That’s a good definition (mine is complete different though), and gets to the heart of the aesthetic transition from medieval Gothic — my particular focus, especially architectural — to the modern version.
The term Gothic was never used in the Middle Ages of course, but the buildings were still pointed to as an example of it, and what I find fascinating is how in the process the original aesthetic was flipped on its head.
Gothic now implies dark, shadowy, scary and when Gothic architecture is used in a modern context it emphasizes this by focusing on ruins, nighttime, some of the darker corners in buildings, etc. But in the Middle Ages, Gothic architecture — the New Style they’d have more likely called it — was about the brightest and most colorful stuff a person would ever see.
Fascinating comment -- and quite right. The OED only traces the usage of the word Gothic back to around the 17thC. Although 'Gothic' style architecture is obviously way earlier than that!
Yes, as someone who is studying being a draftsman in architecture right now I agree. We learned in school that in the gothic era they learned a new way of doing facades. Which means they didnt need all these bulky walls anymore and instead build spindly collumns filled with big and huge glass stained windows. With that, the churches got flooded with colourful light!
Very interesting and thought provoking! Gothic literature is a sub genre in Romanticism, which had a fascination with the medieval world, but in an unrealistic way. The romantics loved the mystique of medieval ruins. Its why Heidelberg is the most romantic city, with a huge ruined caste overlooking it.
Yes, there was a rejection of the art and architecture which came out of the radical innovations of the 1200s, which came to be called “gothic”.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe, while influenced by Romanticism, also fought against it and later in his life, had personal conflicts with the famous German Romantics. From his youth an important essay in which he defends the gothic architecture of the Strasbourg cathedral here https://archive.org/details/goethe-on-german-architecture
His optics are one of a kind. He was a Renaissance man with a wide range of interests, typical of great minds from the period—like Thomas Jefferson. Goethe’s house (now a museum, but like it was during his life) in Weimar is a must-visit if in Germany. His scientific collections are amazing: minerals, animal skeletons etc.
There are likely better translations of the Strasbourg Munster essay! I find it hard to imagine there was once a contempt for Gothic architecture!
I have two essays, one on the etymology of 'Goth' and another that postulates that a viking poem (and a Tolkien favorite) is the proto-Gothic story, featuring a heroine, spooky gravesites, ghosts, and even the word 'gothic' itself in the poem!
Are you referring to Icelandic epics? The Edda, etc were written down by Christians! Not pagan Vikings!
What the hell is going on SubStack with the counter factual pagan stuff? It’s concerning to me tbh. And wrong headed. Tolkien was a devout Catholic btw
My very first post deals with the error of wanting to find proto secularism in the Middle Ages. Trust me, its my field of study, everything is Christian in the medieval world, outside some pagans in Lithuania
For someone who lambasts those 'illiterate vikings', it's ironic you were incapable of actually interpreting what I wrote, of which you might notice that a Christian vs Pagan worldview or origin was never brought up.
"Vikings were illiterate or at the most had runes."
The runes are being pushed back at least to the 1st c. BC/AD (Wodanaz Bracteate) and while we don't find them in codex 'texts' per se, they are being used as a written communication system so defining 'literate' might be pertinent here.
Not all 'Christians' were literate up to a certain point either, so I fail to see how this is relevant.
If runes aren't for 'reading' or 'writing' or some form of 'literacy', then pray tell, how were they being used exactly?
The poem I'm referring to is Hervararkviða aka 'Hervor's Incantation' or 'The Waking of Angantyr', is speculated by scholars to be one of the oldest pieces of Old Norse poetry we have, possibly pushing some of its composition to the 7th c. In case I have to spell it out for you, the Vikings were speaking Old Norse.
Old Norse poetry encompasses material composed from the 8th c. to the 13th c...i.e the fucking Viking period. Just because it was written down at the tail end by another culture doesn't discount their origin. Nor am I saying that Christian's didn't influence the text we received but that mean's we're officially in the weeds of the discussion. It would be like claiming Beowulf is solely a Christian work, of which no right minded person would agree with. If anything, it's something like Tolkien's "granny & fairy problem" idea, where two distinct cultures are grappling with their conflicting world views, or even trying to bend older pagan beliefs into a Christian framework. Your babbling about 'it's written by muh Christians' has no bearing here.
