Comparing Mythology and Gothic Novel - Term Paper Example

A gothic novel has much in common with that of a sacred mythology. Both mythology and gothic are representative of the intuitive, irrational mind, the part of human existence that needs stories and uses stories to represent fears, hopes and dreams. Where a sacred myth explains how god, man and nature are all related universe (Flood, 1996, p. 33), and uses fear as a way to keep the common man in line, as with the horrific stories in Greek mythology such as the story of Prometheus, the mortal who stole fire from the gods and was doomed to have his liver eaten by a bird every day, gothic explains the other realm that exists outside of rationality, the world that we intuitively know exists yet our rational brain does not perceive. Moreover, as in the case of The Castle of Otranto, the gothic novel, as with sacred myths, can make use of the supernatural to make things right. In fact, Georges Sorel considered the non-rational component to be the dominant part of human behavior, and considered irrationality to be “integral” which is in opposition to analytic knowledge (Eagleton, 1991, p. 187). Put another way, myths and gothic stories appeal to the inner core of an individual, the part of a person that is the same, no matter how much information and knowledge is presented to him. Corbett (1965) sees this as fundamental, as all individuals have an innate sense of right, wrong, good, evil, approval and disapproval, and these are concepts that are learned in the cradle, long before we have formed the words to describe them (Corbett, 1965, p. 174). It is this fundamental core from which myths and gothic stories spring, and to which myths and gothic stories appeal. So it is no coincidence that Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein was titled The Modern Prometheus. In crafting her tale of a scientist who creates a monster who goes on a killing spree(although the term “monster” is not really proper, as the creature has the emotions of a man), Shelley recognized the link between mythology and her story, which is that each genre springs from the irrational mind. As stated before, Prometheus stole fire from the gods, and was doomed to have his liver pecked out every day by a giant predatory bird – this was possible because his liver regenerated every day, so that the bird could continually feast (Vadakethu). There are obvious parallels between the story of Frankenstein and the story of Prometheus – both Frankenstein and Prometheus stole something sacred from the creator; Prometheus stole fire from the gods; Frankenstein stole creation from God, if one believes that God is the only creator of man. And, like Prometheus, Frankenstein was punished severely for his transgression, in that he was doomed to watch everybody he loved be killed by his own creation, and Frankenstein himself dies mainly because of his own creation (Shelley, 1818, p. 201). Mythologies also presented lessons from which man should learn – such as the story of Prometheus, in which the lesson that is to be learned is that hubris is bad, and one should never think that one is mightier than the gods. Likewise, the gothic tale of Frankenstein has an explicit message, and that is that man should not try to disrupt nature. Or, as Shelley herself put it Frankenstein mocked “the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world” (Shelley, 1818, p. xxv). Like Prometheus, Frankenstein also is a lesson in hubris. Frankenstein created his monster simply because he could, or that he wanted to satisfy an obsession (Shelley, 1818, p. 36). There was no reason that Frankenstein created the monster that would be morally justifiable, or at least rational. His actions are not understandable to the rational mind, because they were not controlled by his rational mind but, rather, seemed to spring from some overwhelming urge deep inside his psyche, an urge to usurp the Creator, much like Prometheus (Shelley, 1818, p. 36). This part of his mind, the Freudian id, is what controlled Frankenstein when creating this monster. Therefore, Frankenstein is also a cautionary tale about letting one’s dark impulses dictate one’s action. Edgar Allen Poe was a master of giving life to these dark impulses and obsessions, which are part of the irrational id, through his stories as well. An excellent example is his tale “The Tell-Tale Heart” (Poe, 1908, p. 657). In this story, the narrator admits that the reader would “fancy me mad” and tries to convince the reader otherwise (Poe, 1908, p. 657). However, the reader cannot be convinced of this, as the actions this narrator takes are mad – he kills a man just because the man was supposedly giving him the “evil eye” (Poe, 1908, p. 658). The “evil eye” was described as “dull blue, with a hideous veil over it that chilled the very marrow in my bones; but I could see nothing else of the old man’s face or person, for I had directed the ray as if by instinct, precisely upon the damned spot”(Poe, 1908, p. 659). Therefore, the reader knows that this is a man who is not functioning with a rational brain, and this story becomes the very definition of operation through dark impulses. Then, another intuitive, innate, emotion – guilt – takes over for the narrator. He begins to hear the victim’s heart after the man’s death – “there came to my ears a low, dull, quick sound, such as a watch makes when enveloped in cotton. I knew that sound too. It was the beating of the old man’s heart. It increased my fury, as the beating of a drum stimulates the soldier into courage” (Poe, 1908, 659). Of course, only the narrator could hear the heart beating, as officers came to the house to investigate a scream. During the officers’ visit the narrator hears the heart and cannot believe that the officers could not also – “It grew louder-louder-louder! And still the men chatted pleasantly,and smiled. Was it possible they heard not? Almighty God! No, no! They heard! –they suspected!-they knew!