Maura (maura853) -
This is a terrible, terrible book. It's a testimony to the fascination of the subject matter, and to the obvious passion of the author, that it's surprisingly readable, in spite of dodgy writing, poor understanding of the history and culture of the time, and the poor organization of its ideas.
Let's start with the positive things: I learned something! I learned about early experiments in electricity, in human anatomy, and the pre-Frankenstein lives of Mary and Percy Shelley, Lord Byron and their set. I probably could have learned about these things from better, and better organized books, but some fascinating information was here, so don't knock it ... Just for example: did you know that Byron was anorexic? Nope, me neither. And that Dr. Polidori, the least charismatic of the foursome who engaged in the famous ghost story contest that resulted in Frankenstein, and somewhat unfairly, least famous (let's call him the Ringo of the foursome ...) was the uncle of Christina and Dante Gabriel Rossetti. How about that?** Add little things like that to what might almost be called a surfeit of Fascinating Facts about galvanism, grave robbing, alchemy, and the extraordinary sacrifice that frogs made in the name of science, and I'd say this book repaid the investment of my time.
**This is counter-balanced by some odd self-editing: for example, there was a long, and on the whole interesting description of how Byron adjusted his gait to disguise the fact that he limped. But Montillo resolutely refuses to say the the "congenital defect" he suffered was a club foot.
But ... but .... I've said this before, about other books that Could Have Been Better, but Montillo has been very poorly served by her publisher and editor. When I say that the book is poorly organized, it isn't so much that it bounces around, from topic to topic, and detail to detail, but that Montillo gives no sense of how it's all supposed to work together -- why the pieces of the puzzle fit. There are unsubstantiated claims (Dr. Polidori financed his medical education in Edinburgh by indulging in a bit of grave robbing? Just because ... grave robbing happened in Edinburgh, and he was there?) An opening chapter, in which she clearly states her thesis regarding the genesis of Frankenstein could have kept everything on message.
In addition, Montillo's word choice can be very odd. Describing the repressive control of Mary Shelley's stepmother, she describes the second Mrs. Godwin as having "a naughty eye and wagging tongue." She describes Lord Byron's neighbours on Lake Geneva as being shocked by the "strange and scandalous ordeals" they claimed to be able to see, going on at his lakeside retreat. Those are just a couple of examples I jotted down: on almost every page, there was a "huh?" moment, a word or phrase that was just a couple of degrees off.
And finally, Montillo seems to have a very casual acquaintance with the history and culture of late 18th-early 19th century England. For example, this first reference to one of Lord Byron's notorious love affairs: "Lady Caroline ... [a]lready married to a man who would later become part of London's parliament ..."
Let's unpack that: First, she was Lady Caroline *Lamb*. Unlike Lady Gaga or Princess Di, she is not quite notorious enough to be on first name basis. Second, the "man" was Lord Melbourne, who would later become the freakin' PRIME MINISTER, and close advisor to the teenage Queen Victoria. I think that's kinda important. And finally, "London's parliament"? Really?
Where was the editor, that's what I want to know? Approach at your peril -- it's a shame, because there's some good research here.
Let's start with the positive things: I learned something! I learned about early experiments in electricity, in human anatomy, and the pre-Frankenstein lives of Mary and Percy Shelley, Lord Byron and their set. I probably could have learned about these things from better, and better organized books, but some fascinating information was here, so don't knock it ... Just for example: did you know that Byron was anorexic? Nope, me neither. And that Dr. Polidori, the least charismatic of the foursome who engaged in the famous ghost story contest that resulted in Frankenstein, and somewhat unfairly, least famous (let's call him the Ringo of the foursome ...) was the uncle of Christina and Dante Gabriel Rossetti. How about that?** Add little things like that to what might almost be called a surfeit of Fascinating Facts about galvanism, grave robbing, alchemy, and the extraordinary sacrifice that frogs made in the name of science, and I'd say this book repaid the investment of my time.
**This is counter-balanced by some odd self-editing: for example, there was a long, and on the whole interesting description of how Byron adjusted his gait to disguise the fact that he limped. But Montillo resolutely refuses to say the the "congenital defect" he suffered was a club foot.
But ... but .... I've said this before, about other books that Could Have Been Better, but Montillo has been very poorly served by her publisher and editor. When I say that the book is poorly organized, it isn't so much that it bounces around, from topic to topic, and detail to detail, but that Montillo gives no sense of how it's all supposed to work together -- why the pieces of the puzzle fit. There are unsubstantiated claims (Dr. Polidori financed his medical education in Edinburgh by indulging in a bit of grave robbing? Just because ... grave robbing happened in Edinburgh, and he was there?) An opening chapter, in which she clearly states her thesis regarding the genesis of Frankenstein could have kept everything on message.
In addition, Montillo's word choice can be very odd. Describing the repressive control of Mary Shelley's stepmother, she describes the second Mrs. Godwin as having "a naughty eye and wagging tongue." She describes Lord Byron's neighbours on Lake Geneva as being shocked by the "strange and scandalous ordeals" they claimed to be able to see, going on at his lakeside retreat. Those are just a couple of examples I jotted down: on almost every page, there was a "huh?" moment, a word or phrase that was just a couple of degrees off.
And finally, Montillo seems to have a very casual acquaintance with the history and culture of late 18th-early 19th century England. For example, this first reference to one of Lord Byron's notorious love affairs: "Lady Caroline ... [a]lready married to a man who would later become part of London's parliament ..."
Let's unpack that: First, she was Lady Caroline *Lamb*. Unlike Lady Gaga or Princess Di, she is not quite notorious enough to be on first name basis. Second, the "man" was Lord Melbourne, who would later become the freakin' PRIME MINISTER, and close advisor to the teenage Queen Victoria. I think that's kinda important. And finally, "London's parliament"? Really?
Where was the editor, that's what I want to know? Approach at your peril -- it's a shame, because there's some good research here.
