Fellow EDers, I must confess: while I like the idea of sitting before a fire on a rainy night, with a volume of James ghost stories, when push come to shove, I don't find myself transported very far by them. The positive effects of the narratives are often outweighted by the effort it takes to read them. This is not so much a knock on style, but on predictability of execution.

Harsh words, indeed, and many a religious heretic perished for saying comparatively less about a given point of religious interpretation.

James is a very reliable and competent source for a known product, always supplying the expected result. But the product is over-worked and seemingly produced from the same basic recipe, and cut out of the well kneaded and rolled literary dough, using a selection from a limited set of cookie cutters.

Then it occurred to me that for readers of gentile murder mysteries, Agatha Christie fills the same role.

What say ye, fellow EDers? Yes/no/maybe?

;^)

--Sawfish

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12 Jul 21 | 07:37AM by Sawfish.

Weeell, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion, Sawfish ;) ... buuut, I don't agree with you here! :)

I read Collected Ghost Stories a few years ago, and thoroughly enjoyed it; one story after another in succession, from cover to cover; night after night, never a dull moment; it became like a drug, the same formula, more or less, over and over again.

Compare that to my reading lately of Leiber's Fafhrd & Grey Mouser books, which can be a struggle, in spite of them being well written.

And why such difference? My guess is that James was a more mature authority, subtle, plumbing; while Leiber was more childlike, immature, somehow. And James therefore drew my attention better.

I've never read any of Christie's books, so I won't speak to that.

Some of James's stories were written as literary works for an occasion -- the Christmas season ghost story reading. They may well have been revised for book publication, but they almost remain "scripts." Thus an aspect of the storyteller's art is to work in a fresh an interesting way with reader expectations that should be respected. For example, the story's length should be neither too short nor too long; long enough for anticipation to build, not too long for the enjoyment of audience and comfort of the reader. The story should not be hamhanded, should respect the intelligence of the audience, but isn't intended for turning pages backwards to make cross-references (as is the case, I suppose, with Henry James's Turn of the Screw). There are restrictions on how deeply characters may be developed and so on.

I don't know that all of M. R. James's stories were written thus -- I don't think they were; but even ones written originally as stories to be read would presumably bear the influence of reading aloud.

I don't think I am indulging in special pleading here, as if the stories were admitted failures that needed excuse. A reading again of, say, "Count Magnus" will, I think, dispel that idea. Possibly some individual stories do need a little consideration, but James's the measure of achievement should be based on his best work.

So, Sawfish, I'm probably not flat-out disagreeing with you, but suggesting some nuance.

My favorite of James's stories is "A View form a Hill", and happens to be CAS's favorite too. It is BEAUTIFULLY written, has one helluva subtly disturbing and sinister imagination, ... is deliciously morbid!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12 Jul 21 | 01:16PM by Knygatin.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Weeell, you're certainly entitled to your own
> opinion, Sawfish ;) ... buuut, I don't agree with
> you here! :)
>
> I read Collected Ghost Stories a few years ago,
> and thoroughly enjoyed it; one story after another
> in succession, from cover to cover; night after
> night, never a dull moment; it became like a drug,
> the same formula, more or less, over and over
> again.
>
> Compare that to my reading lately of Leiber's
> Fafhrd & Grey Mouser books, which can be a
> struggle, in spite of them being well written.
>
> And why such difference? My guess is that James
> was a more mature authority, subtle, plumbing;
> while Leiber was more childlike, immature,
> somehow. And James therefore drew my attention
> better.

This is all very well and good, K., old friend, but is he or is he not the Agatha Christie of the modern ghost story...? ;^)

You know, here's a funny nuance, and I feel pretty sure that you also have this same quirk in your thinking that I have...

There are cultural institutions that one NEVER attacks: Shakespeare is one such. The third rail of literary criticism, right? If you seek public castration as an English major undergrad, try criticizing the innate sillines-not witty, just silly like comedia del arte, like Leonce & Lena--of some of his lesser comedies. :^)

But Jeezus, not all of Shakespeare is great, and some not even good. This was the Neil Simon of the Elizabethan Age, so let's get our feet back on the ground, shall we?

Now, I feel like Christie is a minor example of such a revered institution, and hence somewhat protected from objective criticism. I'm postulating that in the area of Very British Ghost Tales, James is another such.

There is nothing particularly wrong with his writing--it's quite competent. But it lacks that snap of inspiration and/or imagination that might make it truly special. Like de la Mare sometimes is, and CAS in his better works. James never approaches this level of evocative reader engagement, in my opinion.

So, what say ye now?

