gothic research paper
TRANSCRIPT
“Shivering with Antici…pation” Gothic Adaptation and the French Revolution’s Terrors
Our societal obsession with tragedy is quite peculiar. In theory, we shouldn’t want
anything to do with that which solicits negative feeling, yet we find ourselves enthralled with the
idea of watching some poor sucker in a movie tremble in reaction to his own misfortune. The
phenomenon is not exclusive to cinema: we rubberneck accidents, read tabloid articles about
celebrity divorce and, perhaps most importantly, rip through stories of Gothic suffering with
incredible urgency.
At no point in history was mankind’s literary obsession with distant terror more apparent
than in the aftermath of the French Revolution, which brought the Gothic tropes of terror once
confined to the page into the bloody world of Revolutionary France. With the death of King
Louis XVI and the storming of the Bastille, the bloody murder at the end of Wadpole’s The
Castle of Otranto began to look less like a fictional fright and more like something one could
find in a newspaper article about the latest happenings of the Terror. The Gothic found itself
sharing a stage with the equally terrifying reality of unrestrained democratic attempt. As reality
began to mirror the fictional environments of the Gothic, the genre adapted. Authors sought to
bring readers even farther into different aspects of the fictional, into a world where the terrible
demanded and received response. The trajectory of the Gothic adjusted out of a need to
circumvent the newfound terror wrought by the consequences of the French Revolution, an act of
deliberate upset which defined the Gothic as a response to humanity’s natural desire for the
reassurance of our circumstances through the demonstration of distant circumstances worse than
our own. While historical horrors and terrors such as the French Revolution have been entrusted
Banquer 2
to memory, the fictional horror and terror of the Gothic persists because of the cathartic service it
provides.
In order to understand how the French Revolution affected the progression of the
Gothic’s ability to incite terror and horror, one must first understand the state of textual Gothic
terrorism (in the sense of the genre’s ability to provoke a sense of horror) preceding the French
Revolution. From the publication of the first Gothic novel, Horace Walpole’s The Castle of
Otranto, the Gothic demonstrates an ability to demand attention by means of horror and terror.
Robert Hume elaborates on how Walpole instills attention in his text:
The Castle of Otranto holds the reader’s attention through dread of a series of terrible
possibilities—Theodore’s execution, the (essentially) incestuous marriage of Manfred
and Isabella, the casting-off of Hippolita, and so on…Walpole uses violent death only at
the beginning and end of his book. The reader is prepared for neither of these deaths,
which serve only to catch the attention and to produce a climax, respectively. (Hume 282)
One’s initial motivation to persist in reading Walpole’s novel originates from the initial,
terrible shock provided—a giant helmet unexpectedly falling from the sky certainly instills
surprise and curiosity, and rightfully demands explanation and justification. But as the reader
receives neither of these things upon continuation, a loss of interest occurs as one’s desire for
continued reading evaporates, leaving the reader desensitized. Fortunately, Otranto’s lack of
stimulus suffers no repetition in later Gothic works, and lies as an exception to the genre’s
development in response to the French Revolution.
With the penning of On the Pleasure Derived from Objects of Terror; with Sir Bertrand,
A Fragment, John and Anna Aikin further define and refine Walpole’s shocking implementation
of Gothic stimulus. Anna Aikin’s essay, which discusses why readers enjoy the terror of the
Banquer 3
Gothic when they really shouldn’t, justifies the reader’s enjoyment of the sparsely placed,
suspenseful terror in Otranto, and smartly illustrates the reasons behind the diminishing interest
in the novel upon progression.
