I just started up on some project Gutenberg volumes two days ago. I had read some of his stuff before, and had coming away vaguely liking it. I was a bit more impressed this time, with some *genuine* cold chill moments, but think I see a recurring narrative flaw in that he tends to lose focus or rhythm somewhat--although I need to read much more to be more sure of this.

What are your opinions, fellow-EDers?

--Sawfish

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

I like both Le Fanu and M.R. James. But I would definitely say that Le Fanu is the more "chilly" of the two authors.

I probably agree with you about Le Fanu's recurring narrative flaw, except that I tend to reserve this criticism for his longer works. I have read a few of his full-length novels, and the only one that is truly successful is UNCLE SILAS; and it is no coincidence, I think, that this one is atypical in that it manages to keep the focus on the protagonist. (There is actually an unnecessary shift of focus at one point, but it is not enough to derail).

Some of his mid-length works also suffer from this flaw. THE HAUNTED BARONET definitely loses focus, IMHO. You could make the same argument about CARMILLA, though I would still argue that CARMILLA succeeds in spite of it.

In his shorter pieces, this lack of focus takes the form of a journalistic style; which, on the one hand, does tend to distance the reader somewhat; but, on the other hand, tends to broaden the scope as well as buttressing the suspension of disbelief. Later authors, notably M.R. James and H.P. Lovecraft, have also employed this trick, often successfully.

Platypus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like both Le Fanu and M.R. James. But I would
> definitely say that Le Fanu is the more "chilly"...

> In his shorter pieces, this lack of focus takes
> the form of a journalistic style; which, on the
> one hand, does tend to distance the reader
> somewhat; but, on the other hand, tends to broaden
> the scope as well as buttressing the suspension of
> disbelief. Later authors, notably M.R. James and
> H.P. Lovecraft, have also employed this trick,
> often successfully.

I like Le Fanu much better than James, who followed in his "chilly" footsteps. JSLF deals with different strata of society as the best Victorian authors do (Mrs. Gaskell for example, whose supernatural stories I may eventually to get around to), and he is one of the absolute masters of uncanny atmosphere. I haven't read Uncle Silas, but did see the movie version, and thought the lead actor's performance interesting. I don't agree that the journalistic style in the shorter tales generally blurs the focus. Certainly not in "Wicked Captain Walshshawe, of Wauling", wherein the narrator's intimate knowledge of details is verified by both the central experience of his Uncle as well as his allusion to his father's memory of Walshawe's features, a memory derived only from the descriptions of others! Rather than distancing the reader, these masterly techniques have the effect of authenticating the incredible climax. In "The Drunkard's Dream" the omniscience of the narrator may suggest a lack of focus, but there are elements of satire and irony to make up for it. The same elements that, combined with his imaginary world settings, lessen the need for depth of characterization in Clark Ashton Smith's fiction. M.R. James, btw, wrote a fine tribute to Le Fanu, his chief influence.

jkh

Both "The Drunkard's Dream" & "Wicked Captain Walshawe, of Wauling" show Le Fanu's love of the epigrammatical (more's the pithy).

jkh

Quote:

Kipling
the omniscience of the narrator may suggest a lack of focus, but there are elements of satire and irony to make up for it. The same elements that, combined with his imaginary world settings, lessen the need for depth of characterization in Clark Ashton Smith's fiction.

This is not to differ with you about CAS's depth of character development--which in my opinion is sufficient, but not generous--but rather to suggest that in the short story form, if there's a lavish character development, the narrative emphasis passes to the character, rather than to a central event. And very often, the popular short story is about an extraordinary event, at least in weird fiction.

This can be contrasted against something like Hemingway's Nick Adams stories, Fitzgerald's Pat Hobby stories, and Dunsany's Jorkens stories, where the actions exist to embellish the character. Seems like Doyle's Holmes stories are a balanced blend of character and unusual events.

The whole thing exists on a continuum, doesn't it?

--Sawfish

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

Sawfish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the omniscience of the narrator may suggest a lack
> of focus, but there are elements of satire and
> irony to make up for it. The same elements that,
> combined with his imaginary world settings, lessen
> the need for depth of characterization in Clark
> Ashton Smith's fiction.
>
> This is not to differ with you about CAS's depth
> of character development--which in my opinion is
> sufficient, but not generous--but rather to
> suggest that in the short story form, if there's a
> lavish character development, the narrative
> emphasis passes to the character, rather than to a
> central event. And very often, the popular short
> story is about an extraordinary event, at least in
> weird fiction.
>
> This can be contrasted against something like
> Hemingway's Nick Adams stories, Fitzgerald's Pat
> Hobby stories, and Dunsany's Jorkens stories,
> where the actions exist to embellish the
> character. Seems like Doyle's Holmes stories are a
> balanced blend of character and unusual events.
>
> The whole thing exists on a continuum, doesn't it?

It does. A concentration on short stories can lead to feelings of detachment if one favors the weird. Novels naturally tilt the other way, especially Victorian novelists. Walter de la Mare's The Return, I thought, balances characterization and the central event, as with Doyle. I appreciate your clarity.

jkh

Quote:

Kipling
A concentration on short stories can lead to feelings of detachment if one favors the weird. Novels naturally tilt the other way, especially Victorian novelists.

This is a very insightful comment.

One is "influenced" more by novels than by short stories, I think, and it's perhaps thru a gradual personal attachment to a well-developed character.

In the past, my worldview was profoundly influenced by Catch-22, and by a minor novel, Blood Sport. Hemingway was in there, too. All this was when I was a lot younger.

I'm reading thru Houellebecq's major works for the second time in two years right now; it can be profoundly disturbing if one is in the more receptive stages of youthful questing, I think.

--Sawfish

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