To the Ifacuity Pf The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Monk and folklore Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Gaede, Ruth Brant, 1914- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 28/09/2021 21:23:08 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/319149 THE- 'FOLKEOHB1 by ; , ; Bath Brant Gaede : ' ''' : A Thesi^r ' .:-.v . V, - -. sabtiitted: to the if acuity pf the.-' ' . ' Department of English • : ; in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the.degree of MASTER Of ART in the Graduate College, : University of Arizona 1956 / Approved: of Thesj ( Date Director of Thesis ; Date This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allow able without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledg ment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quota tion from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the dean of the Graduate College when in their judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: ' ' . ; , ' ' V . lABIE OF OOHIBMIS • ' - ' : ' . ":,; -' -./^' ; ■ Page FIST OF TABLES. * . ."v:y:-' « , « - , . , . F - o - ill Chapter : v / y\'T,:'y: 4 - I„ IHTHDDUCTORYs ’THS GOTHIC KEFIVAL OF FOLICLOKS. 1 „ „ 1 II. : THE .BIFBDIMG W F AMD miTIFDA. T '. ' V F ». FL1 III.' THE STORY OF 'THES,MOMKt A,.CHARTIHG.OF ITS ICTIFS. .... 37 17. MOTIFS: OF.' THE MOFR IN PBF-MOm( FOLKLORB . ...'F> . .' $6 • :vf- moMZO,n- am ex&mfis- of Tm W :• - : ; PDST-MOMK; FOLISL.OHE . ' . , . F . F , .... 69 VI.. :G01C1US2DN. F .■ . •. .o . o 65 LIST OF TABLES Table " I. Ambrosio and Antonia II." Raymond and Agnes. ...... c h a p S r 'i :/V'^' ^t^ductbr^t^: ;The'; .C^.liblc -^y3,vai. of Folklore . • Mhen The Monk, > a necrophilic and extravagant Gothic novels was published in 1796) it produced a sensatioti which the antagonistic re views: helped-to; ihcrease, Most reviewers admitted; that the novel was exciting but .charged it with "indecency" and "plagiarism,'11^ The last murmurs 'about The Monk's- immorality seem to have .been made in the. 1930 's,,2 but the: principal': present-daj. Monk scholar, Louis F. Peck, is still very much concerned with plagiarism; in fact, since 1900 nearly . all of the scholarship on M. G,' Lewis has been a series of arguments, 'accusatory or defensive, about his 'sdurces, : ^ 1 : These, sources' of The Monk, -even when; literary;; - were ultimately ■ folk themes, \ Therefore they have been elusive, They annoy scholars, for themes - out of foiklore cannot be.pinned down to-prove or disprove ' ;/Monthly Review, XXIII (August, 1797), >511 Critical Review, XIX (February, l^?;)', 194-200; Scots Magazine., LIT (1802), 548; European .Magazinev: XXXI '(1797), 111-14, ' ' A;.: Baker, History of the English Mdvel (London, 1934), V, 205-11; J, M, S, Tompkinsj The Popular Novel in England, 1770-1800 (London, 1932)> p. 278, .■ v ' . :"■■■ : .3 -; ■- 8^ ' ■ " :: - : ;' 8 ^ "The Monk.and Le Diable Amoureux," Modern Language Motes,. LX7III (June, 1953), 406-8; "The Monk and Husaus 1 ’Die Entfuhrung,111 Philological Quarterly, XXXII- (July,' 1953) > 346-48.. - - Before 1900 there.was practically no Lewis scholarship. Chapter II discusses in detail some of the disputes, since.o , plagiarism. On that account the dispute's over Lewis 1 s alleged borrowing ■■ have remained lively, while the mpie : significant question' of what he did . with the ancient motifs, has been almost ignored. Moreover,, the faot : that the sources of the Gothic romance were generally taken out of folk- . lore has not, apparently, impressed the students of the Gothic, . it ' least, no; authority listed in the Bibliography has ever made the ' - ; ' ■ channeling of folk elexasnts.into and out from the Gothic romance' his , primary point, of inquiry, y.,; ^ : h : ' v v:': Yet the rediscovery of folklore in the late eighteenth century'is .so striking that it seems '"almost 'by itself to have launched the Romantic Movement, If one views the phenomenon as a'" literary' M the. turn to.' fblk:miotif s .may be considered, as -part of romanticism's in clination toward .the. medieval, the outlandish, and the passionate, A .. Sociologist, might reasonably connect it with the new diffusion of. liter ature and. literacy to the masses.