What do you think?
Rate this book
The sorrows of Satan; or, The strange experience of one Geoffrey Tempest, millionaire
This book was originally published prior to 1923, and represents a reproduction of an important historical work, maintaining the same format as the original work. While some publishers have opted to apply OCR (optical character recognition) technology to the process, we believe this leads to sub-optimal results (frequent typographical errors, strange characters and confusing formatting) and does not adequately preserve the historical character of the original artifact. We believe this work is culturally important in its original archival form. While we strive to adequately clean and digitally enhance the original work, there are occasionally instances where imperfections such as blurred or missing pages, poor pictures or errant marks may have been introduced due to either the quality of the original work or the scanning process itself. Despite these occasional imperfections, we have brought it back into print as part of our ongoing global book preservation commitment, providing customers with access to the best possible historical reprints. We appreciate your understanding of these occasional imperfections, and sincerely hope you enjoy seeing the book in a format as close as possible to that intended by the original publisher.
492 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1895
328 people are currently reading
4184 people want to read
About the author
Marie Corelli
396 books178 followersMarie Corelli (born Mary Mackay) was a best-selling British novelist of the Victorian and Edwardian eras, whose controversial works of the time often label her as an early advocate of the New Age movement.
In the 1890’s Marie Corelli’s novels were eagerly devoured by millions in England, America and the colonies. Her readers ranged from Queen Victoria and Gladstone, to the poorest of shop girls. In all she wrote thirty books, the majority of which were phenomenal best sellers. Despite the fact that her novels were either ignored or belittled by the critics, at the height of her success she was the best selling and most highly paid author in England.
She was the daughter of poet, journalist, author, anthologist, novelist, and songwriter Charles Mackay. Her brother was the poet Eric Mackay.
In the 1890’s Marie Corelli’s novels were eagerly devoured by millions in England, America and the colonies. Her readers ranged from Queen Victoria and Gladstone, to the poorest of shop girls. In all she wrote thirty books, the majority of which were phenomenal best sellers. Despite the fact that her novels were either ignored or belittled by the critics, at the height of her success she was the best selling and most highly paid author in England.
She was the daughter of poet, journalist, author, anthologist, novelist, and songwriter Charles Mackay. Her brother was the poet Eric Mackay.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 247 reviews
October 18, 2020
حبكة طفولية بعض الشئ عن الإيمان والشيطان، لكن الشيطان هنا يشعر بالاحتقار والأسف لشرور البشر التي تزيده تعاسة، ويتمنى أن تفتح أمامه أبواب الأمل
September 14, 2025
Whosoever prefers Self to God, and in the arrogance of that Self, presumes to doubt and deny God, invites another power to compass his destinies,—the power of Evil, made evil and kept evil by the disobedience and wickedness of Man alone.
The Sorrows of Satan is Corelli's way of attacking the moral corruption of the British upper society in the late Victorian era. The greed for money and power, lust, and nonbelief in God were flowing in abundance in the minds of both sexes. Both men and women are full of vices, and as such, they have opened their souls to the devil. This moral downfall is what Corelli works on in this Faustian novel.
Satan or the fallen angel, hoping to redeem his sin and attain the glories he's lost, must find souls among mankind who would resist his temptations and glorify in virtues. For this purpose, he comes to earth in the guise of Lucio Rimanez, a wealthy and affluential prince, and tempts one struggling writer named Geoffrey Tempest, all the while giving him hints and warnings against him. But Geoffrey is too weak a character to resist the temptation and willingly surrenders most part of his soul to the devil. And even though he retains some parts of it uncorrupted which helps him free himself from the devil's clutches, he learns the hard way the consequences of one's moral corruption.
Corelli uses a male protagonist, but her censure falls on both sexes. While criticizing men severely for their attitudes in life and their vices, Corelli equally chastises the "modern women" in the character of Lady Sybil. As Corelli sees, this soulless modern woman is the major contributor to society's moral bankruptcy. Instead of being virtuous, believing in God, and guiding the menfolk on the right path, they themselves have become nonbelievers and free thinkers, casting the virtues to the wind and embracing and glorifying vices. Rightfully or not, Corelli seems to be holding women responsible for the social and moral degradation of society.
This may be a thematically important work. But I found the preachy tone, harping too much on virtue, tiresome. The story had an attractive beginning with its Faustian style, but halfway the writing became preachy and so melodramatic that I lost my interest. The story was too long-winded, and the build-up was extremely slow, and for this reason, the climax lost its importance and weight. By the end of it, I neither cared about Geoffrey Tempest nor for the moral lesson that's meant for readers through him. I was bored beyond measures and was thankful that I finally made it to the end!
More of my reviews can be found at http://piyangiejay.com/
June 12, 2016
I can totally see why this was hailed as one of the first bestsellers. It was fascinating, dramatic, and easy to read, even with all the Victorian language. A bit ridiculous in spots, but I love ridiculous, so it's okay. It also has amazingly drawn characters, something I think is often lacking in a lot of the that "high literary classic" genre. The characters of Mavis Clare and of course Lucio Rimanez were especially vivid. It also did a wonderful job of descriptive setting without bogging down the narrative, another pitfall of old timey lit. I could really picture the settings in all their Victorian glory, because Corelli didn't just assume I would know what she was talking about. Living 115 years after the publication of this book, I thank her for her attention to detail. It made the book absolutely come alive for me.
She also hit right upon the idea that seems so lacking in other Faustian works: that pure evil would, logically, be EXTREMELY good-looking. Who's honestly tempted by a hideous thing with horns and grotesque features?
Loved, loved, loved.
She also hit right upon the idea that seems so lacking in other Faustian works: that pure evil would, logically, be EXTREMELY good-looking. Who's honestly tempted by a hideous thing with horns and grotesque features?
Loved, loved, loved.
January 16, 2015
This is one of those "lost opportunity" sort of novels. The premise of this book was a potentially clever and compelling twist on the Faustian legend. Unfortunately, Corelli, in her inimitable way, turned would-be Gothic tragedy into Monty-Pythonesque vaudeville.
Corelli's writing style--melodramatic, preachy and completely humorless, even for her era--makes it impossible to take anything in this book seriously. During the passages most meant to thrill the reader, one is instead left giggling at lines like, "when I recall those white leaves of days that were unrolled before me fresh and blank with every sunrise, and with which I did nothing save scrawl my own Ego in a foul smudge across each one, I tremble, and inwardly pray that I may never be forced to send back my self-written record!"
However, what most sent this book into a foul smudge was the "heroine," Mavis Claire. Mavis is angelic, pure, noble, high-minded, author of novels beloved by the public (yay!) and disdained by those petty, un-discerning, foul-minded critics (boo!) This character would be utterly insufferable in any case, but when one realizes Mavis is meant to be a self-portrait of the author, she becomes completely unreadable. This is quite possibly the most jaw-dropping ego trip I have ever seen in print, and every time Mavis appears on the page it is enough to make you want to send the book...to the Devil.
"Sorrows of Satan" has a certain perverse amusement value, but it is the sort of book that I could not read for more than a few pages at a time before feeling smothered by the sheer narcissistic looniness of it all.
Corelli's writing style--melodramatic, preachy and completely humorless, even for her era--makes it impossible to take anything in this book seriously. During the passages most meant to thrill the reader, one is instead left giggling at lines like, "when I recall those white leaves of days that were unrolled before me fresh and blank with every sunrise, and with which I did nothing save scrawl my own Ego in a foul smudge across each one, I tremble, and inwardly pray that I may never be forced to send back my self-written record!"
However, what most sent this book into a foul smudge was the "heroine," Mavis Claire. Mavis is angelic, pure, noble, high-minded, author of novels beloved by the public (yay!) and disdained by those petty, un-discerning, foul-minded critics (boo!) This character would be utterly insufferable in any case, but when one realizes Mavis is meant to be a self-portrait of the author, she becomes completely unreadable. This is quite possibly the most jaw-dropping ego trip I have ever seen in print, and every time Mavis appears on the page it is enough to make you want to send the book...to the Devil.
"Sorrows of Satan" has a certain perverse amusement value, but it is the sort of book that I could not read for more than a few pages at a time before feeling smothered by the sheer narcissistic looniness of it all.
March 28, 2022
A fascinating and unintentionally hilarious book that wonderfully illustrates the difference between a book being popular and a book being good. Marie Corelli was perhaps the first best selling author (brought about by a move away from the library system to a private buyer system) and she wrote the equivalent of modern airport thrillers:
A struggling writer is saved by making a deal with a mysterious stranger, and he begins to descend into vice under the guidance of said stranger, a Byronic Lucifer as the story quickly reveals (and which the title gives away). Along this journey we also meet Mavis Clare, an obvious self-insert of Marie Corelli, who opines that if only authors wrote the truth, like she does, they would become great like her. She also rails against reviewers and expounds her belief that the people are the ones who recognize true brilliance. Additionally, Clare proves so virtuous and pure a character that Satan himself is utterly powerless to do any harm to her. Even the devil admires her virtue.
The character of Mavis Clare would be funny on its own as a blatant example of narcissism on the part of Corelli, and as a sample of how talentless authors often suffer from delusions of grandeur once they become famous, but what really pushes the novel over the top is the contemporaneous reviews of the novel. My edition of the book included several such reviews, which uniformly state that, while the book was sure to be a crowd pleaser, it lacked literary merit and would not stand the test of time. The reviewers were right on the money, which makes the ego trip of Mavis Clare retroactively hilarious. Read this book for a chuckle, not if you're looking for something of actual quality.