Go watch Jackson Crawford, an Old Norse specialist, on YT back me up here that you're not gonna find complete Christianizing of Pagan stories anyway - so if you're trying to claim 'Angantyr' as a 'Christian' work because it was written down by one, you'll need stronger evidence for why it is so. Are you saying Christians are engaging with and making up Norse Mythology? Is Fafnir just Satan? Is Baldur really Jesus all along? What counter 'factual pagan' claim am I even asserting exactly? If anything, your argument appears to lack defensibility. I never invoked Christianity at all. It's most probable a lot of this Viking/Old Norse material was passed down orally (by Vikings/Old Norse speakers) before it was written down by their Christian descendants. You think just because Christians are the first to copywrite this material that they're now the authors? How misinformed.
"Norse myth was not made up by Christians" by Jackson Crawford
"What the hell is going on SubStack with the counter factual pagan stuff? It’s concerning to me tbh. And wrong headed. Tolkien was a devout Catholic btw"
Once again, what point are you even trying to make? I'm just making observations about texts and apparently it triggered some sensitive religious issue for you? Reread my original post. I said there are Gothic literature tropes in this particular Viking (oops, would it be okay to say Old Norse instead?) poem. The 'Angantyr' section is called a 'poem' because of the meter it is written in that stands apart from the larger saga it's usually incorporated with and its archaic diction lends some scholars to think its the 'oldest' part of the saga, as I noted earlier already.
There is extensive commentary on the 'Angantyr' poem by JRR and Chris Tolkien, this is a fact. It has also been noted how aspects of the poem are found in Tolkien's work.
This isn't some theological claim for gaut's sake.
I never said Tolkien was a closet pagan so what on middle-earth are you non-sequituring about?
I read The Monk in grad school and it was intense. One you read several on the list and then follow them with Northanger Abbey, it makes Austen's humor even more apparent. Love it.
This is so enlightening! I've recently struggled to explain the nature or elements of Gothic fiction (my favorite) to relatives, but this lays it out so succinctly.
Enjoyed this very much. It can be hard to distill down the many facets of the Gothic but I think you've done a great job. My own interpretation is that the Gothic is the first wave of critique against the Enlightenment, often overlooked in favour of Romanticism. Gothic explicitly questions 17th - 18th century reason and progress in all its forms. It's a reaction to the burgeoning left hemisphere mode of thinking. And a big part of that is its meditation on the Fall and human beings as fallen creatures. But crucially, redemption is understood to come not by contradicting our fallen nature but embracing it in order to transcend it.
Nice summary. For an in-depth examination I strongly recommend Richard Davenport-Hines’ “Gothic - Four Hundred Years of Excess, Horror, Evil and Ruin”. Not an easy read, but an engrossing and rewarding one.
I don't mind density, but I found it to be filled with selective perception and unsupported opinions, poorly argued, and bearing an annoying identity-politics slant.
Super cool stuff! And very helpful (especially, for me, the delineation of the differences characterizing "Gothic" vs. "Classical" architecture). And that Loutherbourg painting is just perfect -- I have to use that with my students.
(Also, speaking of Walpole and fairy tales: I discovered just recently that the first attestation of "fairy tale" in English, according to the OED, comes from a letter written by Walpole to a friend, where Walpole is describing the whole carnivalesque atmosphere of a "jubilee masque" he'd attended in London.)
That’s a good definition (mine is complete different though), and gets to the heart of the aesthetic transition from medieval Gothic — my particular focus, especially architectural — to the modern version.
The term Gothic was never used in the Middle Ages of course, but the buildings were still pointed to as an example of it, and what I find fascinating is how in the process the original aesthetic was flipped on its head.
Gothic now implies dark, shadowy, scary and when Gothic architecture is used in a modern context it emphasizes this by focusing on ruins, nighttime, some of the darker corners in buildings, etc. But in the Middle Ages, Gothic architecture — the New Style they’d have more likely called it — was about the brightest and most colorful stuff a person would ever see.
Fascinating comment -- and quite right. The OED only traces the usage of the word Gothic back to around the 17thC. Although 'Gothic' style architecture is obviously way earlier than that!
