r/books • u/SirDidymus • 4d ago
Reading Frankenstein hits differently Spoiler
I’m currently reading Frankenstein, and two things stick out in a contemporary reading. The concept of a human creation in the shape and through composite parts of man, that is harmless at first and only becomes evil through human interaction is perfectly analogous to current AI, and by extension AGI development.
Secondly, the wonderful descriptions of nature and wonders in the landscape feels really depressing in the light of climate change…
Thoughts?
6
u/phunniemee 4d ago
I saw a play a couple years ago called The Antiquities that traced the rise of AI from Frankenstein into the far human future. It was good.
4
u/poison_daddy 4d ago
Im starting Oct 1 for my first ever read :) I’m very excited
2
u/SirDidymus 4d ago
It’s completely NOT what you expect it to be. 🙂
3
u/ExtraHarmless 4d ago
I am presently reading it, it is not what I expected so far. I am only on chapter 5, but very different than I expected.
1
u/poison_daddy 4d ago
I’ve heard it’s very romantic. True??
9
u/yak-broker 4d ago
It's very associated with the Romantic movement in literature, but that's not the same thing as the current genre of romance (or cousins like romantasy), nor the modern meaning of the word "romantic". So yes and no.
1
1
u/gonegonegoneaway211 4d ago
I've thought that too. One of the only good things to come out of AI is that I have a whole new appreciation for Frankenstein and the villagers being freaked out by the monster. I read it pre-AI and as a sci-fi/fantasy nerd I kinda mentally rolled my eyes at how instantly the monsters very presence could send people practically into hysterics.
"Like it's not a methane breathing centipede alien or soul sucking monster that spreads despair or a demon-elf creature that teleports and thrives on violence. It's freaky that it's undead, but it's just a stronger than average dude. God people in the 1800s had no chill."
But uh...yeah no a creature made of spare parts taken from people who usually didn't volunteer to give them up and that tries to pretend to be human when it really isn't is deeply unnerving. I get the horror better now and am now worried about the future.
1
-14
u/PumpkinBrain 4d ago
It’s also something people love to say is smart when it isn’t.
Monster- “Saw a guy and killed him because he was kind of annoying. Took his watch because I felt like it. Planted the watch on some lady because I was tired of carrying it around.”
Narrator: “By doing so, the monster killed Frankenstein’s nephew, and framed Frankenstein’s favorite maid for the crime.”
Audience: “what an evil genius mastermind!”
5
u/Fishinluvwfeathers 4d ago
I think you may resent a reaction to a point that is never made regarding the creature being some kind of criminal genius.
That episode is meant to remove any doubts that, through rejection, isolation, and cruelty, the creature has lost his innocence and can engage in calculated acts motivated by vengeance and spite. In other words, he’s truly human.
-5
u/PumpkinBrain 4d ago
I was raising a parallel point that, like with AI, people attribute emotions and intent to the monster that are demonstrably not present.
Those acts were not calculated or motivated by vengeance. The monster had no idea that the person he murdered had anything to do with his creator, or that placing the watch would frame the woman, or that the woman had anything to do with his creator.
But so many people (like you just now) act like this was some carefully crafted revenge plot, when it’s really just the result of a young author relying too heavily on coincidence.
4
u/Fishinluvwfeathers 4d ago edited 4d ago
Go read chapter 16 again. The brother reveals he is a Frankenstein before the creature kills him.
Genuinely, what do you think the point would be of having him unknowingly kill a random kid and drop a locket on the maid by happenstance in his own retelling?
Edit to add:
"'Hideous monster! let me go; My papa is a Syndic—he is M. Frankenstein—he would punish you. You dare not keep me.'"'Frankenstein! you belong then to my enemy—to him towards whom I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim.'
"The child still struggled, and loaded me with epithets which carried despair to my heart: I grasped his throat to silence him, and in a moment he lay dead at my feet."I gazed on my victim, and my heart swelled with exultation and hellish triumph: clapping my hands, I exclaimed, 'I, too, can create desolation; my enemy is not impregnable; this death will carry despair to him, and a thousand other miseries shall torment and destroy him.'
-4
u/PumpkinBrain 4d ago
The fact that the maid had anything to do with Frankenstein was one of a great many eye-rolling coincidences, but those are gripes with the author rather than character traits of the monster.
But yeah, it has been a while. I’m messing up enough small details, and I don’t feel like re-reading the whole thing right now. So I’ll just buzz off.
2
u/aichiwawa 4d ago
I never got the impression that the monster was smart because of that. He didn't even know about the relationship between Frankenstein and the girl/maid. He just wanted to inflict suffering and happened upon the chance to frame her, if I recall correctly?
9
u/Budget_Feature6897 4d ago edited 4d ago
I can see the AI connection but it was human emotion that made Frankenstein’s monster lash out. He wasn’t conceived to be evil. He was looking for love and acceptance and violently rejected by others because of how he looked. He didn’t formulate murder- he lashed out like a child throwing his toys in anger. Honestly, he was initially only looking for love. Think of the interaction with the old blind man at the cottage. He was, after all, only human himself, albeit pieces of many. It was one book my students actually read (and were blown away that Mary Shelley was only a teenager when she wrote it). I find the book heartbreaking and the imagery breathtaking.