A struggling writer is saved by making a deal with a mysterious stranger, and he begins to descend into vice under the guidance of said stranger, a Byronic Lucifer as the story quickly reveals (and which the title gives away). Along this journey we also meet Mavis Clare, an obvious self-insert of Marie Corelli, who opines that if only authors wrote the truth, like she does, they would become great like her. She also rails against reviewers and expounds her belief that the people are the ones who recognize true brilliance. Additionally, Clare proves so virtuous and pure a character that Satan himself is utterly powerless to do any harm to her. Even the devil admires her virtue.
The character of Mavis Clare would be funny on its own as a blatant example of narcissism on the part of Corelli, and as a sample of how talentless authors often suffer from delusions of grandeur once they become famous, but what really pushes the novel over the top is the contemporaneous reviews of the novel. My edition of the book included several such reviews, which uniformly state that, while the book was sure to be a crowd pleaser, it lacked literary merit and would not stand the test of time. The reviewers were right on the money, which makes the ego trip of Mavis Clare retroactively hilarious. Read this book for a chuckle, not if you're looking for something of actual quality.
August 17, 2018
للشيطان احزان تفوق احزان البشر مجتمعة ، لوسيفر الروح المعذبة الملعونة للأبد لا الندم يرجعه لمجده المندثر ولا التوبة مسموحة ولا شقاء أعظم من فقد رحمة الرب
رواية جميلة على الطراز الفاوستي كان بإمكانها نيل الخمس نجوم بسهولة لو لا خلوها من بعض التفاصيل الدقيقة بين مجريات الحدث وعدم الغوص في خطة الشيطان اكثر وسبب مكره مع بطل القصة
عوضاً عن ذلك كان الهدف هو طرح رؤية الشيطان وتحليله لبني البشر وتم تحقيق الهدف بشكل رائع جداً
رواية جميلة على الطراز الفاوستي كان بإمكانها نيل الخمس نجوم بسهولة لو لا خلوها من بعض التفاصيل الدقيقة بين مجريات الحدث وعدم الغوص في خطة الشيطان اكثر وسبب مكره مع بطل القصة
عوضاً عن ذلك كان الهدف هو طرح رؤية الشيطان وتحليله لبني البشر وتم تحقيق الهدف بشكل رائع جداً
March 3, 2013
This is one of those books that one comes across by accident. It is not featured in any of the anthologies or histories of English literature that the Tweed Mafia produces every year. A Faustian tale with a surprising twist at the end and a rather sympathetic Devil makes this a wonderful read. For those budding authors out there, Corelli's representation of how to deal with critics is both inspiring and funny. I will not tell you what it is, let us just say it involves keeping owls in cages.
March 14, 2022
Marie Corelli was the top-selling author of the 1890s in England—a time when the likes of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Oscar Wilde, H. G. Wells, Mark Twain, and more were writing. So why have you never heard of her?
Writing the popular fiction of your era requires not so much talent as a gift for mirroring the values and preoccupations of the day, and Corelli embodies this adage. Her writing today seems sloppy, verbose, repetitive, and melodramatic, but obviously she was onto something that touched a chord with the readers of her day. It’s hard for us, a century and a quarter later, to see what that might have been.
To the story: an impoverished and overlooked writer, Geoffrey Tempest, is embittered by the hardships of his life. As he reaches a low point, he suddenly in one night receives three communications: one from a distant friend, sending him a little money; another a letter of introduction from a stranger who offers to help him in his career; and the third, a notice from a law firm that he has inherited a vast sum of money. His life is transformed by the inheritance but even more by the stranger, Prince Lucio Rimânez, who promptly takes over his life—hyping his book, introducing him to the haut ton, making him famous and fashionable.
From the start it is obvious who Lucio is (just look at the book’s title), but Geoffrey is willfully dense and plunges gleefully into every temptation the world has to offer, including the acquisition of a trophy wife. But everything, including the wife, bores and disappoints him; his wealth, his fame, his connections all leave him unhappy without fully understanding why.
About midway along he meets a neighbor, Mavis Clare, a fellow novelist who is much more successful than he, albeit one who’s routinely panned by the critics. Mavis lives in a little Eden that she has earned by her labors with the pen, cheerfully laughing off the scorn of the cognoscenti and presenting a picture of contentment that seriously troubles Geoffrey’s sense of self-worth. From this point Geoffrey’s life starts on a downward spiral—as does the book, which becomes ever more turgid and obvious till it reaches its inevitable moralistic end.
I like to read the popular fiction of other eras because it reveals so much about the worldview of the people who lived in other times and places. But this Faustian tale tried my patience. It felt to me like Danielle Steel meets Dante, a story that wants to have its cake (lavish descriptions of the high life) and eat it too (encouraging the reader to despise the excesses of the privileged). There’s a great deal of perseveration about the publishing business, about acclaim versus talent, the vices of critics, the cynicism of publishers, that resonates today but also betrays the author’s obsessive insecurity about the basis of her own popularity. The character of Mavis Clare is held to be a self-portrait, but if it is, Marie Corelli must have been a remarkably self-deluded person because her text belies all claims about Mavis’s confidence and philosophy.
The religiosity of the message is also ill thought out and problematic, an eccentric muddle of Victorian Christian moralizing and reincarnation, spiritualism and bourgeois ambitiousness. It’s loud in the defense of women one moment, misogynist the next, and then exalts the “angel of the hearth” trope the next. Geoffrey’s ambition for fame is never questioned, only his means of attaining it. The one truly positive thing I can say is that Corelli had a remarkable visual imagination and was able to paint a vivid picture in words. As for the rest, the word drek comes to mind.
Writing the popular fiction of your era requires not so much talent as a gift for mirroring the values and preoccupations of the day, and Corelli embodies this adage. Her writing today seems sloppy, verbose, repetitive, and melodramatic, but obviously she was onto something that touched a chord with the readers of her day. It’s hard for us, a century and a quarter later, to see what that might have been.
To the story: an impoverished and overlooked writer, Geoffrey Tempest, is embittered by the hardships of his life. As he reaches a low point, he suddenly in one night receives three communications: one from a distant friend, sending him a little money; another a letter of introduction from a stranger who offers to help him in his career; and the third, a notice from a law firm that he has inherited a vast sum of money. His life is transformed by the inheritance but even more by the stranger, Prince Lucio Rimânez, who promptly takes over his life—hyping his book, introducing him to the haut ton, making him famous and fashionable.
From the start it is obvious who Lucio is (just look at the book’s title), but Geoffrey is willfully dense and plunges gleefully into every temptation the world has to offer, including the acquisition of a trophy wife. But everything, including the wife, bores and disappoints him; his wealth, his fame, his connections all leave him unhappy without fully understanding why.
About midway along he meets a neighbor, Mavis Clare, a fellow novelist who is much more successful than he, albeit one who’s routinely panned by the critics. Mavis lives in a little Eden that she has earned by her labors with the pen, cheerfully laughing off the scorn of the cognoscenti and presenting a picture of contentment that seriously troubles Geoffrey’s sense of self-worth. From this point Geoffrey’s life starts on a downward spiral—as does the book, which becomes ever more turgid and obvious till it reaches its inevitable moralistic end.
I like to read the popular fiction of other eras because it reveals so much about the worldview of the people who lived in other times and places. But this Faustian tale tried my patience. It felt to me like Danielle Steel meets Dante, a story that wants to have its cake (lavish descriptions of the high life) and eat it too (encouraging the reader to despise the excesses of the privileged). There’s a great deal of perseveration about the publishing business, about acclaim versus talent, the vices of critics, the cynicism of publishers, that resonates today but also betrays the author’s obsessive insecurity about the basis of her own popularity. The character of Mavis Clare is held to be a self-portrait, but if it is, Marie Corelli must have been a remarkably self-deluded person because her text belies all claims about Mavis’s confidence and philosophy.
The religiosity of the message is also ill thought out and problematic, an eccentric muddle of Victorian Christian moralizing and reincarnation, spiritualism and bourgeois ambitiousness. It’s loud in the defense of women one moment, misogynist the next, and then exalts the “angel of the hearth” trope the next. Geoffrey’s ambition for fame is never questioned, only his means of attaining it. The one truly positive thing I can say is that Corelli had a remarkable visual imagination and was able to paint a vivid picture in words. As for the rest, the word drek comes to mind.
July 21, 2021
Книга, на мой взгляд, очень незамысловатая, сюжет развивается лин��йно, никаких неожиданностей не случилось. Все очень дидактически правильно, серьезно и пафосно. Но есть и очевидная польза от прочтения - во-первых, лучше понимаешь контекст, общественные настроения конца 19 в. (а этот роман моментально стал бестселлером). Также любопытно посмотреть на эпоху глазами писательницы, т.е. прогрессивной и стремящейся к независимости женщины. Меня очень порадовала сцена, в которой популярная романистка и, возможно, персонаж, с которым Мария Корелли себя ассоциировала, кормит голубей, которым она дала имена особенно недружелюбных литературных критиков. Вот в этой сцене есть и юмор, и темперамент, и эмоции.