Yes, as someone who is studying being a draftsman in architecture right now I agree. We learned in school that in the gothic era they learned a new way of doing facades. Which means they didnt need all these bulky walls anymore and instead build spindly collumns filled with big and huge glass stained windows. With that, the churches got flooded with colourful light!
Excuse my english, its not my native language...
Very interesting and thought provoking! Gothic literature is a sub genre in Romanticism, which had a fascination with the medieval world, but in an unrealistic way. The romantics loved the mystique of medieval ruins. Its why Heidelberg is the most romantic city, with a huge ruined caste overlooking it.
Yes, there was a rejection of the art and architecture which came out of the radical innovations of the 1200s, which came to be called “gothic”.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe, while influenced by Romanticism, also fought against it and later in his life, had personal conflicts with the famous German Romantics. From his youth an important essay in which he defends the gothic architecture of the Strasbourg cathedral here https://archive.org/details/goethe-on-german-architecture
I must read that essay! I like Goethe's writings on colour.
His optics are one of a kind. He was a Renaissance man with a wide range of interests, typical of great minds from the period—like Thomas Jefferson. Goethe’s house (now a museum, but like it was during his life) in Weimar is a must-visit if in Germany. His scientific collections are amazing: minerals, animal skeletons etc.
There are likely better translations of the Strasbourg Munster essay! I find it hard to imagine there was once a contempt for Gothic architecture!
Goethe is etymologically connected to the word 'Goth' and even 'God'.
Funny it never crossed my mind. You are right! Maybe “of God” with Ö
I have two essays, one on the etymology of 'Goth' and another that postulates that a viking poem (and a Tolkien favorite) is the proto-Gothic story, featuring a heroine, spooky gravesites, ghosts, and even the word 'gothic' itself in the poem!
Viking Poem?
Vikings were illiterate or at the most had runes.
Are you referring to Icelandic epics? The Edda, etc were written down by Christians! Not pagan Vikings!
What the hell is going on SubStack with the counter factual pagan stuff? It’s concerning to me tbh. And wrong headed. Tolkien was a devout Catholic btw
My very first post deals with the error of wanting to find proto secularism in the Middle Ages. Trust me, its my field of study, everything is Christian in the medieval world, outside some pagans in Lithuania
For someone who lambasts those 'illiterate vikings', it's ironic you were incapable of actually interpreting what I wrote, of which you might notice that a Christian vs Pagan worldview or origin was never brought up.
"Vikings were illiterate or at the most had runes."
The runes are being pushed back at least to the 1st c. BC/AD (Wodanaz Bracteate) and while we don't find them in codex 'texts' per se, they are being used as a written communication system so defining 'literate' might be pertinent here.
Not all 'Christians' were literate up to a certain point either, so I fail to see how this is relevant.
If runes aren't for 'reading' or 'writing' or some form of 'literacy', then pray tell, how were they being used exactly?
The poem I'm referring to is Hervararkviða aka 'Hervor's Incantation' or 'The Waking of Angantyr', is speculated by scholars to be one of the oldest pieces of Old Norse poetry we have, possibly pushing some of its composition to the 7th c. In case I have to spell it out for you, the Vikings were speaking Old Norse.
Old Norse poetry encompasses material composed from the 8th c. to the 13th c...i.e the fucking Viking period. Just because it was written down at the tail end by another culture doesn't discount their origin. Nor am I saying that Christian's didn't influence the text we received but that mean's we're officially in the weeds of the discussion. It would be like claiming Beowulf is solely a Christian work, of which no right minded person would agree with. If anything, it's something like Tolkien's "granny & fairy problem" idea, where two distinct cultures are grappling with their conflicting world views, or even trying to bend older pagan beliefs into a Christian framework. Your babbling about 'it's written by muh Christians' has no bearing here.
Go watch Jackson Crawford, an Old Norse specialist, on YT back me up here that you're not gonna find complete Christianizing of Pagan stories anyway - so if you're trying to claim 'Angantyr' as a 'Christian' work because it was written down by one, you'll need stronger evidence for why it is so. Are you saying Christians are engaging with and making up Norse Mythology? Is Fafnir just Satan? Is Baldur really Jesus all along? What counter 'factual pagan' claim am I even asserting exactly? If anything, your argument appears to lack defensibility. I never invoked Christianity at all. It's most probable a lot of this Viking/Old Norse material was passed down orally (by Vikings/Old Norse speakers) before it was written down by their Christian descendants. You think just because Christians are the first to copywrite this material that they're now the authors? How misinformed.
