ByzReview: John Skylitzes' 'Synopsis Historion'

Having concluded the 10^th Century in my last review, with Leo the Deacon and his history of the emperors Nikephoros II Phokas and John I Tzimiskes, it now falls upon me to review the action-packed primary sources of the 11^th Century, beginning with the chronicler John Skylitzes and his Synopsis Historion. 

The 11^th Century was a time of great crisis and change for the Byzantine-Roman Empire, and nowhere is this better displayed than in the historical narratives found later in this century. The names of Michael Psellos, John Skylitzes, Michael Attaleiates, Nikephoros Bryennios and Anna Komnene are almost half-famous outside of Byzantine studies, and no wonder. Writing in the aftermath of an unstoppable Turkish invasion, after the death of the ruling Macedonian family and during the rise of a new imperial dynasty on the cusp of the Crusades, one of Byzantium’s most traumatic chapters was about to begin. Of these various historians who wrote within mere decades of each other, I opted to begin with John Skylitzes for a couple of reasons. Though writing a bit later than Michael Psellos, whose famous Chronographia is a cracker by the way, Skyltizes’ chronicle begins much earlier than those of his contemporaries and concludes much earlier. Skylitzes opens his work exactly where Theophanes the Confessor left off, in the early 9^th Century with the short and inconclusive reign of Michael I Rhangabe (r.811-813), and gives us a continuous narrative of the next two and a half centuries up to the similarly short and inconclusive reign of Michael VI Bringas (r.1056-1057). The period covered can pretty much be described as that of the so-called Macedonian Dynasty (circa 866-1056), during which the Roman empire of Byzantium was ruled by the descendents of Basil I the Macedonian*(barring frequent and almost habitual interruptions from outsiders, of course), the empire achieving its territorial zenith for the first time since Justinian I, and during which the new Byzantine aristocracy rose to power.

The 'Monomachos Crown'. Isn't Byzantine stuff pretty?

As a historical source, Skylitzes’ Synopsis Historion has the problem of being wholly unoriginal. He was a chronicler after all, a compiler of information and assembler of other people’s historical work, and nowhere can this better be seen than in the first main chunk of his narrative, from Michael I down to Romanos II. For this period he copies his information directly from an earlier chronicle which covers this exact period, that of Theophanes Continuatus, which I have already reviewed. For the reigns of the emperors Michael I Rhangabe, Leo V the Armenian, Michael II the Stammerer, Theophilos, Michael III the Drunkard, Basil I the Macedonian, Leo VI the Wise, Alexander, Romanos I Lekapenos, Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos and Romanos II, the reader will find little here that is not also addressed – sometimes in greater detail – in this earlier chronicle. Skyltizes’ style of Greek is a little different, and he has certainly engaged with the material in a different way by sometimes casting his characters and events in a different light, but overall he tells us the same story. 

Likewise for the reigns of Nikephoros II Phokas (r.963-969) and John I Tzimiskes (r.969-976) Skylitzes ends up retracing the steps of another historian, Leo the Deacon, giving a more summarized account of these two emperors but nevertheless telling us very little which we do not already know from this earlier source. Things begin to get more interesting with the reign of Basil II ‘the Bulgar-Slayer’ onwards, at least if you want something more relevant to Skyltizes’ own day. Let’s just quickly run down the main events of this period.

So, after the usurper-emperors Nikephoros II and John I successfully expanded the borders of the empire, the young Basil II Porphyrogennetos (r.976-1025) and his brother finally assume power in their own right. Basil II immediately faced dreadful opposition to his rule, at home from rebellious aristocratic warlords, and abroad in the shape of a revived Bulgarian empire. Over the course of his long reign, Basil II defeated and tamed his aristocratic enemies, of whom the Phokas and Skleros families end up being the most notable in this narrative, and completed the conquest of Bulgaria – earning him the nickname, later in history, of ‘the Bulgar-Slayer’. After 49 years of solo-rule, one of the longest reigns the Roman empire had ever seen, Basil finally died. Being childless, the empire

The empire at the end of Basil II's reign.