In summary, Aikin postulates that we enjoy scenes of suffering because of how they
allow us to derive a greater pleasure from extending our sympathy to the sufferers. Additionally,
she notes how we don’t enjoy terror as much as we enjoy satisfying our curiosity, and surmises
that our willingness to accept the terror of the Gothic occurs out of a desire for closure. In the
cases of terrors provided by our imagination, our conduit for the execution of our curiosity, we
gain pleasure in our enjoyment of what we find curious, which supersedes and diminishes the
pains of terror in response (Aikin 127). In terms of applying Aikin’s theory to Otranto, the terror
brought by the falling helmet that crushes Conrad, while hilarious from the modern viewpoint, is
tolerated for the sake of the satisfaction of our curiosity, but because the falling helmet—in
addition to the other minor terrors prevalent throughout the text—never receives full justification
from Walpole, the reader loses their incentive to finish the text. In contrast, Sir Bertrand
manages to keep the reader’s interest by presenting various catalysts of terror in rapid
succession. While the curiosity elicited by the presentation of terror fails to be satisfied, it does
lead the reader to complete the (admittedly short) fragmented text. By means of Sir Bertrand’s
improvement of the terrorist methodology conceived by Walpole through Otranto, the early
Gothic demonstrates its capacity to instill reaction through the use of terrorist anticipation,
contrived by means of the supernatural or the unexplained.
Having been introduced by Otranto and refined by Sir Bertrand, the Gothic now existed
in a state adequate enough to illicit terrible reaction from the eighteenth century reader. With the
advent of the French Revolution, however, the Gothic found its ability to do so equally matched
Banquer 4
by the happenstances of the real world. While the preliminary Gothic primarily invoked reader
reaction by means of Radcliffean terror— the anxious sense of dread one feels when faced with
the mystery of possibility, — the French Revolution instead solicited voyeuristic reaction via
horror, usually through gruesome shock and reaction to the explicitly portrayed. The British
reactions to the storming of the Bastille, the execution of King Louis XVI, and the Reign of
Terror all stand as violent testament to the French Revolution’s ability to produce events which
can instill horror upon the observer.
British reaction to the French Revolution was by no means restrained to horror, for
sensations of terror occurred as well. In response to the British declaration of war against post-
revolutionary France, the French pursued numerous avenues for the potential invasion of Britain,
with Napoleon at one point considering the use of troop-carrying hot-air balloons and the
construction of a tunnel under the Channel. French pursuit of such hypotheticals, in addition to
the stationing of an army at Boulonge—a coastal town in France visible from the English side of
the Channel—between 1798 and 1805 fanned the flames of anticipation: for seven years, the
British dreaded the terrible possibility of French invasion. Even King George III found himself
concerned with Napoleonic possibility, stating the following in a letter to Bishop Hurd:
[Britain] is here in daily expectation that Bonaparte will attempt his threatened invasion;
the chances against his success seem so many that it is wonderful he persists in it…
should his troops effect a landing, I shall certainly put myself at the head of my troops
and my other armed subjects to repel them. (King George III 14)
Though the King of England himself found the possibility of French success slim, he still
suffered from the anticipatory dread of terror at the possibility of such a fact. This sense of dread
at the hands of the possible was expressed in the British printed world as well—even Robert
Banquer 5
Dighton’s sharply illustrated caricatures bowed to the dread of possibility, albeit satirically. His
lengthily titled print An Accurate Representation of the Floating Machine Invented by the
French for Invading England and acts on the principals of both Wind and Water Mills etc plays
off of the rampant fear of invasion, using a ridiculously contrived contraption to illustrate how
British fears distorted realistic perception. This distortion—perpetrated by the large amount of
scuttlebutt throughout all echelons of British society—reiterates Radcliffe’s view on the
manifestation of terror as an anxious sense of dread felt in the face of obscurity, and illustrates
how the terror present in the British reaction to the militaristic consequences of the French
Revolution names the Revolution itself as equally capable of provoking feelings of terror, which
had previously laid exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Gothic. Ronald Paulson, in
discussing the relation between the French Revolution and the Gothic, discusses how the French
Revolution’s turmoil and suspicion made both parties’ equal in terms of their ability to instill
feelings of horror and terror:
When the Revolution itself came, and as it progressed, it was precisely this inability to
make out the events on a day-to-day basis, but with the suspicion of personal
skullduggery beneath each new changing-hands of property, that make the Gothic novel a
roughly equivalent narrative form. (Paulson 542)
In the eyes of the (in) famous novelist Marquis de Sade, the newfound, horrific reality
brought by the turmoil of French Revolution desensitized Gothic readers to the point where
