Year Published : 1764
Author : Horace Walpole
Nationality : English
Publisher : Oxford World’s Classics
Genre : Gothic, Romance, 18th Century
Pages : 115
Blurb : First published in 1764, The Castle of Otranto purported to be a translation of an Italian story of the time of the crusades. In it Walpole attempted, as he declared in the Preface to the second edition, ‘to be the two kinds of romance; the ancient and the modern’. He gives us a series of catastrophes, ghostly interventions, revelations of identity, and exciting contests. Crammed with invention, entertainment, terror, and pathos, the novel was an immediate success and Walpole’s own favourite among his numerous works. His friend, the poet Thomas Gray, wrote that he and his family, having read Otranto, were now ‘afraid to go to bed o’ nights’.
312 BOOK REVIEW : 312 BOOK REVIEW : Although tradition places ‘The Castle of Otranto’ as a spooky, ghostly, gothic novel, in fact the first ever gothic novel, it is difficult what to make of these claims.
The book was originally written as a hoax intended to fool its readership into believing it was an old medieval tale and my suspicion is that rather than being a hybrid of, in Walpole’s words, ‘two kinds of romance, the ancient and the modern’ there is, I believe, a certain amount of flimflam in that claim. After all Walpole only claimed so in the 2nd edition when his hoax had been exposed.
The book most strongly resembles Greek and Shakespearian tragedy, particularly ‘Hamlet’, which as we all know, was set in a haunted medieval castle. However, while Greek and Shakespearian tragedy were and still are serious works of the first grade, there is something almost comic about ‘The Castle of Otranto’. Perhaps, and I stress this is my own reading, it was more a campy joke played on medieval revisionist of the day or those who hadn’t quite grasped the on going age of enlightenment. After all, most of Europe was still run by anachronistic kings and princelings in 1764.
Personally I would question how seriously can one take a piece of literature when almost the first event of the plot is a giant helmet, a hundred times normal size, appearing from nowhere to crush to death a groom as he prepares for his wedding ceremony? Rather than setting the template for gothic chills, the book often reads more like a precursor of the surreal and absurd humour of The Goons, Beachcomber or Monty Python.
The book is littered with other examples of ridiculousness. Much of the plot is based upon a rather simple formula. Character A goes to Place B to see Character C at the same time as Character C goes to Place D to see Character A after which both characters miss each other and then draw the least obvious conclusion possible as to what Character A/C was doing when they should have been at Place B/D. Clearly Occam’s Razor has no place in the realm of Otranto. And despite the medieval setting, the dark hallways, the hysterical domestics who see ghosts and giants in every darkened room and the ruined underground catacombs with secret passages, the story often reads more like a light hearted English farce as characters perpetually rush to and fro, from the castle to the church and from the church to the convent, perpetually missing one another.
Another very apparent element of the ridiculous is the chivalric behaviour of all the main characters. Whether the concept of chivalry was as ridiculous in Walpole’s 18th century as it is to our time is open to debate by my suspicion is that it was and that Walpole has deliberately enhance the ludicrousness of the novel by cranking it up to preposterous levels.
Take Hippolita’s devotion to her rotten husband Manfred for instance. The sanctity with which she treats her marriage vow and status of wife is hard to credit when he cold shoulders her for not providing more than one heir, attempts to rape her daughter-in-law and then plots a scheme to hold on to power, which he can only achieve by her consent, by divorcing her and then marrying a younger woman. Yet through all this Hippolita’s marital subservience barely wavers.
Elsewhere, Theodore, a young knight, blood heir to Otranto, and hero of the piece is so outstandingly chivalrous he barely does anything except eloquently acquiesce before his hosts, who, might I remind you, have stolen his rightful inheritance. All the women fall in love with his courtly manners but as a man of action he’s next to useless and barely has any influence on the plot bar standing around being outstanding polite and gracious.
Even in the final scene when one of the characters is stabbed in a case of mistaken identity, she behaves with the utmost chivalry for almost half a chapter as her life leaks away, demanding forgiveness for her murderer and comforting her distressed relations as she passes away. While courtly love and chivalry did exist the extremity of the virtuousness, seems to me, to be a tool used for satirical effect.
In summary,those expecting a gothic horror will no doubt be disappointed. Those expecting a medieval romance will be equally let down. However, read as a short, silly, rather convoluted, farcical, tongue in cheek satire of modern ideas about the medieval setting, the church and political power it may glean more for the potential reader.