Tag Archive: Novel

Be Careful of Ambition

Christopher Martinez


Once, there was an ambitious scientist whose name was Darwin Frankenstein. Darwin was a very ambitious person and always sought to explore the unknown. His intentions as a scientist was to find out the truth of everything that had a life. In other words, he wanted to recreate life itself. Some would say Darwin Frankenstein is the modern Prometheus, while others may call him idiotic for trying to challenge the creator of his existence – god.  Darwin attended a very prestigious university that focused on the sciences, however, Darwin also learned about the philosophical thoughts created about humans itself. Darwin would hate any other class that had nothing to do with his passion. Using his brilliant mindset, he wanted to create a ‘thing’ with life and emotion. Darwin wanted a companion with consciousness.

When Darwin graduated from his university he had a goal that had to be fulfilled before the day of his death. Darwin wanted the power of life in his hand. One stormy night while walking back home from a small distraction break, Darwin saw something crying its soul out through the corner of his eye. Darwin saw the shadow of death take away the soul of a tender young black dog. As soon as Darwin saw this, he grabbed the dog and rushed straight to his house. Darwin ran with excitement, his dopamine levels were out of control. It was as if Darwin entered a state of euphoria as he finally knew what he was going to experiment on. When Darwin got home he placed the dog on his table and began the procedure. He took out the dogs brain and replaced it with a humans brain that he stole from a nearby hospital. He shaved the dog’s hair and switched it to something very odd. Darwin then stitched up the young dog as he was getting mentally ready for the moment. As the lighting reflected Darwin’s face, he flipped the electric switch that would change the meaning of life. “IT ALIVE!” said Darwin.

Image result for it's alive frankenstein

Darwin looked at the dog with happiness all written all over him. “ Those blue eyes, the white fur, the perfect paws. What a beautiful dog.” Darwin looked at the dog as something to praise. He felt the power of the highest power on his hands. The dog began to run around like a lost person in the wilderness, but once the dog stopped he looked at Darwin and growled. Darwin ran away into his other room, however, when he came back to take a peek into his home laboratory, the dog disappeared.

Related image


Darwin had looked everywhere and the fear spread through his veins. Darwin was starting to go insane. He didn’t even take a glance to reflect what he had done. If only he knew that the dog died from abuse and the dogs wish was to go into his paradise. The dog was rather happy dying. On the other hand, the human brain that Darwin had captured was a brain that would’ve saved a human’s life. The person who needed the brain had been waiting for years and years. If only Darwin took the time to realize what he was doing.



Dear Christopher Martinez,

I want to start off by saying that I really enjoyed your replication of Frankenstein and adapting it to the 21st century. I think that the story really showed Darwin real side in the original Frankenstein. Everything felt right and the sense of originality and creativity is shown. Throughout the story, Darwin is shown as a person who is very ambitious and wants to make something that has never been made before. He wants to have the hands of god and use it to his own benefit. Throughout this short replication of Frankenstein, Darwin is shown as a person who is fully dedicated to his mission. He goes to college for his own benefit and doesn’t really care about anything else that he learns. He ignores the real world just to have the same power as a creator! I also see a connection between the definition of beauty in the original Frankenstein and your story. Frankenstein’s ideology in beauty is that the European looks (white, blue eyes, and clear skin) are better looking than others. The use of the dog’s fur shows how Darwin wants only “beautiful and perfect” looks for his creation

Originality is shown in the story in a very unique way. The way the story is formatted gave me the chills. For example, you used similes to give any reader an image of what they are exactly reading. In your version of the story, I learned about Darwin obtaining a dog and getting a human’s brain. I read a bit of context on these two subjects, however, at the end of your story you come back to these and explain the meaning of these two important parts of the story. I found out how the dog actually died and what the brain was being used for. I am interpreting that you wanted readers to feel like Darwin. Darwin is shown a person who doesn’t give much thought to his actions and likewise, I felt that way as well. I read about these two things with little to no context and I didn’t pause to think what these two objects in the story truly signified about Darwin’s personality.


