This week we will begin to talk about gothic literature, but there are some preliminary issues that we have mull over before getting down to specifics. For instance, the introduction to the three stories you are reading for Wednesday provides a glimpse of the world into which gothic was born. As you can see, there was some degree of disparity between peoples' opinions of gothic fiction; some found it to be an absolutely atrocious form of writing and condemned it for having no value other than base entertainment, whereas others praised it for its ability to get the mind fully engaged in something.
As you read, consider these opinions. Which side of the argument do you find yourself leaning towards? Are the stories simply there to combat boredom, or can we learn from them? Also, which aspects of the stories might one point to if one wanted to argue in favor of their opinion or against the other?
9 comments:
While I don’t see Gothic literature as being an atrocious form of writing, I do find myself leaning towards the argument that it was used as just a form of entertainment. When comparing it to the 21st century, I think of why people today go to see a scary movie or visit a haunted house. They go because they want to feel the thrill and rush of being scared, not to be intellectually stimulated. Therefore, like today, I think 18C audiences wanted to feel the excitement of being scared through story telling. The reader is able to experience these feelings through the descriptive imagery of the character’s feelings of fear. For example in “Sir Gawen,” the audience can imagine just how terrifying the sound of the “hellish” screams were by Sir Gawen’s reaction to them: “ Sir Gawen stood petrified with horror, a many fear ran to his very heart, and dismayed every use about him, he stared wild, with his long locks standing stiffly, and the throbbing of his heart oppressed him” (12). I also think that the suspense of the stories also heightens the entertainment value of Gothic literature. For example, when Sir Gawen felt someone following him due to a “soft, quick, and hollow tread,” I wanted to know who was following him and what they were going to do to him (16). I was not concerned with analyzing why the person was following him or learning anything in general from the story. However, I am interested in why all three stories seemed to end with positive or happy endings. This is actually the only prospect that makes me think that there is something more to these Gothic stories that I am not picking up on. Is there some sort of moral to the story that issues a pleasant ending? Or is the ending reminding the reader that this is just a fictional scary story?
I can certainly see why people would think that gothic literature has no value other than to entertain the reader because the focus on the elements in the gothic stories seem to convey the importance of action and reaction as opposed to a more traditional story where real life events/situations are presented. However, after reading the three stories assigned for Wednesday I got the impression that these stories were probably written to get the mind fully engaged in something and to exercise the imagination.
Like JTA stated, "I think 18C audiences wanted to feel the excitement of being scared through story telling. The reader is able to experience these feelings through the descriptive imagery of the character’s feelings of fear." The qualities of these stories that we read really stir the senses, emotions, and mystery. There were consistent elements of gothic literature seen throughout the stories such as dark imagery, storms, castles, supernatural haunting, and fear. There were so many good lines that expressed these qualities that it's hard to focus on just one but I think one in particular that stood out to me came from the "Sir Bertrand" reading:
"Sir Bertrand resolutely followed, till he arrived within six paces of the coffin. Suddenly a lady in a shroud and black veil rose up in it, and stretched out her arms towards him - at the same time the statues clashed their sabres and advanced" (7). The imagery here is very strong and the reader definitely gets a sense of tensity and heightened emotion when reading it. A lady with a black veil rising out of a coffin clearly evokes a haunting reaction. This passage is just one example of how gothic literature set out to create thrills of fearfulness, yet leave out some details in order for the imagination to take over and build onto the already entertaining literature.
One thing I noticed in all three stories was this reoccurrence of a blue light and I wondered if anyone had any idea of what its purpose might be, if there is one at all? Sir Bertrand: "he looked behind him, and beheld, across a hall, upon a large stair-case, a pale bluish flame..." (5). Sir Gawen: "At length the path grew wider, and a faint blue light, which came from a building at some distance...." (10). Edwin: "he observed the reflection of a pale blue light that issued through a cleft in the rock" (27).
After the assigned reading for Monday, the poem seemed so complex that I thought there was a purpose beyond just entertainment. However, now that your group has presented those short stories I have to say it is for reading pleasure; but I don't think its absurd. Sometimes we need to "escape" reality by video games, movies or reading Twilight. Gothic fiction in the late 18 C is what Twilight is for us now. I admit I have read all four books, but to be honest, all four had the ability to get my mind engrossed in the book that I couldn't peel myself from the book until I was falling asleep! If I really wanted to take my mind off something, I could watch a horror movie such as "The Fourth Kind" because it has no deeper meaning or similarities to my reality; thus giving my mind a "break". I think gothic literature are writers who push the limits on the possibilities of imagination to offer the audience a new experience of reading.
Even so, I have something to say about Cholie's comment on the reappearing blue flame. There are SOME gothic stories that probably have some hint of reality. Some people may spin their experience in something bigger (i.e. perhaps seeing a ghost? having a freaky nightmare they decided to write about?). Also, maybe the blue flame could be a reoccurring nightmare, fear of something, or fear of a person that won't disappear. Still, the blue flame wouldn't apply to the audience so the main purpose would still be entertainment.
