cannot have the satisfaction of taking his own fathers life, the creature that embodies his father will have to suffice.
I've always felt sorry for the creature. Frankenstein makes him and expects him to be beautiful, then when he turns out hideous and confused (because he's basically just been born) Frankenstein runs off and leaves him. It's like abandoning your child.
I wrote a paper on Frankenstein that basically said Shelley's criticism of Frankenstein's character is that he chooses Prometheism (called the male sphere by her mother) over his family (the female one, again according to Wollstonecraft). It becomes even worse for Victor because he doesn't take paternal care of his creation, so he rejects the domestic duties of a "father", thus resulting in everyone he loves dying.
"My god she could write a sentence" I have said this so many times throughout my time as an English Major. I'm glad I'm not alone in admiring sentences!
I usually can't stomach reading most classics, but Frankenstein was one of the few that I just absolutely loved. It has been 5 years since I first read it but I can still remember it all so vividly due to the impression it made on me. Loved the video like always, can't wait for the next :)
Fun fact: Lord Byron's daughter was Ada Lovelace. Ada worked with Charles Babbage, a British inventor who was designing mechanical computers (like the one you're staring at now, but with gears instead of transistors). Babbage designed the machines while Ada wrote the computer programs. Though the machine was never finished, Ada is often considered to be the world's first computer programmer. Also, can there please be a Crash Course Literature episode on "Flatland; A Romance of Many Dimensions" by Edwin A. Abbot? It's probably the first work of mathematics fiction.
Babbage's Difference Engine was never finished in his lifetime, but some fine folks at the London Science Museum built one from his original plans. There's one on display there, and one on display at the Computer History Museum in California.
amartini51 His difference engine was recreated, but he did also try to design a version with memory that would likely have been turing-complete. He died before he could finish the design.
Has anyone else found that Mel Brooks' stunning 1974 film, Young Frankenstein, has severely impaired their ability to take the novel seriously? For starters, it's pronounced Fronkensteen.
I'm SO glad that you are doing these books in at least 2 parts! (This was a great video. I'm really looking forward to what more you have to say about the story.)
Pedantry is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the monster, Wisdom is knowing Frankenstein was the monster, Comprehension is knowing that the "monster" was indeed a Frankenstein. What most people forget is that while the creature is in the shed, reflecting on his life, he comes to the conclusion that Victor Frankenstein was in all essence, his father. This leads to him, in a way, taking the Frankenstein family name as his own. "At length the thought of you crossed my mind. I learned from your papers that you were my father, my creator; and to whom could I apply with more fitness than to him who had given me life?" -Chapter 16
John, this book is so important to me, it was the first "real" book I read (at 8 years old), and it definitely altered my way of looking at a the world for the better, and I am just so happy to see you talking about it.
I've almost finished reading George Orwell's 1984. It's the most fascinating, immersive and terrifying books I've ever read. Please please Please talk about it some day in one of these videos or indeed anything else by Orwell.
This is the first of the books that have actually read, quite a few years back (don't worry, though, I absolutely love your explanations and opinions of all the well-known stories I haven't read) and first things first: Finally a representation of the monster I actually agree with! Sure, I imagine him even more ugly, as he is always described, but still. Much better than the classic interpretation! Secondly, I always felt like the monster was a good being, yet incredibly unfortunate. To me, he was the hero of the tragedy, even as he killed Frankenstein's family, which I barely even remember him doing besides the murder of Frankenstein's cousin (a woman being killed on her wedding night sticks with you ;)) My favorite part of the novel was were the monster explained his entire life, how he attempted to be accepted as a living being, but simply due to his appearance, failed. The Monster of Frankenstein seems to be the perfect story surrounding the importance of one's looks, as the monster is so horrifying, no human can look at it without fear. What is great here is that because you know that the monster isn't evil, you can fully "appreciate" it's ugliness, whereas if it was a horror story with an evil monster, I would have probably thought "yeah, sure, he's ugly, I get it." The fact that people run from it and attack it is not a good thing, as it would be in an actual horror story. I guess that's what I really love about it. Of course, I also recognized the biblical meaning behind the story, but it never seemed to be the perfect example of it to me. Great book; incredibly depressing XD
I just read Frankenstein for spooky season. I knew going in it would probably be different than the Frankenstein stereotypes, but I was completely surprised by this book. Fairly harder read than most but very well written. Very dark and somber story but at times you do really root for the monster and see how Victor really created his own worst nightmare and continued to make everything worse for himself.
Given the Romantic gestalt of the times, I think you also have to see a Faustian aspect to this -- man manipulating forces beyond his comprehension for questionable ends. And always with a price to pay at the end.
Great video! In high school we read Frankenstein in conjunction with Wuthering Heights and specifically looked at issues of child psychology and nature vs. nurture. Sometimes I miss school discussions.
Even though I read some of this in high school and had a couple of awesome teachers, only now do I want to actually pick a book up. Thanks CrashCourse.