"Norse myth was not made up by Christians" by Jackson Crawford
"What the hell is going on SubStack with the counter factual pagan stuff? It’s concerning to me tbh. And wrong headed. Tolkien was a devout Catholic btw"
Once again, what point are you even trying to make? I'm just making observations about texts and apparently it triggered some sensitive religious issue for you? Reread my original post. I said there are Gothic literature tropes in this particular Viking (oops, would it be okay to say Old Norse instead?) poem. The 'Angantyr' section is called a 'poem' because of the meter it is written in that stands apart from the larger saga it's usually incorporated with and its archaic diction lends some scholars to think its the 'oldest' part of the saga, as I noted earlier already.
There is extensive commentary on the 'Angantyr' poem by JRR and Chris Tolkien, this is a fact. It has also been noted how aspects of the poem are found in Tolkien's work.
This isn't some theological claim for gaut's sake.
I never said Tolkien was a closet pagan so what on middle-earth are you non-sequituring about?
If you could kindly edit out the cuss words and irrational "argumentation" and personal attacks, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
Loved this so much! I'm obsessed with the gothic!
Me too!
I read The Monk in grad school and it was intense. One you read several on the list and then follow them with Northanger Abbey, it makes Austen's humor even more apparent. Love it.
This is so enlightening! I've recently struggled to explain the nature or elements of Gothic fiction (my favorite) to relatives, but this lays it out so succinctly.
Thank you Noel, I'm glad to help elucidate things 👍
Excellent post - provided much food for thought and has whetted my appetite for reading some of the works mentioned. Many thanks, Rebecca!
So glad you enjoyed, Pierre! <3
Enjoyed this very much. It can be hard to distill down the many facets of the Gothic but I think you've done a great job. My own interpretation is that the Gothic is the first wave of critique against the Enlightenment, often overlooked in favour of Romanticism. Gothic explicitly questions 17th - 18th century reason and progress in all its forms. It's a reaction to the burgeoning left hemisphere mode of thinking. And a big part of that is its meditation on the Fall and human beings as fallen creatures. But crucially, redemption is understood to come not by contradicting our fallen nature but embracing it in order to transcend it.
A great explanation of gothic vs classical-thanks for sharing. And now I have some new books on my TBR to look forward to 👀
Thank you so much Kasey!! Enjoy your reading
So excited to read this!!
Nice summary. For an in-depth examination I strongly recommend Richard Davenport-Hines’ “Gothic - Four Hundred Years of Excess, Horror, Evil and Ruin”. Not an easy read, but an engrossing and rewarding one.
Counterpoint: Davenport-Hines book is actually one of the worst and most worthless book-length works on the Gothic I have ever read.
It’s really dense, I’ll grant you that…
I don't mind density, but I found it to be filled with selective perception and unsupported opinions, poorly argued, and bearing an annoying identity-politics slant.
Identity Politics?!? Really? Are you trying to be funny?
Thank you for the reading list!!
I love to see how the meaning of Gothic went from architecture style to literary and art genre, but also used to describe the music and subculture.
Super cool stuff! And very helpful (especially, for me, the delineation of the differences characterizing "Gothic" vs. "Classical" architecture). And that Loutherbourg painting is just perfect -- I have to use that with my students.
(Also, speaking of Walpole and fairy tales: I discovered just recently that the first attestation of "fairy tale" in English, according to the OED, comes from a letter written by Walpole to a friend, where Walpole is describing the whole carnivalesque atmosphere of a "jubilee masque" he'd attended in London.)
Great stuff! Your students will love De Loutherbourg
Were most of these stories serialized, or released in parts? And is serialization a hallmark of gothic lit?
Unlike Victorian novels, these were not usually serialised!
Thank you for elucidating the context and history for a genre most of us — especially myself — didn't flitch to understand.
Thank you Nisha!
perfect timing posting this article I just got my local library’s collection of the Brontë sisters.
Hell yeah! Just in time for Halloween 🎃
I agree! I read The Monk in an 18th c lit class in college and remember thinking it was surprisingly readable.
Fascinating article! Thanks for sharing!
Who doesn't love The Monk? Thanks so much for reading, Sarah! x