Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.28 AVERAGE
3.28 AVERAGE
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
The Mysteries of Udolpho has slowly but surely become one of my favorite books. I knew going into this novel that it was hugely successful upon its publication in 1794, and that it was heavily imitated thereafter. With that knowledge in mind, I was worried that the book, then, might feel less mysterious because, perhaps, I have already experienced an imitation of it, thus dwindling any opportunity of surprise and intrigue. Fortunately, that was not the case.
In spite of its age, this novel was mysterious and engrossing. Not only does Ann Radcliffe do a wonderful job at dangling secrets in front of the reader — and delaying their explanations — but she also has a knack for "faking-out" the reader. There were several instances where I thought I had solved some of the mysteries, only to have my jaw drop in surprise at their final reveals. I wonder if I wrongfully assumed that a novel this old would have fewer clever twists and turns in comparison to our modern-day "sophistication," but Radcliffe demonstrates impressive sleight-of-hand, and if I did happen to have that subconscious assumption, I hope I never do again.
I would love to emphatically recommend this book to everyone I meet; however, I think its slow pace will cause problems for many. This book is a typical romance and features a meandering structure and plot. The titular medieval castle of Udolpho is not even reached by the characters until page 216, out of a 654-page book. This might sound like a drawback, but it's not. The first third of the novel allows the reader to know, understand, and empathize with the heroine of the story, Emily. Several of the mysteries — of which there are many — are also set up in the beginning as well. The patient reader will be well-rewarded.
"Silent, lonely and sublime, it seemed to stand the sovereign of the scene, and to frown defiance on all, who dared to invade its solitary reign." (p. 216)
I think, above all, that I am most impressed by the fact that this book is truly a horror novel. There are many scary moments throughout, and there was even one part in particular that gave me chills, which is a difficult reaction for even a contemporary horror novel to get out of me. Furthermore, on page 643 of the Penguin Classics edition, the editor provides a note explaining Radcliffe's views on the difference between "horror" and "terror." As far as I understand it, "horror" is much more visceral and in-your-face, whereas "terror" comes from the suspense and dread that stems from the obscured, the unknown, and the uncanny. As a lifelong fan of horror media, I found these ideas to be incredibly fascinating.
"Horror occupied her mind, and excluded, for a time, all sense of past, and dread of future misfortunes." (p. 236)
The prose is poetic — it also quite literally includes poetry — and the text is deeply layered and thematically rich. The story, to me, seems mostly concerned with critiquing those who misuse their wealth and power to oppress others, especially the ways in which men oppress women. The heroine of the story, Emily, is not the archetypal "damsel in distress," but is instead resourceful and rational. The villain of the story, Montoni, is also excellent and never cartoonishly evil. Oftentimes, he doesn't even speak — he just frowns in contempt, which feels both realistic and frightening. Montoni also utters one of my favorite lines from any villain ever:
"You speak like a heroine...we shall see whether you can suffer like one." (p. 360)
Other characters, such as Madame Montoni and Valancourt, also have interesting character arcs that I was not expecting. These elements help to create a story that is worthy of a read for both enjoyment and challenge.
In summation, The Mysteries of Udolpho is one of the first horror novels, and, 230 years later, it is still a scary, thrilling, complex, mysterious, and enthralling mammoth of classic fiction.
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
2 - 2.5 stars
Read this because I loved "Northanger Abbey" and I wanted to read the book that influenced so much of Catherine Moreland's outlook. I'll say right up front that this was bad per se. It has lots of gorgeous descriptions and the middle chapters are very engaging. But it is just....so....LONG. At least, for a modern audience. I'm sure that this was not an issue during it's time of publication when there was no such thing as television and travel was both expensive and difficult. I can see it's appeal for the time period. But for a modern reader, the entire first and fourth volumes feel like they could have been cut or severely condensed. I grew to like the main character Emily over the course of the story (although the girl must have something seriously wrong with her, considering the amount of fainting she does!) I also really liked her father St. Aubert and the Count Villiefort and his children. But I had no respect for her sweetheart Valancourt. In the beginning, I thought it was just because they were young and in love, but by the end of the book he seems very selfish and wildly self-pitying. So dramatic with much weeping, sighing, and throwing himself upon sofas or chairs and well as some creepy lurking. (I've never seen so much weeping and sighing and carrying on with any character before... and they all do it to some extent!) So for die-hard fans of 19th century literature or those interested in important literary works, have at it, but the average reader might want to take a pass.
Read this because I loved "Northanger Abbey" and I wanted to read the book that influenced so much of Catherine Moreland's outlook. I'll say right up front that this was bad per se. It has lots of gorgeous descriptions and the middle chapters are very engaging. But it is just....so....LONG. At least, for a modern audience. I'm sure that this was not an issue during it's time of publication when there was no such thing as television and travel was both expensive and difficult. I can see it's appeal for the time period. But for a modern reader, the entire first and fourth volumes feel like they could have been cut or severely condensed. I grew to like the main character Emily over the course of the story (although the girl must have something seriously wrong with her, considering the amount of fainting she does!) I also really liked her father St. Aubert and the Count Villiefort and his children. But I had no respect for her sweetheart Valancourt. In the beginning, I thought it was just because they were young and in love, but by the end of the book he seems very selfish and wildly self-pitying. So dramatic with much weeping, sighing, and throwing himself upon sofas or chairs and well as some creepy lurking. (I've never seen so much weeping and sighing and carrying on with any character before... and they all do it to some extent!) So for die-hard fans of 19th century literature or those interested in important literary works, have at it, but the average reader might want to take a pass.
adventurous
emotional
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Sexism, Grief, Death of parent
Moderate: Confinement, Violence, Murder
Minor: Gun violence, Mental illness, Racial slurs, Rape, Suicide, Blood, Stalking
adventurous
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Soooooooo long. The plot is interesting, with many twists and turns, but there is way too much melodrama and detailed description of scenery to suit my taste. But I’m glad I finally read this.