Gothic authors were forced to invoke the supernatural and demonic in order to solicit terror and
horror; he saw it as “the necessary offspring of the revolutionary upheaval which affected all of
Europe” (13). If the French Revolution possessed the ability to instill an equal or greater amount
of terror than the Gothic, then the Gothic as a genre needed to adapt for the sake of continued
Banquer 6
relevance. Under Ann Radcliffe’s The Mysteries of Udolpho, the Gothic genre pivots. Unlike the
early Gothic, which used unjustified instances of the supernatural for the solicitation of terror,
Radcliffe employs what she refers to as the explained supernatural: a writing style which
presents the reader with seemingly supernatural occurrences that precede natural justification
later in the text. The explained supernatural resolves the mystery that the early Gothic habitually
left in question in consequence to its implementation of the crudely supernatural. Its application
within Udolpho provides the reader with the satisfaction of curiosity which, as stated by Aiken,
acts as the preliminary driver for one’s perseverance through the naturally unenjoyable terrors of
the Gothic. In this sense, Radcliffe’s interpretation of the Gothic gives the reader what they want
most: the means to solve mystery.
By satisfying curiosity and the anxieties that accompanied it by means of her use of
terror, Radcliffe’s Gothic succeeds in providing the novel’s reader with a sense of resolution and
certainty that the French Revolution could in no way provide. Radcliffe’s use of the explained
supernatural both indulges the Aiken faculties of satisfied anticipation and curiosity, which in
turn fuels our desire for the horror and terror of the Gothic and makes the terror needed for the
solicitation of such feeling tolerable by means of its resolution. Though the early Gothic’s ability
to instill terror and horror found itself challenged by the French Revolution’s own capacity to do
so, the success of Radcliffe’s explained supernatural illustrates just one of the many ways the
Gothic circumvents the horror and terror brought by the French Revolution.
With the French Revolution as a catalyst for the Gothic’s development, one would think
that the most notable variations in the Gothic would appropriately occur within the confines of
French Gothic literature. While the most popular Gothic works in France during and following
Banquer 7
the revolution were translations of the British Gothic, the French Gothic did respond to the
upheavals brought by the revolution and all its consequences, albeit in a more subtle fashion.
François Félix Nogaret’s Le Miroir des événemens actuels1, published in 1790, concerns an
automation-creating contest held between six talented inventors who compete to win the heart of
Aglaonice, a woman whose innocence and untimely fainting draw parallel to Udolpho’s Emily
St. Aubert. The Gothic characteristics of the text stem from the six inventors “use [of]
mechanical technology to disguise its own existence, to produce the imitation of life in ever-
increasing verisimilitude to its natural and human ‘originals’” (Landes 110). More specifically,
they appear through the thematic questions raised in response to the inventors’ successful
creation of artificial life and the means by which it is used: the Gothic notion of horror can be
observed in the automations’ ability to act in the place of organic life, demonstrated with an
automation stating Nicator’s love for Aglaonice without prompt (Nicator is the sixth of the six
inventors). Similarly, the Gothic notion of terror manifests in the anticipatory anxieties that
appear not only in the presentation and success of artificial life in Le Miroir, but in the wait in
between the demonstration of each inventor’s automation, for the increasing humanity of each
subsequent automation terrorized by means of the hypotheticals raised over the humanity of the
automations. Nogaret’s portrayal of life created at the hands of man—the automations created by
the inventors—as a vehicle for each inventor’s attempt to woo Aglaonice—which by extension
refers to the creation of a better society through the reproductive action that would follow—
symbolizes the optimistic lens through which the initial stages of the French Revolution were
viewed, for as the Revolution attempted to create a new nation out of talent and merit for the
sake of national betterment, the coincidentally named Dr. Frankenstein and the other five
inventors too sought to use their talent and merit to create artificial life for the sake of courting
1 Fittingly translates into English as “The Mirror of Current Events”
Banquer 8
an organic woman. Unlike Udolpho, which used the explained supernatural to satisfy anxieties
over the unpredictability of the French Revolution, Le Miroir celebrated the possibilities of
reform, at least at first. Julia Douthwaite, who exposed Le Miroir’s similarities to Shelley’s
Frankenstein in her article “The Frankenstein of the French Revolution,” comments on how
Nogaret’s tale builds on the ideals of the French revolution:
Underlining the importance of Le Miroir for the political history of revolutionary France
is the demand for action that frames this text… This book, and its tale of the wily
inventors seeking the beautiful virgin, should ultimately serve the goal of anti-clerical
activism. From the writer’s skill, a fraternal bond is created among men and the nation’s
fight against obscurantism makes a concrete step forward.” (383).