Something they won't tell you in your High School or Uni English class: There were pokeballs on Walton's ship (ref. 6:55 ). Probably water pokemon inside them, but we can never know, and that's one of the mysteries Mary Shelley left for us.
I take away from the book that Frankenstein was indeed the monster. Not because he created the monster and was consumed by self ambition but because he was incapable of loving his creation, or even showing any hint of kindness to the monster. All the monster ever wanted was to be loved by his father, but barring that, anyone else! I almost cried through the part where the monster recounts the way he loved that family he met and the way he was then rejected by them. I understand the family's horror and rejection, but not Frankenstein, he created the monster and he should have dealt with him.
You mention a bunch of Frankenstein variations and alluded to kaiju like Godzilla and King Kong, but no mention of "Frakenstein Conquers the World"? :P Speaking of which... let's break out the Ishiro Honda quote: "Monsters are tragic beings. They are born too tall, too strong, too heavy. They are not evil by choice. That is their tragedy. They do not attack people because they want to, but because of their size and strength, mankind has no other choice but to defend himself. After several stories such as this, people end up having a kind of affection for the monsters. They end up caring about them."
Hello, I've been a fan of your channel for a while and this is actually the first video I saw of Crash Course Literature. I love your videos and I want to know your thoughts on Wuthering Heights, Edgar Allen Poe Stories, and The Phantom of the Opera?
This is so beautiful! I wrote my master's thesis on Frankenstein, and it drives me mad that our culture continues to promote the twisted, inaccurate elements. Thanks, JG!
I was one of those sorry souls who went into reading Frankenstein thinking it would be like the movies I had seen. First few pages, I was at a total loss and thought I had some how picked up the wrong book. Once I was able to separate the movie and book into two entirely different stories, I found it to be a fascinating read.
I read many parts of Frankenstein's monster as the monster being an allegory for humankind and Frankenstein as an allegory for god, or at least our own perception and treatment of ourselves as a culture. Am I the only one here?
Possibly. In that mankind often feels like we are having to run around, teaching ourselves. If our species do have a parent of sorts, we often feel abandoned on the side of the road, somewhat unloved. Perhaps we even feel abused by fate, or divine providence. This can actually to go some pretty dark places if you know the typical result of an abusive relationship. Often, the victim forms a strong attachment to the abuser. They justify the abuse by convincing themselves that they deserve it and they fiercely defend their abuser against the judgement who simply "don't get it." This is especially true when the victim does not have any alternate experience. Ultimately, I am not sure this is allegory. Allegory implies that the represented narrative or situation is true (at least to the author). I would just call it a metaphor.
According to the ancient Greeks, the demigod Heracles (or Hercules, as the Romans called him) was the son of a mortal woman named Alcmene and the supreme god Zeus (NOT MY WORDS THE INTERNETS WORDS)
I thought I'd add this for the sake of being interesting. Shelley often referred to the the Creature/Monster outside of her book as 'Adam'. So he did have a name given to him. -For all those who felt oddly connected to the Creature.
I never read Dr. Frankenstein but damn you made it really worth reading....until someone actually goes to the library and starts on it only to realize how fustrating Old English truly is. Still glad to see this was better than I thought it would be. Thanks Mr. Greene. Good to see you're also expanding your library on the English playlist (even if some of these titles are initially boring to the young audience such as myself)
Frankenstein isn't written in Old English. Old English looks like HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum, þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon, hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon!
Happy Garden Of Life HOLY SHIT REALLY!? looks like german to me.I had a book in that entire language. And here I thought that was russian...or even german.
Ndasuunye Look at some common phrases in Icelandic(www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/icelandic.php) and German(www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/german.php).
Yeah, Frankenstein isn't old english. It's not even middle english. Hell, even Shakespeare isn't middle english. It's all modern english, same as we speak today.
At first I was like "meh" to the literature crash courses, but I think I'm hooked now. Perhaps good literature class is just philosophy by a different name?
I enjoyed this report; with respect-- though the sailors had seen the monster on the sled first. Walten awoke to his crew discovering Frankenstein later. Also even though they called her their cousin , the Frankenstein family adopted her. Again this was an excellent presentation on the book.
"I am not a person of opinions because i feel the counter-arguments too strongly." Never heard that quote before. I know it is far from the most impressive line to quote from the book or Shelley herself but that line, more than most, caught my ear. Thanks John, great episode as usual.
But there was an Ygor in the movies. Just not _that_ movie. Bela Lugosi played Ygor in both Son o' and Ghost o' Frankenstein. Dwight Frye (who played Renfield to Lugosi's Dracula) was Fritz to Colin Clive's Henry Frankenstein.
my favorite part of Frankenstein is when the monster is like "I'm gonna kill what you love the most." and Frankenstein is all scared for himself and then the monster is like "dude, I meant your fiancee. yeesh."
I know! I couldn't believe Frankenstein's self - absorption at that point.
he said he would be there on his wedding night
That drop out surely was self-absorbed
Although it was remarkably stupid, I don't think that was self-absorption. After all, the reason he sends Elizabeth away is because he fears for her. He just expects the monster to confront its creator rather than murder an innocent.
