The Devils of Loudun

Letto a tredici anni in italiano, riletto a quarant'anni in inglese. la mia opinione resta quella che era: questo saggio è un capolavoro, uno dei libri che mi hanno profondamente influenzato. Pur nella diversa visione del mondo (non ho nessuna tendenza mistica) ho sempre trovato la narrazione elegante e coinvolgente e, elemento fondamentale, ho sempre condiviso l'analisi dei meccanismi di suggestione e auto-suggestione, di convenienze politiche e eccessi mistici, che determinarono lo svolgersi della farsa epocale, tragica e grottesca, della "possessione" delle monache di Loudun e di molti dei loro esorcisti.
L'Appendice, con la sua perfetta sintesi dei meccanismi di dominio delle masse, rimane un piccolo capolavoro di antropologia show more sociologica. show less

My trade paperback copy of Huxley's Devils of Loudun has the subject classification "religion" on the cover. I suppose that's fair, but it hardly registers the scope of this highly digressive microhistory of alleged diabolical possession in a 17th-century French convent, and the indictment (et sequae) of the local parson as the instigating sorcerer for the outbreak. There are many discussions of the political situation, reflections on the nature of mysticism, and expositions of psychological phenomena that are introduced in an effort to contextualize and explain the events treated in the book. Although Huxley sometimes provides a level of detail that seems almost novelistic, he has clearly done exhaustive archival work to accurately show more represent the historical events involved. (His Latin quotes are translated in footnotes, but not his French.) He credits the now-derogated notions of Murray's Witch-Cult in Western Europe, but they are really peripheral to his subject and his conclusions about it.

There is an "Epilogue (in amplification of material in Chapter Three)" where Huxley presents a theory and catalog of "Grace-substitutes" by which individuals seek to escape the prison of their individuality. This lively essay is the author's contribution to a conversation that runs from Plato's "Phaedrus" through Aleister Crowley's "Energized Enthusiasm." It is possible that Huxley may have read the latter (or received its thesis in conversation with Crowley), and he seems unaware of the connection of his musings with the former.

The story is not told in a way that invites the modern reader to look back on the cruel and blinkered deeds of earlier centuries with any sense of superiority. In fact, there are multiple points where the author pauses to observe that the 20th century far exceeded that earlier age in its destruction of individuals singled out by the machinations of despotic power:

"The soul is not the same as the Spirit, but is merely associated with it. In itself, and until it consciously chooses to make way for the Spirit, it is no more than a rather loosely-tied bundle of not very stable psychological elements. This composite entity can quite easily be disintegrated by anyone ruthless enough to wish to try and skillful enough to do the job in the right way.

"In the seventeenth century this particular kind of ruthlessness was unthinkable, and the relevant skills were therefore never developed" (209-210).

Which is not to say that Huxley romanticizes the truly horrific episodes that he recounts, nor that he detaches them from human weaknesses that afflict us and our societies today.

It is tempting to compare Huxley's European Devils to The Crucible by Arthur Miller, a play about the Salem witch trials written only a year after Huxley's book. Miller's drama was expressly a parable about the Red Scare and McCarthyism, while Huxley's 20th-century comparanda are overt totalitarianisms such as Nazism and Stalinism. Also, Miller's play takes the form of a straightforward tragedy centered on John Proctor. Within the historical narrative offered by Huxley, there is a tragedy with parson Urbain Grandier at its focus, a grim comedy starring prioress Jeanne des Agnes, and even a strange romance about the mop-up exorcist Jean-Joseph Surin. (Huxley himself explicitly classifies Surin as a tragic figure contrasted with the comical Jeanne in pp. 280-282.)