A Bobcat


By Isaac Gallegos Rodriguez

Mary Shelley’s gothic novel, “Frankenstein”, and it’s overall impact on our society and it’s culture is extraordinary. This is further supported by the that the majority of us are at least acquainted with the Frankenstein myth. The name “Frankenstein” conjures up images of a mad scientist, pseudoscience, and of course the monster itself. However, it is a significantly different experience reading the novel as opposed to solely relying on the myth.

Frank.The reason for this is that the myth of Frankenstein creates an inaccurate representation of the characters and their moral standings. For example, I had the preconceived notion that Victor Frankenstein was our stories protagonist, while the monster was the antagonist. In simpler words, I had believed that Victor Frankenstein was our story’s “good guy”— it was thought that although he could be described as a reckless character, his ingenuity and his good intentions would’ve been his redeeming factors. However, as we read the novel, Victor Frankenstein’s character wasn’t  improved – it was damaged.  For instance, when Victor undertook the task to reanimate dead matter he said “Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world.” This quote helped illustrate how Victor viewed himself, as a powerful creator, yet he is only a human. As the story progresses, we come to understand that this god complex is Victor’s hamartia. This lapse in moral judgement ultimately created pain and suffering, but at the expense of others— and because of Victor’s god complex and his irresponsible decisions, his image is ultimately damaged.  Consequentially, as we start to depend on the actual novel instead of the Frankenstein myth  and it’s preconceptions, a noticeable change can be seen with the monster’s character. The former myth that we had been prescribed to had dictated that the monster had been the villain of the story; this preconception is greatly challenged as we start to see that the monster is a very complex and relatable character. Throughout the story, the monster becomes less of fiend and more so a victim of prejudice and discrimination. Even the monster recognizes this injustice, saying “I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam; but I am rather a fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed”. The monster has a valid claim to Victor’s affection, however Victor Frankenstein continues to deny him this until the very end.


Therefore, after reading Mary Shelley’s novel, “Frankenstein”, our aforementioned preconceptions on the myth of Frankenstein are greatly challenged.  In this case, we see a dramatic shift in character relations and moral standings. The true victim in this tale was the monster, because as Percy Shelley wrote, “his original goodness was gradually turned into the fuel of an inextinguishable misanthropy and revenge”, due to the actions of the tale’s true monster — Victor Frankenstein.

By: Carmen Ibarra

Before actually reading Mary Shelley’s book, Frankenstein I always perceived Frankenstein to be this ignorant, flesh-eating, zombie-like, brain-eating monster. Through stories and Halloween costumes, Frankenstein was always just an entertaining story and character. However, we learn through Mary Shelley that Frankenstein is actually the creator of this unnamed “monster” we all think we know so well. It is interesting how we depict the monster to be a simple-minded,  green monster when in reality he is a self-educated and intelligent.

I titled this post, The Real Monster because I believe the real monster of this story is Victor Frankenstein, he abandoned and neglected his very own creation from the start and because of this “the monster” had to fend for itself, learn EVERYTHING on his own, and attempt to understand the ways of life. Not only that, but Frankenstein also attempted to play God by creating life and thinking he can do so successfully. So, of course, I place all the blame on Frankenstein for neglecting and running away from his creation because if he would have properly introduced Frankenstein to the world perhaps things would have turned out differently.

Samantha Shapiro


Even while having read the novel prior, I still see much of and thus associate Frankenstein’s creation as “Frankenstein,” a green, hulking, bolt-necked monster. Lately, around September, even as early as August, we begin to see the monster come out in time for one spooky October night, in the form of cheap costumes and lawn decorations.

