On the subject of M. R. James, I wholeheartedly recommend the unabridged audio version of his published ghost stories, available from Craftsman Publishing (here's a link).

The stories are read by the actor David Collings, who has a peculiar habit of turning up in stuff I like (Monkey, Sapphire and Steel) and always does a memorable job, and on occasion -- as in this instance -- a brilliant one. His readings are more or less perfect in my opinion, and both editorially and dramatically James's marvellous texts are treated with the greatest respect; even a lengthy bit of Latin is read out convincingly (i.e. with at least seeming comprehension).

I am not a fan of audiobooks, personally, but these recordings are very special indeed.

My nomination would be the works of Hanns Heinz Ewers (1871-1943). His Frank Braun sequence of three novels (The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Alraune, and Vampyr) are long out of print, probably in the original German as well as the English translations. (I have the first two, which were wonderfully illustrated by Mahlon Blaine.) Alraune has been filmed a number of times, and is very effective despite its now patently ridiculous premisE that artificial insemination will produce some sort of soulless monster. Ewers's short stories are occasionally found. Ewers had Nazi sympathies at one time and although he and the Nazis quickly fell out of favor with each other, this may have played a role in his current obscurity.

karlpov Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My nomination would be the works of Hanns Heinz
> Ewers (1871-1943). His Frank Braun sequence of
> three novels (The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Alraune,
> and Vampyr) are long out of print, probably in the
> original German as well as the English
> translations. (I have the first two, which were
> wonderfully illustrated by Mahlon Blaine.) Alraune
> has been filmed a number of times, and is very
> effective despite its now patently ridiculous
> premisE that artificial insemination will produce
> some sort of soulless monster. Ewers's short
> stories are occasionally found. Ewers had Nazi
> sympathies at one time and although he and the
> Nazis quickly fell out of favor with each other,
> this may have played a role in his current
> obscurity.

Yes, I love Ewers. Alraune has recently been reprinted by Side Real Press [www.siderealpress.co.uk] in a modern translation (but has just fallen out of print - but I bet you could still find it at certain book sellers and an eBook version is available here: [www.lulu.com]. The other Frank Brauns, I believe, are to be scheduled for publication by Side Real sometime in the future.

A quick post while I am able to grab the Internet out here in the waste:

Who Goes There? by John W Campbell. The House of the Seven Gables by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Are these books worthwhile?

I wonder about Robert Aickman. I can't find any texts online, and the book editions are quite expensive. Is his writing good quality atmospheric fantasy, or is it more like psychedelia horror? His outer appearance has the urbane artsy architect look, and that strikes warning bells for me, because I can't stand modernity. (Concerning modernity, for example I tried Ramsey Capmbell's 70's and 80' horror stories, and didn't really enjoy these attempts at socially engaged, symbolic psychological horror, taken from analogous uses of modern lifestyle. I don't see much horror or atmospheric creepiness in modern city life, I only find it ugly and dispicable. That is because it is materialistic, and has turned its back on and lost contact with the cosmic and deeper natural forces. Contrary to Campbell's thoughts that M.R. James escaped the real horrors of life, James is the one who did deal with the real horrors (as did Le Fanu). Campbell had something good going with imaginitive color in his early Lovecraft pastiches, and then he blew it with socially engaged "important" writing.)

Can someone describe the events in "The Stains"? I understand from a review that it has beautiful descriptions of the English countryside, and that there is something strange about mosses and lichens.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2 Dec 11 | 05:01AM by Knygatin.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... taken from analogous uses of
> modern lifestyle.

Bad phrase.

... using analogies taken from modern lifestyle.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can someone describe the events in "The Stains"?

Sure! It has been quite a while since I last read it, but it is about this guy who becomes involved with a young lady he finds in a hole in the ground. Eventually stuff starts growing on his body. Aickman is probably my favorite "weird" writer; he sometimes achieves that rare thing, perfection.

I love Aickman, he's fast becoming my favourite author... I'm sure he'd share you dislike of modernity, Knygatin. But I think it's fair to say that Aickman is a BIG influence on Campbell, which might put you off... I've only read two books by RC, so I'm not qualified to judge him. I would say that Aickman isn't totally removed from modernism, yet he's not entrenched in it. Ambiguity is key to much of his fiction, which will either work for you or frustrate the hell out of you... I think it's a hard trick to pull off and, I'd probably admit, Aickman sometimes is too vague for his own good, but when he clicks, he's the best IMO. And re-reading him has made me reappraise my initial reaction to some of his tales...

Maybe your best bet is to buy a cheap ghost story anthology or two with Aickman's stuff in it. I know one of his stories is in the Oxford Book of ghost Stories(I can't remember which off hand), there's also an excellent Aickman story in RC's anthology that contains The Hole of the Pit (whatever it is called), which is worth buying for that alone... I'm also pretty sure he included his own work in the Fontana ghost story anthologies he edited, but which ones... I do not know. I'm sure one of this board's scholars will know which is best...

The English Assassin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I
> know one of his stories is in the Oxford Book of
> ghost Stories(I can't remember which off hand),

It is, I believe, "Ringing the Changes," his most frequently anthologized story. Edit: Actually, it is "The Cicerones." Sorry.

> there's also an excellent Aickman story in RC's
> anthology that contains The Hole of the Pit
> (whatever it is called)

UNCANNY BANQUET.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2 Dec 11 | 11:19AM by Jojo Lapin X.

Walter de la Mare was a tremendous influence on Aickman, and a vastly better and more interesting writer, in my view, so I'd certainly recommend exploring de la Mare before Aickman, if you haven't, already. Not to slight Aickman, of course; I do like most of what I've read by him. Now Ramsey Campbell, that's another matter....

