I Like __ A Lot
I Like Matthew “The Monk” G. Lewis A Lot
At the age of 33, the same age that Jesus was when he died, I had a physical and mental breakdown and became obsessed with Catholic literature. I read Flannery O’Connor, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, (not Walker Percy…hmmm), Muriel Spark, St. Augustine and some others. I also went to Mass a few times at St. Vincent de Paul Church on 23rd Street between 7th and 8th Avenue at 12pm, but I never went to confession, so I couldn’t receive the Eucharist. I watched others taking it and cried in the back pew. I loved Mass and my favorite part was how all five or ten of us, straggled throughout that huge, dark Church in the middle of the bright bright day would turn to each other and bless each other. Strangers smiling and blessing each other? I shook and cried. That is what I did.
Over my thanksgiving break, I reread The Monk by Matthew G. Lewis. I read it first in grad school and remembered thinking it was one of the craziest, most entertaining books I’d ever read. Murder, torture, ghosts, thieves, tons of lust, dead bodies, a dead baby with worms in it being held by his mom, weird poems about dead people dancing and pretty much every depravity one can think of shows up in this novel, written by Lewis at the age of—NINETEEN! Holy crap. Also, The Monk is considered to be a “one hit wonder” which breaks my heart and makes me love Lewis all the more. I’d take being a one hit wonder if that meant people two hundred years after I die were still loving my book. Also again!– The Monk caused tons of scandal when it was published in the late 18th century and I sort of like scandalous books. I have two copies of the book and the one I read over thanksgiving fell apart while reading it, which for some reason, heightened the great pleasure of rereading this masterpiece of Gothic literature. (Many would argue that The Monk is no masterpiece, many see it as “camp” and there are great things online discussing it as such as well as discussions of it as gay literature, which I find interesting and true but more on how I chose to read it below.)
Lewis was English and Protestant and The Monk takes place in Catholic Spain and it should be read as a book that mocks the superstitions of the Catholic Church, but I willfully did not read it as it should be read. This willful misunderstanding of the book is not something I recommend doing on any regular basis, but I did it a few weeks ago with The Monk. You see, I love Spain- I lived there for a year—and there is so much I love about Catholicism. For instance, we are all sinners: I like that. Here is a fantastic description of The Devil, when the Monk first meets him:
At the same time the cloud disappeared, and he beheld a figure more beautiful than fancy’s peril ever drew. It was a youth seemingly scarce eighteen, the perfection of whose form and face was unrivalled. He was perfectly naked: a bright star sparkled upon his forehead, two crimson wings extended themselves from his shoulders, and his silken locks were confined by a band of many-coloured fires, which played round his head, formed themselves into a variety of figures, and shone with a brilliance far surpassing that of precious stones.
I love how gorgeous the Devil is when first appearing in the Monk’s life. It rings true to me. In John Berryman’s excellent introduction, he sees the earlier part of the novel and its many digressions as a weakness, but I don’t. In fact, the whole first half of the book is filled with so many digressions that end up plopping the reader more or less in some random feeling place—and I think it’s just brilliant. The threads! The endless labyrinth of it! But what Berryman says that I totally agree with is this:
:the point is to conduct a remarkable man utterly to damnation. It is surprising, after all, how long it takes—how difficult it is –to be certain of damnation. This was Lewis’s main insight, fully embodied in his narrative, and I confess that such work as Thomas Mann’s Doctor Faustus seems to me frivolous by comparison.
So, even though the English Lewis perhaps mocks the superstitions of the Catholic Church, I choose to read it for the fact so well stated by Berryman: we all have so many chances to do the right thing and yet, we fail to do the right thing, over and over again. We are, in other words, human, weak, and really at the mercy of our own folly. But to end on a lighter note, here’s a funny digression about being an author:
An author, whether good or bad, or between both, is an animal whom every body is privileged to attack: for though all are not able to write books, all conceive themselves able to judge them. A bad composition carries with it its own punishment—contempt and ridicule. A good one excites envy, and entails upon its author a thousand mortifications: he finds himself assailed by partial and ill-humoured criticism: one man finds fault with the plan, another with the style, a third with the precept which it strives to inculcate; and they who cannot succeed with finding fault with the book, employ themselves with stigmatizing the author.