- For the folklorist, the motifs of the . Gothic tale have a different significancet they display' for Investiga tion an extremely.active example of a process that always- goes on^-the ' .shifting flow of folk materials into literature.and out again to the area of folk transmission. - ' ' '■ V:; ' ■ :f hi s. paper, is addressed both to f olklprists and to students of: the- Romantic Movement, for a . single theme: from 'fhe Monk has, innumerable • lives and may reappear in a lyric conceived under opium,-or, 150 years : later, in an old wiyes1 tale in- a comic book, i : ; .One of the early: Symptoms, of ^romanticism'as- a reaction against ^Railb comes the closest to a primary concern-with, folk concepts. V : Augustan restraint was that.' some literary men, in the. •latter part - of • the eighteenth century,;: deliberately sought out folk motifs for their ' productionso' They turned to remnants of Celtic mythology and to the . sad -and scary songs and. .bedtime stories of the nursemaids (even while . Richard Edgeworth, .as educator, was afuaouncing that children: should be • kept: away. f ibm- servants because '.of their ^pernicious fairy tales). How ever, men , like Chatterton, ..Eacpherspn, and Walpole: had no scientific interest in literal authentidity; they had no quaint about faking the ■ discovery of antique ballads or pretending to translate a manuscript , of the time of Luther that perhaps some "artful, priest" had. written, "to. confirm the populace in their ancient errors arid \superstltions„" Even Percy, the eighteenth-century antiquarian, drastically rewrote the : ballads in. his collection to make them more-affecting-(one.surmises that he must have delighted greatly in the•ballads for themselves, even as Sco.tt did, to have ever initiated his collecting- and -then - persisted in it), Scott was as obnteht to compose his o m Scottish: ballads as to / v ■■ - ■ - , , ^ \ ■ ' - . _ n . ' ' , • ■■■;' , .. -■ ■ r / - . ' _ . collect those that, were authentic. But' gradually a.scientific^atti tude dominated-, even though more or less, of aesthetic, pleasure remains Preface to the first edition of The' Castle of Otranto, ^See his justification of Percy1s rewriting'in "Remarks on Popular Poetry," Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border (London, 193L), pp, 519-20;’cf, Kittred.ge's defense of Scott's changes in,ballad texts, Sitroduction to English and . Scottish Pooular Ballads . / (Cambridge, 1904), p. xxix. See also Scott's words:on imitations palmed off as authentic ("Imitations of' the Ancient Ballad," . ' Minstrelsy, p. 540,): "There is no small degree: of cant' in:tie :vi- .olent invectives with which impostors o f .this nature have been .asr* sailed"; of. Kittredge.'s defense of Scott's own alleged palming off of "Ki'nmont Willie,11 Introduction to English and Scottish Popular Ballads, pp. xxix-xxx, • ;; ■ .vC;"--;y: '; ' even ;no"M' 'for a collectorj ■ Southey as early as 1$03 wrote in criticism of Scott tlaat, • ^Whenever he patches an old poem, it is- always with new ' bricks„l!<^ ■■ (His disapproval, 'however, was still' more aesthetic than ^scientificy): ;;;; ^ ; ■;' ;■';; ; v; : * r ’,EQriki, l^eitisffaimsel£(.hpatined with; his; short life ,both attitudes: ■■■ 'toward folklore» i.t the beginning of his career, in 17%, he gathered together grisly motifs in The Monk, being deliberately vague- about . where he got them. At the end of his-career, in .1816; and 1818, he recorded West Indiaif folksongs, gtales,and: riddles without aesthetic; relish but.with the detached curiosity of a scientist. He would then ; : conscientiously note the cause of composition, when possible^ and how : -' O ' f ' ' f': . ' -1 11."'- 0 ' 1'-' - i':':/■ he came to hear the “nancy" song or t a l e . ;George Lyman:Kittredge, 100 years later^1 was to use him as an :&uthority on West Indian: wereT- ■ ; .. wolves and medicine men. ,„; . g . The merging cf. the' two - attitudes shows in an article, "Antiq uities of Nursery Literature,11 in the Quarterly He vie# (1X1,; 91-112) for January, 1819; Francis; Cohen (latef Frahcls Palgrave) reviewed a: collection of fairy tales and -combined- recollections of. his own child-- : hood tast® in nursery stories with theories of the Ladle and Ihdo- . European'origin of f o l k t a l e s .' v■ ' -' : ;%.ife and Correspondence (New York. 1851), p. 161.-'; -..f-.- : ^%e e his "Advertisement" to The Monk. Cf. his annotation to The Bravo of Venice (New -York, 1810%" p, 1?: "I suspect that some where o r . dther there exists a scene in some degree resembling this: interview ; » .' but whether 1 read it in english or french, Spanish or german, X have not the most distant,recollection." By this:time \ -Lewis waS' becoming a little exasperated xd.th charges of plagiarism. His accounts were published, in his-Journal of a West-lndia Proprietor (London. ■ 1834.). '. ‘*"%ee his- Index: to. Witchcraft in Old and New England, (Cambridge, . Mass., 1928). - - ■•■■■ '-- ...yy- . -y ' \ ' - -y; ■■ ' ■ ■ ■ ■ - ' . ' 1 " V".1: '• 5 . ■ & 'the l% 9 0 '-s the Gothic roioance. whs. a hodgepodge of old' -folic . motlfSj' no one had: yet thought of 'repofdlhg a ghost story with sclentif* Ic accuracy. Though the motifs were old- the Gothic .tale itself was ' fresh and new and at the height of its sensation and1 influehce when ' .