Don't Reanimate Corpses! Frankenstein Part 1: Crash Course Literature 205
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
- 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? You'll learn about the Romantic movement in English lit, of which Frankenstein is a GREAT example, and you'll learn that Frankenstein might just be the first SciFi novel. Once again, literature comes down to just what it means to be human. John will review the plot, take you through a couple of different critical readings of the novel, and will discuss the final disposition of Percy Shelley's heart.
Consider supporting local bookstores by purchasing your books through our Bookshop affiliate link bookshop.org/shop/complexly or at your local bookseller.
Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at / crashcourse
Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - / youtubecrashcourse
Twitter - / thecrashcourse
Instagram - / thecrashcourse
CC Kids: / crashcoursekids
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.
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.
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.
+
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 CZcams
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.
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.
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.
"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
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.
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?
"Being Alive for Dummies." Sometimes I feel like I need that book.
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.
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 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.
That was one of the best thoughtbubbles I've seen so far. There were pokeballs. And Hank appeared. As the creature.
Mario35
It...is...HANKENSTEIN!
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!
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.
This book is actually really good. Halfway through I started to feel really bad for the Monster. The guy just wanted a friend.
"its hard out there, for a monster."
great quote, worthy of shelley.
"We are not reading it in Crash Course because I didn't want to." - John Green
Best reason to not read a book.
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.
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.
I was suitably entertained by I, Frankenstein.
I am the 4%
:(
TheLoreSeeker under rated comment
"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...
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”.
Knowledge is knowing that Frankenstein isnt the monster. Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein is the monster.
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. CZcams.
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
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 :)
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.
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
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?!
Finally someone’s acknowledging Fritz
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!
Finally, the monster is not called Frankenstein, thank you for rectifying that for everyone who thinks the monster is!! :)
I get so excited when I see a crash course literature or history video in my subscriptions
John Green. This is my favourite novel. Thank you.
Could we have Hankenstein's monster
Hankenstein ._.
Please do Paradise Lost.
"Like my brother, 'Hank'" SciShow
“Who wasn’t having an affair with Lord Byron?” True dat
This just reminds me that parents should always love their children. No matter what they become
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.)
Hankenstein's monster was awesome.
I know the name is wrong, but hell, it's funny.
These crash course vids have left very little room for improvement, but somehow they just keep getting better anyways :)
Agreed! :)
Wow, that was an amazing episode! Definitely brought back some good memories from reading the book. I love how Crash Course can add depth to your impressions of a book.
This was great! Thank you for tackling the somewhat complicated world of Romanticism--not easy. I'd just make one point (which you touched on but should have been a greater focus): Frankenstein, to me and I think to many Romantics, is read as a criticism of enlightenment values/epistemology, industrialization and the supremacy of reason/rationalisation and progress. In that sense it becomes a highly political book (especially at the time it was published). It challenges all these notions and is still crucially relevant today as we push forward with designer genes, genetic modification, cloning etc. We are Dr. Frankenstein. And the monster is the society we are (still) creating.
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.
Interesting discussion. Thanks for acknowledging Blackenstein in your opening.
I was so excited to have you begin this part of Crash Course, as 'Frankenstein' is my favorite novel (this week, at least). Loved the questions you've raised here and very much looking forward to Part 2!
John, I think you have some issues to work out with Hank
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?
Thank you for including the history about how it was written. In high school I loved Byron, I thought it was such a fascinating story about that storm of inspiration.
Most brilliant talk I've seen this side of CZcams. Well done!
"I will create in my own image
If God can then why can't I?
No thought of the consequences,
I've got to know the meaning of life."
The song Frankenstein by Iced Earth is a pretty good song about Frankenstein.
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.
"Being alive for dummies", I love those little tidbits! XD
TBT Frankenstein is my favorite classic novel of all time. It's very complicated, and as John says, it defies a simple reading. Thanks for covering it on crash course!