passed to Basil’s younger brother Constantine VIII (r.1025-1028), who after a three-year reign also died, having achieved nothing but scandal and a bad reputation. Constantine VIII’s two surviving children, Zoe and Theodora, were by this point already well into middle age, and as the last representatives of the Macedonian dynasty they were the sole claimants for the throne. Before he died, Constantine VIII ensured that Zoe – who was still unmarried – would now marry one of the courtiers and thereby raise him as the next emperor. Though not exercising formal authority herself, at least for much of the time, the empress Zoe was to be a central figure in imperial politics from 1028 down to her death in 1050, raising four separate men to the throne during this time. Her first husband, Romanos III Argyros (r.1028-1034), was of little use as a ruler, and eventually died under mysterious circumstances after an undistinguished reign. Zoe’s second husband, Michael IV the Paphlagonian (r.1034-1041), was a similarly useless candidate for the throne – though it was the fact that his brothers held a monopoly on power that made this ruler interesting. As Skylitzes tells us, Michael was not really in control, but rather it was his brother John the Orphanotrophos who ruled from behind the throne. Eventually Michael was to die himself, leaving his nephew, Michael V ‘the Caulker’ (r.1041-1042) to inherit the throne alongside his adoptive mother, the empress Zoe. Michael V was not happy about sharing power, and his brief reign came to an end when he foolishly tried to

A scene from the Madrid manuscript of Skylitzes

depose Zoe. The populace of Constantinople rose up against him, restoring Zoe to power alongside her sister Theodora, and having the young emperor and his uncle blinded. After a brief solo reign, Zoe married for a third time, this time to a certain Constantine IX Monomachos (r.1042-1055). Constantine was to outlive the empress, amidst scandals involving his mistress and many of his courtiers, as well as a deteriorating situation on the eastern frontier and yet more violent internal rebellions. By the time Constantine IX died, the empire was looking a little shaky. The last surviving member of the Macedonian dynasty, Zoe’s aged sister Theodora, smoothly assumed power, but it was clear to one and all that this situation was temporary. Theodora was old and childless, meaning that the Macedonian dynasty had reached its end at last. With the end of Byzantium’s most makeshift imperial house, there was nothing to prevent the new Anatolian aristocracy from squabbling for the throne. Theodora appointed as her successor Michael VI Bringas/Stratiotikos, ‘the Aged’ (r.1056-1057), who immediately faced an angry military elite hungry for wealth and power. Michael VI’s reign was dominated by an armed insurrection from these eastern warlords, who flocked to the banner of one Isaac Komnenos. Skylitzes concludes his narrative with Michael VI’s deposition, and the ascension of Isaac I Komnenos. 

The following is a list of the emperors of the late Macedonian dynasty, from Basil II to Isaac Komnenos:

*Basil II Bulgaroktonos           (976 – 1025) – Son of Romanos II, great-great-grandson of Basil I

           

*Constantine VIII                    (1025 – 1028) – Brother of Basil II. Died leaving two daughters

Romanos III Argyros              (1028 – 1034) – Married Zoe, daughter of Constantine VIII

Michael IV the Paphlagonian  (1034 – 1041) – Second husband of the empress Zoe

Michael V Kalaphates               (1041 – 1042) – Nephew of Michael IV, adoptive son of Zoe

*Zoe and Theodora                        (1042)       – Daughters of Constantine VIII

Constantine IX Monomachos   (1042 – 1055) – Third husband of Zoe

*Theodora                               (1055 – 1056) – Daughter of Constantine VIII, sister of Zoe

Michael VI Bringas                   (1056 – 1057) – Appointed emperor on Theodora’s death

Isaac I Komnenos                   (1057 – 1059) – Seized the throne from Michael VI

* Blood descendants of the Macedonian dynasty

Skylitzes presents us with a long and complex history of Byzantium, and at first it may appear difficult to judge. In one way it could be seen as a continuation of Theophanes Continuatus, bringing the narrative full circle to end of the Macedonian dynasty, but I think it shows us something much more interesting than just that. Throughout the text we can see the gradual emergence of a curious cultural phenomenon, the formation of Byzantine aristocratic clans, who over the course of several generations become steadily more powerful, until in the end they become the main candidates for the throne. In the days of Basil I and Leo VI we begin to see the appearance of names who will become a common feature of Byzantine history thereafter, including Phokas, Argyros and Doukas. To begin with they are mere warlords and professional soldiers, the same sorts of people who would have tried to seize power over the empire before, but as time goes on they become more common and begin to appear in every facet of government. During the early years of Constantine VII they seem poised to take the throne by force, but then they follow Romanos I Lekapenos’ example and attach themselves to the reigning dynasty, gaining power through intrusion and co-option. In many ways it was a

