"I hate this complex book written by a woman widely considered a masterpiece I much prefer this mid novella written by a homophobic victorian man"
The women in Frankenstein are more three-dimensional than the ones in Carmilla
I don't know if this is the same person or two separate people Big Mad that I like Carmilla and not Frankenstein (the novel) but uh
literary taste is subjective, bud or buds
I like critically panned books and generally-acknowledged masterpieces, by men and women, in any combination of those attributes. and I bet you do, too
because (with a few exceptions) liking or not liking a book, personally, is a morally neutral act that does not reflect your thoughts on its place in the broader literary canon unless you try to claim that your subjective taste is an objective definition of quality
imagine that
I also want to challenge the idea that the women in Frankenstein are more three dimensional than in Carmilla, because⊠what? Caroline is barely a character - she exists to work herself to the bone sewing for her familyâs supper, and then to die dramatically for the sake of Frankenstein family angst. Justine is even less of a character, considering her big role in the story is to die due to being the scapegoat for Victorâs crimes. Elizabeth is essentially an emotional support animal for Victor and his family, focusing on taking Carolineâs place in the household seamlessly after her death and providing the stability and comfort the men need in their grief. All her expressed hopes and dreams and wishes, in both versions of the story (for feminist reasons I am a revision stan over the 1818 edition) are about her place in the household and her ties to Victor.
Personally I think thatâs part of the ways the book can be seen as making proto-feminist commentary! The women whose lives and labor and hearts allow Victor to have the leisure time and stability to pursue his experiments and his aristocratic lifestyle are footnotes to him. He considers them in relation to his life exclusively. One reason I thought del Toroâs film was so clever was because it takes this subtextual character flaw and draws it out in ways the audience (who have, particularly wrt the book, favored Victor immensely - heâs in many ways practically a Tumblr and Pinterest sexyman in the classic sense, particularly due to perceived homoeroticism with Henry, and this has blinded people to his shortcomings) canât ignore. It showed that the women of the story existed outside of Victorâs mind, something the original text never directly said. Canonically, on the page, the women in Frankenstein are *really* not developed. Thatâs sort of the point.
The girls in Carmilla are the main characters of the story. The central protagonist and antagonist. Their relationships matter to the plot and their experiences are the reason thereâs a narrative at all. What are we even doing here.
I love this because it highlights how many possible takes on this there are out there!
I'm team "didn't like Frankenstein the Novel because the women were flat characters, Loved Frankenstein 2025, Loved Carmilla"
the comment seems to be team "I like all of these things AND I think the women in Frankenstein the Novel being flatter is a feature, not a bug"
Anon, while being Like that, is team "the women in Frankenstein the Novel are not flat, the women in Carmilla are flat, and I like Frankenstein the Novel but not Carmilla"
isn't the world more fun when we all do literary analysis together rather than assigning moral stances to liking or disliking two Gothic novels (with equivalent levels of 19th-Century Problematique Content as a baseline)?



















