Geoffrey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The White People" ... an artifact of
> the weird. It's as though the reader is holding in
> his hands a thing that should not exist in a sane
> world.

Besides supernatural tales, I generally I get this kind of weird sensation most clearly with great science fiction that describes the far distant future. Such as John W. Campbell Jr.'s "Twilight", A. E. van Vogt's "M 33 in Andromeda", Arthur C. Clarke's The City and the Stars and Rendezvous with Rama.

Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End is another very creepy weird science fiction novel, in how it describes mankind loosing its identity, succumbing to insidious alien influence to become something different and supposedly greater in cosmic evolution.

I also hear good things about Clarke's "A Meeting with Medusa", but have not read it yet.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I generally I get this kind of weird sensation most clearly with great
> science fiction that describes the far distant future.

Suggesting technology and science that doesn't exist today, but may exist in the future. If done so with insight, or mystical divination, and structural verisimilitude, it is the most substantial way of leading me to an almost soul-shaking sensation of weirdness. Much more so than a ghost-story can.

I went with The Last of All Suns since the setting, the characters and the plot made it feel like the culmination of the entire genre. I also absolutely loved the ending.

However, if you find that one too obscure, or perhaps even too modern, some other titles that crossed my mind:

The Night Ocean by Robert Hayward Barlow. Probably my first choice. Most literature, even good literature, has its fair share of filler content while this one feels like every single sentence is a product of deep and serious contemplation. It feels so thick with thought, if you don't mind me constructing such a ridiculous phrase.

The Three Marked Pennies by Mary Elizabeth Counselman. Just a well-rounded weird tale with no major flaws. Probably not even minor ones, to be honest.

The Repairer of Reputations by Robert William Chambers. If The Last of All Suns is the culmination of the genre then this would be where it all started. I know some people might suggest Poe but to me weird fiction as we know it, with the tropes we commonly associate with it, really took off with The King in Yellow.

Idle Days on the Yann by Lord Dunsany. I know the folks here aren't particularly fond of Dunsany but I find his prose incredibly smooth and being born in 1989 means that I grew up surrounded by what came to be known as "generic fantasy" and Dunsany with his approach to world-building felt as a breath of fresh air.

As for the Big Three:

The Double Shadow by Clark Ashton Smith. There are very few things in the universe, if any, that are as synonymous with the concept of passivity as shadows, and here we have one of them take an active, and eventually definite, role in deciding a man's fate, contrary to everything we thought we knew about this place called existence.

There are some other stories I prefer for one reason or another, such as The Planet of the Dead or The Holiness of Azédarac, and some that are arguably better, such as The Dark Eidolon, but they're either simply not as well-written as The Double Shadow, or, as is the case with The Dark Eidolon, more fantasy than weird fiction.

Worms of the Earth by Robert Ervin Howard. It has a bit of everything I like about Howard and even weird fiction in general, including not only his most intriguing character in Atla, but also some of his theories about races and "races". Recently I've been getting into archaeogenetics and it's interesting to see how off the mark some of our preconceived notions were.

Also, this one kinda reminds me of Smith's The Planet of the Dead, in that here too you can feel the author was very passionate about the topic. For Smith it was the poet's place in the modern world and for Howard it was the plight of his beloved Picts.

The Music of Erich Zann by Howard Phillips Lovecraft. Just a very neat little story that kinda encapsulates what this genre is all about. If someone new to weird fiction were to ask me for a suggestion, I'd probably go with this one.

The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
----------------------------------------------
> Idle Days on the Yann by Lord Dunsany. I know the
> folks here aren't particularly fond of Dunsany but
> I find his prose incredibly smooth and being born
> in 1989 means that I grew up surrounded by what
> came to be known as "generic fantasy" and Dunsany
> with his approach to world-building felt as a
> breath of fresh air.

I really do like this story, though I'm not sure I can analyze why. My general impression of Dunsany is that his cynicism is at war with his sense of wonder, and that this sometimes results in unique and inspired creations, while at other times he shoots himself in the foot.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------
> > Idle Days on the Yann by Lord Dunsany. I know
> the
> > folks here aren't particularly fond of Dunsany
> but
> > I find his prose incredibly smooth and being
> born
> > in 1989 means that I grew up surrounded by what
> > came to be known as "generic fantasy" and
> Dunsany
> > with his approach to world-building felt as a
> > breath of fresh air.
>
> I really do like this story, though I'm not sure I
> can analyze why. My general impression of Dunsany
> is that his cynicism is at war with his sense of
> wonder, and that this sometimes results in unique
> and inspired creations, while at other times he
> shoots himself in the foot.

He seems a bit smug, at times.

--Sawfish

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

The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
-----------------------------------
> The Night Ocean by Robert Hayward Barlow. Probably
> my first choice. Most literature, even good
> literature, has its fair share of filler content
> while this one feels like every single sentence is
> a product of deep and serious contemplation. It
> feels so thick with thought, if you don't mind me
> constructing such a ridiculous phrase.

