Customer Reviews
Like a long and complex dream - By: Nicholas Casley, 06 Feb 2008 
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, & a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.
The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no workin the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier & more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.
Whilst not denying a strong gothic elementin the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, & even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, & Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, & the descent of landed property feature heavilyin the plot - but this time set on the continent &in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."
Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeblein characterisation ... lackingin moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speakin this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, & the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.
There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prosein this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin & Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describesin such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett & Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is setin Gascony & Languedoc; volume twoin Venice & Udolpho; volume threein Udolpho & Tuscany; & volume four backin Gascony & Languedoc.
Ostensibly setin the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners & sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time & place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives & forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, & the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castlein her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto & Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s & the city of Tintoretto & Monteverdi.
There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life & then leave only when they have some part to playin Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companionin all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasionsin order to heighten tension or play a minor partin Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castlein which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.
So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. Butin a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long & complex dream - the kindin which pleasure & apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, & determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.
The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheldin this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology & end-notes all appear to guide & enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.
If only there was more Udolpho... - By: RageofKlugman, 08 Aug 2007 
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.
The middle third of the book actually setin the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful & has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced & resolvedin this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-onin Udolpho & the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.
I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, & I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!
(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).
Just plain good fun! - By: Mrs. E. R. Braun, 12 Feb 2005 I came to this book after reading about itin Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.
By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame & childish, but if you're like me & don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror & supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, & that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass & you get on with the story.
I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explainedin the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' & so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)
Have fun!=)
Over-rated and over-written - By: , 23 Mar 2004 Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" & Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pagesin which bugger-all happened.
The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonmentin a dark & scary castle & all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue & sexuality.
However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things upin 200 pages). Her writingin "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe naturein its most 'sublime' & 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.
As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents & secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.
The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters & what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.
All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically & start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" & "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.
I would urge anyone interestedin Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" & compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.
rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw. - By: S. Hapgood, 09 Sep 2003 This book is great fun. It's far too long, & some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French & Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes setin the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, & a bit of Mills & Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrownin for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body foundin the gatehouse, & a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream & faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you getin this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interestedin her for her money & the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants & their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do itin a very panto-ish way!