Mosaic of Zoe and Constantine IX in Hagia Sophia

miracle the Macedonian dynasty survived as long as it did. Through recurring usurpation from Lekapenos, Phokas and Tsimiskes, temporarily being subdued through sheer force by Basil II, by the time of the empress Zoe the aristocracy had become accustomed to marrying into the reigning dynasty rather than trying to supplant it, with Romanos III being from the old and powerful Argyros clan, and Constantine IX being a Monomachos. When the last Macedonian empress died in 1056, the Anatolian aristocracy was too well established to put up with a weak civilian emperor like Michael VI. From this point on, an emperor would be the representative of one powerful family or another.

So how does it read, then? Skylitzes is a fairly no-nonsense chronicler of events by reign, each chapter being devoted to one particular emperor. This is certainly following in the tradition set up by Constantine VII and Genesios, more interested as they are in emperors rather than events. The solid, impersonal year-by-year chronicles of Theophanes the Confessor and his ilk are long gone by now. As such, Skylitzes is dominated by the imperial court and capital, with occasional detours to provincial matters and border conflicts. Occasionally he gives us a look at foreign lands, but these are exceptions to the main narrative, which focuses on emperors and their courts and families. He tries to keep his history strictly factual, rarely indulging in irrelevant stories or digressing on a single point. Rarely does he seem too propagandistic, like Theophanes Continuatus does. In fact, one gets the impression that the writer of this text is a little more negative about these previous emperors than his source, especially in the case of the Macedonian emperors themselves. It could be that whereas Theophanes Continuatus and Leo the Deacon are written to glorify particular rulers, Skylitzes – writing a century later, can be a tad more honest than his source text, and can say what he or his patrons may feel about the emperors of the Macedonian era.

One of the scenes found in the 'Madrid Skylitzes'

                The stuff that can be said about John Skylitzes’ Synopsis would probably take up another few pages. We could talk about the weird connection between Skylitzes’s work and that of another chronicler, George Kedrenos, and ask ourselves who was copying whom. We could talk about the Madrid manuscript of Skylitzes, which is filled with hundreds of colourful and adorable little pictures illustrating the text, portraying Byzantine life and civilisation in a fascinatingly original way. We could even talk about Skylitzes Continuatus, a continuation of the text – possibly written by John Skyltizes himself – which brings the narrative down by a further twenty years to the reign of Nikephoros III Botaneiates. Alas this text has not yet been translated into English, and anyway it is often considered to be a mere copy of Michael Attaleiates in the same way Skylitzes uses Theophanes Continuatus. In the end, there is just far too much to say about it.

                So in conclusion, John Skylitzes’ Synopsis is a very interesting chronicle, albeit a little unoriginal. It blatantly reproduces information from other sources, but its sheer scope and the near incidental additions it makes to the other sources make it more than worth a read, especially when cross-examining particular periods and events. If you have to read just one Byzantine source from these centuries, then it would make sense to start with this one. As a supplement to Theophanes the Confessor, Skylitzes is very useful in that regard. By all means look it up, even if you have only a passing interest in Byzantine history.

* Unless you believe Leo VI (r.886-912) was actually the biological son of Michael III, in which case this dynasty is actually a continuation of the previous Amorian dynasty (820-866), and therefore Skyltizes’ framing of his narrative around this group of rulers is even more apt.

Bibliozantium 13

Georgius Cedrenos et Ioannis Scylitzae. Compendium Historiarum. I. Bekker (ed). [Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae], 8/9, (Bonn, 1838-1839). In two volumes.

John Skylitzes. Ioannis Scylitzae Synopsis Historiarum. I. Thurn (ed). [Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae], 5, (Berlin, 1973).

John Skyltizes. A Synopsis of Byzantine History – 811-1057. Trans. J. Wortley. [Cambridge University Press] (Cambridge, 2010).

