- The final few chapters in The Monk have left me with questions about Ambrosio. In chapter nine, do you think that he still believes that he can be saved? Does he, at this point, have any remaining virtues? By the end of the book, does he believe in salvation. Do you think, as in Macbeth, that there may be some redemption for him at the end of the novel?
- Rousseau said that man is born free, but exists everywhere in chains. How is this idea illuminated through the character of Ambrosio? Also, through the characters of Matilda and Antonia? Is this a theme that we can apply to this novel as a whole, and is this theme consistent with the Romantic aesthetic?
Friday, October 1, 2010
Freedom and Chains -- Response by Oct. 6th
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Faust comes to mind for the first question. Can he be saved? The old man in the play says yes. I think Ambrosio can seek redemeption, even at the end. He tells the daemon at the end that he believes in pardon . . . while asking the daemon to save him, ironically enough. So, to a certain point, Ambrosio can be saved, except he puts his trust in Lucifer and not God. Ambrosio has virtue (no one ever loses their virtue), but it seems he's so consumed in sin that he mistakes everything for it's opposite; Lucifer for God, for instance.
G.K. Chesterton said that we are all free, and we are certainly free to lock ourselves in marriage, which is something like a prison. Ambrosio is free to do what he pleases, but society and God have consequences for the choices he makes. Those are the chains. I think that's a good definition of what Rousseau meant. But also you have internal chains, the things in your mind that hold you back. Antonia is wholly ignorant of society; Matilda, well, does she apply here? I mean, we discover she's a demon in the end. Human morality may not apply to her. I think Rousseau's ideas does apply to the novel. It explores, like all Gothic literature in their own way, depravity. We make the chains ourselves.
1. Ambrosio says through out the book that he can still be saved, and that he still has a chance to repent and ask forgiveness. However, he seems to be saying this only because it is what he was always taught, and not what he actually believes. If honestly thought he could be saved, he would have asked for forgiveness. Even at the very end, he still has this choice, but he does not make it. I think he believes deep down that he has gone too far to turn back.
2. Ambrosio's "chains" are the monastic lifestyle. Because he has lived in the monastery practically since birth, he never experiences the real world. This ultimately leads to his destruction. Similarly, Antonia is also "chained" by her mother's "protecting" her from the real world. Because she does not know or understand about sex, she is defenseless to protect herself from Ambrosio's evil intentions.
1. I'm sure Ambrosio still believes he can be saved. It's part of the religion to have ever lasting hope or something so long as he atones or whatever. Does he have any remaining virtues? I don't think he does. I don't see his actions as benefiting anyone else. I don't see his reasoning. What the hell is Macbeth? just kidding. I think there could possibly be some redemption for him but I openly hope not. I hope he gets a trip to his hell to bask forever amongst the flames. Then again I don't care..but I don't feel he deserves anything good.
2. Born free makes me think of babies as absent of fault and sin and then choosing their paths...but no matter their choices they will always end up doing something that's bad or viewed as such and thus have chains on them whether physical or mental. Ambrosio is left on the steps unknowing of his past. He doesn't carry a legacy. He doesn't have a familial reputation to uphold. He chooses his open path and even though he goes in what the ideas of religion and this book views as good he still makes a pretty big mistake. Mistakes are his chains. I guess this is a theme that can be applied to this novel as a whole as well as the Romantic aesthetic as well. No one is perfect and even in happiness or comfort we locate discontent. blah done.
1. Leigh said that Ambrosio sincerely thought that he could do whatever he wanted and still get redemption from them. Even toward the end he thought he could get forgiveness. I think he thought that he could walk a very thin line and control evil enough to regain himself through forgiveness. When he tried to ask for forgiveness and Lucifer stopped him by interrupting him, just proved that he has lost control. He finally excepts his fate.
2. Ambrosio's "chains" are the monastic ways of life. His training and rules of life controlled his every move. This is the way he was raised and he knew nothing else. When something new came into his life, he being in a powerful position, thought that he could have what he wanted, which is Antonia's virtue,at any cost or consolation. As for Matilda, her chains are the fact that she was a pawn. Lucifer was controlling her like a puppet. Antonia's chains are the over-protective mother, who never taught her the real world experiences. She was sheltered, yet she knew enough to know that what was happening to her was wrong.
1) The character of Ambrosio always came across as extremely arrogant to me. He always operated by taking what he wanted. Or in some cases he conspired to get what he wanted. He always believes in salvation right up until the very end when he is faced with a harsh reality. I believe that his arrogance and pride overwhelm him. There is nothing redeemable at the end. He has fallen from grace.
2) Ambrosio was born and in every sense of the words made into what he is. The whole nature vs. nurture argument. In this case I think nurture wins out. His chains ultimately ruined him. Matilda and Antonia are different. Matilda operates almost under this possessed state where she in turn is nothing more than a puppet. Antonia in he own way can be considered bound to her teachings. She was sheltered when it came to her learnings from the bible. Certain violent passages being omitted. I think that has warped the ideas of her own faith and made it into something its not. The theme resonates strongly throughout "The Monk." It's a fair point to say that they are all somehow bound to their own upbringings.