Yes, Frankenstein is the doctor, but I wouldn't say he's not the monster.
Ohhhhh this was good. This idea would be great for my class discussion
Hee ho.
+
Brian Jensen Haha.
In a way Frankenstein is the monster.........He created the monster, and the monster wouldn't of killed all those people if Frankenstein didn't leave him.
I never really understood why Dr. Frankenstein was so revolted when the monster was brought to life. He knew what it was going to look like; he pieced it together himself, for fuck's sake. So why was he so shocked by what it would look like? Is there something I'm missing here?
yeah. the senselessness and
illogical nature of "LITERATURE".
10's Kingdom Organics
Being literature doesn't excuse the laspe in logic. He knew what it would look like...
It was the sudden realization that he spent his whole life exiled from happiness and warmth to create something that is against not only nature but to himself. He was so occupied in his work that, even though he felt mildly revolted during the process, he had the strong urge to keep going because this is what he was meant for. However, at the end after his job was "done", his thoughts on himself and others struck him hard to the point of illness.
i feel like he instanly regrets his actions. not so much that he was scared of what he physically saw... but rather that he actually did it.
Warwick Bot
Except the book makes it seem that he's horrified by the creation itself.
I think these interpretations might simplify the narrative a bit too much. When I read the book, I thought it was made very clear that the creature was initially an extremely good and pure being. There is a very explicitly described abundance of joy and beauty and compassion in his heart. It is the doctor's repeated vicious rebuffs, in addition to the horrific treatment at the hands of the other people of the world, that twist the creature, that makes his empathy shrink to effectively nothing. The creature even observes this process happening within himself, and analyzes it thoroughly, but finds himself helpless to do anything about it.
When Frankenstein rejects the monster, he doesn't do it by thinking about it and coming to a rational conclusion. Upon seeing the creature for the first time, he feels an instinctive revulsion, and reacts only to that. The creature tried to plead with him often, in articulate, heartfelt language, that he wanted Victor to try to empathize with him, try to see him for the pure and loving being he was. It was heartbreaking to read about this *person* who had such passion for life become so warped.
I think the heavily implied narrative here is that Victor Frankenstein created the creature's body.. and also created the creature's mind. He brought life into the world and treated it abusively, and so that life became bitter and full of pain and anger. The truth is that the monster *was* a person. There was nothing but humanity within him. And the humanity that was twisted in him is the same humanity that we all share.
I agree, you can look at the monster as a rejected child that was never taught social norms and then punished for his lack of knowledge.
Geoffery Wiggleworth The thing is the Monster isn't uneducated, far from it. It was a sentient being, yet it did not belong in the world of men. It read books and learned from what it saw, yet out of anger and frustration went against what he learned to get what he wanted. It was an abomination of life, part of the reason Frankenstein didn't create a female so they could reproduce.
Illier1 It's probably why it was trying to educate itself, was because he was punished for being uneducated.
Great analysis and well said. The monster doesn't turn to violence until he is rejected (or physically attacked) by literally every person he encounters, including his creator. The lesson here isn't 'don't reanimate corpses' it's 'if you're going to reanimate a corpse, give the creature you create half a chance.'
You still probably shouldn't reanimate corpses :) it's a bad idea.
Your brother Hank is a molecular biology major?
... Hankenstein.
+
Knowledge is knowing that Frankenstein isn't the monster, but wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein is really the monster ;)
***** Best summary I've ever read of this book.
***** True, depending on how you define monster. You could define it as simply "The Other" which has an ambiguous association that could mean good or bad. I like to think of it this way as the creature was monstrous in his wonderful strangeness, but human in his rage and fear.
***** not just Frankenstein but society's rejection of the new over excepted norms
Wisdom is knowing that the real monsters are reptilian shapeshifters who have infiltrated the government and only eat children on Tuesdays.
+Harry Hammett that wisdom of knowing the real monster is Frankenstein is the most basic knowledge to those who have studied the novel. But I like what you did there.
You forgot the drugs. The drugs. They were sitting around, reading German stories and doing so many drugs they could have passed for a pharmacy.
Except it was so natural back then that nobody even cares
really? lol that's pretty funny
"natural"
At some parts of the book, I was definitely agreeing with and hoping the best for Frank Ocean (the name I gave the monster). The saddest moment for me is when after learning to read & write and trying to make friends with the only people he cared about, the cabin family, he comes in at the wrong time, is beaten, and runs away broken hearted. Poor Frank Ocean. :(
Good analysis I just wonder why did you name the monster Frank Ocean
@@jytheking1998 lol frank ocean
I just called the creature “Adam”. That is what he called himself.
John Green, may I request you do The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde for a crash course? THAT WOULD BE SOOOOOO AWESOME!
omg definetly
That would be awesooooome !
I defiantly don't just want this because its one of my exam texts no no no
but I do want this...
