Characteristics of Gothic Literature Essay

The Gothic In 1798 an anonymous author published a commentary that revealed just now how some writers received the Gothic during this time riposteAn old castle, half of it ruinous A long gallery, with a great numerous doors, some secret ones. Three murdered bodies, kind of fresh. As many skeletons, in chests and presses. An old woman hanging by the neck with her throat cut. Assassins and desperadoes, quant. suff. Noises, whispers, and groans, threescore at least. (1-7) After reading many of the selections in the anthology, I show this poem on a Gothics recipe to be quite true (602).However, in the case of this anonymous writer, he considers all of these characteristics to be negative. I, on the other hand, get under ones skin it very intriguing that this type of fresh developed in a time ruled by writers whose main concenter was politics and poetry. Many influential writers including Coleridge and Wordsworth criticized the characteristics, morality, purpose, and significanc e of these novels however, I believe many of the features they disliked actually broadened the scope of literature. The Gothic novel was often attacked for being withal formulaic.Although the specifics of the plot changed from novel to novel, the characteristics were often similar, which is something that is pointed out repeatedly by the Gothics critics. The similarities encountered in the characteristics of these novels include the compass, mystery, and characters to name a few. The setting of this type of novel is usually in a castle of sorts, or in some other mysterious place that produces suspense and terror in spite of appearance the reader. Although these settings were often alike, they live to convey the atmosphere and atomic number 18 used for ends that atomic number 18 fundamentally psychological (Hume 286).This characteristic is one that set up the entire feeling of the novel, one of suspense, horror, and mystery. The setting of various novels was not uniform because it was the easy or obvious choice like many critics believed, but because it manufactured a certain atmosphere that was needed for the plot. If the tale had been set on a sunny beach, the atmosphere would have been much different and the reader would not get the same affect. Like the settings, the mysteries that develop within Gothic novels are usually somewhat similar.From what I have educe across, many include a murder or deep, dark secret that is unraveled by an ordinary soul. While this may support Wordsworths claim that these novels are sickly and stupid German tragedies because of their straightforward plot, I find them to be quite evoke (266). These mysteries create suspense, and were the first page-turners that were ever written. Readers no longer had to decipher long and complicated meanings from pieces such as the Lucy Gray poems instead, they could sit back, relax, and enjoy these novels that created an lack into a mysterious world.Another piece of the formula that was important to the genre were the characters that were used by dint ofout the novels. The characters were often simple sight who were thrown into a perspective that required extraordinary actions. While the comfort of the characters was often criticized by writers who considered themselves to be high culture, these characters had the ability to involve the reader in special circumstances (Hume 286). unalike the pieces that came before them, the Gothic novel had the capacity to draw the reader in, and put them in the shoes of the main character.For me, it was very hard to feel for the personas in previous poems that we came across. I think the main reason for this is that the characters tended to be somewhat generic, but fire. They allowed for anyone to understand the character and immerse themselves within the characters archetypes. They also allowed for people to sink in to a particular character and feel the terror that they were feeling. Another aspect of the Gothic tha t was often called into question was the morality of the characters and authors.There are many instances in which these novels incorporated grotesque scenes that included rape and murder among many other things. In The Monk by Matthew Lewis the main character, Ambrosia, is a impeccant and ethical man who seduced by the demon Matilda. In one scene his desires were raised to that frantic height by which brutes are agitated and he hastily proceeded to click off those garments which impeded the gratification of his lust (598). Ambrosia is obviously an immoral character, and he is criticized for not being so.To me, it seems like critics were getting to the point where they were trying to find anything and everything to criticize about the Gothic novel. While this genre may involve some unseemly characters, they are needed in order to create an interesting plot. Having some sort of villain is necessary in any type of writing that has a mystery or murder involved. Without villains, we ca nnot have heroes, and both are very important aspects of literature. Coleridge, for example, not only attacked The Monk as a novel but also attacked Lewis as a person for having the ability to create such an immoral character.He believed that the merit of a novelist is in proportion to the pleasurable effect which he produces (604). I highly disagree with this statement because I believe controversy affects