The Monsters name is Robert DeNiro
No it isn't. Haha
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 :)
John Green talking about Frankenstein is just a combination of two of my favourite things ever!! Argh, why didn't this come out before I wrote a dissertation on Frankenstein?! It would have been so useful!
This is really great, making such seminal novels like Frankenstein accessible to everybody and entertaining, whilst still maintaining a decent level of depth. I have a Lit A-level exam in 2 days and I'm actually planning on using the quote from Shelley about a 'supremely frightful effect from any human endeavor...' So thanks!
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.
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?
OH MY GOD I LOVED THE INTRO! Those are the most common misconceptions about Frankenstein!
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!
Don't study organic chemistry, children! Don't do it! You don't want to end up like Hank, do you!?!
I always thought the meaning was that you should treat your children with love, instead of, you know, abandoning them at the time they come into existence
This never gets old. Love these videos!
I just finished reading the book. So sad, but also so very interesting to each of the characters and their stories!
Hankenstein!
This is my favorite book of all time, and even after knowing about the inaccuracies of media portraying the story, but also never really being a fan of monster movies or the media portrayed monster, it was amazing to read, because it was so much more of a story than I thought it was going to be and so well written as opposed to just being horror as we think of it today, and opened up a whole new world for my love of Gothic horror. Also, while of course like everyone I sympathize with the monster, I found myself relating more to Victor, which was unusual and interesting considering he’s like a terrible person, which really like makes you think lol
I was so excited when I saw this video here because I just finished reading Frankenstein for English class, and I always love Crash Course Literature. Now we're reading Romeo and Juliet, and, coincidentally, there are already a few Crash Course videos about that! I can't wait for next week and every week for Crash Course Literature. I'll give this a thumbs up and hope that Crash Course never goes away!
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.
Interestingly, I just checked out the 1931 film, "Frankenstein" from the library and I come home to find this video in my subscriptions...
A classic (that many a reference is made to in later works) - but so does not follow the book... :)
You should check out the follow-ups, if only to see the evolution of what we've come to perceive in pop culture as the generic Frankenstein Monster. Bride of Frankenstein is the direct follow-up, continuing to fail to portray the events from the book. In the third movie, it's the son of Frankenstein. Bella Lugosi plays the evil Ygor - pronounced "eye-gor" and I guess Igor becomes a thing even though a real, proper Igor never existed. In the fourth, after Igor transfers his brain into the monster, he's blinded, and the monster walking with his hands stretched out becomes a thing - ironically, it's Bella Lugosi who plays the monster in that one. Everyone who imitates the Monster is actually imitating Lugosi's version, not Karloff's! It's pretty amazing how the generic Frankenstein Monster is, itself, a Frankenstein Monster's mash-up of bits and pieces from different films
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.
Paradise Lost
I LOVE LOVE LOVE this book! Along with Tennyson's poetry, it has awakened my love of Romanticism. I see it everywhere now, especially Japanese anime and video games. Final Fantasies are incredibly Romantic, the music, the scenery, etc.
Hank the Creature!
5:34 pokeballs on the barrels
This is wonderful! Please keep up the wonderful videos, I am waiting on pins and needles for the next video already!
why did i just realize that this is John Green.. THE John Green one of my favorite authors.
Makes you salivate with jealousy, doesn't it? That Mary Shelley was just 18 when she started writing _Frankenstein_
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.
The quest for knowledge vs overstepping man's capacity reminded me of Browning's 'Man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?'
This is perfect because I'm starting this book for my AP Language and Composition class next week! :D
would love to see one of these on dracula
me too!!!!
Good video!!!
Thoughtbubble!Frankenstein's Monster needs to be on a t-shirt.
AMAZINGLY helpful and insightful. My goodness!
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 ;)
love Frankenstein. Probably my favorite classic horror novel. Cannot wait for part 2!
This was such a great video. I got a copy recently and i'm putting it higher up on my to read list now.
Ha!!! The Hank Green reference!! 😂😂😂