As a standard of Halloween, the monster’s appearance as a green giant is shattered with a rereading of Shelley’s original novel, with a recounting from Victor Frankenstein noting the creature’s “yellow skin…[hair] a lustrous black…a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, his shriveled complexion and straight black lips” (Shelley, 59-60). This, as we learn, egotistical scientist turned to taking dead body parts from the “unhallowed damps of the grave, …dissecting room and slaughter-house” (57-58). In reading Shelley’s Frankenstein, the standard “Frankenstein myth,” or, a horrifying monster coming to eat your children loses its superficial appearance when faced with descriptive lines including some horrifying actions. Rather than keep up the image, likely popularized by the classic horror adaptations’ perspectives, the novel instead tells a tale about a complex creation.

After reading the novel, there are many elements of a sort of horror, but a more psychological, deeper horror rather than have the focus of a scary child-murderer. The eeriness of Frankenstein’s creature lies in its almost human, but more so human-like being, as well as the connection it has towards death and life, or animation and decay.

Our common depictions now show it as a threat, a monster some poor villagers in the backwoods of Europe threw their pitchforks at, something universally feared.


Although physically, it is presented as terrifying, the creature is terrifying to Frankenstein due to the implications of creation it brings, the guilt of creating something that shouldn’t exist (59). His conflict in creating something animated, perhaps even seen as alive, was a terrifying concept, bringing together life and death, and breaking an almost hallowed tie between the “corruption of death…to the blooming cheek of life” (55). The modern standing of Frankenstein’s monster, fitting into the myth of a horrible, scary monster is due to the appearance of it, but also our uneasiness towards it as a general dislike for something that shouldn’t be there.






My reading of Mary Shelley’s novel challenged my preconception of the Frankenstein myth in many ways. Before reading the book Frankenstein I thought of the creature created by scientist Victor Frankenstein as an evil monster who was a threat to mankind and must be destroyed. To me he was in no way human but rather a whole different species which was created by mistake. However, after reading his story I was able to sympathize with the creature and realized that he had feelings and emotions much like humans. He was not born evil nor had any intentions to hurt humans like most people wrongly believe. Instead he studied humans and watched over Felix’s family and studied their behavior and lifestyles because he wanted a close bond and friendship like the one they had. Later on he expressed his wishes to have a partner like himself to Frankenstein and in return he would vanish from the sight of mankind forever. It was the rejection of both society and his creator which made him do bad deeds and even then he expressed his remorse for his wrongdoings. He was thrown into a world which he did not understand and was disliked by everyone that crossed paths with him. Anyone in his position would do anything in their power to survive. Another interesting discovery I came across was that Frankenstein is not the name of the creature but of his creator. Lastly, I was very mind blown to discover that the story was not centered around the monster but rather the scientist who created him and the consequences of his creation. His biggest accomplishment turned into his biggest misfortune. 

Serena Ya


Initially, upon hearing the name “Frankenstein,” we often imagine a horrific, grotesque creature sewn together from dead tissue. However, Frankenstein is the creator of the frightening creature that we all know. The unnamed creature, also often referred to as the “monster” is not originally created to be a monster. It is when the monster is abandoned, isolated, and rejected from society that he is shaped into the “monster” that he is. Through this, we see that the creature wanted only to be accepted and loved by society, revealing a sensitive and emotional side of him many do not associate the creature with.

Although the creature is created as a fully, physically developed human, we often believe that he has the mind of a baby – undeveloped, illiterate, and oblivious. However, the creature very quickly catches on and becomes extremely educated and knowledgeable, speaking eloquently with significant comprehension. In some ways, it may seem that the monster is more a human than Frankenstein, and that it is Frankenstein himself, who is the real monster.

By the end of the novel, we begin to feel sympathy for the creature, because from the beginning of his existence, he was deserted by his own creator and therefore questioned the purpose of his life. Mary Shelley’s novel uncovers the truth of the monster, through the help of the different narrative perspectives, so that the audience is able to understand the monster through several separate lenses.

