Re: W.H.Hodgson
Posted by:
Platypus (IP Logged)
Date: 20 March, 2019 07:33PM
Minicthulhu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is an excerpt from "The Collected Fiction of
> William Hope Hodgson: House on Borderland & Other
> Mysterious Places".
You might as well identify the author: Jeremy Lassen. I'm not sure why his words have any particular authority.
[snipping a bunch of stuff that is not really in dispute]
> The final three Carnacki stories were not
> published until after Hodgson's death. "The
> Haunted jarvee" was revised by Hodgson's wife at
> the request of the editor of The Premier Magazine
> in 1919, and it eventually saw publication ten
> years later in the March 1929 issue. It was
> further (but only slightly) revised by August
> Derleth for its publication in the 1947 Mycroft &
> Moran edition of Carnacki the Ghost-Finder.
This is not really in dispute either. I never expressed an opinion on "The Haunted Jarvee".
> "The
> Hog" was published for the first time (via
> Derleth's efforts) in the January 1947 issue of
> Weird Tales, and was subsequently reprinted in the
> Mycroft & Moran edition, which also featured the
> previously unpublished story "The Find."
> It has been suggested that these last two stories
> might have been fabricated by Mycroft &
> Moran/Arkham House publisher August Derleth.
And that remains the most likely explanation. Thanks to "The Churchyard Yew", we know Derleth was a literary forger, and these 2 pieces appeared in the same year that he created "The Churchyard Yew". But nobody connected the "The Churchard Yew" or "The Find" or "The Hog" to Derelth, until the 1975 copyright renewals.
> However, noted Hodgson scholar Sam Moskowitz
> confirmed the existence of the manuscript for "The
> Find" and has noted that Derleth changed
> "virtually nothing."
I can well believe that Derleth changed virtually nothing. After all, Derleth probably prepared the manuscript. Why would he need to change it, if he wrote it?
Okay. Maybe Moskowitz means more than this. Maybe. But Moskowitz has been dead for 20+ years. Why are we relying on some loose paraphrase of something he may have said years ago, when alive. If you are going to rely on a dead man's testimony, can you at least quote him directly, so that I can see the context?
Also, I love the ridiculous puffery in Lassen calling Sam Moskowitz a "noted Hodgson scholar". Sam was an anthologist and editor. Back when he was alive, he did more or less the same job that Lassen is doing now, and Derleth was doing before him. He was a salesman, selling stuff to the public, compiling and/or editing anthologies and writing introductions for them, recommending their contents to the public. I have no reason to believe he wasn't an honest salesman and decent guy. But still, he was not exactly in a position to do an independent investigation of the dubious claims of the Derleth Estate. It would be closer to the truth to say he was working for them.
And meanwhile, Derleth's heirs still have this "original manuscript". If it is really genuine, they could arrange for a much better proof than some quote puffery with dead witnesses who are in no position to complain. Why don't they? They've been under suspicion for 43 years, ever since the 1975 copyright renewals revealed there was something rotten in Denmark. I know you don't like my "tic toc tic toc". But seriously, man, there's a point to that. What the hell are they waiting for? Reading between the lines, I would say that the proof just isn't there, and that this "original manuscript", if fairly examined, would collapse their case.
> Moskowitz also found several
> notes from Hodgson's letters that refer to the
> submission of a story called "The Hog."
Did he really?
Maybe he did. But if Hodgson wrote a story called "the Hog" in 1917, it was probably a war story.
But I'm still waiting for this alleged quote from his letters that allegedly proves that Hodgson referred to this story in his letters. Again, his exact words are important.
Why are we playing telephone here? Lassen says that Mostkowitz says that Hodgson said something in his letters?
> Without a
> doubt, these two stories were revised and edited
> by Derleth, but at their core, they are Hodgson's
> work.
Of course! At its core "The Find" is "The Dumpley Acrostics". And at it's core, "The Hog" is "The Swine Things from The House on the Borderland meet Carnacki in The Gateway of the Monster." Nobody denies that!
> The editorial changes make them stand out
> from the earlier Carnacki stories, but they are an
> artifact of their time- edited and published
> posthumously due to Hodgson's inability to find a
> venue for their publication during his lifetime.
This almost sounds like Lassen's admission that the story is NOT genuine. Lassen sounds here like he is trying to justify the unjustifiable. If a story is not the product of Hodgson's time, then it is no longer genuinely the work of Hodgson. A Hodgson homage or pastiche is not the same as an authentic Hodgson story.
And I think we now move from Lassen's comments to yours.
> Yesterday, I read the story again, after many
> years, and I must admit some things about it are
> really suspicious. Chiefly the hints of "a being
> that once ruled the world and that will come back
> one day to get it back" or "The Monster Ones"
> sound as if some Lovecraft´s disciple wrote it.
> :-)
Well "the Monstrous Ones" is an authentic Hodgson reference, taken straight from "The Gateway of the Monster". But you may have a point with the "being that once ruled the world" reference.
> On the other hand, I have no reason (and no proof,
> for that matter) to disbelieve Moskowitz lied
> about the letters about the submission of the tale
> and Hodgson´s authorship.
I agree. There is no evidence whatsoever that poor long-dead Sam Moskowitz lied to anyone about anything. I mean, I don't know the guy. He could be a liar for all I know. But I have no reason to think so. As far as I know, he has said nothing inconsistent with my belief that Hodgson did not write "The Hog".
But he may have his own opinion, for all I know. And he's entitled to it, as you are to yours.
> Judging by the limited
> information one can get, I would say it may really
> be that Hodgson wrote a story called "The Hog" but
> somebody (maybe Derleth) revised and edited it.
> Who knows …
Yeah. Maybe. Maybe. Anything is possible. But I'll stick with my original opinion on which of these is more likely. And I really don't think the Derleth estate is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 20 Mar 19 | 08:10PM by Platypus.