Henry James' master ghost tale kept me engaged well enough with its pleasantly ambiguous & elusive tone. The tempo maintains a good development of...moreHenry James' master ghost tale kept me engaged well enough with its pleasantly ambiguous & elusive tone. The tempo maintains a good development of suspense that drives the reader to the end with an engrossing wonder. The prose is not my favorite, though James can certainly elicit some delectable & impressive descriptions, the diction is often ponderous & strained by the all-too-proper formality and somewhat rigid sophistication that sort of suppress the haunting chords underneath the text. An enduring story, nevertheless, that is worth probing and it will keep you guessing and possibly gaping at its ultimate mystery that can never be fully resolved.(less)
"...there are assuredly few finer pages in the history of architecture than that facade where the three receding portals with their pointed arches, t...more "...there are assuredly few finer pages in the history of architecture than that facade where the three receding portals with their pointed arches, the carved and denticulated plinth with its twenty-eight royal niches, the huge central rose-window flanked by its two lateral windows as is the priest by his deacon and subdeacon, the lofty airy gallery of trifoliated arcades supporting a heavy platform upon its slender columns, and lastly the two dark and massive towers with their pent-house roofs of slate, harmonious parts of a magnificent whole, one above the other, five gigantic stages, unfold themselves to the eye, clearly and as a whole, with their countless details of sculpture, statuary, and carving, powerfully contributing to the calm grandeur of the whole; as it were, a vast symphony in stone; the colossal work of one man and one nation, one and yet complex, like the Iliad and old Romance epics, to which it is akin; the tremendous sum of the joint contributions of all the forces of an entire epoch, in which every stone reveals, in a hundred forms, the fancy of the workman disciplined by the genius of the artist,-- a sort of human creation, in brief, powerful and prolific as the Divine creation, whose double characteristics, variety and eternity, it seems to have acquired." Such is written one of the many mammoth and delicately detail-wrought descriptions that characterizes the eloquence and painstaking craftsmanship worked into Victor Hugo's classic tale, "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," or "Notre-Dame de Paris" as it was entitled in its original French. Hugo was a brilliant master of description with a Romantic appetite for grandiose elevations of language, which at times can even be a tad laborious and exceedingly verbose. Yet nevertheless Hugo achieved a stunning contribution to literature in this novel, in which he tells such a multi-faceted story as not only a novelist, but a dramatist, a poet, and a historian. The novel comprises such a vast scale of angles from the incredibly picturesque catalogue of Parisian medieval architecture, the erudite analysis concerning how the architectural trends of Hugo's day in 19th century France pronounced the decline of classical architecture, the injustices of the medieval law rooted in an oppressive power structure and superstitious bigotry, as well as of course the range of separate conflicts that intersect the story's unforgettable cast of characters doomed to tragedy, the misshapen and crippled bellringer Quasimoto, the orphaned gypsy girl Esmeralda, the raving recluse Gudule and of course the deeply conflicted archdeacon of Notre Dame, Dom Claude Frollo. The story is fascinating in how it blends such an interesting cast into a singular web of drama that involves unrequited and fatal passions, torment, revenge, deception and ultimately a terrible descent into grief and destruction. I loved most of all the delectable and spellbinding flurries of language that elicit Hugo's Romantic flavor. There's many sensational images contrived with figurative and symbolic ingenuity, often juxtaposing the sacred and the profane in a theatre of action hoisted on a stage of spiritual ambiguity. He evokes, with mesmerizing hues, a world of grotesquerie, haunting Gothic mystery, a world that seems to fuse the angelic and the demonic of the supernatural into the setting of the real world. A notable flaw of the story is that with its ambitious scope and incessant weaving around of the different characters and their conflicts, "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" seems to lack a compelling emotional center. While it certainly taps into the profoundest of sufferings and attracts our dearest of human sympathies for the plight of the deformed bellringer and the ill-fated gypsy girl given their share horrendous misfortunes, there is still a significant gap between the reader and these character's inner worlds of torment that is sadly left unfilled by all the prodigious furnishings of description that give the story so much color and dynamic flare. I wish Hugo had devoted at least half as much effort as he did to his lavish descriptions of the Parisian panorama to fleshing out his characters with greater depth and life force. The character of Pierre Gringoire, for all his lofty rhetoric & poetic ravings of philosophy, is more of a nuisance in the large scheme of things. And what was the deal with him going after the goat at the end instead of Esmeralda? That was hardly a fitting device to steer him away from the impending fate of the gypsy. Quasimoto, who is usually thought of as the central character (in large part due to the somewhat misleading English translation of the title), remains sadly neglected throughout most of the story, both by the characters in the world of Notre-Dame as well as by the author. He does receive