-they were making a mockery of my horror!” (Poe, 1908, p. 661). Thus, the narrator is operating on two impulses, the impulses that Sorel considered “integral” and Corbett considered “fundamental” – guilt and rage. The man was not giving the narrator the “evil eye”, so there was not a rational justification for the rage or for the killing. There was, however, a substantial reason for the guilt, yet the manifestation of that guilt – the beating heart – was not heard by his rational brain, but was, rather, heard by his conscience, which made the beating heart a product of his instinctual, therefore irrational, mind. The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar involves another tale of the irrational, and this one is closely related to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the themes that are found in Shelley’s tale. Therefore, it has many of the same lessons that are found in Shelley’s story. Valdemar concerned a narrator who was fascinated with mesmerism, and then became obsessed with whether a person could be mesmerized in articulo mortis – at the point of death. In particular, the narrator wanted to know “to what extent, or for how long a period, the encroachments of Death might be arrested in the process” (Poe, 1908, p. 829). As with Frankenstein, the narrator in this story is consumed with an obsession, and, like Frankenstein, the narrator does not have a rational reason for satisfying this obsession. As with Frankenstein, the narrator wants to do this because he can. As obsession can be said to be related to Freud’s id, it could be said that Valdemar’s narrator, like Frankenstein, is operating on an irrational plane. And, like Frankenstein, the narrator is punished for his obsession, for the narrator does succeed in mesmerizing a person in articulo mortis, and this patient dies while being mesmerized. However, being mesmerized, the patient physically stays the same for seven months. At this point, the narrator awakens the patient, who promptly, upon being “awakened” disintegrates into a “nearly liquid mass of loathsome-of detestable putrescence” (Poe, 1908, p. 837). Therefore, the narrator is punished for his irrational obsession, as he is subjected to a sight that nobody should ever have to see, and that is to see a person completely decompose before his eyes. The Castle of Otranto is considered to be the first gothic novel, and, while it does not deal as overtly with mythical themes as do Frankenstein and Poe’s tales, it does deal with irrationality and obsession, mainly on the part of the lead character, Manfred. Manfred’s obsession, as it were, is to marry off his sickly son, a plan that goes horribly awry when the son is crushed by an enormous helmet on his wedding day (Walpole, 1998, p. 9). Then his obsession turned to marrying Isabella himself, apparently because his own wife, Hippolita, could not bear him a son and he wanted desperately to have a son. His obsession with this task was exemplified when he told Isabella “neither heaven nor hell will impede my designs” (Walpole, 1998, p. 16). At this point, there is a supernatural disagreement with Walpole’s designs, as the portrait of his grandfather heaved a big sigh, then turned into a spectre that led Manfred into a room and shut the door, so that Isabella could escape (Walpole, 1998, p. 16). One could say that this was not rational, that, like The Tell-Tale Heart, the supernatural occurrence did not really happen but was, rather, a product of guilt, except that Isabella herself also heard the grandfather sigh (Walpole, 1998, p. 16), which means that the supernatural in this story is not a manifestation of one’s id but is, rather, an actual supernatural occurrence. This brings another element into the story, one that is not necessarily present in the other gothic stories, and that is an otherworldly presence that serves the same function as the conscience in Tell Tale Heart. Moreover, the Castle of Otranto features another possibly supernatural plot, one that also serves to protect Isabella from Manfred’s obsessions - and that is the return of Prince Alfonso, who was the “last rightful lord” of Otranto (Walpole, 1998, p. 45, 51). It seems as though Manfred did not come to power rightfully, but, rather, usurped Alfonso’s nearest heir, Lord Frederic, who was also Isabella’s father (Walpole, 1998, p. 51). And thus it becomes obvious why Manfred is obsessed with Isabella producing a son, for that son would be a distant heir to the Lord Frederic, which would presumably cement Manfred’s occupation of his position, and would legitimize it somewhat. Prince Alfonso prevents this plot, first by crashing his helmet onto Manfred’s son so that the wedding to Isabella is prevented, then by his presumably coming back as a youth, Theodore, who assisted Isabella out of the castle (Walpole, 1998, p. 72). However, Theodore turned out not to be the reincarnation of Alfonso, but Alfonso’s heir (Walpole, 1998, p. 103). The statue of Alfonso also bled when Manfred made yet another plot, which was to marry Frederic off to his daughter Matilda, in exchange for Frederic’s agreement not to seek the throne from Manfred (Walpole, 1998, p. 86). Then, a giant inhabited the castle, which fulfilled an ancient prophecy, which stated that the “castle and lordship of Otranto should pass from the present family, whenever the real owner should be grown too large to inhabit it”, which portended the end of Frederic’s reign (Walpole, 1998, p. 92). All of these occurrences served to oust Manfred so that Theodore, the rightful heir, could assume his throne, which happened in the end (Walpole, 1998, p. 107). Thus, the supernatural and the natural joined forces to accomplish the deed of Manfred’s abdication – the rational and the irrational working hand in hand. Conclusion The gothic novel makes excellent use, as does mythology, in exploiting the irrational part of the human brain. This is the part of the brain that closely corresponds with Freud’s “id” and harbors such dark impulses as obsession and fear. Obsession and fear are the integral parts of all the stories – Frankenstein, The Tell-Tale Heart, M. Valdemar and The Castle of Otranto, as each of these stories use these two elements to the best advantage. This is emblematic of the gothic tale, which makes the gothic tale a product of the irrational. Sources Used Corbett, Patrick (1965). Ideologies. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. Eagleton, Terry (1991). Ideology. London: Verso. Flood, Christopher (1996). Political Myth: A Theoretical Introduction. London: Garland Publishing, Inc. Poe, E. (1908) The Completed Stories. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Shelley, M. (1818) Frankenstein. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Walpole, H. (1998). The Castle of Otranto reprinted by The University of Pennsylvania in 1998. Available at: http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/walpole/otranto.pdf Read More