Director Ken Russell's production of Huxley's book as the film The Devils (1971) has been cinematic unobtainium for decades, with a restored video release appearing in the last year or so. I have not seen it, despite my fervent wish to do so. Now having read the book, my appetite for that is only increased. The Devils of Loudun is recommended on its own strengths, for its historical interest, for the gripping passages of storytelling, and for Huxley's sage appraisals of the human condition. show less

In early 17th century France, the nuns in a convent all begin to act possessed by devils. The local pastor is accused of being a sorcerer in league with the devil based upon the "testimony" of the devils as told to the exorcists. The possessed nuns even become a tourist attraction bringing thousands to see them acting possessed. The pastor is tried and burned at the stake.

Aldous Huxley provides a detailed analysis of these events and concludes that the possession of the nuns was caused more by the suggestions of the exorcists than any actual possession. The book includes long essays on religious devotion and possession. It also includes very graphic descriptions of the torture and burning of the pastor.

The final essay compares the show more events in Loudon to herd intoxication and crowd-delirium that shows parallels to contemporary political events.

The book is interesting albeit very boring in parts. It is nevertheless well worth reading. show less

I re-read this book in the English language 1970 edition by Chatto and Windus after a very early reading in Italian when I was fourteen. My opinion about it is unchanged.
Masterpiece. I think it is one of the books that most influenced my formation as a thinking human being. I am not a mystic at all, and I don't share many of Huxley's views on spirituality, but his narration is enthralling, powerful and elegant, and his explanation of the mechanisms of control over the masses in the Appendix are a brilliant display of synthetic explanatory skills.

One of the joys of reading is how one subject can lead to a serendipitous find. Having recently come across a brief reference to the early 17th century barking nuns of Loudon I went in search of a more detailed exploration. In Aldous Huxley's book I found all that I sought and much more.

Urbain Grandier, the local parson of Loudon, is a very naughty cleric who partakes much too much of the sensual world. One morsel happens to be the daughter of his best friend. She becomes pregnant with unhappy consequences for many people. Grandier manages in this way of behavior to alienate nearly every important Catholic in Loudon as well as make an enemey of Richelieu.

When Grandier spurns the local prioress, Sister Jeanne, she claims demonic show more possession at the hand of Grandier as do 2 of her nuns. Grandier may have been guilty of many sins, but demonic possession was not among them. Exorcists are brought in as much too destroy Grandier as to throw out the devils (7 specific ones inhabit Sister Jeanne alone). The exorcists produce devils in 14 more nuns. The public exorcisms provide great entertainment, reviving the local tourist industry, but eventually produce the trial of Grandier, who in due turn is burned at the stake. The story continues when the Jesuit Surin arrives to finally successfully exorcise Sister Jeanne's demons.

Huxley's 1952 work explores the psychological aspects of demonic possession and exorcism, sometimes brilliantly against the backdrop of the madnesses of his own time. Liberal rationalists had "fondly imagined" an end to persecutions of 'heretics'. Instead, as he observes "from our vantage point on the descending road of modern history, we now see that all the evils of religion can flourish without any belief in the supernatural, that convinced materialists are ready to worship their own jerry-built creations as though they were the Absolute, and that self-styled humanists will persecute their adversaries with all the zeal of Inquisitors exterminating the devotees of a personal and transcendant Satan...In order to justify their behavior, they turn their theories into dogmas, their bylaws into First Principles, their political bosses into Gods and all those who disagree with them into incarnate devils. This idolatrous transformation of the relative into the Absolute and the all too human into the Divine, makes it possible for them to indulge their ugliest passions with a clear conscience and in the certainty that they are working for the Highest Good."

In the last third of the book he explores the nature of Sister Jeanne's possession, the possession of her exorcist Surin, and the manner of her recovery. The modern mind has some difficulty here. Clearly Surin and possibly Jeanne believed in the reality of demonic possessions (it is worth noting that many learned men, including those behind Grandier's fall and most Jesuits did not believe in the authenticity of these possessions). At the same, Jeanne is also play-acting at times as she concedes in her own subsequent writings. They believed in the Devil, they believed in possession, but understood that the Devil could not overcome the will of the possessed. Huxley paints a poignant, if oddly amusing, scene when he describes how Surin ordered Jeanne's devils to discipline themselves - in other words to flagellate Jeanne. Two of the devils lay on the whip with gusto, but Balaam and Isacaaron abhorring pain, would barely swing the whip and yet the possessed Jeanne would scream in agonized suffering.

