An interesting review in the NY Times on the Library of America Lovecraft collection. Read it all to get the full story:

[nytimes.com]

You can use

username: bugos7
password: bugos7

to access the NY Times site.

This review reminds me of the scene in "Blazing Saddles:" an old woman, who had earlier used a racial epithet on Sheriff Bart, brought him a pie to thank him for his bravery in outwitting Mongo, adding "You'll have the good taste not to mention this, of course." Bart then remarks that "I'm starting to become a big underground hit in this town." So it is with HPL. Snickett obviously wants to dislike him--why, I don't know, I think he's in obvious denial--but is still powerfully affected by Grandpa's prose. I've seen several other writers take similar stances since the LoA TALES came out, but have also been pleasantly surprised to see some unapologetically positive reviews as well. Of course, PUBLISHER'S WEEKLY was a certainty, considering that Peter Cannon (Twayne's H. P. LOVECRAFT, Arkham's LOVECRAFT REMEMBERED, plus FOREVER AZATHOTH and THE LOVECRAFT CHRONICLES) is an editor there!
Best,
Scott

There's no argument against HPL fiction being silly & overwrought by post-Hemingway standards.

Maybe Snicket(Handler) thought there were enough reviews explaining why HPL's work is loved, but not enough arguing why it's also stylistically grotesque.

There's an old saying in the Army: if it's stupid and it works, it ain't stupid. Lovecraft's style might well be grotesque, but it works, and in any event I think he might well consider "grotesque" a compliment.
What irritates me about reviewers like Mr. Handler (Snickett) is their cocksure attitude that any deviation from the Gospel According to Saint (Henry) James is literary heresy, damning the offender to the deepest pit of hack oblivion. For what Lovecraft--and Smith, to get back on topic--wanted to achieve with their short stories could not be accomplished with Mr. Hemingway's "machine-gun staccato." (Don't get me wrong, I _like_ machine guns, but while I can draw a smiley face with a Thompson I don't use one to write.) Littlewits then deduce from this that why, if you can't write 'em like Ernie, then what you're writing isn't valid artistically. I swear, if you dropped Yuggoth into their skulls and shook them, you could be in a mariachi band.

Scott

Quote:

Lovecraft's style might well be grotesque, but it works, and in any event I think he might well consider "grotesque" a compliment.

Indeed. Recall that one of Poe's famous collections of stories is entitled Tales of the Grotesque and Arabesque.

As for the rest, I find nothing "grotesque", in the pejorative sense of that term, about Lovecraft's style of writing, and Hemingway is no authority for me. It's unwise to feed trolls, though, so I shall stop there.

Kyberean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
[snippage] It's unwise to feed trolls,
> though, so I shall stop there.

Troll? Moi? I'm sorry you think so, and apologize for whatever offense I may have committed.

Scott

Perhaps I'm the troll. If so, I'll assume it's no less a compliment than "grotesque".

My comment about contrasting Lovecraft to Hemingway wasn't meant to be contrasting the two. I was just making a comment on the modern standard, which will eventually pass away as previous tastes have done.

Scott:

You're among the last here to whom I would refer as a troll! The reference was to geocorona's remark. See below.


geocorona:

Your remark as phrased seemed troll-like, and I also don't recall seeing you post here before, but
now that you've explained what you mean more clearly, I both regret and retract any hasty conclusions I may have drawn.

Your remark as phrased seemed troll-like

I don't have much emotional investment in defending HPL or CAS (their work defends itself) so I can be blunt sometimes, yet I'll never get into a lemony snicket over the subject.

Also, I have my own grotesquely overwrought writing style as a handicap.

and I also don't recall seeing you post here before,

It's been a couple of years.

Quote:

I don't have much emotional investment in defending HPL or CAS (their work defends itself) so I can be blunt sometimes, yet I'll never get into a lemony snicket over the subject.

Nor do/would I , as I hope that the brevity of my reply would indicate.

Quote:

Also, I have my own grotesquely overwrought writing style as a handicap.

I hope to read more from you, then. Today, we need all the grotesquely overwrought writing we can get!