I absolutely loved the clean break Austen creates with the 18th century novel in Northanger Abbey. Austen's heroine, Catherine Morland, is only an "almost attractive" girl--wholly imperfect in comparison to her female counterparts of Pamela, and Tom Jones , for instance. Catherine is such a refreshing take on what we have witnessed to be the tradition female role. She is confident, sassy, and aware of social standards. It is also important to note that she comes into an awareness of herself within high society by the end of the novel-- discovering its ills, and coming to value her own moral judgment. At times, the satire on the Gothic novel also made me laugh out loud--with Henry Tilney's description of what awaits Catherine at Northanger Abbey. Where she expects to find the terrors she has been trained to in her reading of The Mysteries of Udolpho, Catherine is gravely disappointed and embarrassed by her foolishness. Although she lets her imagination run in Northanger Abbey, Catherine was at least partially correct in her judgment of General Tilney. While no supernatural Gothic scares await her in the Abbey, Catherine discovers an entirely new level of terror-- the greed and ambition that guides General Tilney's regard for her. Although a satire on the Gothic novel, Austen brings Gothic elements to an entirely new level: breaking from the supernatural--to the natural and complex motivations which all humans can relate to.

Udolfo and the never ending mysteries

What I found frustrating about Udolfo was the seemingly never ending mysteries. We waited a long time to find out who was playing the lute at the fishing house, and it seemed like we waited forever to find out who was playing the same song at the castle. It felt like Radcliffe was trying to create as many open ended possibilites as possible, what was behind the vail? Who was playing the lute and writing the poems at the fishing house in Languedoc? Where was Vallencourt all that time? Of course all of the mysteries were solved at the end, exactly what I was afraid of! As the questions were piling up and the pages running low, I was concerned that everything was going to be tied up in a perfect package at the end, and it seems my worries were grouned.

I enjoyed Udolfo very much, I would place it second in line to Robinson Crusoe which I would say was my favorite of the semsester, and I have to wonder if the reason I enjoyed Crusoe so much was becaue of it's lack of emphasis on doing the right thing socially. I can't help but wonder if the reason I enjoyed these novels so much was because it wasn't trying to influence my own behavior as much as the other books!

Odd Udolpho

The Mysteries of Udolpho is an out-of-the-ordinary read. This assessment, in itself, is not a negative, but makes the book hard to define. Book I struck me as a romance in the slightly typical girl meets boy, falls in love, can’t have boy, kind of way. What makes the story exciting is Radcliff’s writing, which is rich, descriptive, and free from cliché. Seen through Emily’s eyes, or the eyes of her companions, the images of the landscapes take on the feel of detailed paintings and, while they can get tedious, the descriptions are in and of themselves such a beautiful use of language they almost take on the feeling of poetry.
In Book II, the story secures its reputation as a gothic novel with the requisite creepy castle and unexplained happenings, and then reverts back to something else, which I haven’t yet figured out how to characterize. When the book wraps up, I feel sure the genre will be another framework entirely. As a whole, though, I haven’t found this approach to feel disjointed, but rather Radcliff succeeds in making the whole greater than the sum of the parts. I would really love the book if it were not for one fairly obtrusive sticking point. What I find hard to digest is Emily’s complete adoration of Valencourt. He is just so… and I struggle to find the proper highbrow literary term… icky. I find him so cloying and whiney and so, so sensitive. I am all for am man that is in touch with his feelings, but a little backbone can be a sexy component as well. This one factor distances me from the love story element because I find it hard to reconcile the intensity of Emily’s feelings with the over-sentimentality of Valencourt. This is the essence of why love is indefinable: it speaks to each person individually.
In the introduction, The Mysteries of Udolpho is referred to as “sheer capricious strangeness,” and I think this defines the book perfectly. For all these peculiar reasons, this book has been the most fun to read this semester, and I look forward to seeing what Austen will bring to it in Northanger Abbey.

