The sun continues to be a bastion of diligent journalism : facepalm

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Jeez, tiktok reading comprehension these days.

The creature was innocent. And from the start he had no defense against the monster's machinations.

[–] Lobster@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

It's a weird internet-meme that the monster is innocent. Internet-dwellers have been posting that 2018 tweet as confirmation, as though that supercedes the text.

But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless; I have strangled the innocent as they slept and grasped to death his throat who never injured me or any other living thing. I have devoted my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love and admiration among men, to misery; I have pursued him even to that irremediable ruin. There he lies, white and cold in death. You hate me, but your abhorrence cannot equal that with which I regard myself.

[+] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world -14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The point of the book isn’t just “people are the real monsters”, but also that evil begets evil. The creature is only ever shown hatred and cruelty, so it begins acting out as something that should be hated. By the end of the book, it has murdered multiple people. The victim eventually becomes the victimizer, which brings the tragedy full circle.

Simply saying “The creature was a victim” lacks any kind of nuance regarding the rest of the book. Yes, the creature was a victim. Then it became a monster, because it had always been treated as if it was one.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Simply saying “The creature was a victim” lacks any kind of nuance regarding the rest of the book. Yes, the creature was a victim. Then it became a monster, because it had always been treated as if it was one.

That sounds more nuanced, but is still a really bad take. A better take on this is the film "Monster" about Aileen Wuornos. If life never gives you a chance, you can be violent, yet still a victim.

[–] b_tr3e@feddit.org -4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Well, it's admittedly been some time I watched any of the various adoptions but didn't the monster inherit some psycho killer's brain? So it has the killers personality but not his memories?

[–] Lobster@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No. There's no mention of who the brain (or any other part) came from. Frankenstein gathered them from various charnel houses.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 days ago

To some people, the monster's brain comes from Abby Normal.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well, it’s admittedly been some time I watched any of the various adoptions

then why were you acting like you had an opinion on the book in your top-level comment?

The real facepalm is always in the comments. The OP even said elsewhere that he/she hasn't read it.

[–] b_tr3e@feddit.org -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

First of all, this isn't high school book club but "Facepalm" and on the image you'll find Boris Karloff in the 1931 adaption which is most likely what anyone will have in their mind looking at the meme on top. Secondary I do not only correctly remember the tragic side of the main character but a quick look at Wikipedia's article is confirming my "non-exisisting" opinion (notice the difference between knowledge and opinion - everybody can have an opinion about anything, lacking knowledge or not) quite obviously:

When he finally reveals himself to the family, they are horrified by his appearance and chase him away. The creature then saves a young girl from drowning, only to be shot by her father, who perceives his rescue as an attack. Angry at humanity, the creature travels to Geneva so he can confront Victor;

Maybe you want to read another trivial novel to be a complete asshole about it. We all fail at first attempts from time to time.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

everybody can have an opinion about anything, lacking knowledge or not)

I don't feel entitled to hold an opinion about quantum physics, or Finnish politics, or anything I don't understand, and I certainly wouldn't say things like "Goddammit! For all those still struggling to understand..." about them

[+] msage@programming.dev -7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The gun is also innocent, yet it's used to murder.

Nobody screams to destroy all guns.

The monster is a product, created by a man. In both cases.

[–] Lobster@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 days ago

A gun in an inanimate object. The monster is a self-described murderer.

"I have murdered the lovely and the helpless; I have strangled the innocent as they slept and grasped to death his throat who never injured me or any other living thing. I have devoted my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love and admiration among men, to misery; I have pursued him even to that irremediable ruin."