Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CAS was pissed off with the pulp publishers who
> demanded this kind of stuff from him. He wrote to
> Lovecraft along the lines of "I'll give them their
> eck-shun this time!!"


I remember that letter! He wrote "A Captivity in Serpens" in response to these demands for more plot and action. He must have enjoyed writing various novelties in it, like the faery-city and vampiric aliens I mentioned, but otherwise it felt like he was just churning this thing out for the money, and perhaps with an air of passive-aggressive irony on his mind. It also seems that the story I mentioned isn't even available on the Eldritch Dark!

Hespire Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CAS was pissed off with the pulp publishers who
> > demanded this kind of stuff from him. He wrote
> to
> > Lovecraft along the lines of "I'll give them
> their
> > eck-shun this time!!"
>
>
> I remember that letter! He wrote "A Captivity in
> Serpens" in response to these demands for more
> plot and action. He must have enjoyed writing
> various novelties in it, like the faery-city and
> vampiric aliens I mentioned, but otherwise it felt
> like he was just churning this thing out for the
> money, and perhaps with an air of
> passive-aggressive irony on his mind. It also
> seems that the story I mentioned isn't even
> available on the Eldritch Dark!

So I noticed. Perhaps to spare us!

Do you have any other suggestions for CAS stinkers available online?

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
> The part that resonates with me is a sort of
> perceived contradiction that is admittedly based
> on my subjective assessment of HPL's attachment to
> the worldview portrayed in most, if not all, of
> his fiction. In short, he portrays a very
> threatening physical cosmos, of which mankind, his
> small portion of the known universe is painfully,
> creepily insignificant.
>
> To the modern mind, it kinda slaps
> "exceptionalism" upside the head...so to speak.
>
> So this all appears consistent with an unexplored
> physical (material) cosmos, and to my mind
> supports the idea that he's a materialist at
> heart--as I am, so this resonates with my own
> sensibilities.

All of which, to one who is not a materialist, sounds like a complete non-sequitur. "Anti-exceptionalism" and "materialism" have little to do with each other. Seems to me that all HPL has done is resurrect the perspective of the ancient sailor on the wild ocean, or the ancient peasant tilling his precarious fields between on the border of a demon haunted forest and in the shadow of a god-haunted mountain.

Perhaps this is blasphemy to certain 18th century rationalists who, having dethroned God, were perhaps sometimes tempted to imagine that Man could claim God's throne and become gods themselves. And perhaps some strains of Christianity were sufficiently vainglorious to adopt similar perspective, and perhaps they too would have been offended by HPL's anti-exceptionalism. But I don't see how that gets us to materialism. Not even close.

> But he so consistently injects his idea of the
> expanded cosmos, the one that we have no
> information of, with an almost subjective
> malevolence, that the entities that might appear
> to humans as both powerful and threatening, and
> that they do *indeed* wish us ill. It's not
> exactly like stepping on ants inadvertently; there
> seems to be a sort of delight in doing so, and
> *this* is an injection of Judeo-Christian or
> gnostic malevolence.

It is almost as though his fiction world were haunted by powerful demons. He even insists on using the word. I'm not saying he actually believes in demons. But he sure as hell loved to write about them.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> > The part that resonates with me is a sort of
> > perceived contradiction that is admittedly
> based
> > on my subjective assessment of HPL's attachment
> to
> > the worldview portrayed in most, if not all, of
> > his fiction. In short, he portrays a very
> > threatening physical cosmos, of which mankind,
> his
> > small portion of the known universe is
> painfully,
> > creepily insignificant.
> >
> > To the modern mind, it kinda slaps
> > "exceptionalism" upside the head...so to speak.
> >
> > So this all appears consistent with an
> unexplored
> > physical (material) cosmos, and to my mind
> > supports the idea that he's a materialist at
> > heart--as I am, so this resonates with my own
> > sensibilities.
>
> All of which, to one who is not a materialist,
> sounds like a complete non-sequitur.

Which is why I find it interesting and why I raised it specifically as a "perceived contradiction".