The plot was rather typical of an overly dramatic gothic novel, though I was a little disappointed that the hints at supernatural phenomenon were all explained! The characterisation was rather polarised. The language was unbelievably flowery. I read it as I ma interested in Jane Austen and her times, and this was a novel read by Jane Austen.
This was a lot of fun to read while remembering scenes and themes from Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey. It was different than I expected - slow-moving in the beginning and wrapping up somewhat suddenly, with no unexplained supernatural effects. The reveal of the veil was definitely a letdown!
I found the gender dynamics very interesting, both amusing and horrifying. The descriptions of nature and society in 16th-century Italy were fascinating (though I know they are not very true to reality), and the racialization of Italians was also fully displayed.
I found the gender dynamics very interesting, both amusing and horrifying. The descriptions of nature and society in 16th-century Italy were fascinating (though I know they are not very true to reality), and the racialization of Italians was also fully displayed.
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Had to accept reality: I don't have time to read this before I leave
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The best I can offer for this sprawling work--beyond its importance as a foundation for later gothics and some Victorian heroines and villains--is that Radcliffe spends a great deal of time offering breathy descriptions of the rural and wilderness landscapes of France and Italy. In fact, while at first I found these lengthy passages needless and off-putting, I began to find them preferable to the absurd and disjointed plot. I could almost overlook the confusing over-abundance of commas.
Where to start? For me, our breathless and often fainting heroine Emily is the primary villain of this review. At no point does our virtuous and highly-principled young woman take a single assertive step in 750 pages to change her situation. She is constantly swept away by others, ceaselessly writing poems to fir trees when she might be considering her circumstances, and all too often changing her mind about what options she has. All the while, when she might be listening to any number of characters, including the love-interest Valancourt, she runs away or claims a violation of her propriety: and it is these endless denials of the events of the outside world that cause much of the drama. Her mistakes, misunderstanding, and outright ignorance create her own distress. Her passivity to all of it makes her a victim to it. I found myself resenting her.
It's not that the caricatures amongst the other characters are much better. The comic but insipid maid-servant, the chronic sighing and wailing of Valancourt (they deserve each other), the over-arching ego of the villain Montoni, the ignorant and arbitrary cruelty of Madame Cheron, and the complete and utter failure of ALL of them to effect any change in their own conditions. Each is an utterly static character, growing or learning not a jot but whining loudly each time they collide. That Emily has many suitors during the novel certainly has nothing to do with her quality of character.
It seems, too, that author Radcliffe understands that Emily herself cannot sustain the story. She spends the first 200 pages traveling in a carriage and looking at the outdoor scenes. After she escapes the evil castle--through the wildest of coincidences that have absolutely nothing to do with any previous events within it--Radcliffe quickly and without warning shifts the narrative point of view and introduces a similar young lady who has her own equally non-sensical adventures, many almost in parallel to Emily's. Why? Certainly not to fulfill any other demands of the main plot.
No, I could go on, but here's the base of it: That The Mysteries of Udolpho has been an origination point for many of the worst of Victorian romance tropes and patterns is not a sign in its favor. Unplanned, improbable, and just silly in its contrivances and coincidences, the length of this work makes it a poor reading choice for much but its own unfortunate role in literary history.
Where to start? For me, our breathless and often fainting heroine Emily is the primary villain of this review. At no point does our virtuous and highly-principled young woman take a single assertive step in 750 pages to change her situation. She is constantly swept away by others, ceaselessly writing poems to fir trees when she might be considering her circumstances, and all too often changing her mind about what options she has. All the while, when she might be listening to any number of characters, including the love-interest Valancourt, she runs away or claims a violation of her propriety: and it is these endless denials of the events of the outside world that cause much of the drama. Her mistakes, misunderstanding, and outright ignorance create her own distress. Her passivity to all of it makes her a victim to it. I found myself resenting her.
It's not that the caricatures amongst the other characters are much better. The comic but insipid maid-servant, the chronic sighing and wailing of Valancourt (they deserve each other), the over-arching ego of the villain Montoni, the ignorant and arbitrary cruelty of Madame Cheron, and the complete and utter failure of ALL of them to effect any change in their own conditions. Each is an utterly static character, growing or learning not a jot but whining loudly each time they collide. That Emily has many suitors during the novel certainly has nothing to do with her quality of character.
It seems, too, that author Radcliffe understands that Emily herself cannot sustain the story. She spends the first 200 pages traveling in a carriage and looking at the outdoor scenes. After she escapes the evil castle--through the wildest of coincidences that have absolutely nothing to do with any previous events within it--Radcliffe quickly and without warning shifts the narrative point of view and introduces a similar young lady who has her own equally non-sensical adventures, many almost in parallel to Emily's. Why? Certainly not to fulfill any other demands of the main plot.
No, I could go on, but here's the base of it: That The Mysteries of Udolpho has been an origination point for many of the worst of Victorian romance tropes and patterns is not a sign in its favor. Unplanned, improbable, and just silly in its contrivances and coincidences, the length of this work makes it a poor reading choice for much but its own unfortunate role in literary history.