----------------------------Original message----------------------------
A P.S. to my earlier Frankenstein-related message re:  Denis Hennell's
message:
 
Let's remember, too, that the word "madness" applied to anything the least
bit off the nineteenth-century beaten path, and it could include a high IQ,
depression, obsession, ego-mania (whether mild or OTT).  Perhaps there is no
evidence of what we refer to today as "madness,"  as Denis asserts, in the new
Branaugh film because, once again, the version of Frank parallels the book
more than the 1931 James Whale film.
 
I realize, too, that the 1931 film created a nearly world-wide persona and
(American) cultural image that many folks today want to see re-affirmed, and
that's why they d8xvRbl[{disliked_ugh film.  Shelley's  masterpiece, for
all the literary criticism it's had to bear (re:  her famous parents and their
influence, the possible meanings of the text regarding Shelley's
motherlessness, comparative mythology and the mother as womb and tomb), does
demand more -- as does Branaugh's film -- than simply comparison to Whale's
film.
 
That's all I'm trying to say.  And again, I would encourage a close reading
of Shelley's text.
 
Donna Harrington
Univ. of MD/NOVA- Loudoun