Hi all,

Right now I'm in the process of (re)reading
some Smith's shorts (thanks to Hilger, Connors
and Nightshade Books for the WONDERFUL editions!!).
Stories like A Night in Malnéant, End of the Story
and Abominations of Yondo are eternal favorites of mine;
among the "new" ones, the lovecraftean The Devotee of Evil
is excellent; The Satyr has wonderful descriptive passages
but is a comparatively minor Averoigne tale (I know I am in
minority here but I think that Averoigne cycle has
some of his better writing);The Ressurection of the Rattlesnake,
although fun and well written, didn't do much for me.
I'm curious. What are your least favorite cycle
stories (Averoigne tales, Zothique etc.)?
What do you consider the worst non-series stories("pure
horror", SF, visionary fantasy etc.)?
What are your favourite non-series and cycle stories?

Thanks in advance!
Ramon

hi, oderus! I must tell you, that I have no "least favorites" - there are some I like better than others - but there are none that do not reward me on re-reading -
There are few authors whose works, for some reason, remain so memorable, that I keep coming back to again and again, and am never bored - there are thousands whose books are, at the best, good for one read - for instance, I enjoy Fr. Greeley's "Bishop Blacky" cycle, but there is in depth that would call you back for a re-exploration - on the other hand, "Seven Pillars of Wisdom, as an example, is inexhaustible. One of the joys of my life has been having the time to re-read many of the books, both fiction and scholarly that were assigned in 17 years of University classes and really have time to study them instead of grabbing the necessary quotes to support a term paper thesis, and then never going near them again. But again, they rarely have the pull to get me back into them unless it is for a technical reference - Robert Graves works are another that cannot be exhausted - the scholarship in his novels is simply immense - also,a major factor in all of this is our own aging and maturing - as you and I grow, experience, learn, so we find many books that we loved when very young, no longer have the same sense of wonder and mystery and excitement that intrigued us, and books that were beyond us (though we might not have suspected it at the time) have become storehouses of wisdom that we seek again and again. The works of CAS yet some other mysterious quality that just sets the hook, and draws you back -- I find that some scene will just pop unbidden into my head, and call me back, and has done so now for the entirety of the 56 years since I met and became best friends with Clark -

I'm sure I'm fairly typical in loving CAS's Zothique stories best. For me they contain his most evocative work, but obviously, his other fantasy settings also contain some very strong work too. Of his one-offs I prefer his prose-poetry such as Abominations of Yondo. I have to confess that I find his SF fairly hackneyed and his contemporary horror is strangely pedestrian and unoriginal: lacking the weirdness of his fantasies or even of Lovecraft's minor work.

Favorite series: Zothique

Least favorite series: Averoigne

Least favorite tale, non-series: "The Phantoms of the Fire"


As much as I enjoy the fantasy tales laid in "worlds of otherwhere", I also enjoy the non-series horror, such as "The Hunters from Beyond", "The Devotee of Evil", and especially "Genius Loci". I find them to be no less original than CAS's other tales, and I enjoy an occasional break from the incessant "thees" and "thous". The strictures of lack of originality apply far more to the Averoigne series, so far as I am concerned. De gustibus, though....


P.S. "Nightshade Books for the WONDERFUL editions".... I hate to be negative, but let's wait until Martinus makes his errata lists available before we over-praise the Night Shade editions as being too wonderful. I haven't yet read them all, but, if the following disaster from the biography of Scott Connors in "About the Editors" in the first volume is any indication, then this series, alas, is not likely to be a great improvement over prior editions in terms of textual corruption:

"He also write regularly reviews books for Publisher's Weekly and Weird Tales". (The End of the Story, following p. 284)

I have always particularly liked the Atlantean cycle of stories, "The Last Incantation", "Double Shadow", and "The Death of Malygris". Everybody of course likes the Zothique stories, don't they?

> P.S. "Nightshade Books for the WONDERFUL editions".... I hate to be negative, but let's wait until Martinus makes his errata lists available before we over-praise the Night Shade editions as
> being too wonderful. I haven't yet read them all, but, if the following disaster from the biography of Scott Connors in "About the Editors" in the first volume is any indication, then this
> series, alas, is not likely to be a great improvement over prior editions in terms of textual corruption:

Isn't that awfully negative? A few (or more) typos in a first printing shouldn't be a big deal. It's much more important that the tales have been carefully restored to not perpetuate the pulp magazine corruptions.

- JMR

Quote:

Isn't that awfully negative? A few (or more) typos in a first printing shouldn't be a big deal. It's much more important that the tales have been carefully restored to not perpetuate the pulp magazine corruptions.

No, it is not "awfully negative", in my opinion. I think that it is no less important to have impeccable texts; that is, or should be, the point of the entire endeavor.

I should add that the books are not exactly inexpensive, and I don't think it unreasonable to expect the highest standard of editing and proofreading. I mean, good grief, did you actually read the excerpt that I quoted?!? If something like that passed unnoticed and uncorrected, then I can only fear for what may have happened with some of the texts of the stories themselves. I realize, of course, that that may have been an isolated case, and that the stories themselves may be mostly correct, but I doubt it (Indeed, some errors have already been spotted and posted elsewhere in this forum, I believe).

Anyway, I am not going to argue the matter. If you think that what counts most is a simple textual restoration, then you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Quote:

A few (or more) typos in a first printing [...]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I missed this the first time. The error that I quoted also occurs in the second printing of The End of the Story.