BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Does anybody read Lovecraft anymore?

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
matthew.
01:45 / 02.03.06
H.P. Lovecraft is notorious for being hard to read. He uses archaic words, long sentences, even longer paragraphs. Narratives are slow with little dialogue. There's no suspense or even fear. A lot of the interest in Lovecraft that I have, is in imagination. The shit this guy comes up with.

Recently, Lovecraft has been derided for racism, sexism and classism in his works. He thought British culture to be supreme, and everything else paled in comparison. He actually named his cat "N*gg*r-man".

A lot of his plots deal with the idea of foreigness. Women characters are generally agents of "evil". He was a fan of eugenics (even though that was really popular in the twenties, even among scientists of good standing).

From Wikipedia:
' Perhaps the best example of his classist views can be found in the short story Cool Air (1926): the (presumably Anglo-Saxon) narrator speaks disparagingly of the poor Hispanics of his neighborhood, but he worshipfully respects the wealthy and aristocratic Spaniard Dr. Muñoz, "a man of birth, cultivation, and discrimination." '

So. With this information in mind, does it dissuade you from reading about Lovecraft?

Here's a thread on Lovecraft. Seems to be unadulterated praise for him with a little mention of sexual- and xenophobia.

Here's a really old thread on the Cthulu Mythos.

There's also a handful of threads dealing with films based on or referencing Lovecraft.

This is a website with lots of biographical and bibliographical resources.

The "Complete" Works in pdf format.

More e-books by the man of the hour.

A compendium of all Cthulu books. Seems like a lavish fansite, if you ask me.

Pretty decent fansite.

The list goes on.
 
 
matthew.
01:48 / 02.03.06


One of the Old Ones....
 
 
astrojax69
02:31 / 02.03.06
i've read very little lovecraft, but have just got hold of houellebecq's essay on him and shall get to it soon and read it with interest. given the thread summary, we might be talking about houllebecq himself, for the press he gets... [i never find him boring!]

thanks all the links, btw!
 
 
assayudin
02:45 / 02.03.06
I read him still. And yes he is awfully xenophobic, but then he was pretty much phobic about everything. But then It's a family tradition starting with my Grandfather to read him. I sort of grew up with it.
 
 
matthew.
03:17 / 02.03.06
Can you separate the man from the phobia, then? Is that easy for you? Personally, I also inwardly shudder when I stumble upon something that criticizes Lovecraft; I don't like to be reminded of his... tendancies. I shudder outwardly when I read Lovecraft, and I don't mean because of his subjects (well, maybe I do a little)
 
 
All Acting Regiment
03:42 / 02.03.06
Well, first of all I'd like everyone to remember that for us to criticise a book (or any other work) because it contains racism, sexism, classism or anything else does not mean that we want it banned or burned, something that the Right would love everyone to beleive. Rather it means that we want people to have more awareness about the work and the ideas it contains.

Moving on, I suppose the first question is whether or not it is ethical to read Lovecraft. My view is that it is, seeing as you're not going to be paying anyone any money as long as you're just downloading free copies. Are you helping to promote the views espoused by the man by reading his books? I don't think so, as long as you're a critical reader, which everyone should be, and a lot of people are; and for the people who aren't, reading the Bible or the Karma Sutra or any other work becomes unethical so that's a wider issue.

I think that in terms of ethics the onus is on the people who are presenting these stories to new audiences- it would be problematic if a new film or video game were to expect us to be totally sympathetic to a racist (etcetera) character. Equally, presenting these stories intact as some kind of truth is unethical. Various other fairly obvious problem situations arise in this context.

I see most of his work as an excuse for his beliefs (which may have been his own or may have been the dominant ideology of the time, or, as seems most likely, they may have been a mixture)- perhaps because when he was writing, it was gradually, slowly becoming apparent, after a long period of denial, that there is no rational reason to hate or fear "the other", and that the views he held may have been wrong, he had to make up a fairy story that meant it was okay to think in that way. Seen in that light, the books can function as an interesting insight into the evasion mechanisms we use as human beings. Whether that interest lasts through the entire monotonous canon is up to the reader.
 
 
matthew.
03:50 / 02.03.06
I don't think anybody mentioned banning or burning. I just wanted to know how some people enjoyed Lovecraft even though he's a bit of a twit sometimes...
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
10:01 / 02.03.06
Unsurprisingly enough, I still read Lovecraft. (Richard Lupoff's novel "Lovecraft's Book" focuses largely on Lovecraft's racism, if anyone fancies checking it out- it's quite a fun little thriller, but nothing too special).

