[PREV - SELF_IDENTIFICATION] [TOP]
VILLANY
October 1-6, 2007
The virtue of villainy in fiction is often
remarked on -- our fiction descends from a
time when it was so tangled with puritanical
observence of the letter of virtue, that the
only spirit left in it was projected out
onto the villanous characters.
Anne Radcliff's "Mysteries of Udolpho" (1794)
could not be better crafted to undermine
virtue and celebrate villany: the main DRIP_DRIP_DRIP
characters drip with perfection to the point
where they're perfect drips, her fine Plus: endless very, very
sentiments and elevated sensibilities are so bad poetry, purported
sappy that they can't help but drive one to be written by the
elswhere... main characters.
Into the arms of Montoni? Thankfully,
this fades
"Montoni had been otherwise engaged; his soul once the plot,
was little susceptible of light pleasures. such as it is,
He delighted in the energies of the passions; picks up.
the difficulties and tempests of life, which
wreck the happiness of others, roused and But unfortunately
strengthened all the powers of his mind, and it resumes when
afforded him the highest enjoyments, of which things slow again.
his nature was capable. Without some object
of strong interest, life was to him little Nothing like a
more than a sleep; and, when pursuits of real habit of writing
interest failed, he substituted artificial shallow poetry to
ones, till habit changed their nature, and endear a character
they ceased to be unreal." to the reader.
Chapter III, Part II
True villainy:
A view of heroism
that can't help
but discredit any
heroism.
A quest for perfection
that can only paralyze.
All action left to the
domain of the evil...
GORGIAS
And I think this may be
the answer, the fatal
flaw in our fictions,
the reason a people
raised on tales of
virtue can be so utterly
bereft of any interest
in it.
It all comes back to
the impossiblity
of virtue to the Ah well, we are
True Christian.... all poor sinners.
(So there's no
point in trying,
is there?)
BURNING_CRITICS
"His character also, unprincipled, dauntless,
cruel and enterprising, seemed to fit him for
the situation. Delighting in the tumult and
in the struggles of life, he was equally a
stranger to pity and to fear; his very courage
was a sort of animal ferocity; not the noble
impulse of a principle, such as inspirits the
mind against the oppressor, in the cause of
the oppressed; but a constitutional hardiness
of nerve, that cannot feel, and that,
therefore, cannot fear."
-- part III, Chapter III
Radcliffe is *totally in love*
with this character.
Is it possible that she could
have been unconscious of this?
Maybe all those chapter head
quotations from Milton are
the tip-off.
--------
[NEXT - DRIP_DRIP_DRIP]