HOW TO WRITE A MASTERPIECE AT JUST 18¾

It was to be the most extraordinary writer’s weekend in all history, leading to the creation of not one, but two, of the most popular and enduring genres in fiction.

During the rainy summer of 1816, the eighteen year old Mary Shelley visited Lord Byron at the Villa Diodati by Lake Geneva with her lover and soon-to-be husband, the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley.

The other guest was John Polidori, Byron’s physician. Sitting around a log fire, staring at the grey skies and wishing they could go water ski-ing, they entertained themselves by reading ghost stories. Then Byron suggested they have a competition to see who could write the scariest story.

Common sense would dictate that the teenage Mary would have no chance against these giants of the English Romantic movement.

Common sense would have been wrong.

Shelley scribbled some paranormal short stories; Byron wrote ‘Fragment of a Novel’ which Polidori used later as the basis for ‘The Vampyre’, the first vampire story ever to be published in English and the forerunner of the entire romantic vampire literary genre. (See WHY VAMPIRES WILL NEVER DIE.)

Meanwhile, Mary wrote Frankenstein, which Brian Aldiss called the very first science fiction story. So Byron’s diversion led to the creation of two of the most popular genres in contemporary fiction. Not bad for a weekend’s work.

If it had rained that summer we may never have had Buffy, Twilight, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, the Monster Mash or the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein.

Mary claimed the story came to her in a  dream, though it’s more likely it was inspired by the visit she and Shelley made to the Castle Frankenstein in Germany on their way to Switzerland. It was here that a notorious alchemist named Konrad Dippel had performed gruesome experiments with cadavers, in which he attempted to transfer the soul of one corpse into another.

It is thought that Shelley himself was the model for Victor Frankenstein, for at Eton he had experimented with electricity and gunpowder and his rooms at Oxford were said to have been filled with scientific equipment.

Shelley encouraged his new bride to develop her short story into a novel, which she did, and it was published anonymously in 1818 (after first being rejected by both Shelley’s and Byron’s publishers – the same genius ‘gatekeepers’ existed back then too.)

It was not immediately embraced by the critics. It left The Quarterly Review in ‘a struggle between laughter and loathing, in doubt whether the head or the heart of the author be the most diseased.’ The British Critic exposed a deeper prejudice: ‘when we did not hurry over the pages in disgust, we sometimes paused to laugh outright … The writer of it is, we understand, a female; this is an aggravation of that which is the prevailing fault of the novel; but if our authoress can forget the gentleness of her sex, it is no reason why we should; and we shall therefore dismiss the novel without further comment”.’

But ‘Frankenstein’ achieved an almost immediate popular success despite the critics. Today it is regarded as a masterpiece of English literature.

I believe there are lessons in this for all writers.

The obvious one is not to be too disturbed by what critics say; another is to appreciate how time pressure and competition can help and not hinder the creative process. There’s nothing like a deadline.

Finally and most importantly, we should appreciate how the subconscious can help create our opus if we go inside instead of outside for inspiration. Shelley said the story came to her in a dream; as if she were embarrassed that a visit to a castle and a character loosely based on someone she knew intimately was not inspiration enough for any writer.

Next week I’ll talk about how Frankenstein tells us more about Mary Shelley than if you were reading her personal diary.

For now, think about the Percy Shelleys and the Castle Frankensteins in your life – is there a monster in those fragments just waiting to be born during on your next rainy weekend?

About colinfalconer

author of bestselling historical novels like Anastasia, When We Were Gods, Aztec and Harem. My books have been published in the UK, US and ANZ and translated into seventeen languages.
This entry was posted in WRITING and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to HOW TO WRITE A MASTERPIECE AT JUST 18¾

  1. Wow, that’s a seriously harsh critique for Mary Shelley…a good one to keep things in perspective! Thanks Colin. Illuminating post, as always :)

    • I thought it was harsh, too. Imagine if you or I got a review like that? I’d go on a bender for the entire week. I put it in to show that we should never take reviews like that too seriously – in this case, Mary Shelley had the last laugh.

  2. thx Colin, for sharing this. If Mary Shelley received such scathing criticism, what chance do the rest of us have to avoid it? great reminder.

    • I don’t think a good critic would ever do this – they almost always keep their reviews balanced. I thought it was a great reminder too – my daughter’s studying Shelley now for her degree, but that critic is anonymous and long forgotten.

  3. susielindau says:

    Shelley wrote Frankenstein during “the summer without sun.” There was a mini-ice age caused by a volcanic eruption and ash blocked out the sun. The light was eerie and it was a cold summer. I think that influenced Mary more than anything else. They were pretty bored since the weather didn’t cooperate.
    I wrote about this too a while back!
    Go Mary Shelley!