В целом, книгу я дочитала (вернее, дослушала на ускоренном режиме) и совсем не жалею. Это примерно то же чувство, когда приходишь в музей смотреть шедевры, а видишь в залах еще множество милых "нешедевров", от которых можно просто получить удовольствие не слишком нагружая мозг.
В целом, книгу я дочитала (вернее, дослушала на ускоренном режиме) и совсем не жалею. Это примерно то же чувство, когда приходишь в музей смотреть шедевры, а видишь в залах еще множество милых "нешедевров", от которых можно просто получить удовольствие не слишком нагружая мозг.
September 2, 2025
من مدة قرأت تفسير الآية:
﴿وقَالَ الشَّيطَانُ لمَّا قُضِيَ الأمرُ إنَّ اللَّهَ وعدكُم وعدَ الحقِّ ووعدتّكُم فَأخلفتُكم وما كان ليَ عَليكُم مِّن سُلطَانٍ إلَّا أن دعوتُكُم فاسْتَجَبتم لِي فلا تَلُومُونِي وَلُومُوا أَنفسَكُم﴾
وفكرت فيما يمكن أن نسميه "سردية" الشيطان، منطق لا تلوموني ولوموا أنفسكم، لا يرى الشيطان نفسه مسؤولًا، يجد تبريرات لما يفعل، هذا المعنى تناولته الرواية حيث يقول الشيطان: "أنا سيئ جدًا لكن عذري الوحيد هو أنني لم أفسد أي شخص.. من فسدوا فسدوا بكامل إرادتهم الحرة"
تخلّى الشيطان عن أتباعه بعدما زين لهم المعصية وأغواهم.
في الرواية رأينا سردية الشيطان أيضًا، محاولة "رمنسة" قصة الشيطان التعيس اليائس المستحق للشفقة والتعاطف! إذ تُصوِّرُه أنه لم يختر مصيره، وكراهيته للبشر مبررة، وخطيئته بسيطة ويمكن أن تُغتفر.. فكرة تصوير كِبر الشيطان وعصيانه وكفره كمأساة تراجيدية، أمر يدعو للتأمل.
- "تخيل أن يغلقوا دونك باب الأمل.. أن تدرك يقينًا أنك مطرود من رحمة الله.. أن تسمع صوت الملائكة في الملأ الأعلى، لكنك تمضي وحدك في الظلمات. إن عذاب سيزيف لهيّن إذا قورن بعذاب الشيطان. لا غرابة في أنه يكره البشر.. من الطبيعي أن يصير عدوًا لهذا الجنس عديم النفع."
كانت شخصيات الرواية نمطية للغاية، البطل الفقير الطموح، توقعه سذاجته في عهد مع الشيطان، يبيع له روحه دون حتى أن يدرك ذلك لفرط سذاجته، يبيعها مقابل الثروة والجاه والمرأة وتحقيق الأحلام، ويسلمه عقله ويتبعه "عمياني" حتى يدمر حياته.
- "أنت اعتبرتني صديقًا.. كان عليك أن تدرك أنني عدو.. كل من ينافق رجلًا ويُطري عيوبه هو عدوه."
وعلى النقيض تأتي "ماڤيس كلير"، التي اعتبرها النقاد تعبير المؤلفة عن نفسها! الفتاة النقية التي تقف في وجه الشيطان وترفض الاستماع لوساوسه، وصفت الكاتبة هذه الشخصية بكثير من المبالغة، أظهرتها بصورة مثالية لدرجة الملائكية.. ياللتواضع!
رواية كلاسيكية رائعة، للأسف كانت مباشرة أكثر من اللازم، يحسب لها إنها كُتبت منذ 130 سنة.
3.5⭐
﴿وقَالَ الشَّيطَانُ لمَّا قُضِيَ الأمرُ إنَّ اللَّهَ وعدكُم وعدَ الحقِّ ووعدتّكُم فَأخلفتُكم وما كان ليَ عَليكُم مِّن سُلطَانٍ إلَّا أن دعوتُكُم فاسْتَجَبتم لِي فلا تَلُومُونِي وَلُومُوا أَنفسَكُم﴾
وفكرت فيما يمكن أن نسميه "سردية" الشيطان، منطق لا تلوموني ولوموا أنفسكم، لا يرى الشيطان نفسه مسؤولًا، يجد تبريرات لما يفعل، هذا المعنى تناولته الرواية حيث يقول الشيطان: "أنا سيئ جدًا لكن عذري الوحيد هو أنني لم أفسد أي شخص.. من فسدوا فسدوا بكامل إرادتهم الحرة"
تخلّى الشيطان عن أتباعه بعدما زين لهم المعصية وأغواهم.
في الرواية رأينا سردية الشيطان أيضًا، محاولة "رمنسة" قصة الشيطان التعيس اليائس المستحق للشفقة والتعاطف! إذ تُصوِّرُه أنه لم يختر مصيره، وكراهيته للبشر مبررة، وخطيئته بسيطة ويمكن أن تُغتفر.. فكرة تصوير كِبر الشيطان وعصيانه وكفره كمأساة تراجيدية، أمر يدعو للتأمل.
- "تخيل أن يغلقوا دونك باب الأمل.. أن تدرك يقينًا أنك مطرود من رحمة الله.. أن تسمع صوت الملائكة في الملأ الأعلى، لكنك تمضي وحدك في الظلمات. إن عذاب سيزيف لهيّن إذا قورن بعذاب الشيطان. لا غرابة في أنه يكره البشر.. من الطبيعي أن يصير عدوًا لهذا الجنس عديم النفع."
كانت شخصيات الرواية نمطية للغاية، البطل الفقير الطموح، توقعه سذاجته في عهد مع الشيطان، يبيع له روحه دون حتى أن يدرك ذلك لفرط سذاجته، يبيعها مقابل الثروة والجاه والمرأة وتحقيق الأحلام، ويسلمه عقله ويتبعه "عمياني" حتى يدمر حياته.
- "أنت اعتبرتني صديقًا.. كان عليك أن تدرك أنني عدو.. كل من ينافق رجلًا ويُطري عيوبه هو عدوه."
وعلى النقيض تأتي "ماڤيس كلير"، التي اعتبرها النقاد تعبير المؤلفة عن نفسها! الفتاة النقية التي تقف في وجه الشيطان وترفض الاستماع لوساوسه، وصفت الكاتبة هذه الشخصية بكثير من المبالغة، أظهرتها بصورة مثالية لدرجة الملائكية.. ياللتواضع!
رواية كلاسيكية رائعة، للأسف كانت مباشرة أكثر من اللازم، يحسب لها إنها كُتبت منذ 130 سنة.
3.5⭐
October 31, 2011
The "sorrows" of Satan are many in this text, as the fallen angel takes the form of Lucio Ramanez and is bound to carry out a pact with God based on an accusation that he uttered in haste. To the best of his ability, he must tempt man to surrender his soul, all the while longing to redeem himself in God's eyes. He tempts Geoffrey Tempest, who is an idealistic writer on the verge of starvation, with five million dollars (which he accepts). All the while that Ramanez pushes Tempest toward more sin, he secretly wishes (and at one point even provokes) Tempest to reject his services. When man rejects his offers Satan is closer to regaining his seat in heaven: a position which he desires very much -- so much so that Ramanez turns to brooding and consistently iterates his feelings: "Judge then, how, under the peculiar circumstances of his doom, this 'Lucifer, Son of the Morning,' Satan, or whatever else he is called, must hate Humanity!"
Rimanez may hate humanity very much for its constant indulgence in sin but his most violent feelings are directed explicitly toward a certain kind of woman: the "New Woman," like Sybil -- the wealthy and "soulless" lady who marries Tempest in order to get closer to her love interest, Ramanez. When Ramanez visits the Tempests after their marriage Sybil throws herself, shamelessly, on his person, begging for erotic love. He, in turn, is repulsed: "I hate you, and all such women as you! For you corrupt the world -- you turn good to evil -- you deepen folly into crime -- with the seduction of your nude limbs and lying eyes, you make fools, cowards and beasts of men!" He tells Tempest, earlier, about his deep anthropomorphic feelings toward women: "But do not forget why I hate them! It is because they have all the world's possibilities of good in their hands, and the majority of them deliberately turn these possibilities to evil."
In this way, clearly, Corelli polarizes Satan with woman. Ramanez detests "New" women who have been brought up on "French" literature and have given up their true calling, which is to guide men in moral practices. These new women are simply "the female of man [who] have no real soul save that which is a reflex of his, and being destitute in logic, she is incapable of forming a correct opinion on any subject."
Yet, Ramanez himself is very womanly -- even "New-" womanly. In the first place, Ramanez's defining characteristic is his attractiveness in Tempest's eyes. This is a point that Corelli never fails to repeat throughout the novel. When Tempest first encounters Satan, he has "a strong and singular attraction" to this "good-looking" man with his "wonderful eyes," "handsome presence," "extraordinary good looks," and "admirable build." Tempest goes so far as to compare his wife's -- Sybil's -- beauty to Ramanez's. In a word, Tempest finds Ramanez HOT (pun, yes?).
Ramanez, additionally, constantly fingers the "glittering beetle body" of what readers are supposed to understand is the soul of a sinful Egyptian woman. Later, when Tempest and Ramanez visit Egypt, Corelli suggests that this grotesque bug is the soul of Sybil, whose mummy is excavated. Surprisingly, Sybil has been right all along. She doesn't seem to have a soul. That soul seems to be the "sprite" pet of Ramanez. He even refers to "the radiant bat-shaped thing" as "an Egyptian female mummy," with a "vampire soul" (he later tells Sybil that her "vampire soul" called to him), and is careful to identify it as "an evil creature."
