The Monk (Penguin Classics) Paperback – June 1, 1999

Satan might dread to dwell in his (Lewis') skull for there he might find a deeper hell -- Byron. It wasn't as graphic and eroticly descriptive as one might be lead to believe by the reviews here; although for it's time apparently it was. The narratives were a bit tedious, dialogue was good, it was a solid story and was worthily meaningful. It seemed to advocate, somewhat in the line of Rousseauian/Romantic thinking that people are born with natures and should endeavor to find and live their authentic selves; society should not chain people to custom, tradition, or have abusive power. I didn't see it as whole hearted anti-Catholic or anti-Christian attack as I saw it as an attack on power and superstition, which not all religious people subscribe to; however it did point to the Romantic notion of there being a higher virtue present in nature it is just a matter of finding one's authentic nature (symptomatic of having one's feelings and actions in harmony). It was in-line with the Romantic/Humanist zeitgeist. The Monk, as the author points out, knew only the life of a monk, from birth, but as the author directly states his nature was something entirely un-monkish which was the root of the problem and the door for which demons could enter (in Lewisfs thinking). Once his authentic nature was awakened he became a threat because he had inauthentic powers which the demons were all too willing to utilize (his inauthentic powers which Romanitic/Humanists wanted to rid the world of); a few other characters are forced into these inauthentic lives as well by corupt uses of power. The hero is someone who is not wrapped in superstition but uses a disguise to hide his power (money/title) so he can know people for who they really are and not have money infringe upon human relationships, he is a Romantic-humanist who proves more virtuous than the church people; his feelings and actions were in harmony and he was not ruled by superstition. The demons are those who enjoy deception and portraying themselves as something they are not, they are the posers and inauthentic peoples who prey on people who are not who they are (and whose feelings and actions are in disharmony) by accident, choice, or vanity, greed, what have you. Some good monks and nuns are described, however, so it was not a whole hearted attack on religion per say; as some reviewers seem to imply.The gypsy? Why does the author have her who she is? She mocks those that are not who they are with gleeful joy, she sees the precipice of hell and dances near it to envoke the anger of demons and mock them, she tells people who they really are, but she is no demon, she asks for money openly and tells it like it is, she even warns people by her manner that to be near her is to unveil disguises, so beaware of the truth -- the truth can be funny, that is what separates comedians (a high art) from clowns.Theodorious disguises himself out of love for his master his intentions are entirely different, his intentions are purely of the heart.The book supports Rousseau's ideas and is in-line with Romantic thinking of the time that society should not place people in chains and perhaps supports Rousseau's statement (in one of the most controversial statements ever and is really the root of public education) gthat people must be forced to be free.hObviously the Monk has many candidates whose lives might be made happier under such a standardA solid book, if it is taken in the right spirit. A literary momento mori in several places as well. It was also interesting that it was written by a nineteen year old. A definite advocation for the Romantic/Humanist Natural Man of Rousseau, Jefferson (he wrote a Bible with all the miracles taken out and the Declaration of Independence, by-the-way), Beethoven, Byron etc. A fine work of its genra and era. It is easy to see how personal these ideas must have been in Lewis' life and the the choices he was going to undertake, plus the particular situation of his mother and father's relationship as he was growing up.Some see contradiction between this book and Lewis' stance against slavery. Slavery, in the Protestant world, was largely justified by religious superstition, Lewis' heroes are obviously not superstitious; so I see no contradiction. It must be remembered that Jefferson, Rousseau, Beethoven, Washington, Byron etc. had much more in common with Jerry Garcia than Jerry Fallwell.

In simple words, this book is very complex yet compelling. Every sentence is poetry and engaging. If you’re interested in religious turmoil, demonic entities and overall dramatic storytelling, I’d recommend this book.

This book has been identified as of the "gothic" mold. I would agree. I am not a fan of such a genre, however this focus of the tale is the Catholic chuch in Spain around the time of The Inquisition. Raised a Catholic, I confess to an interest, you might say delight, in stories that paint unflattering portraits, real or fiction, of the human failings of organized religions. Just to name a few that come immediately to mind: "Assassini" by Thomas Gifford, "The Vicar of Christ" by Walter Murphy, and "The DaVinci Code" by Daniel Brown. So on this point the book captured my attention. It sustained that attention by excellent prose and wonderful character developement, Add a few plot twists, not entirely unexpected, provided a bit more satisfaction to the development arc of the characters. Some negative criticisms have focused on the writing style. Yes, occasionally plotline moves a bit slowly and the writing style is sometimes a tad complicated and overly dramatic. But this novel was published in the 1790s. I believe that by default you have to put these criticisms aside when you first pick up the book. In the introduction, written by Christopher MacLachian, one issue was mentioned that I found reassuring in that he states that Matthew Lewis crafted much shorter sentences than was usual for the time. This was quite true and very encouraging when you find yourself, as I often do, reading quickly through each sentence twice in order to fully understand what the author is trying to transmit and how that information contributes to the progression of the story.I enjoyed "The Monk" and have no reservations recommending it to anyone who enjoys literature as well as the power and subtleties of the English language.

Impossible to put down.

Hilarious and demented. I've never laughed out loud while reading a book from the 18th century before.

If you like classic, Gothic horror then you will LOVE this book. I have tried to read many of the books from the same period and so far the others do not match up (Castle of O, others).This book is exceptional and its a fast read full of side stories and sub plots. I loved it. So far the best of this genre (not counting the classic classics: Drac, Frank).The style was easy to read too not like you might expect. English was the authors first language so there was no sloppy translating.I am currently reading Melmoth The Wanderer and it's good so far.Chris

It’s ok

This book was a page-turner. The characters were well drawn and the situations were shocking even in the 21st century. I truly enjoyed this book and recommend it to people who are curious about centuries old literature. In some ways, it reminded me of Alexandre Dumas' work because...well, I'm not going to ruin the end of the book for you. As good a yarn or better than anything written in modern times. It's amazing to me that a man so young could write this book.