You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
bleuraines 's review for:
The Great God Pan
by Arthur Machen
The Great God Pan, which started as only a single chapter in a British newspaper before later being published as a full novella in 1894, is widely regarded as a vastly influential work of gothic horror. Its touch has run deep, impacting the tastes of many a great author with its unique and dreadful flavor of horror.
Indeed, Machen had crafted a dish so foreign to the common palate of that time that the controversy it sparked comes as little surprise. Critics dismissed the work as the product of a diseased mind, intent on exposing readers to a morbid tale. Yet it captivated others, with peers such as Oscar Wilde and Bram Stoker praising the story. The spice that made this dish so repulsive to its critics was intoxicating to its supporters, inspiring them to implement its elements into their works, such as Stoker's "Dracula", H.P. Lovecraft's "The Dunwich Horror", and Stephen King's "N".
It would seem all but inevitable, then, that anyone with an inkling of curiosity in the genre may find themselves drawn back to this common origin point. In my own case, a love of Guillermo del Toro's film "Pan's Labyrinth" led me to seek out a list of its influences, which included "The Great God Pan".
Despite its renown, I approached the novella with no prior knowledge—unfamiliar with Machen, unaware of its 1890s United Kingdom setting, and even misinterpreting 'Pan' as a geological term rather than the Greek god. It may then come as little surprise that upon my first read of the story, I did not "get" it.
Though I thought the plot of the story was interesting, having been greatly intrigued by the actions of Clarke and Dr. Raymond in the opening and the ever-growing mystery of Helen Vaughan's true nature, I found myself more discomforted by the style and formatting of the story than it's content. I found the narrative was quite straight-to-the-point in many regards, skipping much fluff in favor of focusing on the letters and conversations that directly impact the plot. The story feels as if the author outlined the key plot points and stripped away transitions, leaving little room for readers to process or absorb the events. On one hand, this did contribute to a sense of confusion and urgency, but on the other, I felt that there was no period to allow for a sense of dread to settle in.
As the days passed after my initial read, the novel’s horrors grew more pronounced, lingering in my thoughts in ways I hadn’t anticipated. Like biting into a ripe pepper, the story's impact was subtle at first but gradually intensified, lingering in my thoughts long after. My confusion grew into a mild obsession, as I started to piece together the various elements.
I'll save you the time of trying to explain the various conversations and "a-ha!" moments that occurred in this period and instead provide my interpretation of the story: "The Great God Pan" represents the horror of the occult, the unknown, and the fears of the unexplainable creeping into one's life. By giving in to curiosity and toying with forbidden knowledge, you catch a fleeting view of a world beyond, in it a creature both perverse and grotesque. The door shuts and the sight of it disappears, but then it dawns on you: in that brief moment of chaos and horror, as you stared at the abomination, it glanced back. Just as you learned of its existence, it too learned of yours, and it is only then you realize the door has no lock.
In the case of this story, Mary represents the door in which the occult seeps back into our world, a consequence of Dr. Raymond's experimentation. And what comes through that door presents itself in the form of Helen, the promiscuous and mysterious woman whose presence invites corruption and death. A woman both familiar and alien, embodying a blend of allure and terror that defies explanation.
What we do learn of Helen is that those unfortunate enough to encounter her are subjected to a level of terror so beyond comprehension that it leaves its victims suicidal or mad, which the mere referencing of the encounters is enough to repulse anyone who dares listen. It is interesting to note this corruption is depicted through portrayals of implicit sexual encounters. From the perversion of a young boy, the rape of a teenage girl, and the nightly visits of prominent men, we learn that all of the victims of "Pan's" influence found themselves defiled through the most intimate of acts.
Some of these depictions may have lost their potency with time, as we must keep in mind the story was written for the audience of Victorian England, who were more reserved in their views of sexuality. There also exists some debate on whether the portrayal of women throughout the story reflects misogynistic viewpoints at the time. One such argument is that the story minimizes the value of its female characters, such as Mary, who is viewed as little more than property to do with as he pleases by Dr. Raymond. While I cannot speak to the intentions of the author, I had interpreted this to be an intentional decision to highlight the perversion of the experiment, conducted by a man who held little regard for the life of an orphaned child.
All in all, I've come to grow fonder of the story since my initial read, with it lingering in my mind for far longer than I had ever expected. It is clear to me why such a work would be so influential to a wide range of minds both in its time and today. That said, I do believe that this influence has come at a price, with over a century of literature since having implemented these themes and ideas. There are also some aspects of the book that have diminished with time, due to a shift in writing styles and a broader cultural understanding of certain topics such as sexuality.