Ioannes Skyltizes Continuatus.  E. Tsolakes (ed). (Thessaloniki, 1968)

ByzReview: Leo the Deacon, Liudprand's Embassy, and the Patria

This time on Byzantine Primary Source Reviews, we’re going to have a look at the second half of the 10^th century; a time of campaigns and conquests, and of great military families vying for power over the throne. 

The nerd-emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos (he devoted his reign to having historical texts compiled; of course he's a nerd, and it's why I love him) died in 959, leaving a relatively stable and secure empire to his son Romanos II (r.959-963), and while the new emperor was content to spend his time enjoying himself in the Palace it fell to a savvy general by the name of Nikephoros Phokas to take the fight to Byzantium’s enemies and win back important frontier territories. The Phokas family (not in any way related to the 6th Century emperor Phokas (r.602-610), confusingly) had been ever present characters in Byzantine history for most of the previous century, Nikephoros’ grandfather having been a powerful general for Leo VI the Wise and odd sixty years before, and Nikephoros’ uncle having been narrowly kept off the throne by Romanos I. After conquering Crete, Nikephoros Phokas received word that his emperor, Romanos II, had just died under mysterious circumstances – leaving two underage children, Basil and Constantine, to succeed him. Taking a leaf out of Romanos I’s book, Nikephoros quickly seized power for himself as the ostensible protector of the young emperor, and soon mounted the throne himself. The relatively short but eventful reign of Nikephoros II (r.963-969) was marked by more conquests, as well as allegations of tyranny, and he was eventually to end up being murdered by his own nephew and confidant, John Tzimiskes. Unlike most other violent seizures of power, that of John I Tzimiskes (r.969-976) seemed to go quite well, and having successfully mounted the throne after assassinating his predecessor John went on to quite a distinguished career as a military emperor. Following on from Nikephoros II’s methods of governance, John I waged wars and subjugated the Bulgarians, all the while keeping the young legitimate emperors, Basil and Constantine, in the background to maintain the illusion of a dynasty. This second militaristic usurper avoided being assassinated himself and eventually succumbed to disease, finally allowing Basil II (r.976-1025) and his brother to assume their birthright and rule on their own. The emperors covered in this section are:

Romanos II                         (959 – 963) – Son of Constantine VII

Nikephoros II Phokas     (963 – 969) – Married the empress Theophano, widow of Romanos

John I Tzimiskes               (969 – 976) – Nephew of Nikephoros

Basil II the ‘Bulgar-Slayer’ (976 – 1025) – Sons of Romanos II

                With Constantine VIII

Nikephoros II Phokas, in a manuscript

The main historical narrative for this period of Byzantine history would be the excellent History of Leo the Deacon, a man focussed on telling us clearly and concisely about the reigns of our two military usurper emperors, Nikephoros II and John I. Though he begins with the reign of Romanos II, Leo the Deacon sets the sights of his narrative on Nikephoros Phokas right from the word go, telling the story of his campaign to recapture Crete, and of Nikephoros’ brother’s defence of the eastern frontiers. The History is divided into ten short books, the first few of which are dedicated to Nikephoros Phokas, and the remaining ones to John Tzimiskes and his reign. There are digressions later on into the reign of Basil II, but overall this is a story of two generals, not of the legitimate ‘purple-born’ emperors from the Macedonian dynasty. Though they are essentially usurpers who intruded onto the throne and deprived Basil and Constantine of power, Leo the Deacon seems to hold a great amount of respect for both Nikephoros and John, showing them to be wise and courageous emperors who, though both having their faults, nevertheless accomplished great things for the empire. Despite acknowledging criticisms of Nikephoros’ heavy-handed rule, and despite revealing in gory detail John Tzimiskes’ brutal murder of Nikephoros, we are left with the impression that these are two of the best emperors of the past century.