August Derleth famously tried (and, according to him, succeeded to an extent) to get Lovecraft to ditch the xenophobia, as did various other members of "the Lovecraft Circle".

Oh, and the Houellebecq essay is great- I bet once you've read it you'll find the similarities between the two even more remarkable.
 
 
GogMickGog
10:48 / 02.03.06
Love the Houellebecq essay- There was a link to it a while ago up on Disinfo.com, it may still be there. Lovecraft taps into something which has been raised on here before, which is the inherent conservatism lying beneath horror; fear of the other, the foreign and the new.

Sure, Lovecraft was a bit odd but if you dig deep enough most writers have a skeleton (or un-pronouncable nameless mass) or two, waiting in their closet.

Would one drop Peake because he slept around? John Wilmot was a complete twat, but it doesn't stop one from enjoying his poetry any more, does it?

The only reason I struggle with Lovecraft is his poxy writing; it's all about the imagination and the suspension of revelation for me. The mythos is WONDERFUL in notion, but the execution, I find, always lets him down.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
12:10 / 02.03.06
The Houellebecq ("HP Lovecraft- Against The World, Against Life") is also available in quite a nice (though fairly pricey) paperback from Believer Books, with an introduction by Stephen King (so basically an extra- though much shorter- essay on HPL) as well as "The Call Of Cthulhu" and "The Whisperer In Darkness".
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
12:12 / 02.03.06
(Actually, though slightly off-topic, there's a guy at work with whom I often enjoy discussing literature- he's a big fan of Houellebecq but tends to be a bit dismissive of science fiction and horror. It was quite fun telling him that not only was Houellebecq's latest a science fiction novel, but that he'd written a lengthy essay on a pulp horror writer).
 
 
FreakWolf
13:52 / 02.03.06
I'm not sure that anyone should say that no one should read Lovecraft simply because of his views on whomever. everyone has to remember that all of his writings were done at a time when it was more acceptable to be that way. if someone were to write stories like that today it would be a different story. If one would argue that we shouldn't read them for those reasons then one could say that we shouldn't read Huck Finn since throughout the story people are using the N word as part of the name of Jim the slave. Again it was written during a different time. If anything we can read these stories and see the views and rejoice in how much times have changed.
 
 
matthew.
14:00 / 02.03.06
Once again, I repeat, nobody ever said banning or burning. It's not like Lovecraft is the only person to come up with racist/classist/sexist views in his fiction. There are plenty of authors out there who were simply "products" of their time.

And perhaps less weighty of an issue: I guess most people don't have a problem with the fact that Lovecraft isn't scary at all? That he's sometimes boring? He's far too wordy?
 
 
matthew.
14:03 / 02.03.06
I'm sorry, my first point needs to be fleshed out a little. I was saying that there are plenty of authors who are "products" of their time. I chose to discuss Lovecraft because he's extremely influential to Internet culture. Many people have usernames (not on Barbelith) that reference Lovecraft and/or Cthulu Mythos. Also, most horror fiction today will have (not so)subtle allusions to the man.

I want to speak of Lovecraft because of his immense popularity still today. In the previous example of Mark Twain, I ask this, who's reading Mark Twain outside of school anymore? Lovecraft is read far more than Mark Twain among users of the Internet (who use words like "the dark abyss of my haunted soul" to talk about having to clean their room)
 
 
This Sunday
14:28 / 02.03.06
Reading Lovecraft and trying to remove the work from his personal xenophobia and paranoia is like reading Ambrose Bierce and insisting Ol' Gringo was probaby a really happy, pleasant person who thought everything was splendid.
To be fair, the racism and general maintained-ignorance and paranoia seemed to dwindle as he aged, so those who're bothered by a writer's personal issues can feel better about reading his later works than his earliest. Or something.
I read Lovecraft for horrified fascination, not so I can agree with his characters or develop a mode for living general life. I would hope that's the attraction for most of his audience.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
16:27 / 02.03.06
I've read tons of HPL over the years - can't say I was attracted to his writing style (I mean, how many times can one author use the word "cyclopean?")

describing the indescribable as "unnamable" is a bit weak.

and I don't think he'd fully flushed out the relationships of the creatures in his mythos, which opens up the doors for anyone who wishes to develop them further - an open source fiction world (too bad Gene Roddenbury didn't release the reins).

there are almost no female characters in his books, except the occasional spouse, witch, or librarian, and the tales of familial degeneracy abound (Shadow over Innsmouth, and The Lurking Fear are two very clear examples).

it doesn't take away from his inversion of our universe.

the gods are indifferent to us, if they even know we exist. All of our hubris is for naught. Our greatest accomplisments are only short-sighted distraction, and the greatest horror is enlightenment.

what I always wondered, coming from a man who struggled with the demons of his dying family line, his domineering mother, his short-lived marriage, and notions of racist/sexist superiority, what enlightenment he most feared.