Wishful Ink +++
YESSSSSS
I am blown away at how much of a genius Mary Shelley is, and she was only 18 years old when she wrote this! #jealous
16
Yeah well people were more productive back then before social media and RUclips
Articulate, SMART Girls such as yourself turn me on. I love when the girl is intelligent. My queen. Your response is poignant and has great insight.
I read this book when I was in in school suspension for a week. I didn't expect the monster to be the real humanitarian of this novel and I didn't expect how closely I could relate to him.
Such a great book I only wish they made a movie completely true to the novel. People think it would be boring but that book was interesting and dramatic (sad) as hell. With some artistic sin city-esqu influence and very little changing if the script it would be amazing
No one creates a movie complete true to the book.
The shining
The grinch
Hobbit
vince gredo god yes...and with a book accurate version of the monster, too, please! No neck bolts or anything, gimme the glowy cataracted eyes, the yellowing corpsified skin, and the long black hair that the monster really had!
i had a different reading of frankenstein when i read it, i found i liked the monster more than victor. when victor makes his creation he is but a child, innocent to the world and his first sights are those of his creator fleeing in horror, he follows and victor continues to shun him, he leaves and is shunned by everyone he meets (worse he is actively attacked, driven out for no misdeed of his own) he tries to make the best of himself, he reads and learns to become someone his father could be proud of and he is still scorned for no reason, he asks his father to make him someone he can love and who will love him, to have for himself the joy he has read about in book but which has been forever denied to him for no good reason. and his father still denies him, still scorns him and denies him this one chance at happiness. can it be any surprise then that he would take extreme measures, they are all he has.
i read it not as a cautionary tale of playing god or science gone bad but of the dangers of intolerance and prejudice. if victor had just accepted his creation as his son this story need not have been a tragedy. if people had treated him with kindness and compassion he might have gotten the happiness he so desired.
I'll back you up on that 100%. The monster ended up being extremely well versed in the arts, and loved knowledge. The only "issue" was the difference of look, if people would have looked past that there would have been no real problems.
Book.. cover.. judgement.. ect
the way i understood it was "you can play god, but when your adam awakens and looks at you with puppy eyes surrounded by rotten flesh, take care of him, raise him, as he comes from you and you are part of him"
This is exactly how I interpreted. I don't know what book Greene was reading when he came up with that summary, but it certainly wasn't Frankenstein.
Maybe the shortened Wikipedia version of Frankenstein.
Part 2 will clearly be about who the monster really is. I don't know what video you guys were watching, but it didn't sound like Hank was making any qualitative judgements to me
Eugene Conniff im sure the next video will be about the deeper points of the book but... hank?
The first time I read Frankenstein I was in 7th grade, and it was so tough to get through that I stopped less than halfway through. The second time I read it I was in high school, and at this point I suppose I was more capable of understanding because I loved it. I always felt so much empathy for the monster, especially during the scene in the woods with the little girl...
The way I read it, the creature was created of Dr. Frankenstein's will, and then left to be emotionally tortured by just about everyone (except the blind man...or was that scene only in Young Frankenstein? I always mix them up). When all he wants is a companion who won't fear him, the doctor refuses, then continues to outcast his creation.
I always read it as "you are what everyone thinks you are". If everyone constantly treats you like a monster, despite your best efforts, you will become a monster. If anyone can see you as more than that, only then do you have a chance.
In the novel, the monster is described as having a tall stature, yellow skin with the arteries and veins and muscle fibers visible underneath, black hair, black lips, and pearly white teeth.
He teaches himself how to read and learns English from spying on a family teaching their baby English. He talks like a normal person surprisingly. Not at all how Hollywood portrays him.
"Because this is what happens when you major in Organic Chemistry like my brother, Hank, instead of something healthy and good like film or history or literature." this cracked me up hahahaha
I always thought, in a way, that Frankenstein is a story of science without responsibility. Victor creates the monster then refuses to take responsibility for his creation, and he suffers greatly for it. The monster is the only true innocent, in the beginning, but he is entirely a product of Victor's denial of his creator responsibilities. Makes you think how things would have been different if Victor had accepted his creation as a new being and not shunned it in horror as a monster.
"We are not reading it in Crash Course because I didn't want to." - John Green
Best reason to not read a book.
A smart man will point out that Frankenstein was the doctor and not the monster.
A wise man will point out that Frankenstein was, indeed, the monster.
Stephen Taylor Deep.
***** and a douche bag in desperate need of approval will give his own comment a thumbs up as soon as he makes it.
way to copy the top comment
An even wiser man will point out that he was not called monster in the book either.
Cony and a man with even a modicum of intelligence will tell you that writers often use subtext rather than coming right out an beating you over or the head with it.
Elizabeth isn't his cousin, she's basically his adopted sister
emily taithe there were two versions, one from 1818 and 1831
Oh yeah I knew that but I didn't realise she changed that, learnt something knew
Sue Lor Yes and in the original version, she was his adopted sister.
Dont know what version it is but Victor called her his cousin.