Nevertheless, he clings to her as she -- the insect -- clings to him. They seem to have a kind of equal relationship.
Moreover, Ramanez admits time and again that he -- granted, against his will -- has the agenda of doing the precise thing that he accuses the new woman of doing: corrupting and misguiding men. He and Sybil are doing identical work.
In this way, the devil is a woman.
But then, there is one thing -- and one thing only -- that differentiates Ramanez from Sybil. His sorrow.
Perhaps nineteenth-century literature hasn't known such a pitiful Satan since Byron and Lamb. Corelli gives a new meaning to the Satanic hero: he is so sad. The scene that reveals the depth of his sadness is when his services are rejected by the ephemeral and morally-superior Mavis Clare who is, not surprisingly for Corelli, a popular yet critically-bashed writer of fiction. He tempts her. She rejects him. Then, he gets down on one knee before her and beseeches her to pray for his soul. His redemption is possible, here, through the sympathy of a pure woman.
Reading The Sorrows of Satan I felt bad for Ramanez. But then, too, Corelli does not want me to only feel bad for Satan; she wants me to extend my sympathies to Sybil as well -- because the predicaments of Satan and the New Woman are not dissimilar.
After she is rejected by Ramanez, Sybil decides to poison herself and write down her experience of death, as she dies. Her reflection reveals one very clear truth: that Sybil is not ashamed of her actions and that she is, despite her sins, an extremely truthful woman. For example, when Tempest courts her she tells him blatantly that she is evil and damaged and will not be the kind of woman that he needs. When Tempest catches her throwing herself at Satan she is forthcoming about her desire. She even goes so far as to tell Tempest on their wedding day that she will tell him who she loves very shortly (even though it isn't him). All and all, Sybil has the presence of mind and sharp critical awareness enough to articulate herself as a product of society. Corelli seems to want readers to pity her to some extent, especially since she earns the pity, eventually, of both Mavis Clare and Tempest: the novel's obvious heroes.
Yet, Satan is also heroic -- at least in the way that Sybil is heroic. Satan, Sybil, and women in general are pawns in the same game, apparently. For Corelli, at least, these figures are terrible but they are also products of male desire. The real demonization is of men and, ironically, the devil somehow comes out clean.
Rimanez may hate humanity very much for its constant indulgence in sin but his most violent feelings are directed explicitly toward a certain kind of woman: the "New Woman," like Sybil -- the wealthy and "soulless" lady who marries Tempest in order to get closer to her love interest, Ramanez. When Ramanez visits the Tempests after their marriage Sybil throws herself, shamelessly, on his person, begging for erotic love. He, in turn, is repulsed: "I hate you, and all such women as you! For you corrupt the world -- you turn good to evil -- you deepen folly into crime -- with the seduction of your nude limbs and lying eyes, you make fools, cowards and beasts of men!" He tells Tempest, earlier, about his deep anthropomorphic feelings toward women: "But do not forget why I hate them! It is because they have all the world's possibilities of good in their hands, and the majority of them deliberately turn these possibilities to evil."
In this way, clearly, Corelli polarizes Satan with woman. Ramanez detests "New" women who have been brought up on "French" literature and have given up their true calling, which is to guide men in moral practices. These new women are simply "the female of man [who] have no real soul save that which is a reflex of his, and being destitute in logic, she is incapable of forming a correct opinion on any subject."
Yet, Ramanez himself is very womanly -- even "New-" womanly. In the first place, Ramanez's defining characteristic is his attractiveness in Tempest's eyes. This is a point that Corelli never fails to repeat throughout the novel. When Tempest first encounters Satan, he has "a strong and singular attraction" to this "good-looking" man with his "wonderful eyes," "handsome presence," "extraordinary good looks," and "admirable build." Tempest goes so far as to compare his wife's -- Sybil's -- beauty to Ramanez's. In a word, Tempest finds Ramanez HOT (pun, yes?).
Ramanez, additionally, constantly fingers the "glittering beetle body" of what readers are supposed to understand is the soul of a sinful Egyptian woman. Later, when Tempest and Ramanez visit Egypt, Corelli suggests that this grotesque bug is the soul of Sybil, whose mummy is excavated. Surprisingly, Sybil has been right all along. She doesn't seem to have a soul. That soul seems to be the "sprite" pet of Ramanez. He even refers to "the radiant bat-shaped thing" as "an Egyptian female mummy," with a "vampire soul" (he later tells Sybil that her "vampire soul" called to him), and is careful to identify it as "an evil creature."
Nevertheless, he clings to her as she -- the insect -- clings to him. They seem to have a kind of equal relationship.
Moreover, Ramanez admits time and again that he -- granted, against his will -- has the agenda of doing the precise thing that he accuses the new woman of doing: corrupting and misguiding men. He and Sybil are doing identical work.
In this way, the devil is a woman.
But then, there is one thing -- and one thing only -- that differentiates Ramanez from Sybil. His sorrow.
Perhaps nineteenth-century literature hasn't known such a pitiful Satan since Byron and Lamb. Corelli gives a new meaning to the Satanic hero: he is so sad. The scene that reveals the depth of his sadness is when his services are rejected by the ephemeral and morally-superior Mavis Clare who is, not surprisingly for Corelli, a popular yet critically-bashed writer of fiction. He tempts her. She rejects him. Then, he gets down on one knee before her and beseeches her to pray for his soul. His redemption is possible, here, through the sympathy of a pure woman.
Reading The Sorrows of Satan I felt bad for Ramanez. But then, too, Corelli does not want me to only feel bad for Satan; she wants me to extend my sympathies to Sybil as well -- because the predicaments of Satan and the New Woman are not dissimilar.
After she is rejected by Ramanez, Sybil decides to poison herself and write down her experience of death, as she dies. Her reflection reveals one very clear truth: that Sybil is not ashamed of her actions and that she is, despite her sins, an extremely truthful woman. For example, when Tempest courts her she tells him blatantly that she is evil and damaged and will not be the kind of woman that he needs. When Tempest catches her throwing herself at Satan she is forthcoming about her desire. She even goes so far as to tell Tempest on their wedding day that she will tell him who she loves very shortly (even though it isn't him). All and all, Sybil has the presence of mind and sharp critical awareness enough to articulate herself as a product of society. Corelli seems to want readers to pity her to some extent, especially since she earns the pity, eventually, of both Mavis Clare and Tempest: the novel's obvious heroes.
Yet, Satan is also heroic -- at least in the way that Sybil is heroic. Satan, Sybil, and women in general are pawns in the same game, apparently. For Corelli, at least, these figures are terrible but they are also products of male desire. The real demonization is of men and, ironically, the devil somehow comes out clean.
October 18, 2017
Свідки Єгови мали б більший успіх, якби на їх пересувних стелажах лежала ця книга замість "Вартової Башти". А якщо серйозно, то це один із найбільших шедеврів прози, котрі я прочитав (так, я ще небагато прочитав, але!). Тут красиві думки, недостатньо сказати, що цікаві персонажі і невимовно пишна стилістика. Особливий акцент ставлю на формулюваннях і незрівняних алегоріях.
Віддав би душу (не Сатані, хоча ух який персонаж), щоб поспілкуватись з авторкою, чи просто почути історію про те, що надихнуло її на концепцію, закладену тут.
Віддав би душу (не Сатані, хоча ух який персонаж), щоб поспілкуватись з авторкою, чи просто почути історію про те, що надихнуло її на концепцію, закладену тут.
April 6, 2024
قرأت ترجمة الأستاذ فتحي عوض وهي رائعة واسلوبها رقيق وبسيط ❤
من أجمل القصص عن شيطان الروح الأوروبي الخبيث والذي لا يكذب بالمناسبة عن من يكيد بهم قصة ولا أروع وأظن يوسف بك وهبي أقتبس جزئ من القصة في فيلم عام 1945 بعنوان سفير جهنم قصة إخراج و تمثيل.
لقد وجدت هذا الكتاب بالصدفة لا أدري اهي من الشيطان ؟
من أجمل القصص عن شيطان الروح الأوروبي الخبيث والذي لا يكذب بالمناسبة عن من يكيد بهم قصة ولا أروع وأظن يوسف بك وهبي أقتبس جزئ من القصة في فيلم عام 1945 بعنوان سفير جهنم قصة إخراج و تمثيل.
لقد وجدت هذا الكتاب بالصدفة لا أدري اهي من الشيطان ؟
March 31, 2015
Gothe and Marlowe would be proud of this Faustian work. Bit of a possible spoiler, many of the characters are very demeaning towards woman. And these views play a big role in the narrative.
August 29, 2024
ثلاث نجمات ونصف
إستمعت لها بصوت أحمد معتوق
وللامانة إختياراته مميزة فكأني دخلت مكتبة قديمة بأزقة المدينة العتيقة في سبعينات القرن او ثمانيناته ..