It’s important to note the positivity with which Le Miroir’s first edition addresses the
French Revolution. The second edition, published in 1795, parallels the path of regression the
French Revolution followed through the various instances of violence at the hands of radical
idealism. The political message that once invoked solidarity to the French Revolution was
deliberately made undecipherable by Nogaret. Douthwaite elaborates:
A new framing device and significant textual omissions [in the second edition] transform
the tale from a patriotic allegory and a concrete vehicle of enlightenment into a frivolous
tale of libertinage. This not-so-subtle shift in emphasis underlines the turn, in the five
years between 1790 and 1795, from a conception of literature as a moral and political
force capable of intervening in History, and the author as a speaker of Truth, to a
conception of literature as merely a leisure pursuit and the author as entertainer.
(Douthwaite 384)
Banquer 9
The two drastically different editions of Le Miroir indicate two more means by which the
Gothic reacted to the terror and horror wrought by the French Revolution. At first, the horror of
the French Revolution lay in positive possibility: reaction to the violent storming of the Bastille
contained a vehicle for a hopeful sort of catharsis that eventually manifested in the establishment
of the First Republic. Similarly, the feelings of anticipatory dread associated with Gothic terror
inhabited the anxieties of those who worried of the Revolution’s success or failure. Through the
first edition of Le Miroir, the Gothic responds to revolutionary manifestations of horror and
terror by making the pleasure in the resolution of feelings of horror and terror largely outweigh
the negative experiences of horror and terror themselves: a positive reaction to the feelings
brought by the terror and horror of the Revolution which reflected the positivity with which the
early Revolution was regarded. But as the horrific revulsion and terrorist dread seen in France’s
political instability and in the Reign of Terror started to outweigh the pleasure that came with the
resolution of Revolutionary horror and terror, The Gothic adjusted. Nogaret’s reduced second
edition augmented the presence of terror—by means of improved obscurity which stemmed from
Nogaret’s omissions—and horror, which stemmed from the grotesqueness of Nogaret’s
omissions. Much like Udolpho, Nogaret’s unorthodox implementation of the Gothic
demonstrates how the genre changed itself in response to the French Revolution.
Perhaps the greatest response to the terror and horror of the French Revolution occurs
after its circulatory conclusion. Published in 1818, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein debuted after
the French Revolution had come full circle, going from monarchy to democracy to empire to
monarchy once again. Much like how the post-Battle of Waterloo world attempted to understand
the apparent chaos of the Revolution, Shelley’s Dr. Frankenstein attempts to give meaning to the
meaningless by bestowing life upon the lifeless. Like Victor, Shelly sought to create meaning
Banquer 10
and longed for “an intelligible explanation of how the progressive ideals of the French
Revolution had collapsed in despotism, both at home and abroad” (Clemit 30). In spite of its
conclusion, the French Revolution still managed to instill horror and terror upon Europe. The
total body count of all the wars fought in the name of and in response to the Revolution was
more than enough to instill horror upon the post-Napoleonic. Similarly, the dreadful anxiety felt
at the hands of the Revolution’s apparent futility invoked terror as well. In order to instill any
sort of reaction to the horrible or terrible in a reader, Shelley had to present instances of horror
and terror greater than those of the French Revolution.