I'd add that Aickman at least had the good sense to be open-minded about paranormal phenomena and the like, and represents yet another contradiction of Lovecraft's erroneous dictum that the best weird writing comes from materialists and skeptics.

Actually, if you are willing to go with used copies of his books, you can sometimes find collections for very reasonable prices. Here, for instance, is a search I just did through Amazon:

[www.amazon.com]

And yes, he often included a story of his own in each of the Fontana volumes (which is not a bad primer series for familiarizing oneself with some of the best supernatural fiction).

I, too, would recommend de la Mare, who was a master of the art of subtlety and suggestion. I would also suggest taking a look at his poetry, which is often very good, and not infrequently concerned with spectral matters.

As some may recall, I disagree when it comes to Campbell, whose work I generally admire, though I can see why someone might object to the modernity of much of his fiction. (Personally, I find it all the more disturbing because he so ably blurs the line between perception and reality there, not to mention that between the genuinely weird and what merely appears to be so.)

As for Aickman himself... I think he, too, was one of the greatest modern exponents of such suggestion, and his likening of the ghost story to poetry is perhaps especially applicable to his own "strange stories"....

Jojo Lapin X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> UNCANNY BANQUET.

YES!!! That's the fella!


Absquatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd add that Aickman at least had the good sense
> to be open-minded about paranormal phenomena and
> the like, and represents yet another contradiction
> of Lovecraft's erroneous dictum that the best
> weird writing comes from materialists and
> skeptics.

I concur with your criticism of Lovecraft's unsupportable hypothesis, which I'd argue is just a simple projection of his own philosophical bias upon a genre whose major figures, such as MR James and Machen were either theists or spiritualists or, as you said, at least open minded; all to suit his own cosmic interpretation of supernatural fiction. I'd argue very few supernatural tales are really cosmic in their perspective. I think HP was massively guilty of reinventing the facts to suit his biased agenda based on assumptions that largely applied to his own fiction and very few others... Kind of like a Creationist does with scientific theory... :)

However, neither would I go the other way by saying 'good sense' (debatable) nor (to extrapolate the point a bit...) would I imply that a supernatural philosophy makes an author/reader somehow superior to a secular author/reader (nor the opposite), as I'd argue imagination and the ability to compartmentalise belief from artistic escape is all that is required. After all Lovecraft himself is at least the equal of Machen, MRJ, Blackwood, CAS, etc... Surely the beliefs of an author should largely be irrelevant to the reader as much of what an author puts in is largely unintentional, which is half the fun.

English Assassin:

Just to be clear, I was not implying that the opposite of Lovecraft's thesis is necessarily a better position, either. I do not believe that a bias in either direction would make anyone a better (or worse) writer of weird fiction.

I will add, though, that I find it amusing that, of the various modern masters (M.R. James, Dunsany, Machen, Blackwood, CAS, de la Mare, even Aickman), the only one of that bunch who shared Lovecraft's purely materialistic world-view is Dunsany, to my mind the weakest writer of the lot.

Anyway, I was half joking with my "good sense" comment, since most would consider such views the contrary of good sense. What I mean by the term is, again, the open-mindedness and humility to recognize that "there are more things in Heaven and Earth...". I know that you are not a fan of CAS's "all human thought..." quotation on a philosophical level, as I am, but that sort of recognition of just how little we know is a marker of good sense, I think.

As an aside, Uncanny Banquet is a great anthology, on the whole. I'd recommend it for The Hole of the Pit, alone, but it has a really good selection of other, lesser known tales.

Lest we get carried away, it should be noted that Aickman had very little to say on the issue of the supernatural outside of fiction---indeed, even though he wrote a very peculiar autobiography, he was very reticient about himself and his beliefs more generally.

Absquatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>"there are more things in Heaven
> and Earth...". I know that you are not a fan of
> CAS's "all human thought..." quotation on a
> philosophical level, as I am, but that sort of
> recognition of just how little we know is a marker
> of good sense, I think.

Actually, I don't really have a problem with CAS on this one... If I have stated so before, then I did so rashly. I don't remember doing so, but it is possible depending upon context.

Just to clarify my position, I don't have a problem with any supernatural belief or open mindedness... I have no doubt that the totality of the universe will always be beyond the limits of human imagination; however that doesn't mean I can give credence to traditional supernatural belief and religious dogma, which seems human-centric and lacking in a true appreciation of the complexity and vastness of the unknown, nor does that mean that I consider all facets of the universe to be totally beyond our ken... My only real problem is those who impose their morality upon others based on their cosmological belief and those who only make pretensions to a specific methodology or approach for cheap propaganda purposes. In that regard I doubt we disagree with each other terribly deeply, although I'd dare to wager that I probably make a greater distinction between the reductive assumptions of scientists compared with those of a more spiritual bias. I'm also more than a little sceptical about those who claim 'open mindedness' yet show a significant bias against science while criticising those who question the dubious claims of supernaturalism, paranormal and alt/pseudo-sciences. But maybe I'm being unfair... Equally, science needs its methodology questioning by others. Yet for me tho, the main difference is the scientific community shows signs of self-criticism from within its ranks (not universally, but it's there), whereas I don't see (or at least I'm not aware of) the same self-criticism within the alternative position. But dogma exists in both camps.

Back to the weird: I certainly agree that Uncanny Banquet is a fantastic anthology. I can only think of one that matches it. By the way there is standalone edition of The Hole of the Pit with an additional story by Ross. I'm not sure of the quality of it as I don't own a copy (yet) but it can be found here: [www.oleanderpress.com]