> "Anti-exceptionalism" and "materialism" have
> little to do with each other.

Maybe, but to consider humanity as an exceptional creation imbued with a spark of God's divinity--He creating us in His likeness, you see--seems contrary to materialism, which reduces everything to conceivably knowable matter--quantum mechanics being the logical extension, I would suppose.

So "exceptionalism" is at odds with "materialism", to me it seems like "anti-exceptonalism" is at least in the same philosophical hemisphere as "materialism".


> Seems to me that
> all HPL has done is resurrect the perspective of
> the ancient sailor on the wild ocean, or the
> ancient peasant tilling his precarious fields
> between on the border of a demon haunted forest
> and in the shadow of a god-haunted mountain.

Yes. It seems to me like that too, and then one wonders: why would a convinced and committed materialist do this by choice, since it deals not with the material world, but with the spiritual realm?

>
> Perhaps this is blasphemy to certain 18th century
> rationalists who, having dethroned God, were
> perhaps sometimes tempted to imagine that Man
> could claim God's throne and become gods
> themselves. And perhaps some strains of
> Christianity were sufficiently vainglorious to
> adopt similar perspective, and perhaps they too
> would have been offended by HPL's
> anti-exceptionalism. But I don't see how that
> gets us to materialism. Not even close.
>
> > But he so consistently injects his idea of the
> > expanded cosmos, the one that we have no
> > information of, with an almost subjective
> > malevolence, that the entities that might
> appear
> > to humans as both powerful and threatening, and
> > that they do *indeed* wish us ill. It's not
> > exactly like stepping on ants inadvertently;
> there
> > seems to be a sort of delight in doing so, and
> > *this* is an injection of Judeo-Christian or
> > gnostic malevolence.
>
> It is almost as though his fiction world were
> haunted by powerful demons. He even insists on
> using the word. I'm not saying he actually
> believes in demons. But he sure as hell loved to
> write about them.

Yes. He sure did.

To my perception, much of his fiction, excluding maybe ghost written stuff--presumes that mankind is no great shakes when it comes to the cosmos. If we consider the cosmos as unequivocally material, then maybe it makes better sense than I first thought: a materialist challenging the security of conventional thought. He is bringing the narrator, whom we usually take as an educated and conventional observer with late 19th C sensibilities, face-to-face with just how over-matched he, and everything he assumes to be true, is when compared to infinite existence.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you have any other suggestions for CAS stinkers
> available online?

I almost feel bad for calling them stinkers, because even CAS' lesser efforts have some memorable details and conceptual merits, but I do find several attempts at his planetary sci-fi adventures lacking in substantial storytelling, especially his early ones, like "The Metamorphosis of the World", "The Immortals of Mercury", "Marooned in Andromeda", "An Adventure in Futurity", and "The Invisible City." I feel these five in particular have grand ideas, but are written as though they were rushed at many segments, as if CAS wanted to get some neat ideas out of the way and get that paycheck sooner.

"The Immortals of Mercury", for instance, deals with a race of hyper-intelligent immortals who dwell in the caverns of Mercury. The first half is interesting, when CAS describes their world and builds an atmosphere of suspense surrounding its eerie society, but midway through it drops all intrigue for an extremely drawn-out series of run-of-the-mill action scenes. There's some suspense to it, but it pales in comparison to truly dedicated adventure writers like REH or Merritt. And the fatalistic ending wouldn't be bad, if it weren't just an ironic cap for all that pointless action.

"The Invisible City" had a wondrous idea, about two men who discover an ancient alien city invisible to the human eye. The marvelous inhabitants were intent on assimilating the humans into their multidimensional culture, but on a split-second whim the humans suddenly hate the aliens with all their will, and turn the story into another heroic action-adventure which does nothing to explore or expand on its ideas.