Shelley succeeded in this endeavor by placing humanity in the place of God. Through
Victor’s act of creation, Shelley allows the reader to observe the fictional consequences of the
crude human desire for capabilities beyond our own faculties. In doing so, she creates an
empathetic link between this desire and the consequences of this desire’s fictional satisfaction,
which allows for the horrible and terrible to carry greater weight due to their relativity. So as to
make such a relation more potent, Shelley bestows upon her monster similar faculties to those of
his creator, forcing the reader to grapple with the juxtaposition of a hideous body and a beautiful
mind, exemplified by numerous instances of wonderful dialogue. In one of the confrontations
between Victor and the monster, the monster remarks on his purposelessness:
I was dependent on none and related to none. The path of my departure was free, and
there was none to lament my annihilation. My person was hideous and my stature
gigantic. What did this mean? Who was I? What was I? Whence did I come? What was
my destination? These questions continually recurred, but I was unable to solve them.
(Shelley 178)
Banquer 11
The monster’s confrontation with the most basic philosophical questions of life is a
deliberate illustration of human nature in nonhuman form. Shelly’s use of the monster as an
external vehicle for the presentation of the usually internal questions of identity and purpose is
deliberate in its intent to instill sympathy within the reader. By virtue of common human
experience, the reader will have experienced the same dreadful terror at the hands of the dreadful
ambiguity of individual purpose that the monster grapples with. Interestingly, the Monster’s
experience with horror stems from the very sense of obscure terror that reader sympathizes with.
In the midst of the monster’s dreadful existence, it comes across Victor’s diary, which describes
how he vividly grew to detest his creation in the aftermath of giving it life, a revelation that
elicits revulsion from the monster:
Everything is related in them which bears reference to my accursed origin; the whole
detail of that series of disgusting circumstances which produced it is set in view; the
minutest description of my odious and loathsome person is given, in language which
painted your own horrors and rendered mine indelible. I sickened as I read. ‘Hateful day
when I received life!’ I exclaimed in agony. ‘Accursed creator! Why did you form a
monster so hideous that even you turned from me in disgust? (Shelley 181)
While a response to this question would make a fantastic paper topic on its own, the
monster’s horrid reaction demands attention. In terms of the Gothic, the monster is experiencing
the same sensation of revulsion that the reader experiences in response to the horrific: The
ultimate reciprocation of sympathy occurs. The monster’s reaction to Victor’s diary, in addition
to his struggle against the obscure nature of his existence, allows the reader to experience terror
and horror both sympathetically and practically, which indicates Frankenstein’s contribution to
the Gothic as the definitive manifestation of its ability to amplify sensations of horror and terror
Banquer 12
by virtue of sympathy. Due to the reader’s exposure to both types of horror and terror—the
practical and the sympathetic—and the French Revolution’s singularly-dimensioned provocation
of the pair, which stems from not only the inability to solicit sympathy in the face of the
destruction wrought by the Napoleonic Wars but the inability for the post-Waterloo reader to
understand the Revolution in its entirety—Frankenstein manages to muster more terror and
horror than the recent memory of the French Revolution. Therefore, Frankenstein exists as yet
another example of how the Gothic adjusts in the face of the French Revolution’s own ability to
instill Gothic feeling.
While we still feel its effects, the horror and terror of the French Revolution are history.
In contrast, the gothic invocation of horror and terror persists today because of the service they
provide. While humanity as a whole has progressed to a point where we can unequivocally state
that our current quality of life overshadows that of one hundred years ago, we still feel insecure
in terms of how well we have it. In our capitalist society, we rather ignorantly consider one’s
financial status to be indicative of one’s quality of life—there’s a reason why we fantasize about
driving Ferraris and living in mansions filled with supermodels. The various instances of
extravagance in our lives—take everything related to the Kardashians, for example—instill a
sense of superficial envy. We want to be rich, successful, and famous because it’s what society
portrays as the pinnacle of success, and while the wise correctly claim the opposite, we still find
ourselves blinded by the possibility of achieving affluence.
