Radovarl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sad to see nothing around here ever changes...


It is part of Life. You take the bad with the good. Live and let live. I don't think you will find a forum anywhere completely free from quarrels. You can choose to stay away from the discussion if you find it unpleasant, and contribute with something positive of your own in another thread.

A question to those howling "conspiracy theorist": What about "The Churchyard Yew, by Sheridan Le Fanu"? Is that genuine? Or do you concede that it was actually written by Mr. Derleth?

If you concede "The Churchyard Yew", is NOT a genuine Le Fanu, then what is your argument here? Funny coincidence that the manuscript just happened to end up in the hands of August Derleth, a known fraudster, so he could publish it four years after Bessie's death. Were he and Lissie next door neighbors of something? No?

Why is the burden of proof on me? Ever heard the expression "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me?"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18 Mar 19 | 11:45AM by Platypus.

I'm still waiting for Mr. Anderson to provide the exact quote from Hodgson's log where Hodgson reports having tried to sell this story in 1917. Obviously the precise words will make a huge difference in terms of whether it can be identified as the same story or not.

Tic toc tic toc tic toc.

I'm still waiting for Mr. Anderson to provide the quote from collector H.C. Koenig (died 1959), where H.C. Koenig explains how he came by the manuscript, and confirms that he gave it to Derleth.

Tic toc tic toc tic toc.

I'm still waiting for Mr. Anderson to provide the quote from the author's sister Lissie, where she confirms that she gave the manuscript to H. Koenig, and otherwise confirms that it is a genuine Hodgson work.

Tic toc tic toc tic toc.

I'm still waiting for Mr. Anderson to explain how he knew, when he held the manuscript in his hands, that it was by Hodgson. Was it the psychic emanations? Or was it because Derleth wrote "by William Hope Hodgson" on the byline of the original manuscript? Something else?

Tic toc tic toc tic toc.

I'd also like Mr. Anderson to make a full disclosure of his interest in this matter, and/or his connection with those who may have an interest in this matter.

Tic toc tic toc tic toc.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 18 Mar 19 | 12:55PM by Platypus.

Yes, I'm reminded why most people have fled this forum. My time to depart has come too. No time to waste on uninformed trolls.

Douglas A. Anderson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, I'm reminded why most people have fled this
> forum. My time to depart has come too. No time
> to waste on uninformed trolls.


LOL. You just showed up to shut down the discussion. I guess someone's gotta protect the reputation of the intellectual property.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18 Mar 19 | 07:34PM by Platypus.

I managed to look at "The Crew of the Lancing" (1964), which first appeared in the Derleth-edited, Arkham House published anthology OVER THE EDGE (1964).

It is basically a rewritten version of "Demons of the Sea" (1923). It is pretty much the same story, but with much of the haunting atmosphere sabotaged by a punchier, more abbreviated style. There is scarcely a sentence or a paragraph that is not rewritten or revised. The name of the Glasgow ghost ship has been changed from "Scottish Heath" to "Lancing".

So pick your explanation. Either the resourceful Mr. Derleth managed to come across yet another lost Hodgson manuscript, containing Hodgson's alternate but equally genuine version of the story. Or he just rewrote (and newly copyrighted) the story.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 18 Mar 19 | 08:00PM by Platypus.

Douglas A. Anderson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, I'm reminded why most people have fled this
> forum. My time to depart has come too. No time
> to waste on uninformed trolls.


I can only repeat myself from my post above: Ignore the trolls. Continue to educate the uneducated. Write something interesting, and it will attract other spirited posters. How can this be expected to become a good forum/information center for CAS studies, if every intelligent authority turn their backs on it? This is Boyd Pearson's fine creation; it is him you are punishing, and those who are interested in hearing what you have got to say, not the trolls. This is a great discussion forum. But only as great as those willing to participate. I am sure Dr. Farmer would not have refrained from posting just because there are some trolls thrashing about every now and then. Because he had so much to say, and thus stimulated others. Don't blame your own lack of participation on others. One also needs to learn tolerate hearing different opinions, perspectives, and behavior from ones own. Some of you may regard me a troll because some of my standpoints; if so, I really don't care, because I am comfortable in myself and my views. I try to behave civilized. If someone behaves rudely, flares up, behaves childish ... so what?! Ignore it. Continue with your own thing. There are others who will appreciate it. Don't let them down. Sharing nurtures sharing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18 Mar 19 | 08:20PM by Knygatin.