There are two different versions and she is his cousin in one and his adopted sister in the other
Remember: if you're going to create an abomination, be nice to it and teach it morality or it will probably kill your friends.
I mean, calling it "an abomination" probably isn't the best start to teaching it empathy...
IceMetalPunk Yeah, probably best to avoid that phrasing.
UnqualifiedAdvice
Try "son" instead. Or, you know, maybe give it a name so it doesn't feel like a total freak. How about..."Jake"?
IceMetalPunk Bob?
I mean, he knew what would happen.
Frankenstein's monster always broke my heart in that he never really did anything to deserve the treatment he received other than be created by an overambitious madman.
It...is...HANKENSTEIN!
In which John Green teaches you about Mary Shelley's novel, Frankenstein. Sure, you know Frankenstein the cultural phenomenon, but how much do you know about the novel that started it all?
Don't Reanimate Corpses! Frankenstein Part 1: Crash Course Literature 205
+CrashCourse I know that it might be to late but please do a tail of 2 cities
+CrashCourse please please please
+CrashCourse Can you do Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde?
Great book, one of my favorites.
What about Frankenstein Conquers the World?
"Being Alive for Dummies." Sometimes I feel like I need that book.
I was suitably entertained by I, Frankenstein.
I am the 4%
:(
TheLoreSeeker under rated comment
I get so excited when I see a crash course literature or history video in my subscriptions
That was one of the best thoughtbubbles I've seen so far. There were pokeballs. And Hank appeared. As the creature.
Mario35
This book is actually really good. Halfway through I started to feel really bad for the Monster. The guy just wanted a friend.
John Green. This is my favourite novel. Thank you.
NINETEEN-EIGHTY FOUUURRRR. Please Mr. Green, do me this favor so I can rest easy and live a happy life...
Though 1984 is an interesting read, I'd rather see him do 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' or Fahrenheit 451.
Catch 22 or Brave New World
The list has already been decided:
The Odyssey by Homer
Oedipus Rex by Sophocles
Hamlet by Bill Shakespeare
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe
Beloved by Toni Morrison
Better luck next season?
BallotBoxer I know, maybe next time. I have to say though, it confuses the hell out of me why they don't pick it. Probably one of the most influential books of the 20th century.
BallotBoxer Bill Shakespeare?!
Knowledge is knowing that Frankenstein isnt the monster. Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein is the monster.
“Who wasn’t having an affair with Lord Byron?” True dat
I loved this book. It's a chilling reminder that both doing everything and doing nothing are bad, especially when you're only thinking about yourself the entire time.
Work Cited for this video: Don't Reanimate Corpses! Frankenstein Part 1: Crash Course Literature 205. Prod. Stan Muller. By Alexis Soloski. Perf. John Green. Crash Course, 2014. RUclips.
Hankenstein's monster was awesome.
I know the name is wrong, but hell, it's funny.
Don't study organic chemistry, children! Don't do it! You don't want to end up like Hank, do you!?!
I think the moral of the story is that if you create a sentient being, you are responsible for making sure that it is actually raised, not just abandoned. The reason Frankenstein’s monster killed was because he was abandoned and left to fend for himself instead of being raised and taught basic moral principles like “don’t kill people”.
Traditionally wouldn't the creation take his father's surname and so still also be called Frankenstein?
Also we studied this in school from a parental responsibility context, I had already read and loved it, but it very much strengthened my belief that the doctor is to blame for the creation's misdeeds. The creature is abandoned at birth but goes off and learns many things, including that he is a social outcast, he loses the one friend he ever made in the blind man and generally leads a sucky, but morally upright life. But when he asks the doctor to help him, having told his story, the doctor says 'your appearance is that of a monster so how can I trust you' the creature then realises that if people expect the worst from him anyway he's got nothing to lose by being awful, so he does, the doctor says 'see? I was right not to trust you!' Thoroughly failing to recognise the most important of his mistakes (repeatedly rejecting his child/ward) and generally being a self-rich sous nitwit
You would be correct in the sense that the creature should also bare the same surname as Victor, however since neither the creature nor Victor have no relation other than he reanimated the corpse, you would have to dive deeper into the story itself. Not once does the creature get bequeathed with a real monicker. He does however find himself being called the creature, monster, demon and many other words along his lonely journey.
Also the creature technically is not abandoned. Victor in a frightened state faints (or falls asleep depending on how you view his unreliable narration) and when he awakens the creature is gone. The creature left on his own accord and escaped to the woods where he comes upon the home of the blind man and his two children, where he learns vicariously though the children how to speak and read. He then stumbles across the copy of Milton's Paradise Lost that somehow was left in the middle of the woods. And then takes the viewpoint of almost the fallen angel. Yes both the creature and Victor can be looked at through the viewpoint of a fallen angel. Victor a bright and promising scientist who found the essence of life and created his very own Adam, but then his life becomes nothing but misery and pain. And of course the creature because he is the new evolution in humanity by being more than human. His life starts by being a miraculous scientific break through and then since terrifying his creature flees from his birthplace and isolates himself before coming back and accidentally murdering Victor's younger brother.
