Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kipling Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -
> The obtuseness of the protagonist has a distancing
> effect, which blunts some of the story's impact.
> His obtuseness is not really a flaw, though. It
> is an inherent feature of the story, without which
> it would be a different story. I like the story,
> as it is, well enough. But for whatever reason,
> it is nowhere near the top of my list of
> favorites. I is near the top for me, along with "The Strange High House in the Mist". In both there is genuine human interest, but then, Joshi did go so far as to say that characterization is a "detrimental" to the cosmic approach (materialism). I imagine Lovecraft, were he alive today, might be nonplussed by the fossil record and the scientific implications of the 2001 mapping of human DNA, to say nothing of the cosmological discoveries of fine-tuning in the origin of the universe. He may even have discarded his materialism.

jkh

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kipling Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -
> The obtuseness of the protagonist has a distancing
> effect, which blunts some of the story's impact.
> His obtuseness is not really a flaw, though. It
> is an inherent feature of the story, without which
> it would be a different story. I like the story,
> as it is, well enough. But for whatever reason,
> it is nowhere near the top of my list of
> favorites. It is near the top for me, along with "The Strange High House in the Mist". In both there is a closer approach to characterization, but then, Joshi did go so far as to say that characterization is "detrimental" to the cosmic approach (materialism)! I imagine Lovecraft, were he alive today, might be nonplussed by the fossil record and the scientific implications of the 2001 mapping of human DNA, to say nothing of the cosmological discoveries of fine-tuning in the origin of the universe. He may even have discarded his materialism. Likely not.

jkh

Kipling Wrote:
> It is
> near the top for me, along with "The Strange High
> House in the Mist".

A good story. Not-quite horror. I'm probably more of an HPL fan than you are, so I like most of his stories, without their necessarily being favorites.

> In both there is a closer
> approach to characterization, but then, Joshi did
> go so far as to say that characterization is
> "detrimental" to the cosmic approach
> (materialism)!

I don't necessarily disagree, but since I'm not a materialist, I don't particularly care either. Materialism is arguably inconsistent with all sorts of things, including, arguably, human consciousness. If materialism proves that the characters don't matter, then perhaps it also proves that the reader does not matter, nor the writer, nor the critic. I appreciate "cosmicism" in HPL's work as a sense of awe and humility in the face of the scope of creation. And if HPL's gods and demons are bigger and scarier than puny mankind, then so was Morgoth, Sauron and Ungoliant in the works of JRR Tolkien.

Matters of taste being what they are, anyone is free to dislike HPL, or particular works of his. It is when Joshi gives specific reasons, that he generally makes no sense to me, though materialist ideology seems to play a major role in his preferences. Here are a few of his criticisms, in the form of questions, of DREAMS IN THE WITCH HOUSE, together with my responses:

"What is the significance of the Old Ones in the story?"

He means the star-head aliens. They are aliens. An example of the sort of creatures you can encounter when you can cross inconceivable vistas of space by magic. Maybe they are demons, or maybe they are extraterrestrial sorcerers -- alien equivalents of Keziah. I'm not sure why Joshi would expect to know more. Given the premises of cosmicism, Gilman would not expect to fully understand everything he sees, when he receives chance glimpses of vistas beyond his comprehension.

"To what purpose is the baby kidnapped and sacrificed?"

What would one expect from an evil quasi-pagan witch-cult, if not human sacrifice? Joshi seems to have trouble with the idea that the behavior of the evil demon-worshiping cultists has any religious aspect to it. He wants a lecture of how magic isn't real, and is really just alien science. Because ideology. But even if alien science can look like magic, why should it not look that way to Keziah or any other human cultist?

"How can Lovecraft the atheist allow Keziah to be frightened off by the sight of a crucifix?"

Because he is writing fiction; and, at the moment, his Muse is not in the mood for militant atheism. Perhaps HPL felt that the mood of horror would be undercut if Gilman were to succeed entirely by his own resources, so he hints at the intervention of some higher power. Nor is this the first and only time in HPL's fiction that he has resorted to such devices. If Joshi does not like it, I'm sure he can rationalize it away. Perhaps the tin crucifix, blessed by the good Father Iwanicki, bears a resemblance to the Elder Sign.

"Why does Nyarlathotep appear in the conventional figure of the Black Man?"

Because he does. Joshi seems to hate this, perhaps because it reminds him of Christian-themed medieval lore about Sabbath witches. But this is beside the point. Nyarlathotep is HPL's version of Satan - a demon sufficiently relatable to human beings that it is capable of conversing with them, tempting them, and corrupting them. Nyarlathotep is a figure from an actual nightmare that HPL had.

"In the final confrontation with Keziah, what is the purpose of the abyss aside from providing a convenient place down which to kick Brown Jenkin?"

It is the recess in which Keziah deposits the bones (and bodies?) of all the children she has sacrificed over the years. It also may be Brown Jenkin's lair, since it is where Brown Jenkin's body is found after some building rubble falls on him and kills him. This is a weird question. Did Joshi not read the story? Is he worried that it represents Hell?

"How does Brown Jenkin subsequently emerge from the abyss to eat out Gilman's heart?"

Can rats not climb? Can they not tunnel? He emerged from that recess before. Why should he not do it again after he recovers from being kicked?