The text of Leo the Deacon seems easier than other Byzantine historical narratives, told with a relatively consistent chronological order of events and never digressing too badly from this main narrative. One feature I found rather delightful is Leo’s efforts to classicise his text, particularly in regard to the foreign peoples his heroes make continuous war upon. This is by no means a rare thing in Byzantine writing, as new ethnicities entering the narrative can be far more palatable if they are called Huns, but Leo often almost habitually refers to the other peoples of the Black Sea and Eastern Mediterranean by confusing old-world names – Tauroscythians instead of Russians (usually shortened to Scythians), Mysians instead of Bulgarians, and Carthaginians instead of Fatamid Arabs or North Africans. As I have just mentioned, Leo is by no means unique amongst Byzantines in how he harkens back to the ancient world, but it bears remembering here especially. Overall Leo the Deacon is an important contemporary history for these sixteen years of Byzantine history, and can’t be avoided if you wish to see how the empire was dealing with its neighbours during the later 10^th century.

On to a slightly more interesting historical source for this period. Liudprand of Cremona, whose Antapodasis we briefly discussed in a previous review, later left behind a curious account of his second visit to Constantinople. Liudprand’s Embassy, written about his diplomatic mission to Constantinople in around 968, tells of his personal encounter with Nikephoros II Phokas on behalf of Holy Roman Emperor Otto I. The Cremonese bishop, having already had experience in the Byzantine court, was sent to Nikephoros in order to gain territorial concessions from the Byzantine emperor, and potentially a purple-born bride for a dynastic marriage. Liudprand failed to make any headway with Nikephoros, and in fact suffered some very poor hospitality at Constantinople during this visit. The entire text is little more than a diatribe against the eastern empire, its officials and everything that happened to him during his months as a guest of the Byzantine court. 

Liudprand’s story is essentially just a blow by blow account of what happened, beginning with his arrival in Constantinople and then going on to describe every significant event and meeting with the court he experienced over the course of his time there. His arguments with the emperor and the courtiers are written down word for word (if we trust him, of course), with Liudprand’s own commentary to supplement the speeches, and he complains bitterly at every opportunity about the conditions and disrespect he had to endure.  The house he was given to inhabit was always at an unpleasant temperature, either too hot or freezing cold, he spent most of his time there seriously ill (not the best state of mind for a diplomat to be in), he hated the food, he hated the drink, he hated the entertainment and the ceremonies, and he felt that he was being treated with nothing but utmost contempt. It’s almost as though he’s playing up how bad his experience was, just to make an excuse to his boss as to why he spent four months abroad and failed to get anything to show for it.

                The Embassy of Liudprand is a delicious little text, packed with xenophobic vitriol and bitter complaints, and painting a nasty and unpleasant little picture of Nikephoros Phokas and his government. It presents such a stark contrast to his earlier visit to Constantinople, in which he apparently had an incredibly good time at the feasts of Constantine VII. There was little indication of Liudprand’s disdain for Byzantine imperial pretensions or court ritual, and on the whole he seemed genuinely impressed by the whole spectacle. A decade later he complains endlessly about the food, presents the emperor a vicious little toe-rag, and calls the very basis of Byzantine ideology into question.

                One final source we shall briefly look at here will round off our treatment of the 10^th century. The Patria of Constantinople is a curious little piece, a collection of texts about the buildings, statues and history of Constantinople as it stood in the late 10^th century, assembled out of different pieces of writing composed at different times. The first of the four books of the Patria is a short text that tells the story of the city’s foundation, half legend half fact, first as the city of Byzantium and then its later re-founding  by Constantine the Great as his new imperial capital. Book 2 is much longer, and lists and describes the many statues which could be found in the city, many of which are pagan, whilst Book 3 describes the many important and impressive buildings found throughout the city, predominantly churches. Finally, Book 4 is a largely legendary account of the building of the great church of Hagia Sophia, the current structure of which was commissioned by Justinian I the Great. This last text is rather amusing, for Justinian’s portrayal in this text which was composed long after that emperor’s death has a different tone to the Justinian presented by Procopius and his successors. The intrusion of angels into the narrative, disguised as eunuchs, and Justinian’s interaction with them make this feel a bit more like a fairy story about some legendary king than the vindictive, calculating and power-hungry emperor Justinian portrayed by the histories of earlier writers.

Hagia Sophia, still standing in Istanbul today. Justinian would be proud

                The Patria itself is mixed with both fact and myth, and as such it can be of limited use as a historical source. Some of the story pieces are short and quite readable, particularly the narrative-driven Books 1 and 4, and the catalogues of buildings and statues give some idea about what might have been found in Constantinople in this era of history, but mostly this is a source of only specific uses, such as the Book of Ceremonies and De Administrando Imperio discussed last time. The Patria is an interesting and unique source, and could provide a lot of information for anybody trying to reconstruct the medieval capital of the Roman empire, and it occasionally contains useful snippets of information or history. Perhaps it’s worth a read.