Tags: Gay Literature, Gothic Literature, Matthew G.Lewis
really nice post pr. i had never heard of this person
really nice post pr. i had never heard of this person
i like gothic literature
the little ive read, anyhow
i like gothic literature
the little ive read, anyhow
thanks bb. it’s a great book- incest, rape, murder, dead babies (your thing, right?)…lots of good stuff. i love it. i could read it again tomorrow. but i think i’ll wait a few years.
you were cracking me up in that mentally challenged post. i really like the password for jereme that you wrote. you are great.
ryan- i also reread wuthering heights recently. that is supposedly a “masterpiece” whereas the monk is considered too over the top by many to be considered such. but, i will say this- rereading wuthering heights? not so much fun. i sorta forced myself to do it. the monk? can’t put it down!!! i finished wuthering heights and thought- this isn’t romantic or anything. this is about the horror of isolation. i thought one thing on finishing that book- thank god for trains, telephones, the internet, and so on. man, people used to be sooo isolated. that was bad.
isolation isn’t bad i think.
being reminded you are alienated and alone in your mind among millions of people is bad.
it is my prime reason for wanting to go live in a shack in belize until my head gears grind to a halt.
i do not feel alone around crows and squirrels and bears and monkeys.
i feel so alone in the company of man. i don’t know.
this is a good post pr. i will try to check it out by no promises.
isolation isn’t bad i think.
being reminded you are alienated and alone in your mind among millions of people is bad.
it is my prime reason for wanting to go live in a shack in belize until my head gears grind to a halt.
i do not feel alone around crows and squirrels and bears and monkeys.
i feel so alone in the company of man. i don’t know.
this is a good post pr. i will try to check it out by no promises.
i feel the same way about castle otranto, i think. i loved that book, but i dont think its held that high except as being the first example of gothic lit.
i feel the same way about castle otranto, i think. i loved that book, but i dont think its held that high except as being the first example of gothic lit.
jejereme- the fact that you can go to belize is what the ladies in wuthering heights couldn’t even do. they were so stuck. i guess stuck is better than isolation. also- cousins marrying cousins? isolating oneself from our modern society ins’t the isolation i’m refering to here. i , too, don’t do well with society. but ifeel that wuthering heights is more about small circumstances than it is about anything else.
ryan- i didn’t finish castle otranto, but i started it. the monk is soo good reading to me. just great movement.
jereme- i love your penis.
hey this is rad. i’d heard of this book but never read it. maybe time to change that…
omg, pr! i’ve got an o’connorific treat planned for tomorrow! :)
hey this is rad. i’d heard of this book but never read it. maybe time to change that…
omg, pr! i’ve got an o’connorific treat planned for tomorrow! :)
i’ve never read wuthering heights.
i think i am glad i haven’t. it sounds borrrrrrrring.
i’ve never read wuthering heights.
i think i am glad i haven’t. it sounds borrrrrrrring.
jereme-i find it tough going. but not so tough that i didn’t manage to read it twice now. i will say this-the song by kate bush is more fun than the book. if you can deal with her squeaky high voice.
justin- can’t wait!!
i am reading ‘stranger in a strange land’ right now and holy shit it is hard to read. the writing is so bad but i like the ideology of the book.
if it were boring and bad writing i couldn’t read it. wuthering heights has at least decent writing?
i am reading ‘stranger in a strange land’ right now and holy shit it is hard to read. the writing is so bad but i like the ideology of the book.
if it were boring and bad writing i couldn’t read it. wuthering heights has at least decent writing?
I just googled stranger in a strange land. sounds fascinating- sorry that the writing is so bad. I love scifi and haven’t read any in awhile. I went through a big Philip K. Dick phase. He’s awesome.
I can’t say much as to what I think of the writing in Wuthering Heights – it’s fine? But I found it the second time around a slow moving book. I did manage to finish it and it left some strong impressions- the intensity of revenge, the isolation of humans and helplessness- and love,too. misguided ideas of marriage…hate. hate and love being one in the same, as two sides of the same coin. wanting to “own”and control other people. Anyway, good stuff. not nearly as fun as The Monk, though. The Monk is a blast…a page turner.
i am surprised you have not heard of ‘stranger in a strange land’ before. you’re the one person here i thought would have read it or known about it.
the hippies adopted the underlying philosphy of the book. selfism.
wuthering heights doesn’t sound bad now. you alleviated my boredom. i am a slow reader. i will try to find monk first. maybe one day i’ll get to the heights or watch the MTV equivalent.
i am surprised you have not heard of ‘stranger in a strange land’ before. you’re the one person here i thought would have read it or known about it.
the hippies adopted the underlying philosphy of the book. selfism.
wuthering heights doesn’t sound bad now. you alleviated my boredom. i am a slow reader. i will try to find monk first. maybe one day i’ll get to the heights or watch the MTV equivalent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv0azq9GF_g
just watch this- good nuff.
she is hard to understand. my god what is wrong with her voice?
she is hot.
she is hard to understand. my god what is wrong with her voice?
she is hot.
I LOVE her. But she’s not normal. She’s really really hot. She’s so beautiful. “Heathcliff, it’s my, I’m Cathy, I’ve come home, I’m sooo cooold!” OK, singing around the house now.
yeah she is beautiful. the term ‘cooky bitch’ came to my mind when i saw her.
i mean that in the nicest of ways.
yeah she is beautiful. the term ‘cooky bitch’ came to my mind when i saw her.
i mean that in the nicest of ways.
cooky bitch is perfect.
pr,
i would like to hear about your physical/mental breakdown more than reading either story.
pr,
i would like to hear about your physical/mental breakdown more than reading either story.