--Sawfish

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

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've never read any of Christie's books, so I
> won't speak to that.
>
> Some of James's stories were written as literary
> works for an occasion -- the Christmas season
> ghost story reading. They may well have been
> revised for book publication, but they almost
> remain "scripts." Thus an aspect of the
> storyteller's art is to work in a fresh an
> interesting way with reader expectations that
> should be respected. For example, the story's
> length should be neither too short nor too long;
> long enough for anticipation to build, not too
> long for the enjoyment of audience and comfort of
> the reader. The story should not be hamhanded,
> should respect the intelligence of the audience,
> but isn't intended for turning pages backwards to
> make cross-references (as is the case, I suppose,
> with Henry James's Turn of the Screw). There are
> restrictions on how deeply characters may be
> developed and so on.
>
> I don't know that all of M. R. James's stories
> were written thus -- I don't think they were; but
> even ones written originally as stories to be read
> would presumably bear the influence of reading
> aloud.
>
> I don't think I am indulging in special pleading
> here, as if the stories were admitted failures
> that needed excuse. A reading again of, say,
> "Count Magnus" will, I think, dispel that idea.
> Possibly some individual stories do need a little
> consideration, but James's the measure of
> achievement should be based on his best work.
>
> So, Sawfish, I'm probably not flat-out disagreeing
> with you, but suggesting some nuance.


Yes.

I was/am often purposefully provoctive simply to elicit a response, because on this forum I value and enjoy the sorts of thoughtful responses I'll get.

Yep, I can find some very good stories, did he do Mezzotint, or something like that?

Still, if a work goes out with your name on it, well, you know... :^)

--Sawfish

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

James did indeed write "The Mezzotint."

A normal intelligent young person will usually be curious about the past. One of the great things about MRJ's stories is the way the past is a living -- or at least undead -- presence in them. On the one hand he was a practitioner of a sophisticated literary form, and on the other hand he had a "youthful" zest for the idea of old manuscripts, archaeological remains, and antiquarian lore. (Here's a test: you can divide youngsters up into those whose imaginations respond with more enthusiasm to the idea of finding a bunch of money dropped from a bank heist last week, or finding a treasure buried by pirates four centuries ago.)

I suspect that, of all the major writers of supernatural fiction, MRJ is the one Lovecraft would most have liked to be.

MRJ's stories are replete with the fascination of the past. They are far from the habits of thought of writers of today who would fit right in with travesties such as the move of the University of Leicester:

[www.spiked-online.com]

(Spiked Online is not a site I have visited often. I can't speak for their content at large. I looked for a source with the story I just saw reported in the Times Literary Supplement.)

Sawfish Wrote:

> James is a very reliable and competent source for
> a known product, always supplying the expected
> result.

The same could be said of Lovecraft. Where is there an uncharacteristic Lovecraft story?

(Answer: "Poetry and the Gods" -- but was that a revision of someone else's story?)

In the field of weird fiction, isn't it Machen's fiction that's the most varied? There is quite a difference between, say, "The Black Seal" and "N," or "The White People" and "The Great Return," or "The White Powder" and "The Children of the Pool," or "The Terror" and "Dr. Duthoit's Vision." These are all impressive stories, but they're quite different from one another. (If we want to pursue a thread on Machen's fiction, though, it shouldn't be tucked away in a thread on M. R. James.) Of course there's even more variety in Rudyard Kipling.

But sometimes one just wants to settle in for a Sherlock Holmes story or perhaps a Jeeves and Wooster story, and one wants pretty much more of the same.

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> This is all very well and good, K., old friend,
> but is he or is he not the Agatha Christie of the
> modern ghost story...? ;^)


Naah, my lively, spontaneous, generous old friend, I don't agree! At all! ;) Uuum, ... I have never, ... read Agatha Christie. But it DON'T matter. She was an old CRONE!! ... fiddling with murders, and trifles such as who's guilty. Who the hell cares?? ;D
James was an artist, or expert craftsman, ... occupied with the supernatural, ... the S-U-P-E-R-N-A-T-U-R-A-L, fur christ's sake!!

Wasn't it "The Treasure of Abbot Thomas" that has an imaginative treasure map, that even includes the colored glass mosaic of a chapel window (even better than any romantic Indiana Jones adventure Spielberg or Lucas could come up with)? And then a treasure hidden in the wall of a well, guarded by a froglike monster, like CAS's Tsathoggua or the lizard in "The Weird of Avoosl Wuthoqquan". Far from the Agatha witch that be.


>
> There are cultural institutions that one NEVER
> attacks: Shakespeare is one such. The third rail
> of literary criticism, right? If you seek public
> castration as an English major undergrad, try
> criticizing the innate sillines-not witty, just
> silly like comedia del arte, like Leonce &
> Lena--of some of his lesser comedies. :^)

Weeell, I have tried reading Shakespeare, but couldn't easily get into him. But I still think (or because of it), that he is the greatest! Bar none. Totally beyond criticism! ;D

But seriously, I have read Macbeth, and was quite impressed by his superhuman poetic observations.