There are a million and one ways to interpret Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and I am not saying mine is the right way either, but you would have to look at it at many different angles before knowing exactly how Shelley devised such a brilliant piece of literature. The only thing that upsets me when everyone reads the novel is the completely overlook the Oedipus complex underlying the entire story arc. Yes even Oedipus does not have an Oedipus complex but it is worth looking at. Victor clearly has an infatuation with his own mother, she birthed and raised him and then when her unexpected death happens Victor projects those same feelings and emotions towards Elizabeth, since she now becomes his surrogate mother. Unbenounced to Elizabeth, Victor gravitates towards her in search to understand his complex emotions towards his mother. The creature represents Victors deranged psyche but also embodies his father, Victor was attempting to create the father he wanted Elizabeth to see. Which would drive Elizabeth towards Victor so she would not have a relationship with Alphonse. But this is also why Victor hunts down the creature after slaying his own father, since Victor cannot have the satisfaction of taking his own fathers life, the creature that embodies his father will have to suffice.
Could we have Hankenstein's monster
Hankenstein ._.
John, I think you have some issues to work out with Hank
Interesting discussion. Thanks for acknowledging Blackenstein in your opening.
You and your brother's videos are just outstanding. We love them here in our homeschool!
Lisa Lacy hey I’m home schooled too and as you may have guessed I watch crash course too
Same
I've always felt sorry for the creature. Frankenstein makes him and expects him to be beautiful, then when he turns out hideous and confused (because he's basically just been born) Frankenstein runs off and leaves him. It's like abandoning your child.
I wrote a paper on Frankenstein that basically said Shelley's criticism of Frankenstein's character is that he chooses Prometheism (called the male sphere by her mother) over his family (the female one, again according to Wollstonecraft). It becomes even worse for Victor because he doesn't take paternal care of his creation, so he rejects the domestic duties of a "father", thus resulting in everyone he loves dying.
"My god she could write a sentence"
I have said this so many times throughout my time as an English Major. I'm glad I'm not alone in admiring sentences!
"Like my brother, 'Hank'" SciShow
Frankenstein is a magnificent work I think one of my all time favourites - watching this video makes me want to read it again right now!
I would love a return to this series, it is one of my favourites. Doing novels like Lord of the Flies and Catch 22 would be really interesting!
The next Crash Course Literature will apparently cover Lord of the Flies, though John is apparently not fond of it.
They finally restarted it.
You're in luck. He just did Lord of the Flies.
haha John hates Lord of The Flies
I usually can't stomach reading most classics, but Frankenstein was one of the few that I just absolutely loved. It has been 5 years since I first read it but I can still remember it all so vividly due to the impression it made on me. Loved the video like always, can't wait for the next :)
Please do Paradise Lost.
Thoughtbubble!Frankenstein's Monster needs to be on a t-shirt.
Fun fact: Lord Byron's daughter was Ada Lovelace. Ada worked with Charles Babbage, a British inventor who was designing mechanical computers (like the one you're staring at now, but with gears instead of transistors). Babbage designed the machines while Ada wrote the computer programs. Though the machine was never finished, Ada is often considered to be the world's first computer programmer.
Also, can there please be a Crash Course Literature episode on "Flatland; A Romance of Many Dimensions" by Edwin A. Abbot? It's probably the first work of mathematics fiction.
Babbage's Difference Engine was never finished in his lifetime, but some fine folks at the London Science Museum built one from his original plans. There's one on display there, and one on display at the Computer History Museum in California.
amartini51
His difference engine was recreated, but he did also try to design a version with memory that would likely have been turing-complete. He died before he could finish the design.
That part about hank. That was beautiful.
That awkward moment when you ignored the lessons of Frankenstein and ended up a bioengineering major
Counter offer: Reanimate LOTS of corpses. Teach them to worship you, and then take the world by storm.
Has anyone else found that Mel Brooks' stunning 1974 film, Young Frankenstein, has severely impaired their ability to take the novel seriously? For starters, it's pronounced Fronkensteen.
Knowledge is knowing Frankenstein is not the monster, Wisdom is knowing that he is.
YO THAT WAS DEEP AF
+Darth Savage u being sarcastic or genuinely impressed? because that quote is everywhere in the internet
+Monkey D luffy gamer genuinely impressed lol I've actually never seen it before
oh shit then...i saw this like years ago
I'm SO glad that you are doing these books in at least 2 parts!
(This was a great video. I'm really looking forward to what more you have to say about the story.)
Wisdom is the fact that Frankenstein wasn't the monster. Knowledge is the fact that Frankenstein was the monster.
Lol the quote is actually the other way around
+peanutbuttercracker1 Yeah I noticed that.
Pedantry is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the monster, Wisdom is knowing Frankenstein was the monster, Comprehension is knowing that the "monster" was indeed a Frankenstein.