intermittent pieces of attention that are by no means unimpressive or untouching, for of course the stamp of Quasimoto's tragic pathos is glaring enough simply by virtue of his hideous natural condition, compounded by deafness and cloistered alienation from the world. Yet as appalling as his wretched state is on its face, the novel should dispense with a tad more insight into the emotional world of this poor misfit. I would have liked some additional characterization, however, that would have given the inner turmoil of this poor bell-ringer more intimacy to the reader. Esmeralda, who in her youthful naivete and pathetic abjectness in the dregs of the social order, falls head-over-heels in love with the callous and simple-minded captain Phoebus. The potent caliber of passions reached by Esmeralda seems somewhat unjustified and unexplained throughout the story. Much of this tale is given much more the bent of a melodrama lifted up by soaring flourishes of language and complicated by a harrowing love-triangle or love-quadroped (??) that is appreciated more for its tragic poetic content rather than its convincing realism. I think Dom Claude Frollo stands out as by far the most interesting and well-developed character whose dark complexity twisted by a perpetual inner struggle between the sacred and the profane, guided by a scientific lust for knowledge and religious dogmatism makes him the greatest riddle in this motley cast. He certainly has the malice and coldness of a villain, but is not strictly evil, but entangled by the fiercest of passions that precipitates him into a self-destructive inferno, obsessively hellbent on having Esmeralda and determined to pursue her at all costs. "The tempest which had been raging within him from the instant that he lost all hope and will to save the gipsy girl had not left a single sane idea, a single sound thought, in his brain. His reason was laid low by it, was almost wholly destroyed by it. His mind retained but two distinct images,--Esmeralda and the scaffold; all else was black. Those two closely connected images presented a frightful group; and the more he fixed upon them such power of attention and intellect as he still retained, the more they seemed to grow, by a fantastic progression,--the one in grace, charm, beauty, light, the other in horror; so that at last Emeralda appeared to him as a star, the gibbet as an enormous fleshless arm." The diverse elements of this extremely meticulously conceived tragic tale certainly make it a worthwhile read... The windy and poorly situated chapter involving Louis XI called "The Retreat where Louis of France says his prayers" can be notably skipped. I thought it made a dubious stain on the novel and annoyingly interrupts the momentum being churned by the violent siege of Notre-Dame. The characters' dialogues and flowery discourses serve more as fermented dishes of inspiration and poetic articulation like the stuff of ancient Greek theatre. The book, in spite of its shortcomings and gaudily ornamented pathos, is certainly worth a good read and will leave the reader overwhelmed by its ending that crumbles into a most heart-rending tragedy from which none of the characters are exempt.(less)
I liked this book more than I thought I would. I really expected something tedious and boring, but then I woefully underestimated Hawthorne. I'm a lov...moreI liked this book more than I thought I would. I really expected something tedious and boring, but then I woefully underestimated Hawthorne. I'm a lover of the Romantic writers and some of my favorite literature comes from Hawthorne's American contemporaries Poe and Melville. I appreciated the supernatural and Gothic elements of this story most of all. Some of the language is extremely invigorating and eloquent, though the narrative seems slow-paced and at times even ponderous. A great story though for sure and a brilliant exploitation of literary motifs pivoting around the scarlet letter as a stigma of sin. I found myself intrigued as the plot developed and I was not able to predict how it would all end up. Hester's child is certainly eerie and the part in the forest was one of the most interesting and compelling. An American classic that has earned its place in my book. (less)
A very cool book, though not exactly amazing literature. The coolest element of it is the title character Dracula, who is truly one of the best villai...moreA very cool book, though not exactly amazing literature. The coolest element of it is the title character Dracula, who is truly one of the best villains ever conceived in literature. I loved the atmospheres and all the Gothic aspects that haunt the story through the emergence of Dracula and his spawn in various frightening incarnations. It is a little tough to get used to the epistolary style, everything is written through letters. It can be a little annoying. A good book nevertheless.(less)
Truly a masterpiece of literature. I loved this book for a number of reasons, the most notable of which I think is how immersed I felt in the atmosphe...moreTruly a masterpiece of literature. I loved this book for a number of reasons, the most notable of which I think is how immersed I felt in the atmosphere of Wuthering Heights. Emily Bronte really conjures up a lifelike Gothic setting in the rugged, gloomy moorland of Northern England. This setting entirely encapsulates the melancholy world of Wuthering Heights and it's distinctly a world of its own. At no point in the book do we see any inkling of the outside world, which is something I loved so much. I really felt connected to the ambiance. Emily Bronte's storytelling is stunning. She sets up the variety of elements in such a deliberately compelling manner that draws the reader in and captivates interest. She creates a story that is very pure, very mysterious, and touching the deepest layers of the heart. The tragic love story between Heathcliff and Catherine is unforgettable, a totally original and classic case of ill-starred romance that transcends the graves and imparts the story with its ghostly overtones. Heathcliff, the mysterious, barbaric, and tormented Byronic hero, is hands down one of the greatest characters I've ever read. Bronte brilliantly weaves him into the shadows of her story without ever divulging his nature with complete transparency. He remains elusive, haunting and enigmatic. This work is truly the stuff of great literature.(less)