Kaylin Insyarath

My childhood was filled with nothing but stories. They came in all shapes and sizes, through movies and television, but the most significant form of stories came to me through books. Fairy tales to be exact. I read about girls in red hoods and houses made out of candy and giant beanstalks and while in the back of my mind somewhere, my six year old self knew that what I was reading couldn’t possibly happen, it didn’t stop me from searching for comfort and solace as well as imagination in these stories that seemed so absurd to my older peers.

Somewhere along the lines of my vibrant youth and my collection of storybooks I came across one about a green monster brought to life by a mad scientist. To be more direct, Frankenstein was first presented to me as a fairy tale. It was a story that didn’t hold much depth, one that I found myself dismissing after just one read. After that, the story of Frankenstein was sprinkled across the societal aspects of my young life as my classmates painted their faces green for Halloween and the television shows that played before 9:30, made references. A monster and a mad scientist. That’s all this story was to me…until now.

After reading Mary Shelley’s original story, I found myself reveling in the vulnerability of it all. The authenticity that makes itself so apparent within the story is refreshing as Mary Shelley draws from the most painful experiences of her life. I favor the stories that seem as if it is a teleplay from the writer’s mind itself. As I look onto the paperback book that sits next to me right now, I know now that it is not the story of a mad scientist and a monster but rather a story of a man longing for friendship just as we all do and of a creature that is the most human character of all. The story stands before us as one that is undisguised and the passion that is found within the pages is what makes this novel one that seems more real than any other fairy tale I could come across.


Image result for frankenstein slow

By Galilea Sanchez

As I read Frankenstein, I often stop, and it always surprises me that the creature (who’s name isn’t Frankenstein) talks! It really does. Before coming across this book I was certain that every appearance by the creature would involve only deep grunts and groans. I believed that since he was a creature of the dead he would be reborn with no knowledge and would therefore be unable to learn again. Yet I was wrong.

The picture displayed best describes my stereotypical image of Frankenstein. A silent creature, who lurks and makes noise only when he wants to make his presence known. Although I thought him unable to speak, I am certain that he would therefore be a great listener. Unable to communicate his thoughts but understanding those of others, even when he wasn’t supposed to. A shadow holding secrets that slip from others.

I was proven wrong when he shares how he managed to learn to speak properly AND read. He expressed himself so clearly to his creator that it was easy to forget that he was a creature no one could stand to see.

I had a thought a few days ago, that somehow if the creature was real and he managed to tell his story today he would have become a life coach. Today people are very accepting, in my opinion, of those who are different and with his struggles and way of speaking he might have put other coaches to shame.

Alina Cantero


As humans, we rely on stereotypes to gives us information on people and things we do not know or are uncertain of. Before reading Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, my preconceived knowledge of the myth was that, one the “creatures” name was Frankenstein and two that he was nothing but a “freakish monster” created by the experiment of an “evil scientist” (yes, the one you would stereotype, with the crazy hair). I believed that “Frankenstein” had no intelligence to him and was nothing but a brainless creature. I believed what he looked like (image attached above) because that is all I had been taught when it came to him. I was one to stereotype “Frankenstein” when I shouldn’t have because I had no knowledge about him and never even took the time to educate myself.

Upon reading Shelly’s story I have learned that he was not just a creature, but someone who was able to comprehend human emotions. He was able to feel loneliness and isolation, due to humans stereotyping him as dangerous and scary. I was also informed that he was never given a name, and the name Frankenstein was actually his creator’s last name. For being what I considered a brainless monster, he was quite intelligent. His intelligence was proven throughout the story by finding shelter in order to avoid the cold and snow. His willpower was demonstrated when he continues to stay hidden to ensure no human would see him because he knew they would be afraid of him. This “monster” demonstrated wits for survival, by waiting for the children to leave in order for him to go out and get food. By continuing to stay hidden and learn language from Felix, he attained a knowledge that would help him communicate and hopefully help others realize he was not there to harm them.

All he longed for was friendship and acceptance throughout his journey. All he needed to make him happy was for just one person show him the kindness and hospitality they had for other humans. After reading, I have come to the conclusion that my preconceived knowledge was nothing more than a myth.