Impressions on Udolpho

I also found the first part of Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho to be a tiring read. It seemed that descriptions of the "pastoral valley" in the "shade of the cliffs, with flocks and herd loitering along the banks of a rivulet, that refreshed it with perpetual green," were endless (p. 49). However, as Emily journeys to Udoplho, the mood of the novel shifted to one of intrigue and mystery. The descriptions now were important in understanding the plot, and they helped build anticipation and suspense.

*Note: on p. 49 St. Aubert talks about virtue, which caught my attention as Pamela is always on my mind. "Virtue and taste are nearly the same, for virtue is little more than active taste, and the most delicate affections of each combine in real love."

Evelina: Echoes of Pamela

As I was reading Evelina, I was reminded somewhat of Pamela. OK, so the letter style is obvious, but that is not what I mean. I noticed that Evelina, especially after meeting her grandmother, was desirous to return home to Villars, just like Pamela was when she found out about Mr. B's intentions. And Villars desperately wanted Evelina home, like Pamela's dad. I find it sad in these two books that circumstances do not allow the heroines to return to their families, and their simple lives; instead they grow used to high society and become different people than when they left in the first place. Just seeing the letters never changing locations is a bit disheartening. But Evenlina is better than Pamela, I think. Evelina is not always depressed and on her knees praying to God like Pamela is. She is also funnier and more likable. Even after she's learned about the outside world, her story is more interesting than Pamela's. I think she's stronger than Pamela anyhow; if Orville was a rapist, I bet she would have run away. And marrying Orville? I didn't mind that at all. Sure, he wasn't the most social of characters and hardly said anything, but you could tell by Evelina's impressions of him that he was a real gentleman, and in any case, was definitely no Mr. B. He was also way better than Willoughby; he came off to me as rather foolish and always desirous of people having a high opinion of him. I don't think he would have made a good husband for Evelina; he seemed rather too vain.

Man of Feeling -vs- Woman of Feeling...

The title, Man of Feeling is significant. The term "a man of feeling" is contradicting in relation to the typical 18th century male. Just based on the other novels that we have read, Harley is different from the other male characters. He is emotional and it is seen throughout the novel. His emotions aren't held back. Usually, females were the overly emotional characters and Mackenzie goes above and beyond that stereotype through his writing. Books like that could have created a new genre, the powerful female -vs- the man in touch with his "sensitive" side. Reading this novel made me think of The Rover by Aphra Behn. She was one of the most famous female writers of her time and she wrote beyond the standard; women didn't just sit back and take orders from men, they manipulated men, they tricked men, etc... Just like, Man of Feeling, Behn broke the mold. The title alone, Man of Feeling, helps the reader know what to expect. The title creates questions because how could there be a man who is lead by his feelings? If Mackenzie chose to write A Woman of Feeling, he would have stuck to the standard of the times. Mackenzie decided to change it up a bit and the story is a success. I enjoyed reading a story that wasn't "typical".

The "only thing we have to fear is fear itself"

"The Mysteries of Udolpho" is unequivocally my favorite book we have read so far (assuming Volume IV is as good as Volumes I-III). The novel is unusual, entertaining and fast paced. Radcliffe has (unlike some of the authors we have read this semester) created a heroine that definitely deserves the name (even considering all of her fainting spells). This is also the first book we have read this semester where I haven't been able to predict the ending midway through the novel (though a good guess would be that Emily and Valancourt will end up together).
One of my favorite parts of the book is the style. For example, the way Radcliffe introduces Count De Villefort before bringing Emily back to Languedoc. Radcliffe has this wonderful way of arranging her novel in a way in which things that do not appear to connect at first eventually collide. The only part of the book that bothers me is Radcliffe's fascination with scenery (which can often become tedious to read through and sometimes kills the tension for me). Another thing that I love about the style is the mixing of genres. Volume I gives the book the appearance of a traditional love story, while Volume II makes the novel look like a mystery. Volume III brings Emily away from Udolpho and back to reality, though elements of mystery still exist (and love is no longer a given). The up and down of the plot is much like a rollercoaster (though I hate that cliché) and I can't wait to see where Volume IV takes me.
This brings me to the Gothic aspect of the book (which I have grown to appreciate). After Volume II, I thought I was in for a mystery or detective story. However, Radcliffe only uses the Gothic element as a cover for deeper issues. It is only a facade, which allows for plot development and for Radcliffe to constantly bring the human condition of fear into the fray. In fact, throughout the novel it's as if Emily is living in two worlds: day and night: reality and dream. This (which I just realized while typing) reminds me of "Pan's Labyrinth" (one of the best films I have seen in the past few years if not ever). Both Radcliffe and Guillermo del Toro blend reality and dream to a point where you cannot decipher one from the other anymore and you start to question which is scarier. Is an unknown enemy or fear more terrifying than a known one? Do we create imagined fears to cope with the ones that exist in reality? In the end, is there even a difference between imagined and tangible fears or as FDR said, is the "only thing we have to fear is fear itself?" The beauty of Radcliffe’s novel is that it is not about mystery or love; it is about fear.