أحزان الشيطان ماري كوريللي
طبعت في عام واحد 14 مرة وهو ما لم يصل له كتاب قط
الرواية تتحدث عن الشيطان وما يشعره حين يغوي بني آدم
قصة كاتب مفلس معدم عقد صفقة مع الشيطان دون علمه انه شيطان لتتغير حياته بين ليلة وضحاها للغنى و الإنحدار الأخلاقي
القصة بسيطة ساذجة من منظور ديني مسيحي بحت وربما وعلى الأغلب كاثوليكي
كتبت بقلب وقلم يتميز بذلك التسامح والمشاعر التي تتسم بها العجائز الكاثوليكية قديما ذلك التقبل الساذج رغم التناقض والتماس الاسباب للآخر ان يخطئ أي خطئ ولو كبيرا ثم يكفي ان يعترف ليتوب
القصة مبنية على رواية مسيحية تقول ان الشيطان كان من الملائكة ولكنه م�� الملائكة التي سقطت من عليائها لانها تحدت الله
فحين خلق الله البشر لم يعجب ذلك الشيطان واحسه منافسا له
فانقسمت الملائكة لملائكة بقيت تحت إمرة الله وآخرون انظموا لحزب الشيطان
ثم نزل من السماء معاقبا مكتوب عليه ان كل من يخطئ من البشر يزيده بعدا عن التوبة ورجوعه إليها
الحوارات ذكية جدا جدا ومكتوبة بقلم لماح
نجحت الكاتبة في تقمص دور شيطان اسمه لوتشيو
وتخيل كلامه
حيث رسمت شخصا لا يكذب ولكنه يخدع واجاباته متموجة
يقول الحقيقة ولا يقولها بل يتركها معلقة لفهم شخص اعمى بالشهوة والأنانية
يدعي الحكمة ويحاول التنبيه ويعطي الفرص وي��صح
الخ
لذا قلت تصور ساذج له على أساس أنه مظلوم
لكنه بنفس الوقت يكبت للآخر اي انسانية او رحمة او محاولة مساعدة بحجة ان الغير اختار وهو حر وقد عاش حياته ولست مسؤولا عليه بلا بلا
فيرى الكاتب شخصا سينتحر بسببه ولا يهتم
يحطم حياة اخر وعادي الخ
المهم
رسمت ماري شخصية مافيس النقيض التام للوتشيو
وكأنها تصور السيدة مريم عليها السلام في النقاء
وهي من قاوم الشيطان واغواءه فنصحها ان تبقى على رضاها وقناعتها وبراءتها
اكرر لذا قلت انها حبكة ساذجة أي بديهية موجودة في الروايات الدينية
لكنها ساذجة ذلك السذوج البسيط المفرح بدون تعقيدات
الشيطان يدور ويسقط الناس في اغواءه ومن يسقط فيه
يعاقبه بقتله في الاخير ومع هذا يحزن ويبكي لأنه ضحيتهم فقد أبعدوه عن العودة لسماء
🤔🤔🤔😅😂😂😂😂
منظور امريكي بحت عن السجان والسجين
عن المجرم الذي يقول الضحية أغوتني بقتلها وانا رحمتها
عن امريكا تحتل البلدان الفقيرة لتنقذها من بؤسها وتنشر التطور الخ
بٱختصار
الرواية جيدة كفكرة وجديدة
لكنك اليوم حين تقرؤها ستشعر كم من لوتشيو بيننا
يدعي الصداقة وهو يضمر الكره و ينوي الغدر ثم يتركك حين يغرقك ويكرهك لأنك طاوعته لأنك زدت ذنوبه 🤔😂
ملاحظة
ضمنت الكاتبة نقدا لاذعا لرجال الدين على لسان الشيطان وكيف يساعدهم
ونقدا لساسة ورؤوس الاموال والفساد الاداري والاقتصادي والبورجوازية والتربية الفاسدة الخ
إستمعت لها بصوت أحمد معتوق
وللامانة إختياراته مميزة فكأني دخلت مكتبة قديمة بأزقة المدينة العتيقة في سبعينات القرن او ثمانيناته ..
أحزان الشيطان ماري كوريللي
طبعت في عام واحد 14 مرة وهو ما لم يصل له كتاب قط
الرواية تتحدث عن الشيطان وما يشعره حين يغوي بني آدم
قصة كاتب مفلس معدم عقد صفقة مع الشيطان دون علمه انه شيطان لتتغير حياته بين ليلة وضحاها للغنى و الإنحدار الأخلاقي
القصة بسيطة ساذجة من منظور ديني مسيحي بحت وربما وعلى الأغلب كاثوليكي
كتبت بقلب وقلم يتميز بذلك التسامح والمشاعر التي تتسم بها العجائز الكاثوليكية قديما ذلك التقبل الساذج رغم التناقض والتماس الاسباب للآخر ان يخطئ أي خطئ ولو كبيرا ثم يكفي ان يعترف ليتوب
القصة مبنية على رواية مسيحية تقول ان الشيطان كان من الملائكة ولكنه م�� الملائكة التي سقطت من عليائها لانها تحدت الله
فحين خلق الله البشر لم يعجب ذلك الشيطان واحسه منافسا له
فانقسمت الملائكة لملائكة بقيت تحت إمرة الله وآخرون انظموا لحزب الشيطان
ثم نزل من السماء معاقبا مكتوب عليه ان كل من يخطئ من البشر يزيده بعدا عن التوبة ورجوعه إليها
الحوارات ذكية جدا جدا ومكتوبة بقلم لماح
نجحت الكاتبة في تقمص دور شيطان اسمه لوتشيو
وتخيل كلامه
حيث رسمت شخصا لا يكذب ولكنه يخدع واجاباته متموجة
يقول الحقيقة ولا يقولها بل يتركها معلقة لفهم شخص اعمى بالشهوة والأنانية
يدعي الحكمة ويحاول التنبيه ويعطي الفرص وي��صح
الخ
لذا قلت تصور ساذج له على أساس أنه مظلوم
لكنه بنفس الوقت يكبت للآخر اي انسانية او رحمة او محاولة مساعدة بحجة ان الغير اختار وهو حر وقد عاش حياته ولست مسؤولا عليه بلا بلا
فيرى الكاتب شخصا سينتحر بسببه ولا يهتم
يحطم حياة اخر وعادي الخ
المهم
رسمت ماري شخصية مافيس النقيض التام للوتشيو
وكأنها تصور السيدة مريم عليها السلام في النقاء
وهي من قاوم الشيطان واغواءه فنصحها ان تبقى على رضاها وقناعتها وبراءتها
اكرر لذا قلت انها حبكة ساذجة أي بديهية موجودة في الروايات الدينية
لكنها ساذجة ذلك السذوج البسيط المفرح بدون تعقيدات
الشيطان يدور ويسقط الناس في اغواءه ومن يسقط فيه
يعاقبه بقتله في الاخير ومع هذا يحزن ويبكي لأنه ضحيتهم فقد أبعدوه عن العودة لسماء
🤔🤔🤔😅😂😂😂😂
منظور امريكي بحت عن السجان والسجين
عن المجرم الذي يقول الضحية أغوتني بقتلها وانا رحمتها
عن امريكا تحتل البلدان الفقيرة لتنقذها من بؤسها وتنشر التطور الخ
بٱختصار
الرواية جيدة كفكرة وجديدة
لكنك اليوم حين تقرؤها ستشعر كم من لوتشيو بيننا
يدعي الصداقة وهو يضمر الكره و ينوي الغدر ثم يتركك حين يغرقك ويكرهك لأنك طاوعته لأنك زدت ذنوبه 🤔😂
ملاحظة
ضمنت الكاتبة نقدا لاذعا لرجال الدين على لسان الشيطان وكيف يساعدهم
ونقدا لساسة ورؤوس الاموال والفساد الاداري والاقتصادي والبورجوازية والتربية الفاسدة الخ
July 31, 2014
The book was amazing. I felt the language and the vocabulary very enriching and all in all, I felt like i learnt a lot from the book. The meaning of the story was very propounding and it touched very very interesting and philosophical concepts and themes that not all of us have pondering on. The real impact of riches and Mammon is something that society portrays to be so desirable and fabulous. Until we see its real impact on all areas in our life. This story also touched the realms of Evil as it shows us how satan may not be our enemy but can pretend to be our friend. The devil has kind and noble ways of explaining and justifying things that aren't so kind or noble. Very interesting indeed and I agree and understand 100% with the person who said that it was, at times, very visual. Because it really was. For a person who loves to write descriptive writing, I found it very, very good. I would no doubt read it again for both excellence in writing, and in Moral significance/profoundness. The ending was just very meaningful and very conspicuous as it shows us that there will always be people who choose riches or righteous. I LOVED it.
March 13, 2022
This story is a variance on the Faust story written by the most popular author of the last period of the Victorian Age. That is a sufficient description of the plot.
In rating this book, if I look solely at the quality, this is a 2-star book. As expected with a popular rather than literary author, this book is very much overly melodramatic. The story is also preachy at times, inconsistent in its messaging, and has a lead character that is almost impossible to sympathize with.
Yet, I enjoyed reading it. While reading it in a discussion group certainly enhanced my reading experience, I also often found myself smiling while reading it. I thought Corelli’s writing style was very readable and flowed well.
While reading this book, besides reading some current novels, I alternated a daily reading of this book with Dickens’ Our Mutual Friend, both for GR discussion groups. I found myself looking forward more to reading Corelli’s book than the Dickens, probably because the writing was less cryptic and the plot more straightforward. While that may say more about me than the book, it is a factor I feel should contribute to determining my ultimate rating. Also, while the book was preachy, I thought it no more preachy than the two Anne Bronte novels I have read; and the preachiness here was at least humorous at times, even if unintentionally so.