It's interesting that these aren't so good even though one of his first planetary adventures, "The Monster of the Prophecy", was a good example of science-fantasy. By comparison, it had more engaging characters, a unique plot, a believable sense of immensity, and some truly creative settings and creatures, all beautifully described. Perhaps it's true he wrote the ones I listed earlier for the money, while "Monster" was a more personal project for him. What else is interesting is that at some point in the middle of his career, CAS started writing consistently decent planetary tales again, starting with his Aihai (Martian) cycle.

But I ramble about useless things here! You were simply asking for stinkers! I think the ones I mentioned count the most though.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23 Aug 20 | 10:56PM by Hespire.

Sawfish Wrote:
> > I remember that letter! He wrote "A Captivity
> in
> > Serpens" in response to these demands for more
> > plot and action. He must have enjoyed writing
> > various novelties in it, like the faery-city
> and
> > vampiric aliens I mentioned, but otherwise it
> felt
> > like he was just churning this thing out for
> the
> > money, and perhaps with an air of
> > passive-aggressive irony on his mind. It also
> > seems that the story I mentioned isn't even
> > available on the Eldritch Dark!
>
> So I noticed. Perhaps to spare us!

More likely, i would guess, because he sold the rights to it, & in this case those rights were actually renewed by the owner.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes. It seems to me like that too, and then one
> wonders: why would a convinced and committed
> materialist do this by choice, since it deals not
> with the material world, but with the spiritual
> realm?
>

Perhaps because he was brought up to think and socially behave with rational sensibility. In his letters, and in his own eyes, he wanted to be a respectable man, not come across as a "cuckoo".

Jack Vance did something similar, by more or less denying his own fascination with science fiction and fantasy, saying he did it for the money, and that he rather would have been a mystery writer if it only had payed more. Wanting to come across as a macho man, sailor, worker, family supporter, who rolls up his sleeves, and sits down at a table with a whiskey in his hand, engaged in burly conversation with the other chaps.

Men want to come across as capable, with both feet on the ground. Science fiction and fantasy (and a bearded god sitting in the clouds) is 'cute'. And sexually unattractive. Courting a beautiful woman and telling her first thing, "I like science fiction and fantasy!", is sure to make her turn on her heels; she will never want to bear your children. Unless of course, you are able to make money from your fantasy, or have some other successful career up your sleeve, that you can pull out (and you better be quick about it).

Have you seen photos of Lovecraft from the short period he was engaged? He was a completely different man, transformed. Handsome, stable, relaxed, and self-assured looking. A real ladies man! Not at all the awkward, distant dreamer we see in many photographs.

These are very interesting observations.

For what it's worth, I agree with the underlying, often unspoken, tension between creation and exploitation--and by the latter I don't wish to convey a negative connotation, but it's the best word that I can come up with this early for the act of utilizing resources for one's own (and one's family's) benefit.

So a writer is a creator--which carries with it the cultural connection with the feminine, while the labor/worker, or even entrepreneur or salesman, is a form of exploiter, which carries the idea of a masculine preoccupation.

In writing there's probably a hierarchy of what's more acceptably masculine, and this would include Hemingway-type stuff, and Jim Harrison, Cormac McCarthy, etc. You'd even have hard-boiled crime guys like Chandler, Hammett, Elmore Leonard, etc.

Then you have poets...another case entirely... :^)

This is a very interesting point you raised.

--Sawfish

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Platypus Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > "Anti-exceptionalism" and "materialism" have
> > little to do with each other.
>
> Maybe, but to consider humanity as an exceptional
> creation imbued with a spark of God's divinity--He
> creating us in His likeness, you see--seems
> contrary to materialism, which reduces everything
> to conceivably knowable matter--quantum mechanics
> being the logical extension, I would suppose.

The above sentences reference God and perhaps, by implication, the human soul. That, and not the "exceptionalism", are what makes the above Christian teaching inconsistent with materialism.

HPL wrote in his fiction that cats were sacred to the gods, and made in the image of the divine sphynx. That is just as contrary to materialism. Whether or not it is also contrary to Christianity is beside the point.

> So "exceptionalism" is at odds with "materialism",
> to me it seems like "anti-exceptonalism" is at
> least in the same philosophical hemisphere as
> "materialism".

