The right husband would be proud, not threatened
post
I would celebrate! We are a team. We are invested in each other's success.
If you would be upset, or feel inadequate, in response to your wife's unprecedented success, you simply do not have the temperament for marriage.
What a bizarre rant.
Mary Shelley was married to Percy Shelley, a famous poet.
Which doesn’t demean Mary Shelley’s accomplishments, regardless.
And what if we swapped the genders?
You could do the same to Mileva Marić but that would make you an asshole.
Also kind of ridiculous, because looking deeper into it, Lord Byron wrote "Fragment of a Novel" which seems to be credited as the first vampire themed English literature, though he never finished it.
So literally the competition produced the Vampire and Frankenstein theme in English horror. It's more interesting to me that a bunch of writers played a little game and basically invented so much.
Mary Shelley's actual husband, Percy Shelley, was a poet. Imagine having a career as a professional writer and your wife, who's never published a work of fiction ever, writes a novel for a competition and becomes so famous for it, your name becomes a footnote in history under hers.
I'm all for supporting the endeavors and success of your spouse, but that still has to sting a little bit.
Marry Shelley's husband was not John Polidori, it was Percy Bysshe Shelley. Surprised no one picked this up. Percy was an amazing poet.
John Polidori was in love with Mary, but was not married to her
I think that was just poor grammar, seems like "her husband" and John Polidori are two separate characters in the statement not that John Polidori was an elaboration of what her husband's name was. But that's how I read it initially too.
The OP does not suggest that John Polidori was her husband. There's a comma between "her husband" and "John Polidori". And in fact the post seems to be correct (judging by Wiki):
In 1816—at the suggestion of Lord Byron—Mary, Percy, John Polidori and Byron himself, each agreed to try writing a ghost story
Well, it's an unclear structure. Putting a comma before and after someone's name is correct if including the name would not change the meaning of the sentence, as in this case. In the case of OP's sentence, it could have implied that Polidori was Mary Shelley's husband as his name, while important to the meaning of the sentence, was included in a list of other people, including Mary Shelley, Mary Shelley's husband, and Lord Byron.
I agree it is ambiguous, however usually you don't separate parentheticals by commas inside a comma-separated list, so the "more likely" reading is the one without the parenthetical.
An unambiguous version that doesn't diminish the joke would be "Lord Byron, John Polidori, Mary Shelley, and her husband". But alas it's difficult for writers to find ambiguities in texts that they write (that's what editors are for).
I see the comma now, but Percy Bysshe Shelley was an incredible writer who is studied and lauded, rightly, on his own merit. Anyone reading this thinking Mary's husband is insignificant compared to Frankenstein needs to read Ozymandias or The Masque of Anarchy right now and witness this beautiful, humanistic and liberatory spirit.
As Balsoft said, that is part of the punchline of the joke: People only know him now as Mary Shelly's husband.
I mean, I'm a big fan of Percy Shelley's poetry, the fact that he isn't taught more IMO has to do with the liberatory character of his writing more than he was an inferior writer to Mary. Mary's book is great, but PBS was an incredible writer whose work has wide cultural significance, even if we aren't like forced to read it in school or whatever.
People should read more PBS, he should be more popular.
iirc Percy was very proud of her work
Byron’s story created the vampire romance genre though
What this really tells me is that I should join a writing competition with my wife.
Not Byron. It was Polidori.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_William_Polidori
Edit: Polidori wrote his story based on an abandoned work by Byron.
Byron was a super-famous poet before this competition, and he wrote Draculawhat would late inspire Dracula during this, not to belay the point Mary Shelley is far more well known generally than George Gordon Byron. But 'Lord Byron' is still very well known if short being a household like Shelley, especially in the UK or with those with even a passing internet in English language poetry
Fun facts, The competition was inspired by the gloominess caused by the 'Year without a Summer' which it was the time 1816
And Shelly's mother was Mary Wollstonecraft an early women's liberation writer and activist 'the Mother of modern Feminism' (very influential on the suffragetes)
and Byron's daughter but not the one he had with Shelly was Ada Lovelace the OG coder
Naturally I'd try to be supportive but it would be hard not to get a little competitive if you knew the long term outcome along the lines of "I need to step up my game"
Lord Byron was no slouch either. She overshadowed someone who puts off a decent light himself, that is how badly he was owned.
I know next to nothing about this. Was it her first novel?
Yup. She did write a lot, mind you, but not really to be published. Her father ran a publishing house and I think she wrote a childrens verse for him when she was a kid but otherwise it was journals and imaginative stuff as a kid. The first thing she properly wrote was, indeed, Frankenstein. If memory serves.
frankestein is the most boring and shit book i have ever had the displeasure to read
I personally couldn't finish it, but then I couldn't finish Dracula either; books from 1900's and earlier are not written as entertainingly as novels since the hobbit or Narnia; I tried reading a novel called the smiling man (I think it was called) of whom the joker is supposedly inspired by, and I couldn't bear more than a few pages
This take is so bad it borders on misogyny. No account for taste I suppose but you are just completely and utterly wrong.
Old novels are not written the same way as novels of the last hundred years; unless you're surrounded by old literature, it's hard to get into. It's definitely a taste thing.
This doesn't seem like assuming good faith. They said they really didn't like a specific novel.
Not that I don't think it's a weird take, I loved Frankenstein when I read it. But as you say no accounting for taste
I should have been more clear that it was supposed to be cheaky, but I guess it came off badly and for that @umbrella@lemmy.ml you have my sincere apology. But like, Shelly was a pioneer of what became modern novelization. I actually think people really bounce off it because it is so jarringly different from the popular conception of Frankenstein and the modern horror genre. I can say it certainly was not what I was expecting but once I got into it, it really captivated me. Calling it a shit novel just seemed unnecessarily spiteful.
it's alright. what turns me off from this kind of art is that all that came after it is inspired by it already and frankly, usually builds upon better. sometimes this makes the old pioneers sound generic and bland. you will find me hating on stuff like the beatles just the same when i like a lot of the stuff they inspired.
though rereading my post i did sound angrier and less ironic than i intended to and i can't blame you from reading it exactly how i wrote it in the first place.
all 50 comments