What do you think?
Rate this book
Montalbert
This is a reproduction of a book published before 1923. This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process. We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide. We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book.
270 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1795
About the author
Charlotte Turner Smith
290 books57 followersCharlotte Turner Smith was an English Romantic poet and novelist. She initiated a revival of the English sonnet, helped establish the conventions of Gothic fiction, and wrote political novels of sensibility.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 12, 2015
If you’ve ever read Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen, and enjoyed it, then this book is for you. This is something of a precursor to Northanger Abbey (although it’s a lot less comical). That said the first volume does have some typical Smithian wit in it and is really very enjoyable. The scene is thus: “In one of those villages immediately under the ridge of those chalky hills called the South Downs,...” Rosalie (our romantic heroine) grows up with her family, the Lessinghams. Mr Lessingham is a Rector, Mrs Lessingham is very down-to-earth and ordinary, with her only books being Hannah Glasse’s cookery and “Every Woman her own Housekeeper”. Into this dull family environment, Rosalie grows up feeling that there is some “mystery surrounding her birth”, mooching around the countryside with a heightened degree of sensibility whilst her parents chide her for being so romantic.
Both parties, it transpires, are right – Rosalie shouldn’t be so romantic – it only hurts her prospects when she falls in love (and then secretly marries) the volatile and frankly unstable Montalbert; and there is some mystery surrounding her birth. This is really a very exciting book indeed – from Mrs Glasse’s cookery and a South Downs vicarage, Rosalie travels to Sicily and experiences the earthquake of 1783. Being Smith, there is a fantastic, almost apocalyptical description of this and one can almost imagine the devastation of this enormous natural disaster, providing descriptions of great gulfs opening up in the street and swallowing the houses and the resulting tsunami which follows. Rosalie is then kidnapped and held prisoner (which temporarily solves her homelessness problem after the house was swallowed by an earthquake) but it’s not the ideal solution for her. Escaping, she then goes mad when Montalbert accuses her of infidelity and takes her baby son away from her.
Like Northanger Abbey, the gothic horror of this is present really in the contemporaneous society which Rosalie is subject to – by stepping outside of those prescripted bounds with her secret marriage, the horrors become all too real for Rosalie and can only lead to madness (if you’ve ever read Wollstonecraft’s Maria; or The wrongs of woman, you will see that this is a recurring trope for women in the fate of women in the 18th century – in fact, there might even be something in going mad for women – can it save them somehow by removing them from society – a bit like fainting does for Radcliffe’s Emily in The Mysteries of Udolpho?)
My excellent PhD supervisor told me that this is the least favourite for her of Smith’s novels because Rosalie is so pathetic. And, it’s true, Rosalie IS pathetic and does bring it all on herself, but I still LOVED this book – mainly for the inclusion of Hannah Glasses’ cookery (it’s a real book and was the cookery book of choice for the 18th century housewife – she was the Mary Berry of her day), but also for the clever way Smith twists the traditional discourse of romance novels. When Rosalie gets her happy ending, its resolution with Montalbert. I asked myself, after everything he’s put her through, is this is a happy ending? It sounds like a tragedy to me. Smith’s only really true happy ending comes in her final collection of novellas (Letters of a solitary wanderer) where in the first novella, the heroine gets to live life as a single woman with her fortune. Good on her. Rosalie’s fate is what Emmeline’s would have been, if she had married Delamere (from Smith’s first novel). Definitely recommend this – again, can’t comment on the edition – I read it online in an eighteenth century collection.
Both parties, it transpires, are right – Rosalie shouldn’t be so romantic – it only hurts her prospects when she falls in love (and then secretly marries) the volatile and frankly unstable Montalbert; and there is some mystery surrounding her birth. This is really a very exciting book indeed – from Mrs Glasse’s cookery and a South Downs vicarage, Rosalie travels to Sicily and experiences the earthquake of 1783. Being Smith, there is a fantastic, almost apocalyptical description of this and one can almost imagine the devastation of this enormous natural disaster, providing descriptions of great gulfs opening up in the street and swallowing the houses and the resulting tsunami which follows. Rosalie is then kidnapped and held prisoner (which temporarily solves her homelessness problem after the house was swallowed by an earthquake) but it’s not the ideal solution for her. Escaping, she then goes mad when Montalbert accuses her of infidelity and takes her baby son away from her.
Like Northanger Abbey, the gothic horror of this is present really in the contemporaneous society which Rosalie is subject to – by stepping outside of those prescripted bounds with her secret marriage, the horrors become all too real for Rosalie and can only lead to madness (if you’ve ever read Wollstonecraft’s Maria; or The wrongs of woman, you will see that this is a recurring trope for women in the fate of women in the 18th century – in fact, there might even be something in going mad for women – can it save them somehow by removing them from society – a bit like fainting does for Radcliffe’s Emily in The Mysteries of Udolpho?)
My excellent PhD supervisor told me that this is the least favourite for her of Smith’s novels because Rosalie is so pathetic. And, it’s true, Rosalie IS pathetic and does bring it all on herself, but I still LOVED this book – mainly for the inclusion of Hannah Glasses’ cookery (it’s a real book and was the cookery book of choice for the 18th century housewife – she was the Mary Berry of her day), but also for the clever way Smith twists the traditional discourse of romance novels. When Rosalie gets her happy ending, its resolution with Montalbert. I asked myself, after everything he’s put her through, is this is a happy ending? It sounds like a tragedy to me. Smith’s only really true happy ending comes in her final collection of novellas (Letters of a solitary wanderer) where in the first novella, the heroine gets to live life as a single woman with her fortune. Good on her. Rosalie’s fate is what Emmeline’s would have been, if she had married Delamere (from Smith’s first novel). Definitely recommend this – again, can’t comment on the edition – I read it online in an eighteenth century collection.
Displaying 1 of 1 review