After reading The Monk, it left me with alot of food for thought. The plot and arrangement of events intrigued me. I found Lewis' method of presenting Ambrosio as an eloquent, impeccable abbot whom the city idolizes. As the true nature of his heart is uncovered, it baffled me and even disgusted me. But because of his initial introduction as a character, I felt like I was waiting somewhat on the edge of my seat for the outcome of the monk. Even though I had read the summary on the back of the book, I felt like each page I read I subconsciously wished that Ambrosio would reach a point of turn around.
Matilda's revelation of herself as a female and their coming together for the sake of Ambrosio's new found lusts was interesting to me. I think it showed the nature of the human being and how hiding behind the robe could not shield Ambrosio from what lay inside. It was interesting to me also how one thing led to the other in his life. The influence of Matilda is also obvious. Yet,in my mind I could not really blame him, nor could I blame her for each new venture he explored. It is also interesting how he graduated from one crime to another. While he never really felt remorse for the things he did, I felt like he felt trapped in the exploration of his indulgences and felt he could not back away.
Antonia seemed to be the innocent lamb that Ambrosio sought and pursued frantically till he possessed and defiled her. I found her innocence interesting, but not particularly appealing. This is because I can not possibly see what her mother hoped to protect her daughter from by keeping her from the knowledge of the harsh world they lived on. It had me wondering at some portions of the story what thoughts ran through Antonia's mind as she was pursued by Ambrosio. I think it is interesting that a young woman howbeit a girl of fifteen years old could have no knowledge of certain things.
Fully aware that Antonia was the victim of the story as she lost her virtue and her pride, the story still had me wondering if Ambrosio could in fact have been a victim as well. A victim to his desires which he had never learned to curtial, as he had not been exposed to such temptations at all during his life, as much as we know though.
Other areas of interest were the continual labeling of Antonia as friendless. It makes me wonder, who is a friend? Apart from her mother, she had Flora who was almost wholly loyal. She had relations that we were told would gladly have taken her in and cared for her upon the death of her mother, so did the narrator teach us that she was friendless?
Also, the role of the poems and the songs in the story was interesting. The mystery that surrounded the life of Agnes, Ambrosio's monastery as well as St. Clare's was also interesting.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Antonia v. Ambrosio & Matilda
Setting the Context for the 19th Century Gothic Novel
As I was reading Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's "The Character in the Veil: Imagery of the Surface in the Gothic Novel," I found myself drawing many connections to Bronte's Jane Eyre. One of my favorite things about this class is the ability we have been given to see how the novel has developed during the eighteenth century.
Reading The Monk, I could see some not-so-obvious connections, but it wasn't until I read Sedgwick that I saw how much influence the Gothic novel of the 18th century has on its successors in the 19th century. I tried to remember reading Shelley's Frankenstein (because I'm sure I'd have more to work with, but sadly that was back in my undergrad years (which seem so far away!). Jane Eyre is fresh in my mind, so that is what kept diverting my attention when reading the essay. Bronte's novel can be read as a gothic, especially when considering the scenes involving Bertha Mason and the Red Room scene Jane experiences as a child. However, it was Sedgwick's discussion of the veil that really peaked my interest. Sedgwick argues: "The veil that conceals and inhibits sexuality comes by the same gesture to represent it, both as a metanym of the thing covered and as a metaphor for the system of prohibitions by which sexual desire is enhanced and specified" (256). With this explantion in mind, I recalled the scene where Bertha rips Jane's veil off. It can be interpreted in many ways, but I would argue that given Sedgwick's perspective, Bertha is essentially trying to take away Jane's sexuality - the very thing that attracts Rochester to her. Something so seeming innocent, then, becomes a subject of importance. Similarly in reading The Monk, I wasn't really zoning in on the importance of the veil and what it meant regarding the female characters. However, as Sedgwick points out, from the beginning of the novel when Antoinia appears at the church covered in a veil, readers should read into this a bit more and be able to connect it with her sexality. Sorry if I've gone a bit off topic. I am just fascinated with my new found ability to see and understand how the 19th century novel developed from the 18th century, and will often obsess about it as I read.
Lewis's The Monk, Sexuality, and Desire
Whether this was Lewis's intention or not, The Monk can be read as a damning indictment of the "unnatural" practices of the Catholic Church. Lewis displays a remarkable amount of sympathy for those guilty of sexual transgressions,
as long as those transgressions are in a form that he considers acceptable. For example, Agnes' and Raymon's relationship, although she has taken the vows and they are not married, are viewed with sympathy by characters in the novel, except for Ambrosio, whom we know is guilty of the worst transgressions himself. Repeated mention is made that the convent doesn't suit Agnes' character, and that to shut herself away and not have the chance to have a husband and children is an unnatural choice. Yet Ambrosio also experiences sexual desire, but his desires manifest themselves in a twisted way. He uses withcraft and subterfuge to achieve his evil aims, and the consummation of his desire for Antonia leads to her destruction. On page 297, Lorenzo's thinks, as he watches a religious procession, "He had long observed with disapprobation and contempt the superstition which governed Madrid's inhabitants. His good sense had pointed out to him the artifices of the monks, and the gross absurdity of their miracles, wonders, and suppositious reliques. He blushed to see is countrymen the dupes of deceptions so ridiculous..." (Lewis 230). The nuns of St. Clare are described in equally unflattering terms, with mention made of the intrigues and petty jealousies that flourish inside the claustrophobic confines of the convent. Far from expressing admiration for those who choose a religious vocation, Lewis seems to be telling the reader that ardent Catholicism causes more harm than good.
There is also an interesting inversion of sexuality of the characters in Lewis's work, particularly Ambrosio and Matilda, which I will be talking about further in my presentation tonight, but consider the language that is used to describe Ambrosio at the outset of the novel. He has never left the cloister walls, he's virtuous and a a virgin, and is protected in the abbey much as a young woman would be. His reaction to Matilda's sexual advances and their eventual liasion is also described in very gendered terms, as Matilda takes the lead in their sexual relationship, leaving Ambriosio "trembling and weak." After Matilda has him under her control. she drops all pretenses to gentleness and timidity and begins displaying a masculinity that Ambrosio finds very distasteful. Of course, since we learn that Matilda is no woman and not human at all, we see how Ambrosio has adopted the traditional "feminine" role in their relationship, while Matilda has played the role of despoiler.