I didn't care for it. It is far too "serious" for me, and it is not the sort of "seriousness" I like. If the protagonist believes that life is meaningless and futile and that it ultimately does not matter if the sea monsters get him or not, then why should I care? Barlow ended up killing himself, and the mood and ideation of this story kept reminding me of that sad fact. To which my response is, "Don't do it, kids".

The Sojourner of Worlds Wrote:
> Worms of the Earth by Robert Ervin Howard. It has
> a bit of everything I like about Howard and even
> weird fiction in general, including not only his
> most intriguing character in Atla, but also some
> of his theories about races and "races". Recently
> I've been getting into archaeogenetics and it's
> interesting to see how off the mark some of our
> preconceived notions were.

This one very much impressed me. I recently reread it, and it still had an impact for me.

I gave this one a try.

I've always had a tough time with Howard's works--everything seems contrived to set up "good guy/bad guy" divide. And while he very much likes to adopt a sort of Nietzchean worldview for his "good guys", making them closer to a conventional bad guy (are Howard's main characters anti-heroes?), it's really like making Dirty Harry the good guy--he's supposed to be a product of the kind of world in which he lives.

Or better, Popeye Doyle.

He then goes to some length to make the characters stand out in some physical way. There can be no physically inconspicuous characters, it seems like. Howard seems to relish this.

Then the expository seems very clumsy and forced. In this case he starts with a bad guy cheerfully ordering a crucifixion.

I just can't get far enough into his works to gain exposures to his ideas--which might be interesting, but I just can't get past the writing. My guess is that Howard truly recognized what the average reader of the weird magazines wanted, and how they valued simplified melodrama over nuance and irony. His readers might not stick with a story to see that the tale is culminated in a final ironic situation, as happened in a CAS story where the main character and POV, being tortured to death by a society whose main cultural value seems to be sadism, plays a sorta "whatever yo' does, please don't throw me in dat dere briar patch" with his torturers, who fall for it, and die.

--Sawfish

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

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've always had a tough time with Howard's
> works--everything seems contrived to set up "good
> guy/bad guy" divide. And while he very much likes
> to adopt a sort of Nietzchean worldview for his
> "good guys", making them closer to a conventional
> bad guy (are Howard's main characters
> anti-heroes?), it's really like making Dirty Harry
> the good guy--he's supposed to be a product of the
> kind of world in which he lives.

There are no good guys in this story. Bran is a Faustian figure who makes a deal with the devil. Nothing he does is justified, and no good comes of anything he does. His only redeeming quality is that he is human enough to begin to regret the devil's trap he has walked into.

> He then goes to some length to make the characters
> stand out in some physical way. There can be no
> physically inconspicuous characters, it seems
> like. Howard seems to relish this.

Okay. But I do not see how Bran's physical prowess, or Sulla's, detracts from the story.

> Then the expository seems very clumsy and forced.
> In this case he starts with a bad guy cheerfully
> ordering a crucifixion.

It's unapologetically lurid, but I don't see anything clumsy about it.

The crucifixion is part of the setup, creating the motivation for Bran's drive for vengeance. It foreshadows the denouement, and Bran's horror at the form his own vengeance his taken. Sulla is no saint, but he is basically executing a murderer; and this angers Bran primarily because of Bran's pride.

Did you finish the story? It is hard to tell from your comments.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 4 Feb 22 | 12:05PM by Platypus.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've always had a tough time with Howard's
> > works--everything seems contrived to set up
> "good
> > guy/bad guy" divide. And while he very much
> likes
> > to adopt a sort of Nietzchean worldview for his
> > "good guys", making them closer to a
> conventional
> > bad guy (are Howard's main characters
> > anti-heroes?), it's really like making Dirty
> Harry
> > the good guy--he's supposed to be a product of
> the
> > kind of world in which he lives.
>
> There are no good guys in this story. Bran is a
> Faustian figure who makes a deal with the devil.
> Nothing he does is justified, and no good comes of
> anything he does. His only redeeming quality is
> that he is human enough to begin to regret the
> devil's trap he has walked into.
>
> > He then goes to some length to make the
> characters
> > stand out in some physical way. There can be no
> > physically inconspicuous characters, it seems
> > like. Howard seems to relish this.
>
> Okay. But I do not see how Bran's physical
> prowess, or Sulla's, detracts from the story.

It's fine if you like there to be a connection between physical appearance and character, such as with The Phantom, Caliban, Richard the Third, or the entire Harkonnen family as envisioned by Lynch.

But unless there's some form of symbolic consistency--a symbolic physical representation of an internal character trait--I prefer not to have this level of description in short or intermediate length fiction.

>
> > Then the expository seems very clumsy and
> forced.
> > In this case he starts with a bad guy
> cheerfully
> > ordering a crucifixion.
>
> It's unapologetically lurid, but I don't see
> anything clumsy about it.

It's fine if you like lurid. I thought lurid fit well in CAS's The Weaver in the Vault.

