This has no doubt be beaten to death here years ago, but what the heck...

I've recently gone thru a bunch of CAS's short fiction and am now lumping thru HPL's. As often as I've re-read each (many,many times!), it is only after my participation in this forum that I began to to view each writer's techniques in a different light. I suppose that the rut one assumes, reading/re-reading for enjoyment many, many times, must necessarily be broken by discussion with others, much like the discussions of the Torah, and other religious texts, semes to inspire additional depth of interpretation.

Sometime back I became aware that some of HPL's passages were extremely precise--almost painfully so. I found that I was tempted to plow right thru these passages (and a good example of such a passage is the description of the protagonist's escape from the Gilman House, in "Shadow Over Innsmouth"), but when I took the time, a whole other level of realism was added.

I'm not entirely sure that the effort in time spent, precisely placing the action in space and time, is worth the reward in minutiea. Cerainly, HPL really seemed to value a great deal of precision in description of setting, but this sometimes leads to such verbal convolution that it breaks the pace of the story.

Overall, however, I think that HPL's best short fiction more viscerally involves the reader than does CAS's. Perhaps this is because HPL often used 1st person, and when he didn't, his POV was still much closer to the main character's than CAS's. To this degree, HPL seems to be a much more modern writer, in the tradition of modern mainstream 20th C writers, at least so far as POV and realism goes. At least in a lot of his mythos work, as opposed to his Dunsany stuff.

CAS seems to create moral tales that are closer in impact to true fantasy. There is a certain detachment, almost an invocation of the muse, with the attendent disassociation of time ""long ago and far away"). We are able to see the story, but elements from it will never touch us; however, can we say that when we have read The Shuttered Room, and pass thru the older sections of many American cities? The situations in CAS stories cannot actually touch you (as HPL's can), but the underlying lessons are there and they tend to be traditional.

I believe that HPL was a fine writer with a very good toolset. His choice of descriptive technique seems questionable at times, and to no very good end. But then, he wouldn't be HPL, would he?

CAS is less insistent and personally committed a storyteller, but makes up for this with a very witty commentary on the human condition, a fine and subtle sense of the ironic, mixed with a vocabulary, that, while taxing *if you want to ascertain the specific effect intended* in no way slows the reading of the story, so the pace is unaffected. I would therefore say that CAS functions both as a fairly precise creator of setting, if you should choose to look up all of the words he uses, but even if you are not so willing, his choice is contextually supported well enough to allow you to "read thru" his descriptive vocabulary, coming away with a "taste" of the exotic, without actual precise knowledge of the descriptive terms. I would point to such words as: porphyry, mummia, natron, verdigris, etc. And "balas-ruby". Where in the hell will you ever find this used elsewhere--but whne used to describe the eyes of the dead(?) sorceror-king in the vault with the interstellar monster, it is both memorable and sufficient. Actual definition?

"a pale rose-colored variety of the ruby spinel"

Your thoughts, valued readers?



--Sawfish

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