Overall, based on my reading experience, I will rate this as a 3-star book.
In rating this book, if I look solely at the quality, this is a 2-star book. As expected with a popular rather than literary author, this book is very much overly melodramatic. The story is also preachy at times, inconsistent in its messaging, and has a lead character that is almost impossible to sympathize with.
Yet, I enjoyed reading it. While reading it in a discussion group certainly enhanced my reading experience, I also often found myself smiling while reading it. I thought Corelli’s writing style was very readable and flowed well.
While reading this book, besides reading some current novels, I alternated a daily reading of this book with Dickens’ Our Mutual Friend, both for GR discussion groups. I found myself looking forward more to reading Corelli’s book than the Dickens, probably because the writing was less cryptic and the plot more straightforward. While that may say more about me than the book, it is a factor I feel should contribute to determining my ultimate rating. Also, while the book was preachy, I thought it no more preachy than the two Anne Bronte novels I have read; and the preachiness here was at least humorous at times, even if unintentionally so.
Overall, based on my reading experience, I will rate this as a 3-star book.
July 28, 2019
There are several things to love about this novel. It's very witty and quite well written. It's also amazingly philosophical and smart. I love the fact that it's written by a female author, thus blasting the sexist cultural cliche that man are thoughtful and women emotional. Not that the narrative lacks some drama, but The Sorrows of Satan is more intellectual and moral enterprise than novel of sensation, sensibility, or melodrama.
Of course I have a penchant for such texts, being a Dante scholar by trade, and I must say this moral diatribe is very high on my list of such writing. I agree with all of the novel's moral targets--egotism, selfishness, wealth, greed, cronyism, sexism, the literary establishment, decadentism, etc.--and about 90% of its solution. Yes, you could probably call Marie Corelli the anti-Ayn Rand. Also, the literary portrait of Satan here, to my mind, blows Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita out of the water. To be fair, Corelli's is a kind of Victorian updating of Milton's Lucifer, the evil but also pitiable and tragic figure of the angel who couldn't accept God's eternal superiority. Loved that she sticks with Milton's version, more or less, of the fallen angel and eschews--what annoyed me about Bulgakov's novel--rewriting the Bible to make it palatable to the modern mind. (As you will see if you read on, I'm an atheist so re-writing the Bible strikes me as cheating. I mean, if the Bible is abhorrent to the modern mind it's because we've evolved--it doesn't mean we have to re-write it to fall into sync with contemporary morality. We can, and should, write new, better books, I should think.)
This, I'm sad to say, leads me directly to the ten percent of Corelli's Christian solution with which I disagree. While I teach for a Jesuit University and have come to know, love, and really admire many Christians who absolutely believe in and practice the love for their fellow human beings that Jesus taught, obviously there are also scads of so-called Christians, and practitioners of the other millions of religions in the world, who, despite the moral precepts of the deity to love their fellow man, fall into the egotism, prejudices, and frequently commit horrific acts against their fellow man that pretty much every religion claims in abhors. When I argue this point with believers they always seem to fall back on "Jesus tells me to love God first and foremost." For many, then, this allegiance to God is merely a fantastic projection of their own hatreds and prejudices onto their imaginary deity and thus we have all of the heinous acts against their fellow human beings that religious people commit as a matter of course justified by the holy scriptures: war, genocide, shooting up churches, shooting up schools, flying airplanes into buildings, etc., etc., etc.
As Jesus himself is supposed to have said: "A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things." The Bible is a treasure out of which far too many Christians bring warfare, slavery, selfishness, greed, sexism, and genocide. Of course I believe these things are already inside of those people. Therefore I have difficulty seeing allegiance to an imaginary deity--faith--as the solution to social strife after so many centuries of this concept failing to solve these problems.
Also, if one practices the opposite of all of these evils: pacifism, equality, peace, and love, only because they are afraid of the chastisement that this paternal deity will exact upon their immortal souls--as this novel offers as a solution to the narrator's having fallen into sin--what real good is that person's virtue? Are we always children or trained dogs only forbearing to shit on the carpet in the living room because we fear the rolled up newspaper? I declare that virtue is self evident--linguistically anyway, good is always good and evil always bad. We just have to be careful not to let the evil among us redefine concepts like war, genocide, slavery, sexism, greed, and wealth, as good things. They are evil and remain evil and evil needs to be avoided not because God says so or we'll be punished after death for them but quite simply and logically because they are evil. So, to reverse paraphrase Voltaire's oft-repeated maxim: If God did exist, it would be necessary--to secure peace through actual equality and justice for all--to ignore him.
If you want to meditate on these moral issues, even though more than a hundred years old, The Sorrows of Satan has a lot to say about the ills of our monetary bourgeois culture as we inherited it from Jolly old England.
Of course I have a penchant for such texts, being a Dante scholar by trade, and I must say this moral diatribe is very high on my list of such writing. I agree with all of the novel's moral targets--egotism, selfishness, wealth, greed, cronyism, sexism, the literary establishment, decadentism, etc.--and about 90% of its solution. Yes, you could probably call Marie Corelli the anti-Ayn Rand. Also, the literary portrait of Satan here, to my mind, blows Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita out of the water. To be fair, Corelli's is a kind of Victorian updating of Milton's Lucifer, the evil but also pitiable and tragic figure of the angel who couldn't accept God's eternal superiority. Loved that she sticks with Milton's version, more or less, of the fallen angel and eschews--what annoyed me about Bulgakov's novel--rewriting the Bible to make it palatable to the modern mind. (As you will see if you read on, I'm an atheist so re-writing the Bible strikes me as cheating. I mean, if the Bible is abhorrent to the modern mind it's because we've evolved--it doesn't mean we have to re-write it to fall into sync with contemporary morality. We can, and should, write new, better books, I should think.)
This, I'm sad to say, leads me directly to the ten percent of Corelli's Christian solution with which I disagree. While I teach for a Jesuit University and have come to know, love, and really admire many Christians who absolutely believe in and practice the love for their fellow human beings that Jesus taught, obviously there are also scads of so-called Christians, and practitioners of the other millions of religions in the world, who, despite the moral precepts of the deity to love their fellow man, fall into the egotism, prejudices, and frequently commit horrific acts against their fellow man that pretty much every religion claims in abhors. When I argue this point with believers they always seem to fall back on "Jesus tells me to love God first and foremost." For many, then, this allegiance to God is merely a fantastic projection of their own hatreds and prejudices onto their imaginary deity and thus we have all of the heinous acts against their fellow human beings that religious people commit as a matter of course justified by the holy scriptures: war, genocide, shooting up churches, shooting up schools, flying airplanes into buildings, etc., etc., etc.
As Jesus himself is supposed to have said: "A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things." The Bible is a treasure out of which far too many Christians bring warfare, slavery, selfishness, greed, sexism, and genocide. Of course I believe these things are already inside of those people. Therefore I have difficulty seeing allegiance to an imaginary deity--faith--as the solution to social strife after so many centuries of this concept failing to solve these problems.
Also, if one practices the opposite of all of these evils: pacifism, equality, peace, and love, only because they are afraid of the chastisement that this paternal deity will exact upon their immortal souls--as this novel offers as a solution to the narrator's having fallen into sin--what real good is that person's virtue? Are we always children or trained dogs only forbearing to shit on the carpet in the living room because we fear the rolled up newspaper? I declare that virtue is self evident--linguistically anyway, good is always good and evil always bad. We just have to be careful not to let the evil among us redefine concepts like war, genocide, slavery, sexism, greed, and wealth, as good things. They are evil and remain evil and evil needs to be avoided not because God says so or we'll be punished after death for them but quite simply and logically because they are evil. So, to reverse paraphrase Voltaire's oft-repeated maxim: If God did exist, it would be necessary--to secure peace through actual equality and justice for all--to ignore him.
If you want to meditate on these moral issues, even though more than a hundred years old, The Sorrows of Satan has a lot to say about the ills of our monetary bourgeois culture as we inherited it from Jolly old England.
September 5, 2015
The glowing reviews everywhere really hyped this piece up for me, but I'm sorry to say that this book is sorely disappointing by modern standards. Don't get me wrong, it started rather well, but it then quickly ran out of steam not terribly far into the story... almost as if there was a diminishing rate of return on the number of pages read.
Highlights:
*Nothing but 1 dimensional characters who speak nothing but purple prose
*There's a crazy obvious Mary Sue character
*The novel spends more time as a criticism of the publishing industry of the day than as an actual story.
*Plot is absurd and childishly transparent and predictable
*If you were to sum the plot up, you'd realize it's pretty much a half baked short story stretched to hundreds of pages of pointlessly plodding plot details.
*Descriptions are bland and unimaginative in that they "tell" rather than "show."
*Antiquated quirks of speech are rampant... "I am the world's richest man with five millions of dollars!" and more, but are inexcusable when you realize that even her contemporaries and predecessors wrote in a clearer fashion.
"But wait, it was a best seller! How could it be that bad?" you might ask... only to Google it and realize it was a best seller because it was one of the first books around to benefit from the library systems newly adopted practice of buying books that sold more than a certain threshold per run.
Seriously, please avoid this book at all cost. I read it because I must neurotically finish any book that I start, but you hopefully won't have to do so. Life is short, if you own this book, recycle it and pick up something better.
