Decoding the past - In search of the real Frankenstein 1-5

[LocoRico89]

A triumph of science over God

[CajunKhan]

There's a huge number of differences between the book and the movies. For example, in the book there's nothing to suggest he stitched together body-parts. The monster is apparantly more of a alchemical homonculas. Also, the Doctor controlled the creatures proportions and intended them to be beautiful. It was mostly the translusant skin and eye-color that made it hideous. Picture an 8-foot-tall supermodel with semi-transparant skin and jaundiced eyes. THAT'S the monster.

[Gilari]

The novel is less horror than it is gothic. It's more about what it means to be a person, and about what the limits of human ingenuity should be. Victor was playing God, and the implications of his actions ruin his life. It's more relevant than ever to our day, because we are creating (artificial) life. Just like the Creature, should a robot be considered a person?

[PhreakStep]

I think frankenstein monster is possible just not in this way more like a cyborg.

Even if you make a robot but instead of a plastic as a cover you would use flesh and skin would be conisdered as cyborg.

[drumtap2792]

@Rubenmon - lol, you and me both. Alternatively people could just...oh, I don't know. Read the damn novel maybe. It's a shame people don't bother to do that so much nowadays, it's a brilliant piece of work. Same goes for Bram Stoker's Dracula.

[kifferd]

@drumtap2792 Dracula is based on Vlad the Impaler. Perhaps you should go deeper than a simple fiction book ;)

[SOMERANDOMGUYDOZ]

Oh and, electricity CAN make a heart work. But not from outside of the inside of the body. We could work in computer-way. Wiring the heart to a to a battery which is constantly recharged by anti-matter and keeps it from exploding could make the heart work. However the risks of such expirementing are the heart not being able to sustain the damage or the battery being overcharged. BTW I am no crazy scientist.

[SOMERANDOMGUYDOZ]

Dr.Frankenstein just did it wrong. A human can live as long as blood moves inside his veins. However, that does not neccerarly require a heart. A complex magnetic device can make blood move. However there is no simple way magnets can move anything that hasn't metal in it, which means the person MUST eat a lot of meat in order for magnetic blood movement to be performed.

[serpentsandrainbows]

Dr. Frankenstein is the monster, the creature is an extension of him and his ideas, his new technology, which when it is misused, mistreated and or misunderstood can run amok.

[drumtap2792]

It's funny how people think Frankenstein is the name of the monster, but it's actually the name of the SCIENTIST who makes the monster. The monster is referred to in the book as either "the Creature" or "the monster", it doesn't have an actual name. Never is it said that Frankenstein used electricity to make the monster either, it only says "the spark of life" which doesn't necessarily mean electricity. Also the monster wasn't born evil, he became evil because mankind spurned him.

[ksotikoula]

@drumtap2792

You are all too correct in your comment :)

Especially the fact that Frankenstein's name is identified with his creature seems to imply that the scientist was the monster after all.

[1993MovieMan]

@ksotikoula Actually in Shelley`s Novel , Victor was A Misguided , Arrogant Young Man and his Foolishness is somewhat forgivable when you take into account he WASN`T EVEN A REAL Scientist BUT A Medical School Dropout ! His Creation was A Scared Chimera/Homunculus/Golem Mix who was rejected by NEARLY EVERYONE INCLUDING HIS " FATHER " ! The REAL Monster of Shelley`s Work IS NEITHER Victor NOR his Creation BUT The Repressive Society that drove them to sin !

[Rubenmon1]

@drumtap2792 I tell people this, but they're like "NOOOOO< It's the name of the monster". Course I tell them to look it up on the internet to prove them wrong.

[kifferd]

@drumtap2792 Im pretty sure every person in todays world knows that Frankenstein is the Dr. Not the monster. However, frankenstein has been named AFTER the Dr, by modern writings. Wich dont make it wrong. Since its all fiction. Please remember that. ;)

[kifferd]

@drumtap2792 Not to forget the scientists its based on experiemented with electricity, And Luigi Garvani was the person who learned bioelectricity when he gave electricity to dead frog legs and they moved as if alive. So the spark of life as you call it, is truly electricity. But how it was applied is another story.

[scottieman2]

@drumtap2792 Usually when people think of Frankenstein they think of the monster, so don't blame them.

[trueChaos23]

Bram Stroker has his Dracula and Mary Shelly has her Frankenstein both masterpieces :)

[CrazySingingNote]

P.s. she was 17 when she acctualy wrote the first draft.

[CrazySingingNote]

actualy, Mary Shelly used chemestry in her book to bring the monster to life Electricity is mentioned in the first part of the book, but Frankenstine uses chemestry to acctualy bring the monster to life. I thought that was kinda cool, sense popular culture believes it to be electricity.

[ArisztidZ]

@CrazySingingNote If I remember correctly, the monster was named Adam and was a dapper gentleman... until he began to rot. He turned on his creator for doing this to him, the end battle being in a frozen wasteland.

I might be completely off or remembering another book.

[1993MovieMan]

@CrazySingingNote NOT Chemistry ! Alchemy which was The Precursor to Chemistry !

[HardHackers]

university of bologna !!! LOL

[thanassathan]

πολύ ενδιαφέρον...

[maria16410]

poli omorfo mprabo sou

[ksotikoula]

Euxaristo!

[GhostWatching]

5 stars ***** Great vid, well done !