Now that we've broached CAS's strongest work, I'd like to balance that out against his weaker works, and perhaps start by identifying what I think his main weakness is, as a writer of short fiction.

I feel that Smith does not handle dialog, especially if the story is set in contemporaneous times, very well. I just read a couple of his SF stories, set on Mars or Venus, and the dialog is almost laughable. A lot like in the original King Kong. He has the characters say words and phrases that, even allowing for the difference in conversational cliche over the last 70 or so years, just does not ring true. He also uses dialog as an expository device for too transparently.

Of course, ultimately he gets away with this because, he is, after all Clark Ashton Smith, a superbly gifted storyteller, especially of imaginative tales, and the reader is till left with the great reward of reading thru to the culmination of the tale.

It does seem to me that in his tales set in epochs that one might identify as sharing the sensibilities of the past (Zothique, Hyperborea, etc.), he is not so clumsy. Maybe it's a combination of using less dialog,a nd the dialog that he does choose to use, although still stilted, is not out of character.

I just finished reading The Dweller in Gulf over my breve and croissant this morning. He has a guy, who he describes as one of three "hard-bitten" adventures, not "overly imaginative or prone to nervousness," say, of an approaching sandstorm (and I kid you not!):

"...I don'r recommend a lungful of that ferruginous dust."

Clealry, Smith succumbed to the temptation to put in the mouths of some of his characters the descriptive words he, himself, knew and loved. The problem is, these guys wouldn't have said "ferruginous", even if they knew what it meant. (I admit to having to look it up to obtain the precise meaning.)

Any comment on this weakness, or others?



--Sawfish

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

What you may like to ask is whether the style of his prose in consonant with the genre he uses, such as science fiction, as opposed to fantasy. What, also, of accusations that his plotting is not as strong as others, and that he achieves less focus of depth than a superficial sheen of linguistic brilliance, surface pyrotechnics rather than insightful linguistics?

Also, what of the fact that most have little to say beyond the needs of the plot, as opposed to his verse? That is, where he goes beyond the "slim purpose" of scaring in his verse, he does not do so in his weaker plot works, and this lack of a greater focus tells.

Phillip

*Author of Strange Gardens [www.lulu.com]


*Editor of Calenture: a Journal of Studies in Speculative Verse [calenture.fcpages.com]

*Visit my homepage: [voleboy.freewebpages.org]

voleboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What you may like to ask is whether the style of
> his prose in consonant with the genre he uses,
> such as science fiction, as opposed to fantasy.


> What, also, of accusations that his plotting is
> not as strong as others,

This I don't see, but I am open to specific examples.

> and that he achieves less
> focus of depth than a superficial sheen of
> linguistic brilliance, surface pyrotechnics rather
> than insightful linguistics?

This I would reject out of hand. If Smith does one thing well, it is to layer nuance. By nuance, I mean use of multipile techniques to potentiate each other: descriptive brilliance that establishes a both mood and atmosphere to an almost tangible degree (choking dust in The Vaults of Yoh-Vombis, e.g.); evocative story-telling (The White Sybl, Xeethra); and superlative use of irony in both major (Necromancy in Naat) and minor (Vintage From Atlantis) applications.

Oh, yeah. He could also creep you out pretty well, too. Maybe not like "Charles Dexter Ward" ("You fool..."--yeow! That was scary!), but pretty good, nonetheless.

I really do think that when he was on, he was a very effective writer who combined a greater number techniques than most other writers of fantasy.

>
> Also, what of the fact that most have little to
> say beyond the needs of the plot,

What would there be to "say" in a short story? Most of his stuff actually "says" more than Lovecraft, when you think about it.

I'm assuming that by "say" you mean theme, right? They both like to show man's relative insignificance in terms of the cosmos, but Smith makes further observations on human nature.


> as opposed to
> his verse? That is, where he goes beyond the
> "slim purpose" of scaring in his verse, he does
> not do so in his weaker plot works, and this lack
> of a greater focus tells.

See above.



--Sawfish

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

You seem more aware of Clark Ashton Smith's weaknesses than me. After all, I am still a novice as far as his stories are concerned. Even so, from what I can remember of his stories, he seems to use dialgoue in a functional way. However, I don't remember finding any other potential weaknesses in his stories. Lastly, I have all of the old Panther versions (in paperback) of his writings. Therefore, I was wondering if this is a complete collection of his fiction? (I'm not really interested in his poems).

Modern writers in the horror and fantasy genres seem unable to generate the atmosphere of either HP Lovecraft or Clark Ashton Smith. My only regret is that Clark Ashton Smith is not still with us today. I'm sure that he would be rather critical of much of today's writing in these fields.

Julian L Hawksworth