    • Apparently the volcano was all the way over in Indonesia, is that right? No wonder people became a touch morbid. Must have been very weird.

      • susielindau says:

        There is a lot written about that summer. All of Europe was effected. It must be similar to our wildfires out here in Colorado. We get some strange lighting too!

  4. CC MacKenzie says:

    Wow!

    Great stuff, Obi Wan, great stuff.

  5. Julia Indigo says:

    “So Byron’s diversion led to the creation of two of the most popular genres in contemporary fiction. Not bad for a weekend’s work.”

    No kidding. And that scathing review! May I write something as lasting and receive a similar one!

    • She didn’t get one good review! I only picked out the two worst ones! I am imagining that coming from such a strong literary backgrouond helped her ride out the critical storm. I can imagine Shelley saying to her: ‘Don’t worry about it, you should ahve heard what they said about Ode to the West Wind.’

  6. prudencemacleod says:

    Awesome as usual, Colin. Hmm, should we truly let our deeper imaginations run loose? Now there’s a frightening thought.
    It is fun getting the last laugh on the critics. So, when’s it my turn?
    Go Mary Shelley
    Go Colin Falconer

  7. Wonderful post Colin! So glad you are now on the Book of Face so I can find you. Looking back on the fateful summer day is quite inspiring to me, and as for critics I have to think that they tried to be writers first, and failed, and now all they have left to do is criticize other writers.

    • I’m on the Book of Face finally because they finally got their act sorted over there – I told Zuckerberg I wouldn’t buy any shares at his IPO and they seemed to frighten them. This story about Mary Shelley is inspiring in light of the criticism she received – reminded me of Ian Main’s letter about Fawlty Towers on your Facebook entry today!

  8. Debra Kristi says:

    Love this post Colin! To think she endured so much bad press over her monster. But you’re right, look who’s laughing now! :D The information about that summer and the stories that came to be at that time is fasinating. I agree with Rachel, great to finally see you on FB.

    • Good to be on Facebook and follow what’s happening. CC thinks I’m a lurker but it’s not true – it really has taken me that long to get my Facebook profile running. What a saga.

  9. Fabulous story to share! Thanks to Susie too for the info re the eruption that year.

    • It’s a great story, isn’t it? I think the eruption is a whole different post. That must have been a very strange summer yet I never heard anything about that before.

  10. Reetta Raitanen says:

    An inspiring story. I loved learning the background of two classic novels. Although Mary’s reviews were most unjust and propably skewed due to her gender.

  11. Pingback: Link Feast For Writers, vol. 13 | Reetta Raitanen's Blog

  12. Wishing they could go water skiing? That made me laugh out loud.

    It is so interesting to find out how the writers of old came up with their stories. And how idiot critics have been around for centuries. :)

    • There are some very good critics out there (Roger Ebert for example, who I love.) But there are some critics who think their job is to criticize. I believe it’s a difficult job to do well; amateurs mostly articulate prejudice. As Shelley’s did.

  13. Pingback: DOES YOUR MONSTER KEEP YOU FROM THE MASTERPIECE IN YOU? | LOOKING FOR MR GOODSTORY

  14. Dave Morris says:

    I’ll accept that Frankenstein is an extremely influential work, but “recognized as a masterpiece of English literature”? Hardly!

    Btw it’s far from certain that Mary Shelley ever visited Castle Frankenstein, though she may very well have swiped the name from it – as we all draw our inspiration from maps and so forth from time to time. As for whether the novel tells you a great deal about her as a person, I’d say beware of using a novelist’s work as some kind of psychoanalytic key.

    • Thanks Dave. But I’ll have to contend with you on this one.
      First, ‘Frankenstein’ is today considered a defining work in Gothic literature that continues to influence art, film, theater and books and is still taught in universities almost two hundred years after its initial publication (it’s also part of my daughter’s degree course in at Goldsmith in London.) I will maintain that this is sufficient to qualify.
      I would also say that ‘far from certain’ does not mean the same as ‘unconfirmed’, especially if you examine her itinerary for her European trip that year with her husband.
      As for the third point, it might perhaps be better to dispute that point with the many universities around the world who study psychoanalytic approaches to literary criticism as part of their degree courses in Literature. I would refer you to the vast body of work by Jacques Lacan, of whom much has been written (here, for example). If you’d like to know more about psychoanalytical criticism -and every writer should at least be aware that it exists – then you can see this article here, which includes a selected biography – just a hundred or so books from the vast body of work that has been devoted to the subject. The author and critic David Lodge agrees with you that the methodology is subject to abuse but nevertheless it is a vast field of study – as I am sure you are aware. You could perhaps take up your problems with the theories with some of the greatest thinkers of the last one hundred years. They’re a lot smarter than me. I just borrowed from some of the material because I thought readers might find it of interest.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s