While the story may have grown on me over time, I can easily see it falling either way for many people. If you do have an interest in the evolution of the genre or are more familiar with the cultural context of the novel, I think it's worth a read. Otherwise, you may wish to temper your expectations going into it.
Indeed, Machen had crafted a dish so foreign to the common palate of that time that the controversy it sparked comes as little surprise. Critics dismissed the work as the product of a diseased mind, intent on exposing readers to a morbid tale. Yet it captivated others, with peers such as Oscar Wilde and Bram Stoker praising the story. The spice that made this dish so repulsive to its critics was intoxicating to its supporters, inspiring them to implement its elements into their works, such as Stoker's "Dracula", H.P. Lovecraft's "The Dunwich Horror", and Stephen King's "N".
It would seem all but inevitable, then, that anyone with an inkling of curiosity in the genre may find themselves drawn back to this common origin point. In my own case, a love of Guillermo del Toro's film "Pan's Labyrinth" led me to seek out a list of its influences, which included "The Great God Pan".
Despite its renown, I approached the novella with no prior knowledge—unfamiliar with Machen, unaware of its 1890s United Kingdom setting, and even misinterpreting 'Pan' as a geological term rather than the Greek god. It may then come as little surprise that upon my first read of the story, I did not "get" it.
Though I thought the plot of the story was interesting, having been greatly intrigued by the actions of Clarke and Dr. Raymond in the opening and the ever-growing mystery of Helen Vaughan's true nature, I found myself more discomforted by the style and formatting of the story than it's content. I found the narrative was quite straight-to-the-point in many regards, skipping much fluff in favor of focusing on the letters and conversations that directly impact the plot. The story feels as if the author outlined the key plot points and stripped away transitions, leaving little room for readers to process or absorb the events. On one hand, this did contribute to a sense of confusion and urgency, but on the other, I felt that there was no period to allow for a sense of dread to settle in.
As the days passed after my initial read, the novel’s horrors grew more pronounced, lingering in my thoughts in ways I hadn’t anticipated. Like biting into a ripe pepper, the story's impact was subtle at first but gradually intensified, lingering in my thoughts long after. My confusion grew into a mild obsession, as I started to piece together the various elements.
I'll save you the time of trying to explain the various conversations and "a-ha!" moments that occurred in this period and instead provide my interpretation of the story: "The Great God Pan" represents the horror of the occult, the unknown, and the fears of the unexplainable creeping into one's life. By giving in to curiosity and toying with forbidden knowledge, you catch a fleeting view of a world beyond, in it a creature both perverse and grotesque. The door shuts and the sight of it disappears, but then it dawns on you: in that brief moment of chaos and horror, as you stared at the abomination, it glanced back. Just as you learned of its existence, it too learned of yours, and it is only then you realize the door has no lock.
In the case of this story, Mary represents the door in which the occult seeps back into our world, a consequence of Dr. Raymond's experimentation. And what comes through that door presents itself in the form of Helen, the promiscuous and mysterious woman whose presence invites corruption and death. A woman both familiar and alien, embodying a blend of allure and terror that defies explanation.
What we do learn of Helen is that those unfortunate enough to encounter her are subjected to a level of terror so beyond comprehension that it leaves its victims suicidal or mad, which the mere referencing of the encounters is enough to repulse anyone who dares listen. It is interesting to note this corruption is depicted through portrayals of implicit sexual encounters. From the perversion of a young boy, the rape of a teenage girl, and the nightly visits of prominent men, we learn that all of the victims of "Pan's" influence found themselves defiled through the most intimate of acts.
Some of these depictions may have lost their potency with time, as we must keep in mind the story was written for the audience of Victorian England, who were more reserved in their views of sexuality. There also exists some debate on whether the portrayal of women throughout the story reflects misogynistic viewpoints at the time. One such argument is that the story minimizes the value of its female characters, such as Mary, who is viewed as little more than property to do with as he pleases by Dr. Raymond. While I cannot speak to the intentions of the author, I had interpreted this to be an intentional decision to highlight the perversion of the experiment, conducted by a man who held little regard for the life of an orphaned child.
All in all, I've come to grow fonder of the story since my initial read, with it lingering in my mind for far longer than I had ever expected. It is clear to me why such a work would be so influential to a wide range of minds both in its time and today. That said, I do believe that this influence has come at a price, with over a century of literature since having implemented these themes and ideas. There are also some aspects of the book that have diminished with time, due to a shift in writing styles and a broader cultural understanding of certain topics such as sexuality.
While the story may have grown on me over time, I can easily see it falling either way for many people. If you do have an interest in the evolution of the genre or are more familiar with the cultural context of the novel, I think it's worth a read. Otherwise, you may wish to temper your expectations going into it.