Highlights:
*Nothing but 1 dimensional characters who speak nothing but purple prose
*There's a crazy obvious Mary Sue character
*The novel spends more time as a criticism of the publishing industry of the day than as an actual story.
*Plot is absurd and childishly transparent and predictable
*If you were to sum the plot up, you'd realize it's pretty much a half baked short story stretched to hundreds of pages of pointlessly plodding plot details.
*Descriptions are bland and unimaginative in that they "tell" rather than "show."
*Antiquated quirks of speech are rampant... "I am the world's richest man with five millions of dollars!" and more, but are inexcusable when you realize that even her contemporaries and predecessors wrote in a clearer fashion.
"But wait, it was a best seller! How could it be that bad?" you might ask... only to Google it and realize it was a best seller because it was one of the first books around to benefit from the library systems newly adopted practice of buying books that sold more than a certain threshold per run.
Seriously, please avoid this book at all cost. I read it because I must neurotically finish any book that I start, but you hopefully won't have to do so. Life is short, if you own this book, recycle it and pick up something better.
December 19, 2021
"Until an hour before the Devil fell, God thought him beautiful in Heaven."
Arthur Miller - The Crucible
This lost son of the morning, bearing here the name of Lucio Rimanez, is at the center of a five stars masterpiece, the plot of which unfolds in sweet rippling prose the fact that Evil is human and not supernatural!
The story is that of a poverty-stricken author, namely Geoffrey Tempest, whose genius for writing was laid to waste on account of his financial difficulties. In this manner, the plot explores the chasm between the upper well-to-do classes and the destitute poor who were left to die of starvation. Such approach emphasizes the degeneracy of Victorian England in which money was all that mattered. Geoffrey's book, by means of illustration, was rejected by all publishers on account of his penniless state. Once, his fortune had altered, however, the same manuscript became the main attraction of the best social and literary circles of London, which indicates the hypocrisy of the age and its money grabbing nature.
The abyss which money had placed between the different classes ultimately led to a state of alienation, at times so acute and bordering on cruelty. The book dwells upon this sense of estrangement. Being left to starve to death when he was poor, Geoffrey, for one, had acquired an amount of psychological harshness that prompted him to disregard the suffering of his fellow creatures the way his own suffering was formerly disregarded by others.
Another issue which the authoress of the book had focused on is the unhappy unions of the age. The marriage of Geoffrey and Lady Sybil brings to the fore the agonies of loveless matrimonial lives. Love and compatibility were no reasons for or against a given union at the time. What mattered most was the financial status of the pair. Accordingly, Lady Sybil had found herself engaged and then married to a man she almost abhorred just because her bankrupt father needed the bridegroom's money to revive his finances. The marriage was more of a business transaction between the father and the husband. As a woman, Lady Sybil had no say. She was forced into the union. Consequently, her unfaithfulness and subsequent suicide do not provoke feelings of indignation in the reader but rather induce compassion and pity.
Prince Lucio Rimanez, arguably the most charismatic character in the novel, is an allegorical representation of the Victorian moral degeneracy, the collapse of religion, and the widespread of vices. By the same token, the character of Mavis Clare is a constant reminder that Evil has its roots in human behavior, and is therefore a choice which one can avoid if one can step away from the path of temptation. This was the ultimate decision of Geoffrey who had redeemed his soul by the end of the story, and went back to being poor but truly HUMAN.
Arthur Miller - The Crucible
This lost son of the morning, bearing here the name of Lucio Rimanez, is at the center of a five stars masterpiece, the plot of which unfolds in sweet rippling prose the fact that Evil is human and not supernatural!
The story is that of a poverty-stricken author, namely Geoffrey Tempest, whose genius for writing was laid to waste on account of his financial difficulties. In this manner, the plot explores the chasm between the upper well-to-do classes and the destitute poor who were left to die of starvation. Such approach emphasizes the degeneracy of Victorian England in which money was all that mattered. Geoffrey's book, by means of illustration, was rejected by all publishers on account of his penniless state. Once, his fortune had altered, however, the same manuscript became the main attraction of the best social and literary circles of London, which indicates the hypocrisy of the age and its money grabbing nature.
The abyss which money had placed between the different classes ultimately led to a state of alienation, at times so acute and bordering on cruelty. The book dwells upon this sense of estrangement. Being left to starve to death when he was poor, Geoffrey, for one, had acquired an amount of psychological harshness that prompted him to disregard the suffering of his fellow creatures the way his own suffering was formerly disregarded by others.
Another issue which the authoress of the book had focused on is the unhappy unions of the age. The marriage of Geoffrey and Lady Sybil brings to the fore the agonies of loveless matrimonial lives. Love and compatibility were no reasons for or against a given union at the time. What mattered most was the financial status of the pair. Accordingly, Lady Sybil had found herself engaged and then married to a man she almost abhorred just because her bankrupt father needed the bridegroom's money to revive his finances. The marriage was more of a business transaction between the father and the husband. As a woman, Lady Sybil had no say. She was forced into the union. Consequently, her unfaithfulness and subsequent suicide do not provoke feelings of indignation in the reader but rather induce compassion and pity.
Prince Lucio Rimanez, arguably the most charismatic character in the novel, is an allegorical representation of the Victorian moral degeneracy, the collapse of religion, and the widespread of vices. By the same token, the character of Mavis Clare is a constant reminder that Evil has its roots in human behavior, and is therefore a choice which one can avoid if one can step away from the path of temptation. This was the ultimate decision of Geoffrey who had redeemed his soul by the end of the story, and went back to being poor but truly HUMAN.
March 20, 2015
The soul of a sinner is indeed a sight to look at, the delicacy it feels of how fragile it's in the absence of its great Lord and Master, thus the soul of a sinner is sorrowful, yet in its sorrow it dons the cloak the repentance which brings a human's soul to the utmost point of clarity, that we have the capability of both right and wrong, and we are in constant need of the our Lord to protect us from both, because the arrogance of superiority and the the illusion of not doing wrong was and is the ultimate sin of Satan. And here lies the rub; the difference between Man and Satan in this score, God guaranteed Adam another chance and graced him with repentance upon prayer, yet cursed Satan, why? Because Satan believed he is not wrong, he was superior, yes he believed in God, and resented being cursed, but he cannot fathom that Adam should be held higher than him, Vanity was his sin.
The story is rather philosophical in that score, well all fiction is, it tells perhaps of something that may never happened, but the idea is worth thinking and the tale around it was artistically woven.
A fearful thought, why should a novel that introduces a new concept in understanding the Evil one , be the creation of a woman? I would say she's got more imagination necessary to the task! :D
The story is rather philosophical in that score, well all fiction is, it tells perhaps of something that may never happened, but the idea is worth thinking and the tale around it was artistically woven.
A fearful thought, why should a novel that introduces a new concept in understanding the Evil one , be the creation of a woman? I would say she's got more imagination necessary to the task! :D
January 2, 2013
wow, this book just left me speechless. Inspite of the traditional story of devil seducing man, marie coreili just managed to produce an epic story, superb and huge. the only drawback is the excessive wordiness but regarding that this book was written early on in the last century, one could get past that. wonderful plot, great style, very interesting.
September 18, 2025
Чем меньше имело значения мнение людей, тем сильнее чувствовался бог.
May 14, 2016
I borrowed this book from the library at my uni, and I don't remember why, since it hasn't been recommended to me or anything like that. Now I'm just glad it's a library book and not something I paid money for, because I'm just so disappointed by it.
It started out promisingly! (That seems to be a trend with books I pick up. Worrying.) The Devil is a handsome man with a secret! The protagonist is an oblivious author/jerk! I thought the book would be far more entertaining in how it revealed Lucio's true nature (and in the process, Geoffrey's true nature). Alas, it quickly became clear that Geoffrey was not to be sympathised with (until the very end, at least) and that Lucio would try to tempt Geoffrey into doing good, rather than evil, only to have his attempts thwarted.
I wish that Corelli had cut down on a lot of the unnecessary prose - like Sybil's letter, dear Lord, did I have to read the whole pointless letter - and also a lot of the preachiness. My personal faith is not so frail that it might get shaken (or strengthened) by Corelli's heavy-handed moralising, so all of that was not only lost on me, but also got on my nerves quite a bit.
All the blathering about 'immoral' literature made me roll my eyes on multiple occasions, and given that the author is a woman, the continuous misogyny came completely out of left field. Did Geoffrey go 7 pages before reiterating how dumb/useless/selfish/'sensual' women are? Don't think so. Did he ever show a hint of self-reflection? Nope. By the end I began to agree with Lucio that womankind has great potential, but so many women carelessly squander that potential; then I realised that that was just Stockholm Syndrome in action and was glad that I didn't have that much longer to go until the end of the novel.
There were also a few things that could have been explained in greater detail. I'm still not sure why Geoffrey was so sad and disappointed on his honeymoon. Is it because he and Sybil had furniture-smashing sex and she had - God forbid - orgasms, when he expected her to be virginal and/or a prude? Did Geoffrey expect to have to give Sybil the birds and bees talk and was hurt when she didn't need it? Because that's kiiiinda the impression I got from it.
In the end, though, I did actually feel sorry for Lucio, and I was glad that Geoffrey gave him that one hour of Heaven. I know that sounds saucy, but really, it's not. (Sadly. I expected more in the way of homoeroticism from this novel, based on how beautiful Lucio is and how much Geoffrey waxes lyrical about him.)