>
> But Jeezus, not all of Shakespeare is great, and
> some not even good. This was the Neil Simon of the
> Elizabethan Age, so let's get our feet back on the
> ground, shall we?

Nooooo! He is ALL great!

And let us stay off the ground!! Grounded earth gazing is so dull. ;DD



I'm sorry, ... I had too much wine today. x^)
Okay, let's tackle the next, ...


>
> Now, I feel like Christie is a minor example of
> such a revered institution, and hence somewhat
> protected from objective criticism. I'm
> postulating that in the area of Very British Ghost
> Tales, James is another such.
>
> There is nothing particularly wrong with his
> writing--it's quite competent. But it lacks that
> snap of inspiration and/or imagination that might
> make it truly special. Like de la Mare sometimes
> is, and CAS in his better works. James never
> approaches this level of evocative reader
> engagement, in my opinion.
>
> So, what say ye now?


I say, oh, ... to hell wiff it!

Okay, okay, he was British stuffy in a manner. :I And I agree that de la Mare and Arthur Machen were more interesting artists of the supernatural. But James was master of his craft, he could really tell an engaging, beautifully composed, story, or make a Christmas ghost story reading if that was its ultimate purpose, in perfect pitch. I just found them very engaging, and pleasant to my inner aesthetic balance. Not sure if I would find re-reading them much worthwhile though. (By the way, yes, "The Mezzotint" is really impressive.)

My favorite of James's stories is "A View form a Hill", and happens to be CAS's favorite too. It is BEAUTIFULLY written, has one helluva subtly disturbing and sinister imagination, ... deliciously morbid!

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
>
> > James is a very reliable and competent source
> for
> > a known product, always supplying the expected
> > result.
>
> The same could be said of Lovecraft. Where is
> there an uncharacteristic Lovecraft story?

Yes. HPL plays in the same playground every day.

It's not the usual playground, but he consistently prefers it.

Many writers do, now that I think of it.

>
> (Answer: "Poetry and the Gods" -- but was that a
> revision of someone else's story?)
>
> In the field of weird fiction, isn't it Machen's
> fiction that's the most varied? There is quite a
> difference between, say, "The Black Seal" and "N,"
> or "The White People" and "The Great Return," or
> "The White Powder" and "The Children of the Pool,"
> or "The Terror" and "Dr. Duthoit's Vision." These
> are all impressive stories, but they're quite
> different from one another. (If we want to pursue
> a thread on Machen's fiction, though, it shouldn't
> be tucked away in a thread on M. R. James.) Of
> course there's even more variety in Rudyard
> Kipling.
>
> But sometimes one just wants to settle in for a
> Sherlock Holmes story or perhaps a Jeeves and
> Wooster story, and one wants pretty much more of
> the same.

Yes! Exactly!

Recovering from surgery nothing sounded better than reading the entire Holmes collection.

I think James is like this. But I tend to forget his stuff faster than some of the others I read.

--Sawfish

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

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > >
> > This is all very well and good, K., old friend,
> > but is he or is he not the Agatha Christie of
> the
> > modern ghost story...? ;^)
>
>
> Naah, my lively, spontaneous, generous old friend,
> I don't agree! At all! ;) Uuum, ... I have never,
> ... read Agatha Christie. But it DON'T matter. She
> was an old CRONE!! ... fiddling with murders, and
> trifles such as who's guilty. Who the hell cares??
> ;D
> James was an artist, or expert craftsman, ...
> occupied with the supernatural, ... the
> S-U-P-E-R-N-A-T-U-R-A-L, fur christ's sake!!
>
> Wasn't it "The Treasure of Abbot Thomas" that has
> an imaginative treasure map, that even includes
> the colored glass mosaic of a chapel window (even
> better than any romantic Indiana Jones adventure
> Spielberg or Lucas could come up with)? And then a
> treasure hidden in the wall of a well, guarded by
> a froglike monster, like CAS's Tsathoggua or the
> lizard in "The Weird of Avoosl Wuthoqquan". Far
> from the Agatha witch that be.
>
>
> >
> > There are cultural institutions that one NEVER
> > attacks: Shakespeare is one such. The third
> rail
> > of literary criticism, right? If you seek
> public
> > castration as an English major undergrad, try
> > criticizing the innate sillines-not witty, just
> > silly like comedia del arte, like Leonce &
> > Lena--of some of his lesser comedies. :^)
>
> Weeell, I have tried reading Shakespeare, but
> couldn't easily get into him. But I still think
> (or because of it), that he is the greatest! Bar
> none. Totally beyond criticism! ;D
>
> But seriously, I have read Macbeth, and was quite
> impressed by his superhuman poetic observations.
>
>
> >
> > But Jeezus, not all of Shakespeare is great,
> and
> > some not even good. This was the Neil Simon of
> the
> > Elizabethan Age, so let's get our feet back on
> the
> > ground, shall we?
>
> Nooooo! He is ALL great!
>
> And let us stay off the ground!! Grounded earth
> gazing is so dull. ;DD
>
>
>
> I'm sorry, ... I had too much wine today. x^)
> Okay, let's tackle the next, ...
>
>
> >
> > Now, I feel like Christie is a minor example of
> > such a revered institution, and hence somewhat
> > protected from objective criticism. I'm
> > postulating that in the area of Very British
> Ghost
> > Tales, James is another such.
> >
> > There is nothing particularly wrong with his
> > writing--it's quite competent. But it lacks
> that
> > snap of inspiration and/or imagination that
> might
> > make it truly special. Like de la Mare
> sometimes
> > is, and CAS in his better works. James never
> > approaches this level of evocative reader
> > engagement, in my opinion.
> >
> > So, what say ye now?
>
>
> I say, oh, ... to hell wiff it!
>
> Okay, okay, he was British stuffy in a manner. :I
> And I agree that de la Mare and Arthur Machen were
> more interesting artists of the supernatural. But
> James was master of his craft, he could really
> tell an engaging, beautifully composed, story, or
> make a Christmas ghost story reading if that was
> its ultimate purpose, in perfect pitch. I just
> found them very engaging, and pleasant to my inner
> aesthetic balance. Not sure if I would find
> re-reading them much worthwhile though. (By the
> way, yes, "The Mezzotint" is really impressive.)

