Journalist achieves remarkable feat of writing about book he’s never read

In a desperate attempt to appease the resentment of getting older, one man with unjustifiable access to a keyboard wrote an article that remarkably managed to encompass a hatred for students, young people, readers, professors, human rights law, fictional characters, and feelings long-dead writers.

“Frankenstein has been dubbed ‘misunderstood’ by snowflake students who see the monster as a victim,” he writes. “One professor even claimed that the murdering monster could have been protected by human writes laws today.”

Well…no, he didn’t. What Professor Nick Groom said was, “If he’s not human, but he is intelligent and sentient, does he have rights?”

Unlike the author, who it seems is clearly neither. But, hey, we’ve all got to blame something for our anger, right.

Shelley’s gothic masterpiece has long been part of literary analysis, raising questions around sentimental origins and capabilities, responsibility, the concept of a “monster” (who is not Frankenstein – Frankenstein made the monster), alienation and love, which is what people have been interpreting and discussing for decades, long before snowflakes arrived on the scene.

This isn’t about ‘snowflakes’ or university professors trying to give rights to fictional characters from a 19th Century novel. It is quite literally the academic analysis of a classic work of literature.

Someone please send Gary a copy of the book – he’s clearly, umm, misunderstood the entire point – before he starts wandering the streets with a pitchfork.