Materialism fails to ascribe any value to anything at all. It seems to me to be meaningless to say that it is either for or against human exceptionalism. The materialist, at least, is capable of appreciating that there exists a tendency, perhaps natural, for humans to be species-centric, ethno-centric, and ego-centric. Materialism offers no particular incentive to resist such urges or tendencies; though of course, neither does it forbid such resistance.

Materialism refuses to allow that reality has any spiritual component whatsoever. Materialism does not allow for the tiniest and most insignificant imp, nor does it allow for the most ultra-powerful god or demon. Debating on where the human soul stands in the hierarchy of spirits, and what the Christian position on this might be, is utterly beside the point. The argument is over the instant you allow that any god, demon, imp, human soul or animal soul exists at all.

On a side note, you will have a much easier time arguing that HPL's fiction was (often) un-Christian or anti-Christian.

Even there, though, you may be a bit unsure what to do with "Psychopompos" or "Dreams in the Witch-House".

And even there, arguing that HPL's rejection of human exceptionalism is an un-Christian aspect of his fiction would be an extraordinarily weak point. Chistianity merely teaches that God in some sense put Man above the animals. It says nothing about whether humans are more powerful than demons, or are more important in the eyes of god than angels or other powerful spirits. And it expresses no opinions on space aliens either. IIRC, Swedenborg, in the mid 1700s, speculated that certain space aliens might be children of god with analogous status to men; and I doubt he was the first. Had HPL used his fiction to agitate in favor of equal rights for bunnies and cockroaches, you might possibly have argued that this contradicts the Christian doctrine that humans are higher than the animals. But HPL did not believe in equal rights for cockroaches. Nobody does. Not really. It's a non-issue.

And HPL could be quite the "exceptionalist" in the sense of being a class-snob and a race-snob. And this does influence his fiction at times. Arguably, he might have been less of an exceptionalist, rather than more of one, had he made more attention to Christian teachings such as "Christian humility", the sin of pride, the value and dignity of the poor in the eyes of God, and the universal brotherhood of mankind.

Christianity does anticipate an apocalypse in which ultra-powerful demons will arise and destroy mankind. Hmmm. Sounds vaguely familiar.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 24 Aug 20 | 10:25AM by Platypus.

That was a good job of creating both sides of an argument and proceeding to argue with yourself.

We're done.


"It is Pointless, and endless Trouble, to cast a stone at every dog
that barks at you."

--Sawfish

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That was a good job of creating both sides of an
> argument and proceeding to argue with yourself.
>
> We're done.
>
> "It is Pointless, and endless Trouble, to cast a
> stone at every dog that barks at you."

Did you just compare me to a barking dog? There are more graceful ways of bowing out of a discussion that no longer interests you. You do not owe me your time, after all. Note that I did not insult you in any way, and I shall try not to do so, even now.

As for your first sentence, I am unsure if you are accusing me of misrepresenting your position, or contradicting my own. In either case I'm not aware how I have done so. I guess I won't expect further clarifications. Peace!



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 24 Aug 20 | 12:09PM by Platypus.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jack Vance did something similar, by more or less
> denying his own fascination with science fiction
> and fantasy, saying he did it for the money, and
> that he rather would have been a mystery writer if
> it only had payed more. Wanting to come across as
> a macho man, sailor, worker, family supporter, who
> rolls up his sleeves, and sits down at a table
> with a whiskey in his hand, engaged in burly
> conversation with the other chaps.

This may be true, but it sounds wrong to me. When exactly did Jack Vance deny his interest in sci-fi and fantasy?

And he wrote enough profitless mysteries that we can hardly doubt his interest there was also sincere. I hardly think we can doubt he would have written more of them if they could have earned him money.