Hah!

Very good! My hat is off to you, K!

--Sawfish

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

To me, M.R. James is comfort food: you know exactly what you are getting, but boy is it good! I’m sure that Ms Christie’s fans feel the same about her scribblings.

I recommend listening to David Collings’s readings of the complete ghost stories. They’re on Spotify: [open.spotify.com]

(I must question the designation ‘ghost stories’, by the way: many of James’s stories are about monsters, demons etc. -- not ghosts.)

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is nothing particularly wrong with his
> writing--it's quite competent. But it lacks that snap
> of inspiration and/or imagination that might make it
> truly special.

That’s funny: I think the Jamesian ‘snap’ is one of the hallmarks of his writing. The reader gets a long, slow burn, full of Old Testament obscurities or Latin quotations, and then suddenly it’s there:

Quote:

‘The Treasure of Abbot Thomas’
It hung for an instant on the edge of the hole, then slipped forward on to my chest, and put its arms round my neck.

Quote:

‘The Diary of Mr Poynter’
What he had been touching rose to meet him.

Quote:

‘Wailing Well’
‘They hadn’t much to call faces,’ said the shepherd, ‘but I could seem to see as they had teeth.’

Yikes!

For a special Jamesian treat, seek out the short story ‘The Guide’, by Ramsey Campbell. He’s got the formula down pat.

Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.spiked-online.com]

Humanities departments are like Jonestown nowadays.

Avoosl Wuthoqquan Wrote:

> Humanities departments are like Jonestown
> nowadays.


Zinnngggg! My compliments to you on a zinger that those departments often deserve.

Avoosl Wuthoqquan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To me, M.R. James is comfort food: you know
> exactly what you are getting, but boy is it good!

Yes!

And it's good because you crave it already!

> I’m sure that Ms Christie’s fans feel the same
> about her scribblings.

Probably!

;^)

For me, Sherlock Holmes is the same way, except, as with Oreos, I no longer feel like indulging.

>
> I recommend listening to David Collings’s
> readings of the complete ghost stories. They’re
> on Spotify:
> [open.spotify.com]
> xH
>
> (I must question the designation ‘ghost
> stories’, by the way: many of James’s stories
> are about monsters, demons etc. -- not ghosts.)
>
> Sawfish Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is nothing particularly wrong with his
> > writing--it's quite competent. But it lacks that
> snap
> > of inspiration and/or imagination that might
> make it
> > truly special.
>
> That’s funny: I think the Jamesian ‘snap’ is
> one of the hallmarks of his writing. The reader
> gets a long, slow burn, full of Old Testament
> obscurities or Latin quotations, and then suddenly
> it’s there:
>
> It hung for an instant on the edge of the hole,
> then slipped forward on to my chest, and put its
> arms round my neck.
>
> What he had been touching rose to meet him.
>
> ‘They hadn’t much to call faces,’ said the
> shepherd, ‘but I could seem to see as they had
> teeth.’
>
> Yikes!

Yep, I have to agree.

I overstated my original point in the hopes of having just such discussions as these.

I mean, I could have (almost did) start one, "Subterranean Motifs in CAS and HPL", and I'd possibly still be waiting for my first "hit"...

>
> For a special Jamesian treat, seek out the short
> story ‘The Guide’, by Ramsey Campbell. He’s
> got the formula down pat.

I'll try to give it a go.


[SNIP...]

--Sawfish

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