“Frankenstein’s Monster” is a faithful literary sequel to Mary Shelley’s classic, set ten years later. It is narrated almost exclusively from the point of view of the mad scientist’s surviving creature, still unnamed until about a third of the way through when he takes his creator’s name “Victor.” Though the book is well written and demonstrates great understanding of Shelley’s novel, the creature’s journals provide sparse revelations into his nature not already clear from a careful reading of the original.
In “Frankenstein,” the creature takes revenge on his creator not by merely killing him but by first murdering his loved ones. In the sequel, his revenge fixation is upon Captain Walton, who vowed to the dying Frankenstein he would destroy the creature. Walton pursues Victor in Captain Ahab like monomaniacal fashion and provokes Victor to initiate the same kind of all-encompassing revenge upon him.
This revenge is complicated, however, when Victor meets Lily, Walton’s niece, a young woman suffering from a mysterious mental illness. They become good friends and Victor’s plans are delayed, only to set in motion a series of tragic events for Victor and all of Walton’s relatives. Much of the novel is spent on this interaction. Even though more complex than any relationship Victor had in the original novel, it does not provide for much insight or change in his nature until the end of the novel.
Much of this novel depicts the same repetitious cycle familiar in most screen versions as well. The creature meets and reaches out to someone, only to be misunderstood (often leading to the demise of the would-be companion) and then he is on the run, being hunted again.
The final section of the novel is the best and does lead to an exciting climax and bittersweet denouement. There was one revelation that did surprise me and a letter from another narrator’s perspective adds an insightful epilogue which made me wish the writer had used the multiple narrator approach more to her advantage instead of almost exclusively using Victor’s journal. The only other deviations are sparse entries from Walton’s journal.
The low scare factor is not a sleight to the author. This book is written in literary mode, not as a thriller. While scaring readers, making us jump, is clearly not her goal, I think she could have added more suspense to move things along a bit faster. There are many journal entries that begin with statements like: “it is done and cannot be undone; I have my revenge after all.” This serves as a kind of “anti-suspense.” We already know what will happen now all that is left is the “how.” I found this a bit frustrating and at times the creature was a bit long-winded.
Overall, the book is worth reading for anyone who wondered what was next for the monster wandering off into the Arctic at the end of the original novel.
– George Wilhite
- Interview with J.R. Bookwalter - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Andrew J. Rausch - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Rick Popko and Dan West - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Director Stevan Mena (Malevolence) - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Screenwriter Jeffery Reddick (Day of the Dead 2007) - January 22, 2015
- Teleconference interview with Mick Garris (Masters of Horror) - January 22, 2015
- A Day at the Morgue with Corri English (Unrest) - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Writer/Director Nacho Cerda (The Abandoned, Aftermath) - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Actress Thora Birch (Dark Corners, The Hole, American Beauty) - January 22, 2015
- Interview with Actor Jason Behr, Plus Skinwalkers Press Coverage - January 22, 2015
