top 49 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 48 points 11 months ago (5 children)

if you're a reader of the story, you know that the monster considered the doctor to be his father. so calling the monster Frankenstein is just accepting that perspective... not accepting it could be detrimental to you and your family and friends health.... don't piss off the monster is pretty much what I am saying

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

    His name is Adam Frankenstein

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    If only Mary Shelley knew the eternal chaos she caused by not giving that green monster a name.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    That was my memory! Wasn’t he named Adam?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago

    His name is Frankenstein Smonster

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    If Victor Frankenstein created "The Frankenstein Monster," then the monster would inherit his paternal surname, making them both Frankensteins proper. It's one of Victor's failings that he did not give "The Monster Frankenstein" a proper first name, along with his failing in abandoning his creation.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Didn't Frankenstein's creation take on the name "Adam?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Shit maybe, if so I don't remember, gonna need to reread/watch something other than Young Frankenstein (which I watch yearly lol).

    Still, then his name is Adam Frankenstein, he still inherits the surname (unless he chose one of those too and I forgot lol).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Woah, Frankenstein reboot idea, the Doctor was the puppet master of the monster so they were actually one in the same. The monster mimics all the Docs moves because replacing a brain is hard so he just used tech.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Oh man, I thought that was supposed to be Einstein, but then figured the joke is that it's his supposed son, Frank Einstein, which sounds a lot like "Frankenstein". I guess, the joke is a lot simpler than that...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    The joke is Frankenstein is the doctor from the novel by the same name (the mad scientist). He ordered the beverage, but he confused the monster who is also waiting for his drink. The monster from the novel Frankenstein has no name, but people call him Frankenstein after the book's name, so it's a play on that confusion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago
    [–] 5 points 11 months ago (13 children)

    TranscriptionA cartoon of a woman standing next to a coffee machine, holding out a takeaway coffee container. She smiles as she asks "Frankenstein?"

    The same woman, now with no visible mouth, in a wider shot, showing two figures raising their hands and looking at each other: a man in a lab coat, glasses, and with grey frizzly hair, and a depiction of "Frankenstein's monster" as soon in popular culture.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 11 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago*

    Nope, just me! 😊

    Back on Reddit, I was a co-mod of a sub with the guy who founded the "transcribers of Reddit", and that helped instill in me an appreciation for the value of accessibility.

    It's not too hard to do and I'd encourage anyone to give it a go. There's no need for perfection, and you get a better sense of it as you get used to doing it.

    Mastodon and Pixelfed both yell at users to provide alt text for their own posts, but unfortunately Lemmy's devs don't seem to have quite the same care for accessibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Probably not. I think most of these are human volunteers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago* (6 children)
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Sure, and yes, it's literally doing what alt text would do, for the same purpose (i.e. describe the image for the visually impaired). The "style" of these that I've seen (not just here) is pretty verbose, so I don't think that's necessarily an indication of llm use. Obviously I can't prove it either way, but I'd rather give these the benefit of the doubt, since this is useful work if it helps people follow along.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I actually tend to do these less verbose than what I've seen is common with others. I concentrate first on getting across the specific message of the post, and second on describing details that help get across the mood.

    The wide shot is an important detail, because it explains why we didn't see the other subjects in the first frame. The lack of visible mouth felt important to me because it contrasts with the smile in the first frame, the lack of smile (or indeed any mouth) gives it a weirder feeling.

    Your initial comment seemed like a fairly innocent question and I was happy to answer it, but seeing the thread continue, it's looking more like a baseless accusation. And that's dickhead behaviour. Don't do that. To me, or to others. It's extremely rude, and honestly provides nothing of value. It's especially galling to be accused when I'm spending my effort trying to make this a more inclusive space.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    I'm sorry, but "he described the people with no mouths as having no mouths" is a bullshit reason. Just...don't make accusations like that. It's a shitty thing to do.

    If you want to ask a polite question, that's one thing, but going on and on through a thread trying to persuade someone else of a completely baseless and unfair accusation is really low behaviour.

    And if you had been right, what then? What would you have gained? Weigh the consequences of your actions. When the potential upside is almost-nil, and the probability you're right is a complete toss-up, it's not worth it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    People say β€œFrankenstein was the doctor”, but he never even graduated!

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Since the creature depicted is the extremely unfaithful to the book Boris Karloff version, sure, he can be named Frankenstein. The book version would not be, though.

  • source