1. After committing murder and contemplating rape, Ambrosio has no virtues left to speak of. However, I think that he still believed that he could be saved. The Catholic religion offers purgatory as a means of reaching heaven even after one has grievously sinned. Other Christian religions believe that once a person is saved he is always saved. God's mercy is infinite. Lucifer does not want Ambrosio to consider God's mercy, only God's vengeance. Lucifer interrupts Ambrosio so that he will only consider his own sins, instead of God's love.
2. From the minute we are born, we are "chained" to rules and regulations of some sort -- our parents, our faith, our government. At first, Ambrosio is chained to his faith; however, after becoming involved with Matilda, he is chained to his emotions. He loses the ability to reason coherently. He does not think; he only reacts. Matilda is chained by her servitude to Lucifer. He is in control. He is manipulating her to achieve his own ends. Antonia is chained by the society in which she lives. She has been taught proper behavior by her mother and the church, and she is too innocent and naive to realize that not everyone will behave correctly.
1. Yes. Ambrosio persistently believes his redemption is a possibility. He reflects on the vile sins he intends to carry out, and he is aware that these are BAD sins; yet he is fickle. Ambrosio allows himself to be easily persuaded by Matilda’s implorations. Ambrosio even refuses the idea of making a pact with demons, so as not to jeopardize his soul: “He persuaded himself that, however great may be his iniquity, so long as he preserved his claim to salvation, he need not despair of pardon”: It seems Ambrosio almost views this as a disclaimer to exact whatever sins he wishes (265). Perhaps his inexperience with consequence and suffering further propels his atrocities, though, at times, Ambrosio seems guided by supernatural forces: The instant following his “ruin” of Antonia is akin to the breaking of a spell. Remorse overcomes him immediately, as if he is not the same being who performed these violations.
2. Undoubtedly, the theme of chains exists in this novel. The chains of Antonia and Ambrosio certainly lead them to destruction. Neither can recognize the evil that surrounds them, because it is something they have never experienced. Matilda’s motives come from Lucifer, and those also act as chains. It is necessary to consider the chains of fate and the chains of supernatural forces, which tend to prevail throughout the text even stronger than societal chains and take into account the tremendous force of chance or coincidence. Also, one must question whether the theme of chance is actually chance or design. Following this, ponder the idea of time: What if certain events took place a day earlier, a minute later, etc.?
1. I think that Ambrosio, although aware of his guilt, does not fear consequences in chapter nine. At this point, he has not directly dealt with Lucifer, and his sins with Matilda were consensual. Whatever virtues he may have had, they have been suppressed by the teachings and influence of the Catholic church (according to Lewis). I think that he does not feel any significant remorse until after the rape of Antonia. His apparent belief that his sins are too great for God’s infinite mercy to cover is an example of his pride and arrogance, and I think that at the end of the novel, his pride has become so deeply engrained that he cannot bring himself to ask for forgiveness. This leaves him without the opportunity for redemption.
2. Ambrosio does spend nearly his whole life behind the walls of a monastery, which is a prison of sorts. He is later bound by the “chains of sin,” one might say, to Matilda. Eventually, his guilt becomes a chain of sorts that weighs heavy on his thoughts. One might even say that his religion is a binding influence that keeps him from taking certain actions. Matilda is much less fettered; she is a demon in disguise with no conscience. Antonia is mostly bound by her naivete and innocence. You could probably extend the trope of bondage throughout the novel, but I don’t feel that it lines up very directly with Romanticism. Romanticism tends to focus on the throwing off of bonds; this novel discusses the nature of the bonds that hold its characters.
The final chapters of the novel reflect the notions of salvation versus damnation in the character Ambrosio. He has a chance to redeem himself by taking responsibility for his actions and facing the consequences. He refuses this and attempts to flee from the stake that he feels he will be tied to and it is the moment that he signs the document pledging his soul to the devil that he is truly damned. He has committed horrible acts, which he does not understand until the very end, that cannot be taken back or forgiven by many. He could admit his guilt,ask for forgiveness, and face the consequences of his actions.
1. I believe that Ambrosio truly believed that he had the possibility until the very end of the novel. While else, for example, would he have refused making a pact with demons? He felt that all could and would be forgiven as long as he did not deliberately sign over his soul to Lucifer. At the end of the novel, however, he has signed his soul over and knows quite well what that means. How can he expect his soul to be forgiven if he doesn't actually possess one anymore?
2.It seems that Ambrosio is technically free, yet he has factors working against him: testosterone, evil, fate, etc. Whatever the resisting variable is within him, it is quite obvious that he is unable to make decisions completely independently. Hence, he is chained by outside sources. Matilda and Antonio are similarly bonded by outside variables such as evil and fate. Their paths are almost made by these outside influences which leads one to believe that they have to power of free will. As a whole, the entire novel seems to be one symbolic of bondage and a lack of freedom of choice which is quite certainly a form of Romantic aesthetic.
Post a Comment