What most people forget is that while the creature is in the shed, reflecting on his life, he comes to the conclusion that Victor Frankenstein was in all essence, his father. This leads to him, in a way, taking the Frankenstein family name as his own.
"At length the thought of you crossed my mind. I learned from your papers that you were my father, my creator; and to whom could I apply with more fitness than to him who had given me life?" -Chapter 16
Isn't that supposed to be the other way round?!
John, this book is so important to me, it was the first "real" book I read (at 8 years old), and it definitely altered my way of looking at a the world for the better, and I am just so happy to see you talking about it.
Whoa, you read "Frankenstein" at age 8?! Kudos. It was a tough read for me (mentally that is) at 17. O_O
It'sMeTheMeeems so did I lol for a book report. It was hard as hell for that young age but I made it work and it paid off :)
I've almost finished reading George Orwell's 1984. It's the most fascinating, immersive and terrifying books I've ever read. Please please Please talk about it some day in one of these videos or indeed anything else by Orwell.
This is the first of the books that have actually read, quite a few years back (don't worry, though, I absolutely love your explanations and opinions of all the well-known stories I haven't read) and first things first: Finally a representation of the monster I actually agree with! Sure, I imagine him even more ugly, as he is always described, but still. Much better than the classic interpretation!
Secondly, I always felt like the monster was a good being, yet incredibly unfortunate. To me, he was the hero of the tragedy, even as he killed Frankenstein's family, which I barely even remember him doing besides the murder of Frankenstein's cousin (a woman being killed on her wedding night sticks with you ;))
My favorite part of the novel was were the monster explained his entire life, how he attempted to be accepted as a living being, but simply due to his appearance, failed. The Monster of Frankenstein seems to be the perfect story surrounding the importance of one's looks, as the monster is so horrifying, no human can look at it without fear. What is great here is that because you know that the monster isn't evil, you can fully "appreciate" it's ugliness, whereas if it was a horror story with an evil monster, I would have probably thought "yeah, sure, he's ugly, I get it."
The fact that people run from it and attack it is not a good thing, as it would be in an actual horror story. I guess that's what I really love about it. Of course, I also recognized the biblical meaning behind the story, but it never seemed to be the perfect example of it to me.
Great book; incredibly depressing XD
I think anyone would be scared of a powerful walking dead body. No matter how nice it wants to be. It is still a freak of nature. Not meant to be.
LOVE THIS!!! NEEDS TO BE ON TV!
Did you cut those books in half for the sake of that shelf? You monster.
I just read Frankenstein for spooky season. I knew going in it would probably be different than the Frankenstein stereotypes, but I was completely surprised by this book. Fairly harder read than most but very well written. Very dark and somber story but at times you do really root for the monster and see how Victor really created his own worst nightmare and continued to make everything worse for himself.
Given the Romantic gestalt of the times, I think you also have to see a Faustian aspect to this -- man manipulating forces beyond his comprehension for questionable ends. And always with a price to pay at the end.
Great video! In high school we read Frankenstein in conjunction with Wuthering Heights and specifically looked at issues of child psychology and nature vs. nurture. Sometimes I miss school discussions.
or do Faust
Even though I read some of this in high school and had a couple of awesome teachers, only now do I want to actually pick a book up. Thanks CrashCourse.
Something they won't tell you in your High School or Uni English class: There were pokeballs on Walton's ship (ref. 6:55 ). Probably water pokemon inside them, but we can never know, and that's one of the mysteries Mary Shelley left for us.
Cool, at least I wasn't the only one who noticed :)
I take away from the book that Frankenstein was indeed the monster. Not because he created the monster and was consumed by self ambition but because he was incapable of loving his creation, or even showing any hint of kindness to the monster. All the monster ever wanted was to be loved by his father, but barring that, anyone else! I almost cried through the part where the monster recounts the way he loved that family he met and the way he was then rejected by them. I understand the family's horror and rejection, but not Frankenstein, he created the monster and he should have dealt with him.
You mention a bunch of Frankenstein variations and alluded to kaiju like Godzilla and King Kong, but no mention of "Frakenstein Conquers the World"? :P
Speaking of which... let's break out the Ishiro Honda quote:
"Monsters are tragic beings. They are born too tall, too strong, too heavy. They are not evil by choice. That is their tragedy. They do not attack people because they want to, but because of their size and strength, mankind has no other choice but to defend himself. After several stories such as this, people end up having a kind of affection for the monsters. They end up caring about them."
7:46 Nice Kevin Sorbo cameo there Thought Bubble.
Isn't Dr. Frankenstein the REAL monster? Isn't that one of the points?
i thought so too
i hope john touches on that
I need 20 of these a day. best of the web. back to work, feed us!
Ha!!! The Hank Green reference!! 😂😂😂
Hello, I've been a fan of your channel for a while and this is actually the first video I saw of Crash Course Literature. I love your videos and I want to know your thoughts on Wuthering Heights, Edgar Allen Poe Stories, and The Phantom of the Opera?
