Rating: 
Summary: The monk
Review: a delightfully horrific, goth masterpiece that every twisted mind should own.
Rating: 
Summary: Watch out for the "Introduction" by Stephen King
Review: After hearing many wonderful things about this book, I was very excited to read it. I opened up the cover and begin reading the introduction written by Stephen King, one of my favorite authors. I almost yelled out in disgust when he managed to spoil the entire plot by giving away several key events before I had even began to read the book. I can't believe he did that! Despite knowing what was going to happen, I read the book. It was hard to get into at first, as the language is very dated and wordy. However, after the first few chapters the language barrier disappears and you become drawn into the dramatic plot and vibrant characters. "The Monk" was written in ancient Spain, when the Catholic Church controlled society and government. It is a tale of love, lust, sin and salvation; a sort of historical soap opera. I loved this book; after I got into it, I couldn't put it down.
Rating:
Summary: It's still shocking
Review: Another reviewer was right: DON'T READ THE STEPHEN KING INTRODUCTION BEFORE YOU READ THE BOOK! If you do, it will give the whole plot away. Although not as famous as Dracula or Frankenstein, this is a must-read for any serious Gothic horror fan. One of the things that makes this book different is that (unlike Dracula) there is no proactive villain. We kind of admire Dracula because (pardon the expression) he makes no bones about what he is. Dracula is a villain and he's OK with that. The Monk is a re-active villain. His crime is that he's a hypocrite. He finds himself committing crimes because he is week, not strong. Therefore, one cannot admire the Monk the way we can admire Frankenstein's monster. It is surprising how shocking the novel is, considering when it was written. It has a very cynical - some would say "modern" - assessment of people. The Monk's main motivation is sex. Actually, sex is everywhere in the book. It is obvious that it was written by a twenty-year-old who could not, even for a moment, imagine a vow of celibacy. As the first novel of a boy barely out of his teens, Lewis pulls out all the stops as only a novice can - even bringing in the Devil himself, at the end, to dispence justice. The plot is convoluted beyond belief, sub-plots and backstories abound, as well as other outmoded conventions of Gothic literature. That having been said, this a briskly-written book. It never bores. Despite being over two-hundred years old, it is very accessible and sufficiently gruesome to interest any modern horror fan. As for being anti-Catholic, I think "Monk" Lewis ends up sounding surprisingly pious. By condeming the hypocrites, he affirms the values they are supposed to represent.
Rating:
Summary: It's still shocking
Review: Another reviewer was right: DON'T READ THE STEPHEN KING INTRODUCTION BEFORE YOU READ THE BOOK! If you do, it will give the whole plot away. Although not as famous as Dracula or Frankenstein, this is a must-read for any serious Gothic horror fan. One of the things that makes this book different is that (unlike Dracula) there is no proactive villain. We kind of admire Dracula because (pardon the expression) he makes no bones about what he is. Dracula is a villain and he's OK with that. The Monk is a re-active villain. His crime is that he's a hypocrite. He finds himself committing crimes because he is week, not strong. Therefore, one cannot admire the Monk the way we can admire Frankenstein's monster. It is surprising how shocking the novel is, considering when it was written. It has a very cynical - some would say "modern" - assessment of people. The Monk's main motivation is sex. Actually, sex is everywhere in the book. It is obvious that it was written by a twenty-year-old who could not, even for a moment, imagine a vow of celibacy. As the first novel of a boy barely out of his teens, Lewis pulls out all the stops as only a novice can - even bringing in the Devil himself, at the end, to dispence justice. The plot is convoluted beyond belief, sub-plots and backstories abound, as well as other outmoded conventions of Gothic literature. That having been said, this a briskly-written book. It never bores. Despite being over two-hundred years old, it is very accessible and sufficiently gruesome to interest any modern horror fan. As for being anti-Catholic, I think "Monk" Lewis ends up sounding surprisingly pious. By condeming the hypocrites, he affirms the values they are supposed to represent.