Evelina: Same Ol' Ending

I enjoyed "Evelina" in a few different respects. Like "Pamela," Burney's novel is based on a letter format, however, unlike "Pamela" the novel is not didactic and uses its format to pace itself and move the plot forward in an entertaining and engrossing way. Evelina is also a likeable character and does not share any of Pamela's often redundant and grating characteristics. Overall, the book was one of the most entertaining we have read so far.
I do have some gripes with the novel however. Like "Tom Jones" I found the ending to be a little too convenient. I understand the constraints of the time period that the book was written in and that having Evelina end up with Lord Orville was probably the most logical ending that could take Evelina out of harms way, but it didn't satisfy me. I should say, it didn't satisfy the intellectual side of me (since my emotional side did find it gratifying to see Evelina end up with Orville). I guess what ticks up off the most about the ending is the continual way in which the heroines are represented throughout the novels we have read so far this semester. No matter what they are always defined by the man they end up with (who is usually wealthy). As a female author, I guess I expected a little more from Burney. To be honest, for much of the novel I hoped her love interest would end up being Mr. Macartney (before you find out they are related). An ending of that nature would have had many more interesting possibilities than the textbook Evelina + Orville=Happiness.

The Mysteries Of Udolpho

Radcliffe's wonderful depictions of nature in, The Mysteries Of Udolpho, can become quite boring after a while. I kept trying to rush passed it; but then i realized that this was not the way the novel is suppose to be read. The author does this for a reason; in order for the audience to escape and relax from their hectic everyday lives. I think we take too many things for granted in life; and her description of the landscape makes the reader appreciate nature and all the beautiful sceneries we ignore.
I absolutely LOVE the suspense in the novel; it's quite different then all the other books we have read in class. Throughout the semester I felt as though the endings of the novels we read weren't shocking. In fact I'm pretty sure half the class guessed that each character was going to end up within a stable environment in which they not only obtained wealth, but ended up exactly where they wanted to be and with the person they longed to be with. I felt that many of the endings were too much of a cliche, but in this novel, I can't guess what will happen at the end.. And I think that's why I'm enjoying it so much. I find it interesting that Radcliffe choses to make Montoni, the cruel and violent figure in the novel, a handsome powerful and forceful character. Valancourt is overpowered by Emily, but he signifies the safe and secure type; while Montoni represents the "bad boy".

Lack of Mystery in Udolpho

Despite Radcliffe's endless descriptions of the breathtaking scenery, this novel is intriguing up until the point when all of the mystery is given a logical explanation. I feel that the explanations ruin the story because the eeriness and mystery is what kept me interested. Once I found out that the creepy apparition outside of Emily's window is actually Du Pont, the story seems more like a Scooby-Doo episode than a Gothic novel. I'm also a little disappointed to find out that the creepy Chateau-le-Blanc from earlier is actually a house with the average family living in it. I had certain expectations for this narrative, and for a while Radcliffe was satisfying them. I'm not saying that I wanted every mystery to remain unsolved or turn out to be supernatural, but I feel she could have done a better job keeping up the suspense. Now I'm worried because I still have part 4 to read, and I'm afraid it might not hold my attention the way parts 1, 2, and 3 did. I'm sure the music will turn out to be a peasant or Valancourt, and that the Marchioness in the picture will have an anticlimatic explanation as well. Also, maybe it's just me, but it seems as if Radcliffe only has the same four or five characters running throughout the novel, she just changes their names. The characters are either goodnatured and have a love for nature and poetry, or they dislike nature and are coldhearted and only care about material wealth. Although there's nothing wrong with having similar characters, some of her characters are so alike that they seem as if they are the same person with a different name.

