sylvia pimentalVathek
December 13th 2006 23:49
In essence Vathek is a study of transgression. Its characters surrender themselves literally to pursuing the treasures offered to them by the forces of darkness. While the forces of ‘light/good’ are reduced to a vague thread of moralising. There is a near total abandonment of anything resembling moral order until the end where a ‘moral’ ending is imposed.
If the ending of Vathek feels like a token nod to the conventional moral order it is because of the vividness of what has gone before. And even the ‘morality’ of the ending is questionable, marking as it does the punishment of evil via the ultimate victory for the forces of darkness. ‘…this warning against excess comes at the end of a story that has flagrantly indulged in imaginative and descriptive excess.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
Not only does the narrative of Vathek ‘flagrantly’ indulge in excess, it positively embraces it as Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar rush headlong and wholeheartedly into transgression motivated by greed and self interest.
It cannot really be said that the journey Caliph Vathek takes along what amounts to the road to hell actually corrupts him. Because from the time we first encounter him he has already departed from the ‘light’ and his abandoned his role as the instrument of Mahomet by attempting to place himself in the role of ‘god’. This attempt to elevate himself is seen by the giant tower to the stars that he builds.
Just before they reach ‘hell’ Vathek is given one last chance by Mahomet to repent, but ‘fired with the ambition of prescribing laws to the powers of darkness.’ (Beckford 1968: 242) he refuses.
Instead of a conventional moral/romance narrative with conventional characters governed by In essence Vathek is a study of transgression. Its characters surrender themselves literally to pursuing the treasures offered to them by the forces of darkness. While the forces of ‘light/good’ are reduced to a vague thread of moralising. There is a near total abandonment of anything resembling moral order until the end where a ‘moral’ ending is imposed.
If the ending of Vathek feels like a token nod to the conventional moral order it is because of the vividness of what has gone before. And even the ‘morality’ of the ending is questionable, marking as it does the punishment of evil via the ultimate victory for the forces of darkness. ‘…this warning against excess comes at the end of a story that has flagrantly indulged in imaginative and descriptive excess.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
Not only does the narrative of Vathek ‘flagrantly’ indulge in excess, it positively embraces it as Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar rush headlong and wholeheartedly into transgression motivated by greed and self interest.
It cannot really be said that the journey Caliph Vathek takes along what amounts to the road to hell actually corrupts him. Because from the time we first encounter him he has already departed from the ‘light’ and his abandoned his role as the instrument of Mahomet by attempting to place himself in the role of ‘god’. This attempt to elevate himself is seen by the giant tower to the stars that he builds.
Just before they reach ‘hell’ Vathek is given one last chance by Mahomet to repent, but ‘fired with the ambition of prescribing laws to the powers of darkness.’ (Beckford 1968: 242) he refuses.
Instead of a conventional moral/romance narrative with conventional characters governed by the conventional moral framework which implies that the characters will either be rewarded for their goodness by living happily ever after, or be punished for their transgressions. Rather Vathek focuses on transgressive characters and there is no reward at the end for goodness because none has been displayed and ‘the ending like the uncomfortable identification with the hero - villain throughout the tale refuses to affirm, in the manner of romances any stable boundary line between good and evil.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
The power and wealth that Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar so craved are revealed as fleeting and ultimately illusory. But if the punishment they receive befits their transgressions it also means that there is no room for redemption just as there is no ‘hope’ for the doomed characters there is no hope for the moral framework, it has become so subverted it too falls victim to the powers of darkness.
Bibliography:
Beckford, W. (1968) Vathek in Fairclough, P. (ed) Three Gothic Novels Penguin: London
Botting, F. (1996) Gothic Routledge: London
the conventional moral framework which implies that the characters will either be rewarded for their goodness by living happily ever after, or be punished for their transgressions. Rather Vathek focuses on transgressive characters and there is no reward at the end for goodness because none has been displayed and ‘the ending like the uncomfortable identification with the hero - villain throughout the tale refuses to affirm, in the manner of romances any stable boundary line between good and evil.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
The power and wealth that Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar so craved are revealed as fleeting and ultimately illusory. But if the punishment they receive befits their transgressions it also means that there is no room for redemption just as there is no ‘hope’ for the doomed characters there is no hope for the moral framework, it has become so subverted it too falls victim to the powers of darkness.
