Another Bride

Frankenstein’s Bride by Hilary Bailey is the third sequel to the Frankenstein novel by Mary Shelley that I’ve read recently. This one is a sort of alternate world sequel to the novel. It’s narrated by Jonathon Goodall, a wealthy young man interested in languages who becomes friends with Victor Frankenstein in London and then becomes involved in Frankenstein’s attempts to teach a mute singer (no, that’s not a typo) to speak.

I can understand titling the book Frankenstein’s Bride for marketing purposes but I think it serves the story poorly. The story seems to be trying to be a mystery. “Frankenstein in London” would have perhaps been a better title. It still references the good doctor without other parts of the plot becoming obvious.

This isn’t a direct sequel. It takes place a few years after the events of the original but concerns events that happened differently here than in said original.

Bailey gets the character of Frankenstein right. He’s a vain, self-involved obsessive who only gets more so as the story progresses.

The monster himself appears little and when he does he seems to be more the dumb brute of the films than the articulate demon of the novel.

The narrator, Goodall, is pleasant enough fellow to spend time with, a good chap who tries to do the right thing. And fails. Otherwise we wouldn’t have much of a story.

Now I want to read about the monster’s adventures in Australia.

6 thoughts on “Another Bride

  1. I didn’t really care for this one. Probably because the monster was vague and idiotic, more as he’s been portrayed in the movies than the novel. Frankenstein is one of my all time favorite books because of the intelligence and pathos of the monster. I found this to be entirely lacking, especially narrated by a relative outsider to the story.

  2. The monster is definitely the reason I like the original novel. He’s a vital, justifiable angry creature. I’ve yet to see a filmed version of the story that portrays him well.

  3. There was one which I can never remember right, but I think it was a two part made for television movie. They had the beginning and ended of the story almost perfect, and while they change a few things around in the story, the monster was very well portrayed. I cannot stand the shambling brute that they usually portray him as, so this was a welcome interpretation!

    Incidentally, the Phantom of the Opera, another of my favorite books, has never been properly interpreted on film. The movies are all well and good, but in the story, the phantom is the main character and the only full one. In the movies he typically plays second fiddle to Christine Day.

  4. Was that Frankenstein, the True Story? With Jane Seymour as the Bride? I saw that when it was first broadcast and remember enjoying it. I think it would be fun to see it again and see what I think of it now that I’ve read the novel.

    The only filmed version of the Phantom that I’ve seen is Phantom of the Paradise. It’s a rather liberal adaptation of the novel šŸ™‚

    The novel is a lot of fun. I love the Phantom’s lair under the Opera House.

    Somewhere out there is a story or novel in which Frankenstein’s monster turns out to be the Phantom. I’m not sure what it’s called and I’m not finding it online. My google fu is weak today.

  5. I don’t recall which Frankenstein it was. I only know it was in two parts and was fairly faithful to the book though some things were obviously changed as is typical with any book to movie deal.

    Phantom of the Paradise is great! lol It’s one of my favorite adaptations. Believe me, I’ve seen and read a lot of really bad ones. There was a French movie where the Phantom had a… sexual relationship with the rats who apparently raised him. And there was one that was pretty awful with Robert England that seemed to be equal parts original Phantom and Phantom of the Paradise. I even read a sequel by Forsyth where somehow the Phantom had a son with Christine. For some reason there’s a predominant urge for writers and filmmakers to throw the Devil in the mix is all I’m going to say.

    Are you serious about the Monster being the Phantom? OMG! That’s awesome! lol

  6. I’m pretty sure I ran across reference to a Frankenstein Monster as the Phantom story sometime in the last five years. I’ve been trying to find any links to the novel (I thought it was a novel) but I’m still having no luck. I didn’t read it the story itself. I remember just reading a synopsis and mentally filing it away as something to track down later. Unfortunately my mental files are pretty disorganized.

Comments are closed.