I love how this thread lay dormant for a week before I started to contribute. Now all of a sudden, I'm to blame for driving everyone away.

Kyberean, I think you need to come back here and set things straight. And we could discuss de la Mare!

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kyberean, I think you need to come back here and
> set things straight. And we could discuss de la
> Mare!

Does Kyberean have proof that Hodgson wrote "The Hog"? Or will he merely punish me for not believing?

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does Kyberean have proof that Hodgson wrote "The
> Hog"? Or will he merely punish me for not
> believing?

No, I don't know if he would enter the discussion of "The Hog". But he was rather robust, and accepted that discussions sometimes get upset, he didn't much mind ... he continued pushing his own cause with authority.

This is an excerpt from "The Collected Fiction of William Hope Hodgson: House on Borderland & Other Mysterious Places".

Carnacki, the Ghost-Finder arose out of Hodgson's desire to build a reliable market for his short fiction. A popular series character all but guaranteed regular sales to the magazine markets. Carnacki is at once an example of his pursuit of commercial markets, and at the same time, and an indication of his fascination with the fantastic. This fusion of popular formula
and personal fixation resulted in one of the most enduring figures of the ghost breaker/psychic detective genre. It is also another great example of the duality that inhabits his work—a detective... of the supernatural.
"The Gateway Monster," "The House Among the Laurels," "The Whistling Room," "The Horse of the Invisible," and "The Searcher of the End House" were published in The idler in 1910, from January through May. "The Thing Invisible" had been scheduled to appear in the June issue, but was not published until January 1912, in The New Magazine. It would be the last Carnacki story to see publication during Hodgson's lifetime.
Several of these stories were slightly re-written for their 1913 republication in the Eveleigh Nash book entitled Carnacki The Ghost-Finder. In addition to rewriting them, Hodgson also reworked the order in which they were presented. In 1910, for copyright reasons, an abridged edition was published in the US. This edition was titled Carnacki, The Ghost Finder, and a Poem. It featured events of the Carnacki stories as part of a single narrative. It is an interesting and effective enough variant that it will be reprinted in the fifth volume of this series.
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. "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. However, noted Hodgson scholar Sam Moskowitz confirmed the existence of the manuscript for "The Find" and has noted that Derleth changed "virtually nothing." Moskowitz also found several notes from Hodgson's letters that refer to the submission of a story called "The Hog." Without a doubt, these two stories were revised and edited by Derleth, but at their core, they are Hodgson's work. 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.

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. :-)
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. 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 ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 20 Mar 19 | 04:28AM by Minicthulhu.

I have not read any of the Carnacki stories. (Only have a voice-recording of "The Hog", but have not listened to it yet.) I never bothered with them, because others said they were detective or adventure yarns with some supernatural touches not up to the quality of his other more famous work. I am not a completist (only for a very few writers, including Lovecraft and Smith), ... I have too much else to read, and time is not enough.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have not read any of the Carnacki stories. (Only
> have a voice-recording of "The Hog", but have not
> listened to it yet.) I never bothered with them,
> because others said they were detective or
> adventure yarns with some supernatural touches not
> up to the quality of his other more famous work.

The Carnacki stories are horror-fiction, for the most part, but (unlike most of Hodgson's horror) deliberately written so as to undercut the horror, using Carnacki's "by Jove" schoolboy style of storytelling, as a buffer between the reader and the horror. And some of the stories have Scooby Doo endings.

If some don't like them, that is fine. And if some prefer "The Hog" to the originals, that too is fine. I just don't think "The Hog" was written by the same person as wrote the originals.

(@Minicthulhu, I'll get to your post later).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 20 Mar 19 | 12:17PM by Platypus.

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.