Bibliography:
Beckford, W. (1968) Vathek in Fairclough, P. (ed) Three Gothic Novels Penguin: London
Botting, F. (1996) Gothic Routledge: London
If the ending of Vathek feels like a token nod to the conventional moral order it is because of the vividness of what has gone before. And even the ‘morality’ of the ending is questionable, marking as it does the punishment of evil via the ultimate victory for the forces of darkness. ‘…this warning against excess comes at the end of a story that has flagrantly indulged in imaginative and descriptive excess.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
It cannot really be said that the journey Caliph Vathek takes along what amounts to the road to hell actually corrupts him. Because from the time we first encounter him he has already departed from the ‘light’ and his abandoned his role as the instrument of Mahomet by attempting to place himself in the role of ‘god’. This attempt to elevate himself is seen by the giant tower to the stars that he builds.
Just before they reach ‘hell’ Vathek is given one last chance by Mahomet to repent, but ‘fired with the ambition of prescribing laws to the powers of darkness.’ (Beckford 1968: 242) he refuses.
If the ending of Vathek feels like a token nod to the conventional moral order it is because of the vividness of what has gone before. And even the ‘morality’ of the ending is questionable, marking as it does the punishment of evil via the ultimate victory for the forces of darkness. ‘…this warning against excess comes at the end of a story that has flagrantly indulged in imaginative and descriptive excess.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
Not only does the narrative of Vathek ‘flagrantly’ indulge in excess, it positively embraces it as Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar rush headlong and wholeheartedly into transgression motivated by greed and self interest.
It cannot really be said that the journey Caliph Vathek takes along what amounts to the road to hell actually corrupts him. Because from the time we first encounter him he has already departed from the ‘light’ and his abandoned his role as the instrument of Mahomet by attempting to place himself in the role of ‘god’. This attempt to elevate himself is seen by the giant tower to the stars that he builds.
Just before they reach ‘hell’ Vathek is given one last chance by Mahomet to repent, but ‘fired with the ambition of prescribing laws to the powers of darkness.’ (Beckford 1968: 242) he refuses.
Instead of a conventional moral/romance narrative with conventional characters governed by the conventional moral framework which implies that the characters will either be rewarded for their goodness by living happily ever after, or be punished for their transgressions. Rather Vathek focuses on transgressive characters and there is no reward at the end for goodness because none has been displayed and ‘the ending like the uncomfortable identification with the hero - villain throughout the tale refuses to affirm, in the manner of romances any stable boundary line between good and evil.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
The power and wealth that Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar so craved are revealed as fleeting and ultimately illusory. But if the punishment they receive befits their transgressions it also means that there is no room for redemption just as there is no ‘hope’ for the doomed characters there is no hope for the moral framework, it has become so subverted it too falls victim to the powers of darkness.
Bibliography:
Beckford, W. (1968) Vathek in Fairclough, P. (ed) Three Gothic Novels Penguin: London
Botting, F. (1996) Gothic Routledge: London
the conventional moral framework which implies that the characters will either be rewarded for their goodness by living happily ever after, or be punished for their transgressions. Rather Vathek focuses on transgressive characters and there is no reward at the end for goodness because none has been displayed and ‘the ending like the uncomfortable identification with the hero - villain throughout the tale refuses to affirm, in the manner of romances any stable boundary line between good and evil.’ (Botting 1996: 60)
The power and wealth that Vathek, Carathis and Nouronihar so craved are revealed as fleeting and ultimately illusory. But if the punishment they receive befits their transgressions it also means that there is no room for redemption just as there is no ‘hope’ for the doomed characters there is no hope for the moral framework, it has become so subverted it too falls victim to the powers of darkness.
Bibliography:
Beckford, W. (1968) Vathek in Fairclough, P. (ed) Three Gothic Novels Penguin: London
Botting, F. (1996) Gothic Routledge: London
| 116 |
| Vote |