--not jack

ps I'm writing stories in the Lovecraft world, and have taken each of his unnamed narrators (not all, but a few), and made them into fully-fledged female characters.
 
 
Withiel: DALI'S ROTTWEILER
19:34 / 02.03.06
One thing that might want to be taken into consideration when discussing Lovecraft's racism is that in stories like "The Rats in the Walls", you have the aristocratic-as-can-be protagonist degenerating into a cannibalistic frenzy precisely because of this heritage. It could be read that at a very basic level, everyone is a savage servant of the Old Ones. Or so I'd like to think. Does anyone have a link to any of Lovecraft's letters in which he expresses particularly racist views in his "own" voice, by any chance? I'd be interested to find out whether he was in fact unusually racist for his time - the fact that his cat was called "N*gg*er-man" doesn't tell us much, considering that I've heard several stories from my (British Military) father and uncles about senior officers with black labradors called "S*mbo"*, and this is up to thirty years beforehand... Not that I particularly want to excuse Lovecraft's racism - it's just that if it is merely that displayed by the vast majority of the white "educated" population at the time, then it can at least be filtered out: if HPL can be proved to be, I don't know, hyperbolically racist, then reading him for pleasure is a little more of a dubious activity.

I personally read Lovecraft because his work's got this wonderful sense of a wider context in which everything occurs, and when you factor in the Dream Cycle (which is my favourite bit) it's rich and strange and innovative and compelling. Also, it rips off Dunsany, so I can't complain.



*I feel really fucking uncomfortable typing this out in full - PM me if you're unaware of the etymology.
 
 
This Sunday
19:41 / 02.03.06
There's a book reprinting some of his letters to Howard and other writers, demonstrating at least an innate paranoia about the dirty, filthy infiltrations of the Asian Menace into our (and our, of course, always reads and decent, upstanding white) society. And something about black folk coming from eggs. Like lizard, external-of-the-body kinda eggs.
Then, there's theories that his own lineage may not have been entirely anglo, and that's where his aunts vicious doctrine he was brought up with came from. A sort of self-loathing to some degree. This may be pop psychology at best, though, as I am unaware of any factual basis. Not that I'm aware of factual basis in the other direction, either.
 
 
iconoplast
21:41 / 02.03.06
Not that I'm aware of factual basis in the other direction, either.

It's true. Black people don't actually hatch from lizard eggs.
 
 
Mistoffelees
22:01 / 02.03.06
One thing that might want to be taken into consideration when discussing Lovecraft's racism is that in stories like "The Rats in the Walls", you have the aristocratic-as-can-be protagonist degenerating into a cannibalistic frenzy precisely because of this heritage. It could be read that at a very basic level, everyone is a savage servant of the Old Ones.

That´s what I was thinking, too, as I read this thread. Exactly the same happens in The Shadow Over Innsmouth. The protagonist in the end devolves into a fishman and returns to his ancestors in the sea. There´s only one instance, though, where one could think, the protagonist might be racist:
When he hears his pursuers, he says [paraphrasing]:"They were jabbering in a perverse tongue, that surely wasn´t English." As if a language is weird by default, if the protagonist does not understand it.

I like to read Lovecraft, not because he´s "scary". But because he conjures a mood. What I like best, is when the protagonist finally understands, that he´s confronted with something, that´s beyond his understanding, that´s so old, alien and superior, that humanity is only a page in a big book written by someone else.

For example, the story, where the protagonist finds texts written in his own handwriting in the ruins of an alien city in Antarctica. I could so well imagine his utter shock, when he realized, all those nightmares he had, weren´t nightmares at all, but his own memories.

That´s probably, why Lovecraft´s stories can be so powerful: He was using his limited writing abilities to get to grips with his horrible nightmares, that were haunting him since early childhood.
 