                The three sources discussed here are all thoroughly enjoyable and worthwhile to those of us interested in late 10^th century Byzantium. From the historical narrative of Leo the Deacon which shows us the campaigns of two powerful usurper-emperors, to the Patria which gives us a nice little window onto the history and architecture of the capital, and Liudprand’s Embassy which shows us a gorgeous and hateful snapshot of the imperial court and foreign policy under Nikephoros II Phokas, these three sources are well worth having a look at, by anybody.

Bibliozantium 12

Leo Diaconus et al. C.B. Hase (ed). Bonn. [Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae], 30, (1828)

Leo the Deacon. The History of Leo the Deacon – Byzantine Military Expansion in the Tenth Century. Translated by A.M. Talbot and D.F. Sullivan. Washington D.C: Harvard University Press. [Dumbarton Oaks Studies], 41, (2005)

Liudprand of Cremona. The Complete Works of Liudprand of Cremona. Translated by. P. Squatriti [Medieval Texts in Translation], Washington D.C: The Catholic University of America Press. (2007)

Accounts of Medieval Constantinople – The Patria. Translated by Albrecht Berger. Washington D.C: Harvard University Press. [Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library], 24, (2013)

My Immortal, attributed to Tara Gilesbie

Oh. Dear. God.

          So it’s time to have a brief look at the world of ‘fan fiction’, by digging up its worst possible example. Fan fiction, for those who have until now had minimal contact with it (a group in which I include myself), is an attempted pastiche by a fan of an original creative property, or – to use less jargon – an amateur knock-off by a fan of some fiction they like. To use a popular example, the Harry Potter series of novels by J.K. Rowling gained immense popularity over the course of their publication, and huge numbers of fans have ended up writing their own stories set in the world of Harry Potter. While many of these works have not been published professionally, many budding writers of this ‘fan fiction’ have uploaded them to the internet and are available to

Some proper goths

read for free. From what I understand, and what I fully expected given the nature of the stuff, fan fiction can vary immensely in terms of quality, genre, and faithfulness to the original story. There is, after all, a huge amount that can be done to any story, and anybody who takes it upon themselves to write something that will go straight into the public domain without need for editing or complying with any narrative efforts might still be passionate enough about the world they wish to write about that they can do something quite fresh and original with the material.

          With the acknowledgement that some fan fiction can be well written, have narrative cohesion and can be creative and original with the source material, let’s go now and look at something genuinely and truly terrible. Over the course of 2006 and 2007 there appeared on the internet a story by the name of ‘My Immortal’ (a title which alludes to an Evanescence song), and it quickly gained notoriety. Around 22,000 words long (novelette length), divided between 44 ‘chapters’, this story is set at Hogwarts where the protagonist, Ebony, is a student in Slytherin House alongside Harry ‘Vampire’ Potter and Draco Malfoy. Believing herself to be openly ‘gothic’ in terms of lifestyle, as well as a vampire, Ebony frequently takes time to tell us exactly what black gothic clothes and make up she’s wearing, and tells us about the many sordid encounters she has with Draco and other characters from the Harry Potter series. For instance, as the text is in the public domain, I’m going to plop the first paragraph down here for you to experience:

‘               Hi my name is Ebony Dark’ness Dementia Raven Way and I have long ebony black hair (that’s how I got my name) with purple streaks and red tips that reaches my mid-back and icy blue eyes like limpid tears and a lot of people tell me I look like Amy Lee (AN: if u don’t know who she is get da hell out of here!). I’m not related to Gerard Way but I wish I was because he’s a major fucking hottie. I’m a vampire but my teeth are straight and white. I have pale white skin. I’m also a witch, and I go to a magic school called Hogwarts in England where I’m in the seventh year (I’m seventeen). I’m a goth (in case you couldn’t tell) and I wear mostly black. I love Hot Topic and I buy all my clothes from there. For example today I was wearing a black corset with matching lace around it and a black leather miniskirt, pink fishnets and black combat boots. I was wearing black lipstick, white foundation, black eyeliner and red eye shadow. I was walking outside Hogwarts. It was snowing and raining so there was no sun, which I was very happy about. A lot of preps stared at me. I put up my middle finger at them.                  ‘