This is so beautiful! I wrote my master's thesis on Frankenstein, and it drives me mad that our culture continues to promote the twisted, inaccurate elements. Thanks, JG!
This is my 3rd time watching and I just noticed the tiny Frankenstein at the beginning
These crash course vids have left very little room for improvement, but somehow they just keep getting better anyways :)
Agreed! :)
I was one of those sorry souls who went into reading Frankenstein thinking it would be like the movies I had seen. First few pages, I was at a total loss and thought I had some how picked up the wrong book. Once I was able to separate the movie and book into two entirely different stories, I found it to be a fascinating read.
"its hard out there, for a monster."
great quote, worthy of shelley.
This is wonderful! Please keep up the wonderful videos, I am waiting on pins and needles for the next video already!
I read many parts of Frankenstein's monster as the monster being an allegory for humankind and Frankenstein as an allegory for god, or at least our own perception and treatment of ourselves as a culture. Am I the only one here?
Possibly.
In that mankind often feels like we are having to run around, teaching ourselves. If our species do have a parent of sorts, we often feel abandoned on the side of the road, somewhat unloved. Perhaps we even feel abused by fate, or divine providence.
This can actually to go some pretty dark places if you know the typical result of an abusive relationship. Often, the victim forms a strong attachment to the abuser. They justify the abuse by convincing themselves that they deserve it and they fiercely defend their abuser against the judgement who simply "don't get it." This is especially true when the victim does not have any alternate experience.
Ultimately, I am not sure this is allegory. Allegory implies that the represented narrative or situation is true (at least to the author). I would just call it a metaphor.
HeliosMaximus Damn that abusive relationship example sums up religion to damn well.
10:05 is the moment John Green shows us how well he knows his audience. Well played :P
Hercules WASN'T GREEK! IT WAS HERACLES!!! WHY DOESN'T ANYONE GET THIS?!
Jennings Collins you read The Heroes Of Olympus book three The Mark of Athena
Oh yeah, I remember seeing that somewhere
According to the ancient Greeks, the demigod Heracles (or Hercules, as the Romans called him) was the son of a mortal woman named Alcmene and the supreme god Zeus (NOT MY WORDS THE INTERNETS WORDS)
Because everyone takes the Roman forms more seriously even though they came second
I thought I'd add this for the sake of being interesting. Shelley often referred to the the Creature/Monster outside of her book as 'Adam'. So he did have a name given to him.
-For all those who felt oddly connected to the Creature.
7:47 I call inconsistency! Zeus is Greek and Hercules is Roman. The correct name would be Heracles. :P
Furthermore, Elizabeth's hair is explicitly stated to be the "brightest living gold", yet in the video tis dark! CrashCourse Research is slipping ;)
Does anyone else pause the beginning to read the what is in the opening?
It actually helps me on my test.
I never read Dr. Frankenstein but damn you made it really worth reading....until someone actually goes to the library and starts on it only to realize how fustrating Old English truly is. Still glad to see this was better than I thought it would be. Thanks Mr. Greene. Good to see you're also expanding your library on the English playlist (even if some of these titles are initially boring to the young audience such as myself)
Frankenstein isn't written in Old English. Old English looks like
HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum,
þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon!
Victor Niccolo To me, Old English looks much more like Icelandic than it looks like English.
Happy Garden Of Life
HOLY SHIT REALLY!? looks like german to me.I had a book in that entire language. And here I thought that was russian...or even german.
Ndasuunye Look at some common phrases in Icelandic(www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/icelandic.php) and German(www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/german.php).
Yeah, Frankenstein isn't old english. It's not even middle english. Hell, even Shakespeare isn't middle english. It's all modern english, same as we speak today.
Please do a Crash Course Literature on Macbeth! I'd love to see how John talks about it! :)
Makes you salivate with jealousy, doesn't it? That Mary Shelley was just 18 when she started writing _Frankenstein_
At first I was like "meh" to the literature crash courses, but I think I'm hooked now. Perhaps good literature class is just philosophy by a different name?
5:31 Are those....pokemon balls? for Frankenstein?
Yes.
+Armored Interactive Also, he appears to know Alf the alien cause he has his picture on the wall lol
I enjoyed this report; with respect-- though the sailors had seen the monster on the sled first. Walten awoke to his crew discovering Frankenstein later. Also even though they called her their cousin , the Frankenstein family adopted her. Again this was an excellent presentation on the book.
"I am not a person of opinions because i feel the counter-arguments too strongly."
Never heard that quote before. I know it is far from the most impressive line to quote from the book or Shelley herself but that line, more than most, caught my ear.
Thanks John, great episode as usual.
The crying monster at about 11 minutes is pretty heartbreaking :( thanks Thought Bubble...
5:34 pokeballs on the barrels
But there was an Ygor in the movies. Just not _that_ movie. Bela Lugosi played Ygor in both Son o' and Ghost o' Frankenstein. Dwight Frye (who played Renfield to Lugosi's Dracula) was Fritz to Colin Clive's Henry Frankenstein.