 
Axolotl
22:12 / 02.03.06
I can't remember the title of the story in question, but it takes place in Red Hook NY, and iirc it has some pretty blatant racism in there. "The Haunter in the Dark" has some fairly retrograde views about the superstitious nature of the non-WASP immigrants in the story. However since they were correct in their fear of the church and the horror it contains you could argue it's not as simplistic as all that (it's not necessarily a correct argument but it could be made).
However the exact extent of Lovecraft's racism I would argue can be divorced to a certain extent from the artistic merit of his work due to it's antiquity. I always think the style of Lovecraft's writing is an essential part of the effect it had; if it was more technically gifted I feel that it wouldn't have quite the same effect.
 
 
Evil Scientist
09:58 / 03.03.06
I hadn't realised HPL actually did believe that black people laid eggs, the only time I've seen that mentioned was in Planetary. Although, to be honest, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Part of what I enjoy so much about HPL's stories is that his protagonists xenophobia, something abhorrent to me, exagerates the ugly, twisted nature of the Cthulhu Mythos. Although Lovecraft probably didn't intend it that way, his narrators often come off as being, in some ways, worse than the unknowable horrors they encounter.

Herbert West: Reanimator has one of the strongest examples of this. The narrator seems to implicate the title character as being the one responsible for the atrocities committed, ignoring his own submissive compliance with West's experiments and subsequent cover-ups. After reading the narrator's description of a black slave's arms as "forelegs" I was hoping he'd end up on the recieving end of some sweet zombie justice.
 
 
rizla mission
10:51 / 03.03.06
My take on Lovecraft as regards the relationship between his work and his apparent personal opinions essentially goes as follows;

All available biographical material creates the impression of HPL being essentially the definitive example of a terminally uptight, repressed white, middle-class Victorian male, and one who took his inbuilt terror of 'The Other' - as represented not only by women, foreigners and non-aryan people of pretty much all kinds, but also by uneducated and poor people, urban living, modernity in general, and any philosophical viewpoint that strayed beyond the bounds of Western rational materialism* - to an absolute extreme.

So yes, he was a racist - read a story like the aforementioned 'The Horror at Red Hook' in which the protagonist fantasises about the virtue of killing two “chattering jews” he sees on a sub-way train and any other conclusion is undeniable ; at some points, especially in that particular story, the fear he expresses toward 'foreigners', 'immigrants', 'mulattos' etc. is positively hysterical. You’ll recall the elderly professor in ‘The Call of Cthulhu’ who drops dead of fright after being “jostled by negroes”. His terror of women is also palpable in the few instances in his work in which they actually appear.

So basically, deal with that or go find some more ideologically acceptable authors to read. Personally, It makes perfect sense to me that the man beyond such deranged literary conceptions should be a somewhat disagreeable character with whose views I would not necessarily seek to agree.

Because I think one of the keys to understanding Lovecraft is that he was basically OBSESSED with forcibly shutting out and dismissing anything that he didn't recognise in himself or his extremely insular and old fashioned (even in the 1920s) view of the world.

He hated all of the above not through any personal grudge or fascistic ideology, but just because he hated and feared MOST THINGS that he considered outside of himself.

But then..... when he closes his eyes to go to sleep at night, or sets pen to paper to come up with a story, well just take a look at what comes howling out of the void as soon as he lets his guard down!

One of the reasons Lovecraft’s work remains so powerful compared to that of other horror hacks is that, even at their most fantastical, his stories always give the impression of being intensely personal, relating back constantly to people, places and ideas that were part of his life with a real honesty of feeling. Despite the emotionless façade of his prose, you can always feel the desperate loneliness and fear / fascination with the outside world working just below the surface, eventually exploding into screaming Old One related mania as if he can’t help but plunge himself headfirst into all the stuff he’s locked out of his life, before withdrawing again in pain and self-disgust as his unlucky characters are left with a bullet in their brain or gibbering in the asylum.

We are after all talking here about a guy who came back to Providence after his short, extremely unhappy period of marriage in New York and came up with ‘The Horror at Red Hook’, a story in which a policeman convalescing in the countryside recalls the circumstances that sent him over the edge – a nightmare of nerve-rattling urban claustrophobia full of overcrowded tenements stuffed with horrifying, ratlike immigrants setting up basement churches to their barbaric pagan gods, culminating in a honeymooning couple being slaughtered by, or to, a host of demons presided over by some kind of vicious feminine entity identified only as ‘Lilith’.