And surely he was indeed, to a significant extent, a macho man, sailor, worker and family supporter, who did indeed like to hang out with his buddies (who included Poul Anderson and Frank Herbert, neither of whom were likely to look down on his interest in sci fi). It sounds strange to say that he merely "wanted" to be these things. He had a real experience of life, and an interest in the real world, that gives his sci fi and fantasy a level of conviction that it would otherwise lack. His interest in and knowledge of boats (for instance) also influenced his sci fi stories (e.g. "The Moon Moth" and "Showboat World"). I don't see the conflict here that your words imply.

HPL was maybe less of a "macho man" (relatively speaking) than Vance was, but he too had "real world" antiquarian interests that inform his writings and give them conviction.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Jack Vance did something similar, by more or
> less
> > denying his own fascination with science
> fiction
> > and fantasy, saying he did it for the money,
> and
> > that he rather would have been a mystery writer
> if
> > it only had payed more. Wanting to come across
> as
> > a macho man, sailor, worker, family supporter,
> who
> > rolls up his sleeves, and sits down at a table
> > with a whiskey in his hand, engaged in burly
> > conversation with the other chaps.
>
> This may be true, but it sounds wrong to me. When
> exactly did Jack Vance deny his interest in sci-fi
> and fantasy?
>
>

I see him as both interested in practical things and in fantasy. But he preferred to discuss practical things, like sailing for example, have a good laugh and dinner with friends, play music in aband, more than discuss his books which he regarded as his professional job and way of income. He was very private about the details of his writing. It was many years ago, but I think I remember reading an interview with him in which he said he did not enjoy reading science fiction but read science articles. And his own work was of a cultural exploration, drama, and humor, accidentally in a space setting, more than pure sci-fi. I also seem to remember he said something along the line that sci-fi and fantasy can easily come across as cute and childish or non-serious in people's eyes.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see him as both interested in practical things
> and in fantasy. But he preferred to discuss
> practical things, like sailing for example, have a
> good laugh and dinner with friends, play music in
> aband, more than discuss his books which he
> regarded as his professional job and way of
> income. He was very private about the details of
> his writing.

Sounds perfectly understandable to me. A good story should speak for itself, no? Why would a writer necessarily be eager to discuss the details of his writing? Nothing about this implies he wanted to deny his love for fantasy and sci-fi.

> It was many years ago, but I think I
> remember reading an interview with him in which he
> said he did not enjoy reading science fiction but
> read science articles.

I recall something similar (not, as I recall, that he did not enjoy sci fi, but merely that he no longer read it), but don't remember the year. But Vance wrote sci-fi until he was 86. This sounds like a perfectly credible statement at a certain stage of his career. I'm sure he said it because it was the simple truth, and not because he was trying to deny his love for sci fi and fantasy. Certainly he did not deny having read and enjoyed sci fi and fantasy in his youth. But later, he is the story-teller, and not the story-reader. He expresses his love for sci-fi by telling stories, not by reading them. And he reads real-world articles, and seeks real-world experience, in part for their own sake, and in part so he can inform his sci fi and keep it from being stale and derivative.

> And his own work was of a
> cultural exploration, drama, and humor,
> accidentally in a space setting, more than pure
> sci-fi.

Vance wrote sci fi and fantasy, even in his old age. I don't know what "pure sci-fi" is. If I ever read "pure sci fi", I might not like it. But certainly Vance was none too interested in the nuts and bolts of how interstellar space ships work. They were just a device for reaching alien planets. But I don't think anyone can deny Vance's sincere interests in the alien planets and cultures he created.

> I also seem to remember he said something
> along the line that sci-fi and fantasy can easily
> come across as cute and childish or non-serious in
> people's eyes.

Well, if he ever said that, it was simply a true statement. No?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 25 Aug 20 | 11:46AM by Platypus.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > I also seem to remember he said something
> > along the line that sci-fi and fantasy can
> easily
> > come across as cute and childish or non-serious
> in
> > people's eyes.
>
> Well, if he ever said that, it was simply a true
> statement. No?

Yes, would seem so.

I think he didn't want to come across as a dreamer of fantasy, but as a capable and practical man with both feet on the ground. So he presented his profession as something he did to make money, not as a hobby or simply for the joy of it.