From
what I've read so far the book's main value for me is in Joshi's giving the
date when Lovecraft wrote each story described; this is useful in getting a
sense of the development of his career, and the point at which specific ideas
entered (this latter point being the main reason I'm reading the book). Joshi's
judgments of the stories' merit or otherwise are typically idiosyncratic. In
essence Joshi divides said stories into "the Lovecraft Mythos", of
which he approves, and "the Cthulhu Mythos", which he does not. Given
his years of working on Lovecraft, it's disconcerting that at one point he
summarizes the plot of THE DREAM-QUEST OF UNKNOWN KADATH, and gets it wrong.*
For
the sake of determining whether a story is or is not part of the Mythos, Joshi singles
out several iconic features that tend to distinguish Mythos tales, noting that
not all need be present in each story: "fictional New England
topography" (Arkham, Dunwich, Innsmouth), forbidden tomes (the
NECRONOMICON), extraterrestrial god-like entities, cosmicism, and (sometimes) a
scholarly narrator (p.16–18). I'd drop 'cosmicism' from the list but otherwise
think this is a sensible approach.
For
Joshi's critique of said stories, by Lovecraft and others, he lays down several
principles by which to judge each individual story (p.12):
"intrinsic
literary merit"
"skillful
and effective prose style"
"competence
in the execution of the plot"
"non-stereotypical
characters"
"a
. . . distinctive message about human life and the cosmos"
This
list is of particular interest because I find Lovecraft's work distinctly
lacking in just those features. I enjoy reading Lovecraft's stories the same
way I've come to enjoy Godzilla movies, but don't think either transcends the
category of pulp fiction. Joshi, however, sees a literariness that doesn't
register for me. So reading his book I do get to see HPL's work through his
eyes, albeit somewhat skeptically. We'll
see if he wins me over as I continue to make my way through the book.
--John
R.
--Little
Rock Clinton international airport.
*Joshi
writers "Randolph Carter seeks to confront Nyarlathotep and demand the
return of the 'sunset city' of his dreams" (p.44). In fact during his quest to find "the
mild gods of earth" Carter takes great pains to avoid the Other Gods in
general and Nyarlathotep in particular, correctly guessing that this would
spell disaster.
5 comments:
Updated last year under the title The Rise, Fall, and Rise of the Cthulhu Mythos.
It is fascinating the way Lovecraft's work was pushed so heavily by Derleth, colored by Derleth's agenda, and now Joshi pushes it while pushing his own agenda, and the agendas are somewhat opposite of each other. Lovecraft is a sort of literary tabula rosa, reflecting to the reader what he or she most wants to find.
Hi Magister
Thanks for the update.
A little online jiggery pokery suggests that for the new edition Joshi added a ten page section refuting someone who's disagreed with some of the original book and had come to Derleth's defense. There's also apparently an added final chapter that covers newer releases in the Mythos that had come out since the first book's completion. All in all, I think reading just this edition shd do it for me.
Oh, by the way, check out the new arrival (see my next post)
--JDR
Hi Paul
I take your point, but think that attempts to absorb and re-direct Lovecraft haven't been that successful because his work isn't in fact a tabula rosa but has a highly distinctive flavor all its own, much harder to emulate that it at first seems. The same is true of C. A. Smith and (a good way down the literary scale) Rbt Howard. I think Joshi's sincere and sustained efforts to have Lovecraft seen primarily as a great thinker hasn't taken any more than Derleth's Xianization did.
I wonder who the next person or group to seize upon, and attempt to claim to be the proper interpreter/spokesman for, HPL will be.
--John R.
Very true, especially the Lovecraft is harder to imitate than many think. :) I find it interesting that you rate CA Smith higher then Howard. I only recently read his work in a serious way, prior to this I just read some of the Averoigne tales due to Castle Amber, and the Maal Dweb tales because of his old Giants in the Earth entry. But starting last fall I listened to the _Collected Fantasies of Clark Ashton Smith_ and I was pretty blown away by his tales. Some of them were very repetitive but overall I just loved them.
I'm not sure I rate him more highly than Howard, however. I think they were fairly even, though Howard has a more pulp, magazine style - CAS seems far more esoteric.
I wonder if Joshi sees Lovecraft as a sort of anti-CS Lewis?
Post a Comment