It’s one of the most teeth-grindingly demented, almost psychedelically intense, pieces of writing in the whole Lovecraft canon, and gives a shocking insight into how thoroughly disturbed Lovecraft’s view of the world actually was. The irony is, you can almost hear HPL, if asked about it, deadpanning “why, it is nothing but a piece of imaginative fiction – to try and connect it to real life would be absurd and distasteful in the extreme”, and then retiring to sweat through another sleepless night. Deny, deny, deny seems to have been his mantra throughout life, but his writing gives it all away.

But whilst viewing the horrors in Lovecraft’s stories as externalised manifestations of his sexual / social / racial hang-ups is a fairly important notion, I also think it’s fair to say that this is only really half of the equation. Disagree should you wish, but I definitely feel that Lovecraft’s work conveys an essential motherlode of mystical, visionary, or indeed ‘cosmic’, imagery and ideas which is utterly extraordinary – the early prose-poems he wrote based directly on his dreams, and later incorporated into his longer stories, are startlingly powerful and unprecedented. Whatever explanations you may wish to apply to such things, it seems to me that, whether he liked or not (and I think it’s evident he didn’t), HPL was hooked up to the source of religious visions, mystical revelations and whatever else.

Only, as befits the stubborn personality I’ve outlined above, Lovecraft seems to have spent his life fighting this strange inspiration for all he was worth, fearing rather than embracing it, and filtering it through his own prejudices and dysfunctions until the strange power that could otherwise have sparked into the fire of a prophet or visionary or great artist became twisted, damaged and denied by his arch-repressive persona until it mutated into a mass of unspeakably bad energy, and Dread Cthulhu emerged unheeded from his troubled sub-conscious.... and that I think is the kernel of where his genius and abiding power lies.

-------------------------------------------------------

*Yes, despite his position as a demagogue of crazed esoteric horror, Lovecraft in real life was utterly dismissive of any religious, mystical or supernatural ideas throughout his life..... in public, at least.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
17:37 / 03.03.06
nice post rizla...

yeah, Lovecraft wasn't a big fan of relativity - I think the end of Newtonian physics was shaking HPL's world.

he often stated an admiration of New England's "salt of the earth."

his most vocal (well, written) criticism of the urban occurred in the fragment entitled simply He in which he rants against New York City, where he was living, married, and woefully unhappy (which explains his subsequent divorce and return to Providence).

in the Lurking Fear he refers often to the degenerate squatters in the Apallachians, living in the shadow of the degenerate Martense family's mansion.

degeneracy, in the case of the squatters, is living simply, close to the land, and in ignorance of honour, I suppose. The Martense degeneracy was one against the flow of evolution - they had devolved into ape-like beasts.

and lo, did he ever celebrate the discovery of Pluto - which he had already named Yuggoth before its discovery -

this may very well have been the rising of R'lyeh for dear old HPL. He goes on about it in whisperer in darkness.

maybe he's the 20th Century's most insightful prophet. He is an appropriate spokesperson for the horrors of the United States during the 20th century.

--not jack
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
20:19 / 03.03.06
GodDAMN, I read most of the thread, start composing a post in my head, then find out Rizla's said pretty much everything I was going to... DAMN YOU, RIZ!!! (shakes scary fist)

The only thing I have left to take issue with is I guess most people don't have a problem with the fact that Lovecraft isn't scary at all? Maybe I'm a big wuss, but The Rats In The Walls, as well as Dreams In The Witch House rank up there for me as some of the scariest fiction of all time (For comparison, Gilman's The Yellow Wallpaper and Jackson's The Haunting Of Hill House freak the piss out of me every time). They may not have frightened me when I first read them, but they're two of the stories that still resonate in my nightmares to this day.
 
 
Digital Hermes
21:17 / 03.03.06
Interesting how this thread has progressed from a does anyone read Lovecraft to should anyone read Lovecraft. A couple of people have suggested that if his racism was a driving theme in his work, it would make it morally dubious to be reading him.

Are you kidding me?

I can enjoy a writer's work, if it's strong enough, or fun enought, without having to subscribe to his or her prejudices. I loved Ender's Game, but probably wouldn't stand Orson Scott Card.

Anyway. The other thing I've read a couple times is that HPL isn't scary. Well, it's often not nail-biting terror, but 'The Rats in the Walls' is possibly the only horror story that's actually unsettled me. His visions of weird alien-gods that to preceive them floods you with an esoteric worldview enough to drive you mad? Again, it's not exactly thriller fare, but I would class it as intellectual terror: what would happen to your mind if you perceived a world far beyond it?
 
 
lekvar
02:53 / 04.03.06
I read HP Lovecraft.
When I first read his work, I thought it was a bit boring as I was used to the more visceral horror of Stephen King and Clive Barker, but after reading some of his works and going back to King, Barker, Koontz, etc. I realized that in a lot of ways they were just aping themes that Lovecraft had already explored. I went back and read Lovecraft with a different perspective, trying to read them as if I were the audience for which they had originally been written, with an eye for the language used, and I enjoyed it immensely.

