Interview With William Latham, Author of Mary's Monster   Q: Why a sequel to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein? WL: Well, it's not really a sequel. It's not like it picks up where Frankenstein left off or anything like that. The Monster in Mary's Monster isn't exactly the same monster we know. Mary Shelley kind of filtered a real story into her book. This is a novel about the product of the real story.   Q: But this is a story that everybody knows. WL: Maybe, maybe not. The challenge I felt when I first started this book way back when was that even though I always loved Boris Karloff and the neck bolts and all that stuff, as an adult, the Frankenstein Monster isn't really scary. The whole appeal when I watch "Bride of Frankenstein" now is kind of sentimental. It's like I'm reliving something I experienced as a kid. I wanted to tell a story in the present, with this real person who just happened to be created two hundred years ago in a laboratory. Spending two hundred years as an outcast, that's got to have an effect on you. I read the original book as a teenager, and I will admit it took me a couple of times to get into it. I kept expecting Boris Karloff, and that's not in the book. But the Monster in the book, especially when you're a teenager, that's some character Mary Shelley created way back when. This kind of broken soul walking around and wondering why he's here and stuff like that. In Mary's Monster he definitely gets scary, but not in the way people expect. I remember being scared of the Monster as a kid. That wasn't enough. I wanted him to scare me as an adult too.   Q: So the Monster in your book is more like the one in the novel, not in the films. WL: He's not really either one. It's interesting. When I first started this book, the beginning kind of wrote itself, where the Monster basically tells this story of how he came to be and stuff like that. And that was a lot of fun to write. But then, boom. Nothing. Then it stopped. He told this interesting story, but then it was time to use him as a character in a novel, but he didn't have a voice. I waited years before he really came to life for me. And then, he just kind of evolved into this other person. The guy with his own sort of wisdom, but no real experience in dealing with people. And add to that a definite chip on his shoulder. He's still a broken soul. But for all the ways he's the Frankenstein Monster we all know, he's something else too. He's got problems.   Q: What should a reader expect then? WL: Well, naturally, I don't want to give too much away. I don't think it will be the book people expect it to be. If you are a Frankenstein buff, and I'm definitely one of those, there's lots of good stuff in there. I mean, how often do you get to see the actual Frankenstein Monster watching "Bride of Frankenstein" over a pepperoni pizza? Parts of the book are kind of funny, parts of it are kind of sad. Parts of it get pretty dark. You've got a guy who had the most awful childhood imaginable, if you can call it a childhood. That's not the best foundation for building a normal life on. He's a victim. And victims sometimes create other victims.   Q: Do readers need to read Mary Shelley's original to really enjoy Mary's Monster? WL: No, definitely not, but I hope it will get some people to read the original. The Monster gives enough of an overview to get people familiar with the important stuff. But, that's a key part of the book. Mary heard a story from Lord Byron, and she made up most of Frankenstein. And somebody wasn't happy, and the book goes from there.   Q: What made you write Mary's Monster? WL: Outside of being a Frankenstein fan? Well, like I said. I wrote a whole chunk of the book way back when, where the Monster tells this alternate version of what was in the original novel, and then this character just kind of came alive to me. When you get a character that comes to life, you don't have much choice in the matter. You kind of have to see where it's going to turn out. But part of me wanted to redeem this icon from my childhood. Frankenstein's Monster is on cereal boxes, now. I think everybody's jaded about him. I was watching a documentary about John Barrymore recently, and when he died, Harpo Marx said something about how it's tragic when a great man dies, but it's even more tragic when the greatness dies before the man. That's how I felt about the Frankenstein Monster. I wanted him getting under people's skin again. To get off the cereal box. There's something visceral about the Monster, something kind of primal about why he's scary. Scary doesn't mean what it meant in 1931, anymore, when they made "Frankenstein" at Universal. I wanted to usher him into modern times, and get people uncomfortable again. Make them a little uneasy about the whole idea of this indestructible guy who wants to fit in, but just can't.   Q: Any message for the readers? WL: If you want a gothic horror story, this ain't it. But if you want to see the Frankenstein Monster walking around in 1999, reacting to the same world you and I react to every day, give it a whirl. Just don't expect things to turn out all right in the end.