All in all, I'll rate this book at an ugh.
It started out promisingly! (That seems to be a trend with books I pick up. Worrying.) The Devil is a handsome man with a secret! The protagonist is an oblivious author/jerk! I thought the book would be far more entertaining in how it revealed Lucio's true nature (and in the process, Geoffrey's true nature). Alas, it quickly became clear that Geoffrey was not to be sympathised with (until the very end, at least) and that Lucio would try to tempt Geoffrey into doing good, rather than evil, only to have his attempts thwarted.
I wish that Corelli had cut down on a lot of the unnecessary prose - like Sybil's letter, dear Lord, did I have to read the whole pointless letter - and also a lot of the preachiness. My personal faith is not so frail that it might get shaken (or strengthened) by Corelli's heavy-handed moralising, so all of that was not only lost on me, but also got on my nerves quite a bit.
All the blathering about 'immoral' literature made me roll my eyes on multiple occasions, and given that the author is a woman, the continuous misogyny came completely out of left field. Did Geoffrey go 7 pages before reiterating how dumb/useless/selfish/'sensual' women are? Don't think so. Did he ever show a hint of self-reflection? Nope. By the end I began to agree with Lucio that womankind has great potential, but so many women carelessly squander that potential; then I realised that that was just Stockholm Syndrome in action and was glad that I didn't have that much longer to go until the end of the novel.
There were also a few things that could have been explained in greater detail. I'm still not sure why Geoffrey was so sad and disappointed on his honeymoon. Is it because he and Sybil had furniture-smashing sex and she had - God forbid - orgasms, when he expected her to be virginal and/or a prude? Did Geoffrey expect to have to give Sybil the birds and bees talk and was hurt when she didn't need it? Because that's kiiiinda the impression I got from it.
In the end, though, I did actually feel sorry for Lucio, and I was glad that Geoffrey gave him that one hour of Heaven. I know that sounds saucy, but really, it's not. (Sadly. I expected more in the way of homoeroticism from this novel, based on how beautiful Lucio is and how much Geoffrey waxes lyrical about him.)
All in all, I'll rate this book at an ugh.
July 3, 2021
Գիրքը պատմում է տաղանդավոր, բայց աղքատությունից տառապող գրող Ջեֆրի Տեմպեստի մասին: Իր կյանքի ամենահուսահատ պահին իր սենյակում հայտնվում է մի խորհրդավոր, գեղեցիկ և անսահման հարուստ բարերար արքայազն Լուչիո Րիմանեցը, որը նրան հայտնում է ,որ անհայտ միլիոնատեր ազգականից Ջեֆրին մեծ գումար է ժառանգել:
Լուչիոն մտերմանում է Ջեֆրիի հետ, դառնում է նրա լավագույն ընկերը և օգնում է անձնական հարցերում :
Շատ հետաքրքիր է ներկայացված Սատանայի կերպարը, որին մենք բոլորս լիարժեք չար կերպարում ենք պատկերացնում
Իսկ հեղինակը, մեզ է ներկայացնում մի նոր կերպար, որի մեջ կա և’ չարություն, և’ ազնվություն, և’ բարություն։
Ու այս պատմության մեջ ինձ համար գլխավոր հերոսը հենց Սատանան էր, որը չի հանդուրժում երկրի վրա տիրող քաոսը, անբարոյությունն ու անազնվությունը, ու տառապում է մարդկության գործած մեղքերից: Մարիա Կորելլին կարողացավ ցույց տալ նրան ավելի պարկեշտ ու բարեսիրտ:Նա լի էր վշտերով, ցավերով և տառապանքներով։Նրա համար մարդկանց մեջ ամենամեծ հիասթափությունն այն էր, որ նրանք այդքան հեշտությամբ ենթարկվում են նրա գայթակղություններին և խոստումներին։ Սատանան անընդհատ նրանց ակնարկում է, թե ով է ինքը իրականում, բայց մարդկանց համար կարևոր են միայն անձնական կարիքներն ու հաճույքները, ու չեն նկատում , թե ով է իրենց կողքին:
Չնայած սա մարդուն հրապուրելու սատանայի ավանդական պատմություններից է՝ Մարիա Կորելին պարզապես ստեղծեց հոյակապ ու չկրկնվող պատմություն: Գրքի միակ թերությունը չափից շատ նկարագրություններն են , բայց հաշվի առնելով, որ այս գիրքը գրվել է անցյալ դարի սկզբին, կարելի է աչք փակել դրա վրա:
Ավարտը լուսավոր է եւ հուսադրող։
Կարդալուց հետո երկար ժամանակ գիրքը. մտքիցս դուրս չէր գալիս, այն ստիպում է մտածել կյանքի արժեքների, բարու ու չարի մասին։
Շատ կցանկանայի, որ հայերեն լեզվով հրատարակվեր գիրքը եւ հասանելի լիներ հայերեն կարդացողների համար։
December 24, 2019
"تخيّل أن يغلقوا دونك باب الأمل.. أن تدرك يقينًا أنّك مطرود من رحمة الله، أن تسمع صوت الملائكة في الملأ الأعلى، لكنّك تمضي وحدك في الظلمات. إن عذاب سيزيف لهين إذا قورن بعذاب الشيطان. لا غرابة أنّه يكره البشر".
أوّل مرة أقرأ لـ"ماري كوريللي"، وهي لمن لا يعرفها كاتبة أسكتلندية عاشت في نهايات القرن التاسع عشر وبدايات القرن العشرين.
في "أحزان الشيطان" تحكي القصة "الشيطانية" الحزينة، التي سادت كثيرًا بعد ذلك في الروايات والقصص وهي تمثيل الشيطان في صورة بشري يُضلّ الناس بوسوسته لهم، فمنهم من يرفض ومنهم من يقبل.
ماري مباشرة جدًا في طرحها، ليس هناك إسقاطات خفية كثيرة، بل وصفت طرقًا واضحة يستخدمها الشيطان بمهارة للسيطرة على البشر، طرق كلنا نعرفها ومع ذلك لا نسلم من شركه.
التحولات التدريجية للأشخاص في القصة، وطريقة تحوّلهم ووصفها كان ميزة أخرى.
الرواية لطيفة، أعجبتني جدًا..
أوّل مرة أقرأ لـ"ماري كوريللي"، وهي لمن لا يعرفها كاتبة أسكتلندية عاشت في نهايات القرن التاسع عشر وبدايات القرن العشرين.
في "أحزان الشيطان" تحكي القصة "الشيطانية" الحزينة، التي سادت كثيرًا بعد ذلك في الروايات والقصص وهي تمثيل الشيطان في صورة بشري يُضلّ الناس بوسوسته لهم، فمنهم من يرفض ومنهم من يقبل.
ماري مباشرة جدًا في طرحها، ليس هناك إسقاطات خفية كثيرة، بل وصفت طرقًا واضحة يستخدمها الشيطان بمهارة للسيطرة على البشر، طرق كلنا نعرفها ومع ذلك لا نسلم من شركه.
التحولات التدريجية للأشخاص في القصة، وطريقة تحوّلهم ووصفها كان ميزة أخرى.
الرواية لطيفة، أعجبتني جدًا..
March 28, 2017
اعتقد ان النص الاصلي هيكون مشوق.. هاحاول أدور عليه واقراه
September 21, 2025
даже незнаю с чего начать...
сначала я грешила на то, что очень давно не читала классику на русском, потом на самого переводчика, потом надеялась, что идея всетаки должна быть но я слишком проста чтобы её не заметить, потом у меня все чесалось от раздражения на гг и его лучшего друга, потом я вообще перестала понимать, что здесь происходит, кроме того что в то время бухгалтерия похожу была от лукавого и ею никто не занимался иначе объяснить наличие не угасающих 5 миллионов при невероятном перечне расходов никак....
потом когда я уже решила все это "не скорбь сатаны" а "издевательство над Аней" в книге появилось письмо главной героини, за которое я была готова обнять писательницу...и даже была уверена, что поставлю высшую оценку...но потом письмо закончилось, мы вернулись к гг и книга закончилась абсолютно нечем....
сначала я грешила на то, что очень давно не читала классику на русском, потом на самого переводчика, потом надеялась, что идея всетаки должна быть но я слишком проста чтобы её не заметить, потом у меня все чесалось от раздражения на гг и его лучшего друга, потом я вообще перестала понимать, что здесь происходит, кроме того что в то время бухгалтерия похожу была от лукавого и ею никто не занимался иначе объяснить наличие не угасающих 5 миллионов при невероятном перечне расходов никак....
потом когда я уже решила все это "не скорбь сатаны" а "издевательство над Аней" в книге появилось письмо главной героини, за которое я была готова обнять писательницу...и даже была уверена, что поставлю высшую оценку...но потом письмо закончилось, мы вернулись к гг и книга закончилась абсолютно нечем....
Read
May 7, 2020a busy day today, so more to come shortly after I go over it in my head.
January 16, 2025
One of the best books….
"Истинное проклятие человека — это не дьявол, а его собственное сердце, которое предпочитает зло добру, когда оно сулит выгоду."
"Истинное проклятие человека — это не дьявол, а его собственное сердце, которое предпочитает зло добру, когда оно сулит выгоду."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 247 reviews