Rating:
Summary: A classic plot-driven narrative
Review: At risk of being impertinent, I can summarize my review of this 200-plus year old classic in literature as follows: Wow! Talk about your plot-driven narratives, The Monk sets the standard. There's a surprising twist of the tale every two or three pages and, truly, it is difficult to put down. That the author, 19-year-old Matthew Lewis, accumulated so much intuitive knowledge about human nature is another wonder of this wonderful yarn. In The Monk, you will find most everything to entertain and titillate your imagination: chanting monks, deceit, love, romance, tragedy, torch-lit processions in underground passages, monstrously evil humans and no-so-human beings and heroism on a grand scale. Oh, the joy of it! A worthy monument in the history of literature. -o0o-
Rating:
Summary: Still a good read
Review: Even after two centuries, "The Monk" can still entertain readers while encouraging them to think about such weighty subjects as the coercisive power of religious hypocrisy. Set in Madrid during the time of the Spanish Inquisition, the book's main story arc is the rise and fall of Ambrosio, a Capuchin friar who is initially regarded by everyone as a living saint. Lauded for his brilliant oratory skills and personal beauty, Ambrosio is courted by the richest women in the city to be their personal Confessor. As Ambrosio's fame increases, so does his vanity, and it is through this Deadly Sin that he enters into later acts of violence and depravity. Lewis does a fine job of creating archetypal characters that are still used in genre fiction today. There is the Fallen Hero who becomes the Villian (Ambrosio), the Temptress (Rosario/Matilda), the Good Knights (Lorenzo and Don Raymond), and two Damsels in Distress (Agnes and Antonia). The author also provides a subordinate Villian (the Prioress of the Convent of St. Clare), who is in some ways more evil than Ambrosio. For leavening in this very dark narrative, Lewis gives readers a trio of humorous characters: Leonella, Antonia's lusty aunt and chaperone; Flora, the very chatty chambermaid in Antonia's service; and Jacintha, the superstitious neighbor who swears that she sees ghosts everywhere. The characterizations of Ambrosio and the Prioress are great examples of how power (whether it's spiritual or temporal) can corrupt. Neither character feels answerable to anyone. Even God isn't really present (although his Other Half puts in an appearance!) Lewis poses questions on personal accountability that are certainly relevant today, while deftly mixing in good character interaction and biting social commentary. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Still a good read
Review: Even after two centuries, "The Monk" can still entertain readers while encouraging them to think about such weighty subjects as the coercisive power of religious hypocrisy. Set in Madrid during the time of the Spanish Inquisition, the book's main story arc is the rise and fall of Ambrosio, a Capuchin friar who is initially regarded by everyone as a living saint. Lauded for his brilliant oratory skills and personal beauty, Ambrosio is courted by the richest women in the city to be their personal Confessor. As Ambrosio's fame increases, so does his vanity, and it is through this Deadly Sin that he enters into later acts of violence and depravity. Lewis does a fine job of creating archetypal characters that are still used in genre fiction today. There is the Fallen Hero who becomes the Villian (Ambrosio), the Temptress (Rosario/Matilda), the Good Knights (Lorenzo and Don Raymond), and two Damsels in Distress (Agnes and Antonia). The author also provides a subordinate Villian (the Prioress of the Convent of St. Clare), who is in some ways more evil than Ambrosio. For leavening in this very dark narrative, Lewis gives readers a trio of humorous characters: Leonella, Antonia's lusty aunt and chaperone; Flora, the very chatty chambermaid in Antonia's service; and Jacintha, the superstitious neighbor who swears that she sees ghosts everywhere. The characterizations of Ambrosio and the Prioress are great examples of how power (whether it's spiritual or temporal) can corrupt. Neither character feels answerable to anyone. Even God isn't really present (although his Other Half puts in an appearance!) Lewis poses questions on personal accountability that are certainly relevant today, while deftly mixing in good character interaction and biting social commentary. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: The book is a chilling reflection of the human soul.
Review: Every time I took a breather from the book, I'd wonder how so much evil was contained in its pages. Everytime I thought this was the worst it could get, Lewis upped the ante, til there was no turning back. Amazing book, sweet dreams.
Rating:
Summary: where can i find the spanish version for this book?
Review: I need this book in spanish language, can you help me
Rating:
Summary: Get to Gore of the Matter
Review: I read this in college for a Gothic, Terror, Romance class. From the looks of the cover (I can't help but be lured or deterred by them), I thought I was in for a complete waste of time. Far from it! This is gothic at its most perverse. Yes, the time it took Lewis to write the book (8 wks. or so) is astonishing, but it's what he was saying about Gothicism, in general, that is important : Readers want the horror, to be scared out of their wits. The popularity of 'The Monk' may have proved his point. Lewis went against the beliefs of authors like Anne Radcliffe who felt that terror could seem real without the violence and blasphemous machinations. Lewis chose a character, a Monk, who seemed so dramatically pious that his FALL would shake the foundations not just of religion, but the boundaries of good and evil and how religion can justify them. At the middle of this pulse-pounding romp, we get the tale of the 'Bleeding Nun'. I was bothered by it at first because I was getting into the monk and his eventual demise, but this departure from the main tale proved just as fantastically chilling. If you like this one, try 'Frankenstein' by Shelley, and 'Drakula' by Stoker. They are the best of the in-your-face grotesque and symbollically allusive classics. Radcliffe's novels (The Mysteries of Udolpho, The Italian) are great ways to get a sense of how the gothic was idealized....until Lewis burst on the scene with this shocker!
| 