change, and change is needed in order to forward society. Novelists and poets were no longer writing poems that had the sole purpose of making a person feel good or empowered instead, they were writing for entertainment. Also, many of the writers before The Monk addressed political issues that were not considered pleasurable, but controversial and hard to confront.Coleridges statement seems to contradict everything that literature stands for. Authors and the literature they create are unpleasant at times, and that is not wrongit is merely a necessity for the forward driveway of society and evolution of literature. Another important issue to address when it comes to these novels is their specific purpose. It seems that every literary movement in history had some sort of fountain or driving force behind them. For the Gothic, this driving force or purpose seems to be to induce terror while entertaining.Before this movement, we never rightfully encountered works of literature that were straightforward, suspenseful, and enjoyable all at the same time. In an essay by Aikin and Aikin, they claimed that people would rather chuse to suffer the smart pang of a violent emotion than the uneasy craving of an unsatisfied desire (584). By this, they mean that terror is pleasurable, and that is exactly what these novels delivered to their readers. It was not an emotion that was regularly produced when readers came into contact with the representative works of this time. For a piece of literature to induce such error was something novel and interesting that affected ma ny of their readers. Because terror is an emotion that is hard to come by, these novels were, like I tell, an escape for readers. Terror is not something that a person wants to encounter in their real life, but is something they can enjoy and acquire through reading these novels. Their purpose was not to confuse the reader with complicated meanings full of allusions. Instead, these terrifying novels have the ability to render the poorest and most insipid narrative interesting when once we get fairly into it (584).Although many of the authors of Gothic novels may not have been the best composers compared to standards during this time, they were still able to draw in a long audience because they gave the people what they wanted. I would not consider the narratives insipid, but compared to the works that came before them, they were much simpler and used language that was not considered to be as articulate. This simplicity that is encountered when reading a piece of Gothic work, thoug h criticized, says much about how society was changing during this time.These novels significantly altered the way in which literature was imperturbable and whom it was available to. Instead of being read by the elite few, it was accessible to pretty much anyone who could read. During this time, the percent of literate people was rising rapidly, especially in the middle class. These books appealed to these people, and sold millions upon millions of copies because of this. I think that much of the distaste that so-called high culture writers had for these novels is because of their success.They were extremely popular, more so than the most popular of the poets during this time. For example, Wordsworth was said to be a commercialized version of real poetry because it was easier to understand than many other pieces out during this time. However, he never even came close to interchange as many copies of Lyrical Ballads as the Gothic writers did with their own works. For Wordsworth to criticize a genre that feeds off of the readers ability to comprehend seems to be extremely insincere of him. Also, I think that when something appeals to the masses, it is a good thing.Change cannot occur unless everyone is on the same page, and that is what the Gothic provided to the people. Finally, I would like to confront just how significant this movement is to the literature we have today. This was the first time we encounter a genre that is similar to the types of genres we see today. The Gothic genre was criticized because the novels were too alikebut that is exactly what a genre is, according to todays standards. One could argue that the novels that are published today are not of the same caliber as novels published 50, 100, or 200 years ago.And maybe that is true, but is it necessarily bad? In my opinion, having novels that are more accessible to more people makes for a better, more unified society. Having works of literature that are too complicated, wordy, or abstract leads to more ambiguity, and eventually creates a divide among social classes. I am not saying that all written works should be easy to understand, but I do think that the Gothic novel was the first in a wave of works of literature that helped society grow more literate.Finally, scholars and everyday people were able to read and talk about the same kinds of things. Although scholars who thought they were better writers were constantly criticizing it, they could not appeal to the masses. Gothic literature had the ability to do this, and you can still see its influence in novels on shelves today. It has a definite place in literary history, and should not be overlooked. It may not have had the deepest plots or the most complicated characters, but the genre had an impaction during the 18th century, and continues to have an impact today.