Molland's Community

[Reeba]

I finished reading this book some time ago.
After much thought I finally decided on posting my views here.

The best thing about the book IMO is that it is well written. The choice of words and their use, plus the construction of the plot was quite good especially when compared to Francis Lathom's (whose Midnight Bell we've just finished reading).

He comes up with some very *wise* lines (wise for his age - 19 yrs.) He nails Ambrosio's (the monk's) character as being of;

conscious superiority, in which humility's semblance combated with the reality of pride.

So also the last sentence in the book;

Lady,to look with mercy on the conduct of others is a virtue no less than to look with severity on your own.

That said - the striking feature of the book is that it assaults your sensibilities *shudder*   
In the introduction it says that Matthew Lewis was a great admirer of Mrs Radcliffe and liked The Mysteries of Udolpho.
My comment to all those who say that *any* gothic book could be parodied in place of The Mysteries of Udolpho, and so The Monk was alright -  is something similar to -
 Laugh at Mr. Darcy?
 Parody The Monk?'
Believe me it is no laughing (or parodying) matter!!!!!
That Catherine Morland could be erotically aroused by the scenes in the book is astounding. The first time he tries to ravish Antonia, she 's senseless, and the monk doesn't get his way but ends up murdering her mother.
The second time, when he gets his way, is soooo sinister. Down in the vaults with Antonia dressed in her shroud, as she is considered dead and buried.
**shudder** **shudder**

Then there is the horror of Agnes imprisoned way way down!¨Even lower than the vaults. **more shuddering**

While in The Mysteries of Udolpho there is a wax figure of a mouldering body, t(he sight of which makes Emily swoon) here the heroines are in constant contact with the real stuff - without fainting!!
Now that i mention it, the heroines in this book are not the typical, fainting highly accomplished with poor ailing fathers.

No way can one parody this book!!!
Come to think of it. The only thing taken from this book were for those erotic scenes. Hmmmm. Was *that* supposed to be the parody?''!!!

The banditis here do not go about brandishing their swords. At least not in this story. They adopt sly methods where the woodcutter in the forest provides weary travellers refuge, and poisons them or murders them while they are asleep in bed.
So obviously *this* part was not parodied.

I am of the opinion that AD felt 'No one will know'. 

Now I can lay this book to rest. Long had it been the cause of mischief and much discomfort!!!

[Reeba]

OK. I really don't know who the author is addressing as 'Lady'.

In fact the last few lines of the book went right over my head.

Haughty lady, why shrunk you back when you poor frail one drew near? Was the air infected by her errors? Was your purity soiled by her passing breath? Ah, lady! smooth that insulting brow: stifle the reproach just bursting from your scornful lips: would not a soul that bleeds already! She has suffered, suffers still. Her air is gay, but her heart is broken; her dress sprkles, but her bosom groans.

The above passage is then followed by what i quoted in my earlier post, and while I understood the sentiment there it is after all part of the whole speech to this 'lady.'
Of course it is perhaps a personification of some word like 'pride' or' destiny' or soul etc. It still doesn't fit.

I don't get it at all. 

And my last word (hopefully) on this is that  - it is so **preachy**!!
Very different from the *other* gothic novels.

[Mags]

No ninjas? What's a gothic without ninjas?

[Reeba]

I think I must finally ask for help regarding the meaning of ninjas, Mags?

The meaning on the internet always refers to the original one about spies etc.

So what does it really mean? In terms of a gothic novel - or in modern terms 

[Mags]

I think of ninjas as characters in cheesy martial arts movies--black clad, masked, incredible fighters, who tend to drop in unexpectedly and defeat all challengers. They use weapons like nunchuks and staffs that they whip around.

I think the *real* definition is different. But that's why I said Ralberg/Byroff in Midnight Bell was a ninja, because he sneaked up on the bad guy and took him down silently. It was a ninja attack. And then Alphonsus comes in with his staff and kicks butt, so he's a ninja, too. Now I want all Gothics to have ninjas, because that only makes them better.