>
> The crucifixion is part of the setup, creating the
> motivation for Bran's drive for vengeance. It
> foreshadows the denouement, and Bran's horror at
> the form his own vengeance his taken. Sulla is no
> saint, but he is basically executing a murderer;
> and this angers Bran primarily because of Bran's
> pride.
>
> Did you finish the story? It is hard to tell from
> your comments.

Did not finish it--very tough to get past his style.

Tell you what, Platypus, you make the story sound so morally nuanced that I'll give it a go after I get back from the gym. I'll make damned sure I get thru it, and I'll work hard to keep an open mind.

Ta, ta, for now!

--Sawfish

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



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 4 Feb 22 | 12:28PM by Sawfish.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've always had a tough time with Howard's
> > works--everything seems contrived to set up
> "good
> > guy/bad guy" divide. And while he very much
> likes
> > to adopt a sort of Nietzchean worldview for his
> > "good guys", making them closer to a
> conventional
> > bad guy (are Howard's main characters
> > anti-heroes?), it's really like making Dirty
> Harry
> > the good guy--he's supposed to be a product of
> the
> > kind of world in which he lives.
>
> There are no good guys in this story. Bran is a
> Faustian figure who makes a deal with the devil.
> Nothing he does is justified, and no good comes of
> anything he does. His only redeeming quality is
> that he is human enough to begin to regret the
> devil's trap he has walked into.
>
> > He then goes to some length to make the
> characters
> > stand out in some physical way. There can be no
> > physically inconspicuous characters, it seems
> > like. Howard seems to relish this.
>
> Okay. But I do not see how Bran's physical
> prowess, or Sulla's, detracts from the story.
>
> > Then the expository seems very clumsy and
> forced.
> > In this case he starts with a bad guy
> cheerfully
> > ordering a crucifixion.
>
> It's unapologetically lurid, but I don't see
> anything clumsy about it.
>
> The crucifixion is part of the setup, creating the
> motivation for Bran's drive for vengeance. It
> foreshadows the denouement, and Bran's horror at
> the form his own vengeance his taken. Sulla is no
> saint, but he is basically executing a murderer;
> and this angers Bran primarily because of Bran's
> pride.
>
> Did you finish the story? It is hard to tell from
> your comments.

I read it and it demonstrates that enjoyment of literature is highly subjective. I still don't care for the way Howard tells a story.

But again, it's subjective.

I may have mentioned this on ED before, but here's a story that has a lot of thematic similarities to some of the Howard stories. I like this one much better than any Howard story I've read, but could not easily tell you why. I'm going to leave out a little spoiler.

The Barrow Troll - 1975 David Drake

[baencd.freedoors.org]

Not long. If you read it, let me know what o think of it.

--Sawfish

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

Sawfish Wrote:
-----------------------
> I read it and it demonstrates that enjoyment of
> literature is highly subjective. I still don't
> care for the way Howard tells a story.
>
> But again, it's subjective.

Taste is definitely a thing.

> I may have mentioned this on ED before, but here's
> a story that has a lot of thematic similarities to
> some of the Howard stories. I like this one much
> better than any Howard story I've read, but could
> not easily tell you why. I'm going to leave out a
> little spoiler.
>
> The Barrow Troll - 1975 David Drake
>
> [baencd.freedoors.org]
> 0716__11.htm
>
> Not long. If you read it, let me know what o think
> of it.

I've read that one before. I did not dislike it, but it did not do much for me either. It felt very ... modern. I can't exactly say why, but there was no real sense that I was being transported to another time and place. Another pesky matter of taste, I guess.

The spoiler was that there's no supernatural element--indeed, the idea that the "troll" is serially transformed from a man by what amounts to a sort of avaricious OCDS does inject a modern sensibility, but since this only comes at the end it tends not to flavor the milieu or the plot until the ultimate resolution because to the modern reader, this seems possible, but to the contemporary characters, this was beyond their worldview.

--Sawfish

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

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The spoiler was that there's no supernatural
> element--indeed, the idea that the "troll" is
> serially transformed from a man by what amounts to
> a sort of avaricious OCDS does inject a modern
> sensibility, but since this only comes at the end
> it tends not to flavor the milieu or the plot
> until the ultimate resolution because to the
> modern reader, this seems possible, but to the
> contemporary characters, this was beyond their
> worldview.

Ulf does not have much of an arc. He is a mad evil monster at the beginning of the story, and remains a mad evil monster at the end of the story. The twist is that he goes mad in a different way than the reader could have reasonably anticipated. Which is not a bad twist. But not an earth-shattering one either.

I'm not sure I agree that there is no supernatural element. For two berserkers to go mad in the exact same place, in the exact same way, only 20 years apart, implies to me supernatural curse. Explaining it instead as "serial avaricious OCDS" does not sound more plausible to me. It just sounds more modern. But this does not make your theory wrong. You like the story better than I do, and probably understand it better too.

Ulf is impossible to identify with as a character. It seems every waking moment is spent trying to figure out how to be as brutally evil as possible. I don't mind villains as main characters, but I'd like to understand what drives and tempts them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 5 Feb 22 | 08:55PM by Platypus.