My Chemical Romance, whom Ebony loves on artistic grounds

                Okay. So that was the introduction. The rest of the plot – if one can call it that – is rambling, and it jumps around so much that it’s impossible to gain any sense of what story the writer is trying to tell. The prose is stumbling, badly-written and so awkwardly constructed that one can be forgiven for believing it to be the work of an inexperienced child, potentially with learning difficulties – and it only worsens as the story goes on. In fact, by about twenty chapters into the story the text is virtually unintelligible, so riddled is it with incorrect spellings, typos and single-letter phoneticisms (r u ok wiv dis?). The author is clearly obsessed with ‘gothic’ fashion and bands such as My Chemical Romance (MCR) and Good Charlotte (GC), and many times throughout the story the protagonist ends up attending a live concert by one or other of these groups. Here’s a section from chapter 19, after Ebony and Draco have had some sort of argument, or something, just to show the level of the quality and subject matter:

‘         But it was to late. I knew what I herd. I ran to the bathroom angrily, cring. Draco banged on the door. I whipped and whepped as my blody eyeliner streammed down my cheeks and made cool tears down my feces like Benji in the video for Girls and Bois (raven that is soo our video!). I TOOOK OUT A CIGARETE END STARTED TO smoke pot.

Suddenly Hargrid came. He had appearated.

“You gave me a fucking shock!” I shouted angrily dropping my pot. “Wtf do you fink you’re doing in da gurl’s room?”

Only it wasn’t just Hargrid. Someone else was with him too! For a second I wanted it 2 b Tom Rid or maybe Draco but it was Dumblydore.

“Hey I need to ask you a question.” he said, pulling out his black wanabe-goffik purse. “What are u wearing to the concert?”

“U no who MCR r!” I gasped.

“No I just saw there was a concert dat a lot of gothz and punx were going 2.” He said. “Anyway Draco has a surprise for u.                ’

                Believe it or not, it gets worse than that. As you stumble endlessly on through the side-splitting sexual references, stilted descriptions of make-up and clothes and recurring diversions to go to the concerts in “Hogsmeade”, any efforts the author made to keep the writing vaguely comprehensible fall by the wayside. Here is the first half of chapter 36:

‘               I loked around in a depresed way. Suddenly I saw Profesor Sinister. B’lody Mary, Socrates and Draco, Vampire and Willow were their to.

“OMFG Sorius I saw u nd Samaro and Snip nd everyone!11111 I kant beleev Snap uzd 2 b goffik!111111”

“Yah I no.” Serious said sadly.

“Oh hey there bitch.” Profesor Trevolry said in an emo voice dirnking some Volxemortserom.

Hi fuker.” I said. “Lizzen, Satan asked me out to a gottik cornet and a movie so I need a sexah new outfit for da date. Also I’m playng in a gothic band so I need an ootfit for that too.”

“Oh my satan!1” (geddit lolz koz shes gofik) gasped B’lody Mary. “Want 2 go to Hot Topik to shop 4 ur outfit?”

“OMFS, letz have a groop kutting session!11” said Profesor Trevolry.

“I can’t fucking wait 4 dat but we need 2 get sum stuff first.” said Willow.

“Yah we need sum portions for Profesor Trevolry so she wont be adikted 2 Volxemortserum anymore nd also………….sum luv potion 4 Enoby.” Darko said resultantly.

“Well we have potions klass now.” Willow said so let’s go.            ’

                By now you ought to have a pretty clear picture of what this monstrosity is like. Words cannot adequately describe it, which is why I’ve had to take sizeable excerpts of the text to show. Apparently the earlier chapters are better in terms of spelling and grammar thanks to the author having a co-writer, named as ‘Raven’, but by chapter 16 they had had an argument meaning that the author had to take on a greater part in the burden of writing. The writing is at its worst in the brief author’s notes, at the heading to every chapter, in which the writer usually does two things: first to vehemently defend herself against ‘flamers’ and ‘preps’, who appear to be on a course to belittle and denigrate her work, and secondly to thank her colleague Raven for her assistance in writing. Here is the heading to chapter 11, displaying fairly typical ‘My Immortal’ spelling and subject matter:

‘               AN: i sed stup flaming up prepz! c if dis chaptr is srupid!1111 it delz wit rly sris issus! sp c 4 urself if itz ztupid brw fangz 2 ma frend raven 4 hleping me!    ’

A Gothic Camera Bag, referenced in the story

                ‘My Immortal’ is commonly considered to be one of the worst abuses of fan fiction in the public domain, and hopefully the excerpts delivered here can go some way to showing why this might be the case. Reading it makes me feel genuinely dirty, as you might feel if you are ever forced to use a run-down toilet in a backwater petrol station. It’s offensive in just how bad it is, and by God does it make one thankful that most fan fiction is nowhere near this awful. I am by no means the first person to engage with the material in this way, and all I can really do is reiterate what has probably been said time and again by critics and pundits of the work. I can offer no fresh perspectives here, and all I can do is advise you not to do what I did, and read it from start to finish. It’s a potentially soul-destroying experience.

                I will however support the theory that this text is nothing more than an elaborate hoax. It is a satirical take on fan fiction by collecting all of the worst abuses of this genre into one story, constructing an entire novelette out of stereotypes and bad grammar. There is bad fan fiction, but this text is so poor, contains too many of the clichés and makes so many comical errors that it cannot be anything except a joke. The writing deteriorates gradually over the course of the story, but to such an extent that it seems as though the writer (or writers) could be consciously daring themselves to see how bad they could make it. And then there are obvious mistakes in the text where the wrong word is included, such as in chapter 33 in which is included the line:

‘  “Oh Draco!111111!1 Oh mi fuking gud Draco!1111” I screemed passively as he got an eructation. ’

                It would be too much of a stretch to misspell ‘erection’ as ‘eructation’ (a belch, or other blast of wind), and it might be feasible had a spell-check been used – except that for a good proportion of the story no attempt at spell-check has been made. Why do so for ‘eructation’ and not for ‘mi’, ‘fuking’, ‘gud’ or ‘screemed’? There are numerous examples of this sort of thing littered throughout the story, of a slight misspelling which humorously changes the meaning of the sentence. Likewise the character of Tom Riddle, a canonical Harry Potter character who makes an appearance in ‘My Immortal’, is at one point misnamed as Tom Bombadil – which is interesting, as that is quite a spelling mistake. That Tom Bombadil is a character who only appears in The Lord of the Rings books, I find it implausible that somebody who would know who this character is would write something like ‘My Immortal’. Unless the writer, who would likely also be a consumer of fan fiction herself, had learned of this character third-hand through a Lord of the Rings pastiche.  Other things seem just a little too clichéd to be real; the author’s apparent falling-out with her friend, the numerous references to wrist-slitting, the honest an uncritical belief that My Chemical Romance is the greatest thing in the world, and the numerous digressions into ridiculous fashions of the day.

                While these arguments are based only on incidental details, I feel that whoever wrote ‘My Immortal’ must have been making a joke at the expense of the fan fiction community of the early 2000s. A novelette is not too long a thing to write for a joke such as this, especially if it was done episodically. But then, who knows really? Only the writer of this text, who may or may not have been this Tara Gilespie, knows for certain. 

                In conclusion, ‘My Immortal’ is a curious piece of writing, noteworthy mostly for its own notoriety. Whether intended sincerely or not, it contains just about everything a work of fan fiction ideally should not; bad writing, over-the-top author-insert protagonist, laughable sexual content, woeful misuse of characters and settings from the official canon, and a sickening level of obsession with ‘gothic’ subculture and My Chemical Romance.

My Bibliortal

Gilesbie, T. (XXXbloodyrists666XXX). ‘My Immortal’. [Online]. Available Online at: <https://www.fanfiction.net/s/6829556/1/My-Immortal> [Accessed 15/07/2016]. (Originally published: 2006-2007)

[As this text is open-access on ‘fanfiction.net’, here is the web address. The original story was published here, only to be taken down a year or two later, but fortunately enough copies were made to enable it to be republished by another writer. This is apparently the complete original text, should U eva wish 2 reed dis!!!1111]