I'm a huge lover of Kafka but I was somewhat bored by most of this book, even though the general concept and backdrop is intriguing in its very Kafkae...moreI'm a huge lover of Kafka but I was somewhat bored by most of this book, even though the general concept and backdrop is intriguing in its very Kafkaesque fashion. One must remember the book was not published, so unlike most literature, it suffers from the lack of polish that we would find had it been edited or intended for publication. The book is interesting enough for its originality, with the setting of an obscure and enigmatic village where the main character K has arrived on official business on account of the all-powerful and mysterious "Castle". You could just read a hundred pages of it and that would suffice for getting the gist of it-- the inextricable, uncompromising and menacing web of bureaucracy that dictates every facet of life under the Castle and creates the perplexing quagmire in which K becomes involved, seemingly without end. And unfortunately the book, not only unpublished, is also unfinished. So the reader does not get the full exposure to what Kafka's idea was with this bewildering story.(less)
I wanted to read this because I'm such a lover of the Gothic and I knew this was the original Gothic novel-- Walpole's Castle of Otranto from 18th cen...moreI wanted to read this because I'm such a lover of the Gothic and I knew this was the original Gothic novel-- Walpole's Castle of Otranto from 18th century England. So on the superficial level of Gothic atmosphere and elements the story was very interesting to read. It's got the whole classic setup of the ancient castle, the prophecies and portents of doom, the moving statues, the subterranean passageways and ghostly encounters. All that is cool. However the story itself was a little disappointing to me. The whole tone of the book was very melodramatic, tedious and almost downright silly. I was not satisfied with the end of the book either. However, I'm a lover enough of the Gothic that I will give this seminal work a good ole 3 stars.(less)
Mary Shelley's classic is definitely one of my favorite works of literature. I found it very powerful and profound, the Gothic atmosphere evoked a com...moreMary Shelley's classic is definitely one of my favorite works of literature. I found it very powerful and profound, the Gothic atmosphere evoked a compelling vision of darkness into the wanton failings of humankind in its daring, Promethean aspirations to act as the ultimate form of creator. In our modern age, those who haven't had the experience of reading Shelley's novel, often carry a misconception about Frankenstein's monster because of what's been purveyed by our cinematic media, which is ever dutiful to the public whims, rather than authentic interpretation of literature, and so the story's essence has been subdued and diluted so that the monster could be sensationalized and overblown into this unstoppable, malicious golem reflexively propelled by a blind blood-lust. It is perhaps of more telling significance in a fact that is often overlooked that the alternate title of this novel is "The Modern Prometheus" referring to the role of Victor Frankenstein who dares to transcend mortal law and imitate the ancient Greek god in molding human life out of his own contrived resources. The novel makes a bold exploration into the ethical problems of science and implicitly raises the question of where humans should obey some moral boundary that supercedes the insatiable urge for omniscience and god-like control over nature. Form and essence are two concepts central to the narrative, where the reader must ultimately decide which of the two characters is really the "monster"- Frankenstein, the unscrupulous, visionary scientist who like Prometheus has defied the cosmic order by stealing fire and even Icarus flying too close to the sun in that archetypal act of forbidden trangression, or is it his misshapen creation whom he abandons out of abhorrence for the monster's hideous form? Each has his own unique cause of guilt: The monster is a killer who acts our of vendictive hatred for the man who infused him with life only to abandon him immediately. Frankenstein is guilty not only for the hubris of his scientific indiscretion, but his wanton failure in his inherent responsibility for that which he so dangerously created. It's a timeless tale of enduring greatness and spellbinding originality that enshrines it in the crown of best Gothic literature and it has left an unparalleled legacy of enduring, seminal fertility.(less)
When all is said and done, Edgar Allan Poe is my favorite. I can read and re-read his stories any time and love them all the same. His imagination and...moreWhen all is said and done, Edgar Allan Poe is my favorite. I can read and re-read his stories any time and love them all the same. His imagination and his prodigious talent for conjuring up a gloomy atmosphere while shaping his morbid tales is simply unrivaled. Some of my favorite stories of his include: The Fall of the House of Usher, The Black Cat, Masque of the Red Death, the Gold Bug, Mitzigerstein and Murders in the Rue Morgue. I just can't get enough of Poe.(less)
Loading...