The Gothic possesses a capacity to bring its reader back into reality by invoking negative
affluence—the possession of something we don’t want. In the surprisingly Gothic movie Aliens,
for example, Ripley fights a whole bunch of horrifying, killer aliens who reproduce by
involuntarily hugging your face and bursting from your chest. After Ripley throws the Alien
Banquer 13
queen out of the airlock and the credits roll, we’re filled with relief: we’re glad that we
(hopefully) don’t live in a world filled with the Aliens from the movie, and we’re relieved that
we no longer have to experience the dreadful terror of the obscure brought by the movie’s
conceit. A similar relief overcame the Gothic readers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,
who put down books such as Frankenstein and Dracula and gave thanks to the fact that their
circumstances were better than those of the book’s characters. Similar to how those who
observed the French Revolution gave credence to their lack of direct involvement, we appreciate
the fiction of the Gothic every time an encounter with the genre ends. The influence of the
Gothic prevails throughout history because of how it reaffirms the positive qualities of our own
existence by demonstrating distant circumstances worse than our own. It makes itself
indispensable, and we welcome shivering in response with antici-
…pation.
Works Cited:
Banquer 14
Aikin, John, and Anna Laetitia Aikin. "On Pleasure Derived from Objects of Terror; with Sir
Bertrand, A Fragment." Ed. E. J. Clery and Robert Miles. Gothic Documents: A
Sourcebook, 1700-1820. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2000. 127-9. Print.
Aliens. Dir. James Cameron. Perf. Sigourney Weaver et al. Twentieth Century Fox Home
Entertainment, 2003. DVD.
Clemit, Pamela. “Frankenstein, Marry Shelley’s Myth-Making. The Godwinian Novel: The
Rational Fictions of Godwin, Brockden Brown, Mary Shelly. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1993. 139-74. JSTOR. Web. 9 December 2015.
Dighton, Robert Freville. An Accurate Representation of the Floating Machine Invented by the
French for Invading England and acts on the principals of both Wind and Water Mills
etc. 1798. National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. Collections- National
Maritime Museum. Web. 9 December 2015.
Douthwaite, Julia. “The Frankenstein of the French Revolution: Nogaret’s Automation Tale of
1790.” European Romantic Review 20, 3 (2009): 381-411. MLA International
Bibliography. Web. 9 December 2015.
Hume, Robert D. "Gothic versus Romantic: A Revaluation of the Gothic Novel." PMLA 84
(1969): 282-90. Print.
King George the Third. "The King to the Bishop of Worcester." Letter to Richard Hurd. 30 Nov.
1803. Napoleon and the Invasion of England: The Story of the Great Terror. London: J.
Lane, 1908. 14. Print.
Landes, Joan. "The Anatomy of Artificial Life: An Eighteenth-Century Perspective." Genesis
Redux: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Artificial Life. By Jessica Riskin.
Chicago: U of Chicago, 2007. 96-111. Print.
Banquer 15
Nogaret, François-Félix. Le Miroir des événemens actuels ou la belle au plus offrant, Histoire à
deux visages. Paris: Au Palais Royal & Chez les Marchands de Nouveautés, L’An de
notre salut, et le deuxième de la Liberté, 1790. Print.
Paulson, Ronald. "Gothic Fiction and the French Revolution." ELH 48.3 (1981): 532-54. JSTOR.
Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
Radcliffe, Ann. “On the Supernatural in Poetry.” The New Monthly Magazine 7 (1826): 145-52.
JSTOR. Web. 9 December 2015.
Radcliffe, Ann. The Mysteries of Udolpho. Ed. Bonamy Dobrée. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008.
Print.
Sade, Marquis de. "An Essay on Novels." The Crimes of Love. New York: Oxford UP, 2005.
Print.
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein. Ed. Patrick Nobes. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.
Walpole, Horace. The Castle of Otranto. London: Penguin, 1986. Print.