Initially, I also view the genre of gothic literature as a mere source where readers could tap into without physically placing their bodies in danger. When thinking about real life experiences that may spark the same adrenaline rush as gothic literature may do for some. I think of when acrophobic individuals patiently wait in extremely long lines just to ride the Giant Drop, because of ride's natural ability to trick your mind into thinking that you are genuinely placed in a situation of free falling from a very heightened stance. However like gothic literature, the reality still remains that their entire experience have be controlled from the very beginning. The long lines serve as literal and metaphorical meanings, because the anticipation of the participant, whether it be the rider or the reader, is played upon by the suspense that he/she is getting closer and closer to his/her turn to look fear in the eyes.
Although, I believe that the writers of C18 may have potentially want some of their gothic pieces to be taken more seriously. However, or at least for me personally I still think that the three readings serve as nothing more than mere entertainment. But, I will admit that Cholie brings up a good point, because I honestly overlooked those cues of blue lightening, yet I too would like an explanation for why this particular imagery is present in all three readings.
These Gothic pieces, as with almost any form of art/entertainment, probably can contain both entertainment value AND artistic achievement. Much like withThe Vision of the Golden Rump, became to the healthy conclusion that that piece obviously contained elements of sophomoric humor, but it also functioned within political agemda as well. Any art form, even the horror movie, will have varying levels of proficiency in producing higher forms of art, depending on the artist. The Saw movies may not be revered for their layers or technical proficiency, but so e horror movies are able to change the cinematic landscape (Hitchcock) or are able to make social/political commentary. These short stories are no different. Because they are in the Gothic Lit/ B List Horror movie end of the spectrum, we may want to assume that they contain little value. But even low-end art can contain ideology. Think Sir Bertrand's masculinity shows a sort of recommendation for the modern man when he encounters the sabred statues and the veiled woman. Rather than running away in fear, he courageously faces his adversary and is instantly rewarded with a sumptuous banquet and the attention of a Lady. Sir Gawen, however, goes through a lot more drama because he is frozen with fear throughout half of his story. The contrast between the two creates an effective commentary on masculinity, and so, even in some random Gothic stories, ideology is capably represented.
I agree with Aaron that gothic literature can serve more than one person. I think it was entertainment but also got the mind engaged. For example, there is value in being able to provoke an emotional response from a reader. These short stories do that by drawing the readers into the characters' anxieties and the horror of their surroundings. The vivid imagery also helps to provoke a response and keep the reader engaged. Overall, I think that gothic literature has value because it was entertainment and engaged the reader. Although, I'm personally glad that gothic literature has evolved because the story of a knight exploring a haunted castle or woods would become tedious to read.
In response to Michelle's post above, I also am under the impression that gothic literature serves both the purposes of entertainment and the engaging of one's mind. The quality of gothic literature that stands out most to me in this regard is in the description of the story's surroundings. In the readings for Wednesday, readers encounter an exceptional example on page four, where Sir Bertrand "fastened his steed under a shed; and approaching the house, traversed its whole front with light and slow footsteps--All was still as death!--He looked in the lower windows, but could not distinguish a single object through the impenetrable gloom." From the description of the setting, readers actually feel as though they become Sir Bertrand, looking through the windows of the house they've imagined in their minds and surrounded by an overwhelming and heavy darkness. Gothic literature emphasizes its surroundings to set the mood for the reader, ultimately enticing readers to mentally and physically engage in the story before them.
The emotional response gauged by gothic literature also lends the genre to being both entertainment and thought-provoking. In order for a reader to fully connect to a text, there has to be some detail that creates a line of understanding. Gothic lit provokes the fear and tentativeness that one feels when watching a horror movie or a thriller television series. It forces the reader to lend all senses--seeing the unknown, feeling the darkness, hearing the footsteps, tasting the stale air, smelling the overgrown moss. One haphazardly engages without recognizing that they are doing so. We get the thrill, but also get the lessons to be learned.
I agree with what has been said about Gothic fiction serving more than one purpose, because each individual reader reads for different reasons, and thus everyone gets something unique out of the material they read. I think this holds true with today's readers, and definitely with 18th C. readers of Gothic fiction.
I think that Gothic fiction's ability to have the reader emotionally invest themselves in the text speaks largely to its ability to be considered "valuable literature." For my own definition, I think any time that an art form (literature, drama, or modern day TV and movies) is capable of emotionally moving the reader (whether it be through fear or comedy or sentiment), then it has achieved some of its purpose. Not only does this add to it's entertainment value, but I think that anytime an individual has a emotional response to a piece of art, we learn something about ourselves in the process, for we have to think what it is about this piece that makes us feel this way, thus the value of art.
However, in the pieces we've read for today, it seems like 18th C. Gothic fiction may have been leaning slightly towards a more formulaic style, which ca be fine for a while, but how many times can you read about a knight traveling to a castle and encountering the supernatural. If this is all that 18th C. Gothic had to offer, then I think after a while I would agree with the more negative criticisms and say its time to move on to something different, as these pieces have already served their purposes.
I do not think that the stories are there just to combat boredom; even though I agree that they do serve a purpose as entertainment. I believe that there are lessons to be learned from Gothic literature just as other genres. When we think of Gothic literature we sometimes due think of Knights and things of that nature as the reading for Wed focuses on. Things that these stories teach are bravery, strength, courage, determianatio, etc.. I think that because these stories are entertaining and have some moral meaning behind them encouraged some reader to continue to read Gothic literature. I have to say that Gothic literature was different from what was written in the past and can possibly account for why people were drawn to it as well; but I cannot say it was just due to boredom because the other genres of literature was still read as well.
Post a Comment