[Deb R.]

That Catherine Morland could be erotically aroused by the scenes in the book is astounding. The first time he tries to ravish Antonia, she 's senseless, and the monk doesn't get his way but ends up murdering her mother.
The second time, when he gets his way, is soooo sinister. Down in the vaults with Antonia dressed in her shroud, as she is considered dead and buried.
**shudder** **shudder**

EWWWWWW!!!  This sounds repulsive, even by today's standards.  What year was this written?

[Reeba]

I see now. Thanks Mags.   

No there are no ninjas in 'The Monk'.

Lorenzo is unable to offer for Antonia earlier on as other pressing matters had to be dealt with.
Later, after her rape he was prowling underground with helpers because he discovers his sister imprisoned there and discovers the dying Antonia who breathes her last in his arms (stabbed to death by Ambrosio to save his own skin but fortunately he wasn't able to).

So there was no ridiculous sudden arrivals at the right time to save the damsel in distress.
No sir, no ninjas here.

The same story with Raymond. Hiis love Agnes becomes a nun and so he had no chance of fighting with sword or stick to save her.
Instead he becomes a gardener at the convent to enable him to establish a contact and hatch a plot of escape, but she gets pregnant.
So no chance there either.

So you see! How lacking in gothic elements (the ridiculous ones) this book is. The kind of gothic element which JA parodies.
Yes there are sighs and groans and a Matilda, and a bleeding nun - the only gothic elements that could have been parodied even though they formed a rather minor part of the whole book.
 
But these were not parodied in NA2007.

[Reeba]

EWWWWWW!!!  This sounds repulsive, even by today's standards.  What year was this written?

You've said it, Deb!! 

The book was written in 1796, and  JA mentioned  it in NA -  a book which John Thorpe boasts of having read.

[Mags]

So there was no ridiculous sudden arrivals at the right time to save the damsel in distress.

See? Needs ninjas. 

[Deb R.]

JA mentioned  it in NA -  a book which John Thorpe boasts of having read.

AH HA!!!  (lightbulb goes on)  So Jane's contemporary readers, who would have either read The Monk or at least heard something about its sickening plot line, would have had some context on which to form their opinion of John Thorpe.  Whereas I just took his boast to mean that he was bragging on reading A book, in order to impress the ladies. 

Sorta demonstrates that "showing, not telling" can lose a little in interpretation after a few hundred years. 

So was John boasting that he was A Man's Man?  That he was a rough and tumble kind of guy, ready to show a girl adventure and excitement?  That he was up on all the current hot novels?  (As opposed to other men who might be considered safe, preferring the classic novels, interested in fabrics and fashions?)

OMIGOD!!!  I see it now -- musical version of NA, a la Grease.  Good Girl knows she should go for Good Guy, but Greaser (loves his FAST vehicle) is much more interesting.  My fingers are snapping already!!! 

[Reeba]

So was John boasting that he was A Man's Man?

I very much doubt that if he had read the book this would be his conclusion - that he was a man's man, since the book deals with a man who has retired from the world.

That he was a rough and tumble kind of guy, ready to show a girl adventure and excitement?

Again, if he had read the novel he would know there was really no adventure not even excitement as far as Antonia was concerned. It was horror and totally sinister, full of intrigue, magic and the added unholiness of one considered holy.

That he was up on all the current hot novels? 

I would go with this one definitely.
I personally think John Thorpe didn't even read the book. He just wanted to be associated with the reading of it because
after all the book was making news- It was highly controversial. There was a society called prevention of vice or something like that, which wanted the book banned. It wasn't banned but became even more popular. Like now, sex sold even then 

[Reeba]

Talking of ninjas!!!

I now see that JA was actually parodying this in NA when she said;

Something must and will happen to throw a hero in her way

The hero throwing himself with stick or sword to safeguard the fair maiden. 
Not forgetting that Valancourt actually did throw himself in Emily's and her father's way in The Mysteries of Udolpho when they were travelling in France - they saw  a young man spring from the bushes on to the road.
LOL!!