Evelina: You want...what?

This book definitely set itself apart from the books we read before it. Being the first one of our readings to be authored by a woman, I felt that it offered us a more realistic portrayal of young girls in this time. In Pamela, all the main character thought about was her virtue. In Shamela, it was sex. But in Evelina we see some of the private desires of a young girl: to feel a sense of belonging, to join the “in” crowd, and to catch the favorable attention of a handsome guy.
While I agree that this book is something of an instruction manual for young girls, I can’t help but feel that it was also something of a critique of society at the time. I feel that this was maybe the true purpose of Burney’s novel but she “pulled her punches” a bit because perhaps she was afraid of criticism. The humorous situations that Evelina gets herself stuck in and the spats between the Captain and Madame Duval show just how improper society really was under all that pretentiousness. Even the petty acts of Mr. Lovel represent just how unforgiving this world is to the smallest mistakes.
There were times in this novel where I felt like Evelina was being hunted down like a naive deer by those that are more experienced with worldly matters, Sir Clement, Mr. Lovel, even Madame Duval seem to exploit her lack of social grace. And after all the trouble Evelina gets herself into, I wondered whether it was all worth it.
I’m really tempted to include this excerpt from a song called “Why You’d Want to Live Here” by Death Cab for Cutie which reminds me of this novel:

“It's a lovely summer's day
I can almost see a skyline through a thickening shroud of egos.
Is this the city of angels or demons?
And here the names are what remain: stars encapsulate the golden lame
and they need constant cleaning for when the tourists begin salivating.
And I can't see why you'd want to live here.
Billboards reach past the tallest buildings,
You can't swim in a town this shallow
because you will most assuredly drown tomorrow.”

It seems like something Mr. Villars would say to Evelina, or something even I would say to her because after all of the emotional anguish and embarrassment of her time in London society, all she really gets is a guy. And sure, Lord Orville is this amazingly polite and caring guy, not to mention rich and popular. But to be completely honest, he really doesn’t have any reason to like her other than the fact that she’s really beautiful. But hey, he must have had some deeper feeling for her than that because he sees her screw up so many times and still likes her. But after all of that headache, she gets...married. Forgive me for not leaping for joy here, but doesn’t that all just mean NEW social interactions that she’ll need to master as Lord Orville’s wife, and that she may very well screw up just as badly as she did this one? Does anyone else feel like Evelina got ripped off in this deal?

Not Feeling Like the Man of Feeling

I also found myself thinking about how Harley was different from the contemporary standard of the ideal man. Today, these men are portrayed as the "strong silent type." Strength is in not being affected by the unfairness of the world, in not crying, even for one's own grief, let alone those of other people.

Harley is drawn towards marginalized people, he is unafraid of feeling strong emotions and is constantly making himself vulnerable to them. One of my favorite quotes in this novel is when he says “[T]o calculate the chances of deception is too tedious a business for the life of man ” (P.41) I connected with Harley in this moment (one of very few I have to admit) because I know what it's like to feel frustrated because you just want to live your life instead of worrying about who you should trust and who you shouldn't. For Harley, feeling is easier, and more natural than forcing himself not to feel. Harley gives so much of himself that he does so at a loss to himself. It's his unwavering kindness and almost complete disregard for himself that gets him so sick.

I don't think Mackenzie did a very good job of making me as a reader to want to be like Harley. For the one thing, it was difficult for me to really identify with all of the crying. It's true that if I was in those situations and I met these people, I'd probably cry. Maybe if this was a well made movie and I could better imagine these people, I might be more moved to tears. But aside from the emotional effect, while I admire Harley, I'm not moved to be like him because of the book. Mackenzie didn't really show me a benefit of being like Harley. I feel a religious obligation to be somewhat like Harley, but that had nothing to do with this book.