Re: Less Familiar Weird Literature
Posted by:
jdworth (IP Logged)
Date: 9 June, 2014 11:02PM
gesturestear Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know why I respond sometimes because I
> always get blasted back but Fanu's Green Tea is a
> macrabe story of physiological terror. The
> beginning through half way is a little slow but
> the second part is a crazy ride through self
> mania, with this crazed monkey always showing up
> more and more abd know one else can see it. Even
> when the monkey isn't there he is constantly
> afraid until he lets his guard down after like six
> months and then it starts all over. I haven't read
> it in awhile but I believe that was one of the
> first physchological horror novels that deals with
> mental illness. Carmilla is great and Schalken the
> Painter is also an excellent thrill.
I know that you and I seldom agree on these things, but there is no rancor involved in my part; simply critical disagreement. I would hate for you to stop posting because of such disagreements; even when I may be profoundly in disagreement with you, I think the input from your end is nonetheless interesting to me, and likely to be so to others as well... not to mention that there are quite likely those who agree with you, whether they voice their opinions or not.
When it comes to this particular story ("Green Tea"), I'm not quite sure I understand your use of the phrase "physiological terror" here but, if I am understanding it, then I think you are at least partly right, and certainly this take on it has its own distinct chill (and story text to support it -- again assuming that I am understanding your use of the term).
Kyngatin: when I first read "Green Tea" many, many years ago (in Great Tales of Terror and the Supernatural), I, too, found it disappointing. It grew on me with time, and I began to see more going on there than I had at first realized. Now I am among those who would consider it among Le Fanu's masterpieces of subtle but particularly horrific (not, however, without a strong element of pathos) nature; very carefully constructed, but not necessarily easily deciphered. I lean toward Jim's statement that it plays on a multitude of levels, and the answer(s) to the riddle are more complex (and compound) than may at first appear. I would suggest you give the story some good length of time (a year or two, perhaps more) and revisit it then; see if your views on it have changed. I may be mistaken, but I am willing to wager they will....