An absolutlely fascinating read by one of the great minds of the 20th century. show less

Huxley’s way of looking at the affair suggests, that accusing Urbain Grandier being in league with the devil was ridiculous. But the priest should not have refused to become spiritual advisor of a convent. The nuns and their Mother Superior most probably had fallen in love with the handsome man, well-known for a lot of sexual relationships, ending in a state which modern psychologists would explain with collective hysteria. Grandier was condemned for witchcraft. Before he was burned alive at the stake, all bones of his pretty limbs were broken under severe torture.

Picked up this excellent book because I remembered liking the movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066993) back in 1971. The subject is the 'possession' of nuns at the Ursaline convent in Loudon, which reached its climax (though not its end) in 1634, when Urbain Grandier, the local pastor, was burnt at the stake as a sorcerer. Though Huxley occasionally adds details as if he were the omnicient narrator of a fiction, the book is factual, the author supplying footnotes and bibliography.

Huxley tells three overlapping lives: the secular priest Grandier, the Ursaline Prioress Jeanne des Anges, and the Jesuit Jean-Joseph Surin.

Grandier was charismatic, lascivious, and indiscreet, making many enemies in the town of Loudon where he was pastor. show more Soer Jeanne never met him, but gossip spreads easily, and when (as was depressingly common at the time) some lighthearted hysteria in the convent blossomed into the full-blown theatrics of exorcisms, she and her Sisters named Grandier as the culprit.

Surin arrives on the scene only after Grandier's death. Although arguably as troubled and unbalanced as Sister Jeanne himself, he does help her return to something like a normal life, though at great personal cost.

Huxley begins by introducing Grandier and describing the political environment. (Among other things, he had an enemy in Cardinal Richelieu, the most powerful man in France -- this was one of the things that allowed the patently fraudulent prosecution to continue.) After briefly telling us of Surin, Huxley then has a digression on the subject of "transcendence", by which he means the deeply-felt awareness of being a part of something larger than oneself. His purpose in this digression is to show later how the nuns, and Surin, are negative examples, where a false, unenlightened transcendence is achieved by a 'downward' course, via depravity or self-mortification. Next we meet Prioress Jeanne and the Ursaline sisters. At this point (1629), the hysterics begin.

After Huxley explains how and why accusations of witchcraft were handled in the courts, he follows the arrest and prosecution of Grandier. There is a substantial discussion of why the hysterics were believed (though many were skeptical), followed by the awful condemnation, torture, and execution of Grandier. Certain details here are of course horrifying, but the libertine Grandier's behavior in the last days and hours of his life -- all well documented -- is shockingly saintly; I was deeply moved.

The last third of the book concerns the Jesuit Surin, who took charge of the exorcisms at Loudon shortly after Grandier's death. He is able, eventually, to give Jeanne back some of her self, and relieve her of playing the demoniac. (This does not happen because Surin sees through the 'possession', he is in fact completely credulous.) Finally, Huxley follows both Jeanne and Surin to the end of their days.

He appends an Epilogue extending the philosophical discussion of 'downward transcendence', giving the three major contemporary examples of drugs, "elementary sexuality" (promiscuity), and herd-mentality (particulary crowds stirred to madness by demagogues). He states that the days when religious leaders could stir their followers to a homicidal frenzy is now past; alas, history has proven him wrong.

Although it reads well as simple historical anthropology, Huxley's deeper point is that we all seek transcendence (as defined above), and the religious hysteria described is but one example of the perversion of that instinct.

My one problem with this book is that he assumes the reader is fluent in French. Most of the time I could figure it out, but still. show less