As rizla mentions, there is a scope to Lovecraft's stories that few other writers have been able to capture. He invokes cosmic scales and eternities where other writers say "it was big and old." Juxtaposed against this backdrop of Srtange Aeons is a claustrophobic, paranoid tale of a small protagonist who struggles to explain something bigger than the human mind can contain, like an ant trying to describe Scotland.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

But then I also enjoy reading Mark Twain outside of school.
 
 
matthew.
02:54 / 04.03.06
Stoat: I meant not thrilling or perhaps suspenseful. When I think of HPL, I think of academia and scientists, not young beautiful teenagers running from an unseen killer. Not that I'm making a qualitative statement here. I'm just espousing my associations.

I've never said anybody should or should not read HPL based on his personal views. I just wanted to know in a general sense.
 
 
eddie thirteen
06:58 / 05.03.06
Without putting any words in Rizla's mouth, I agree that Lovecraft's whacked-out fear of "the other" (which also pretty clearly extended to women) is both the driving force in his fiction and what gives it most of its power. This is not to excuse Lovecraft's racism or sexism (or at least gynophobia), but it is to say that I'm not so sure you can have one without the other (or "the other," to get all, you know, cute). The worldview in Lovecraft's stories could not, I think, have been produced by anyone who was not a paranoid shut-in with a dread of humanity and a deep sense of the world as terrifyingly random, chaotic and brutal (which isn't to say that such circumstances would themselves invariably produce a Lovecraft -- the same description as above could without much work also apply to Emily Dickenson). I think what people respond to in Lovecraft is that worldview; the difference being that most of us sometimes feel that way, whereas HPL did as a matter of course.
 
 
eddie thirteen
07:02 / 05.03.06
And to clarify (because I realized after I posted that I'd backspaced over this part), it seems to me that Lovecraft's unlovely tendencies toward racism and sexism are symptomatic of his overall illness, and it's the illness (not the symptoms) that the reader responds to, because strains of the illness (but not necessarily the -isms) exist in everyone.
 
 
GogMickGog
11:29 / 05.03.06
Wonderfully, sensitively put Mr. Thirteen-

It would be an absurd bit of p.c. self-censoring to pretend that we are not all succeptible to at least a smidgeon of Mr. Lovecraft's fears.
 
 
Triumvir
14:14 / 05.03.06
What I think we are all forgetting here is the time peroid that Mr. Lovecraft lived in. HP Lovecraft was not a pc, sensitive, 21st century guy. He was an early 1900's WASP. We need to realize that his racism, sexism, classism, etc were all widely accepted in his time, and that they were nothing unusual. Now of course, somebody could just point to an example of a writer who was a contemporary, or even a predecessor of Lovecraft who didn't display his prejudices. However, those writers were few and far between. Lovecraft was a horror writer, not an agent of social change, and we need to realize that and try to appreciate him for what he is, rather than attempting to discredit him for what he is not.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
19:35 / 05.03.06
don't think anyone was trying to discredit him...

except as being too wordy, and maybe not all that scary.

--not jack
 
 
rizla mission
09:08 / 06.03.06
Apologies for stealing your thunder Stoatie - trying to get to the bottom of Lovecraft and what made him tick is endlessly fascinating though, so it would be good to read your take on things, even if it does repeat some ideas already raised in this thread..

Anyway; a somewhat shorter post than my previous one;

And perhaps less weighty of an issue: I guess most people don't have a problem with the fact that Lovecraft isn't scary at all? That he's sometimes boring? He's far too wordy?

Well if you're looking something thrilling and easy to read with lots of "BOO!" moments, I'm sure the horror section of your local library can provide.

Lovecraft was fully aware that the aim of his writing was to provoke a somewhat different and deeper variety of 'horror', and applying such expectations to him seems rather akin to complaining that William Burroughs doesn't make any bloody sense or that Philip K Dick doesn't write enough about rocket engines.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
04:01 / 07.03.06
and if you think HP Lovecraft's got some "interesting" opinions on matters of race, sex and class, have you read Edgar Rice Burroughs?

--not jack
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply