1.) Who is under attack in the novel? Who (antagonist) or What is portrayed as seriously negative? Who or What is the danger? What is the warning Mary Shelley had for us?

2.) Who is the protagonist? What or where is the 'good'? What is positive about the book? If it is all negative, how is that positive?

3.) Who was Prometheus when he's at home, and why the references to him/her/it? What is “modern” about Prometheus? Do these questions help with the above two questions?

4.) What is the significance of the ‘bride of the monster’? Why did Victor move so far in the direction of making her, and what made him stop?

5.) Consider each of the deaths: Elizabeth Lavenza, William Frankenstein, Henry Clerval, and particularly of Justine Moritz: what significance does each have for the story, the theme, the ending, the message? Is there a unifying theme here, or do some or each serve separate purposes?

6.) Is this essentially a novel about religion: Creator, created becoming sinner? Is there ‘redemption’ in the novel?

7.) Is this essentially a novel about science: Scientist, product, hubris? Is there redemption in this reading of the novel?

8.) Consider the film Jurassic Park: is this Frankenstein redux? Why have so many films of this story been done so differently (badly?) compared to the novel?

9.) The genetics industry -- cloning, stem cells, selective abortions due to baby-abnormalities -- is this the target of Mary Shelley's warning in the novel? Is John Henry Newman's "knowledge for its own sake" a dangerous goal and motive?

10.) "Robinson Crusoe and Frankenstein have little in common. The two books center on different themes, have different conclusions and present different messages to their readers." -- Do you agree with this statement? Explain with examples, your commentary and the necessary context to fill out your argument.

11.) Consider the final scene: Does the dialogue have climactic significance? Does the story even end at the end?

12.) Consider the Enlightenment ideals of society, education, knowledge, individualism: How does the novel address these Enlightenement ideals? Pro, anti, or..... what?

13.) Consider the Western Civilization characteristic of reason, rationality? What part does it play? Is rationality involved in a struggle? Is this story a romantic reaction against reason? How does 'passion' fit into this line of inquiry?

14.) Consider the Reformation: is the story about 'unintended consequences'? Did the Reformation (or Luther, or Calvin, or, or?) create a monster that not only devoured its children in the Wars of Religion, but continues to devour any meat in sight?

15.) Levine's article noted connections between the themes in Shelley's book and the French Revolution. Explain the connection. Then explain why you think that this thesis stands, or falls.

16.) Victor and Candide/Pangloss share some interesting characteristics: both begin as pure and simple heroes, then the world intrudes. Do the similarities continue, or not? Asked in another way, in these two books, do Shelley and Voltaire have similar, or radically different, objects of attack, hopes for improvement, methods of critiquing society?

17.) Positivism, and its later monster-brother -- Post-Modernism -- have angles on explaining the meaning in the book. Each also fails in various ways. Please explain, with examples from the book, these FOUR positions. Which convinces you? Why this and not the others?

18.) The novel was conceived and written by Mary Shelley, a woman. How did she portray ‘woman’ or various women in the novel? How did males in the novel view women? Is there a difference in Victor’s views of women compared with the monster’s views?

19.) Romanticism is often used as a context for Frankenstein. How does this context work for the book. What other examples of Romanticism in art, literature etc relate to Shelley's book? Does the link between Romanticism and Frankenstein break down anywhere? Explain.

20.) The last essay in our Frankenstein book, by Fred Botting, details a myriad of references between 'monster' and the French Revolution.  Levine's essay made similar assertions.
           Name-calling is one thing, evidence and reasoning is another. Let's test it: Applying secondary and primary source evidence, is there convincing link between the man-made horror that Dr. Frankenstein created and the man-made horror that became the French Revolution? Or not? Or further -- do any of our 'revolutions' fit this paradigm? From the Renaissance to the various upheavals in the Reformation period, to the Scientific Revolution to the Enlightenment or the English Revolution? Or not some, or not any, of them?