I almost can't believe that I have not read "Out of the Aeons" until now, year of our lord 2011! And I had my read-through of the Lovecraft tales in the 1980's (largely skipping the revisions)! Well it is not bad to have some good leftovers in "old age"!

It's a pity that a story like this should be hidden away among the category "revisions". This story shows off Lovecraft's tremendous imagination and construction ability; I think it is one of his very best stories (if not the best), if one looks aside from the cumulative effect of the longer works.

It is also yet another reminder of how very different the American fantastic writers are from the European.
In Europe, the old country and culture, which has reached its civilization peak and lost its forward momentum long ago, the artists don't invent so much, but work with what they already have, rearranging, polishing, fine-tuning, drawing from their deep cultural roots.
In USA, the new frontier, lacking deep cultural roots, the forward momentum and creative force has been much stronger. While the work of the American fantastic writers may lack a sense of deeply rich cultural fabric and history, this is compensated by their unrivaled fresh inventiveness, creativity and imagination, and flair for gadgets. They so to speak "invent" new imaginary cultural fabrics to move around in. So clear in the works of Lovecraft and CAS (and many others), and in Jack Vance who in many ways often is a continued sophisticated evolvement of especially CAS's creative fantasy perspective (excluding the explicit horror stories, but including the subtle horror flavours and especially the sardonic humor).

Lovecraft's "revisions" are the best Lovecraft parodies around. Not surprisingly, he seems to have lost certain inhibitions when writing under someone else's name.

Jojo Lapin X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not surprisingly, he seems to
> have lost certain inhibitions when writing under
> someone else's name.


Yes, "Out of the Aeons" seems very unrestrained, and free from inhibiting prestige, in its imaginative flow.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

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

Perhaps the enthusiasm on this forum is not very high for either of these two. (A little further exploration told me that Who Goes There? is pulp garbage.) Anyway, I bought a copy of The House of the Seven Gables. If for nothing else, I think it may enrich the texture of my next Lovecraft reading.

"Perhaps the enthusiasm on this forum is not very high for either of these two. (A little further exploration told me that Who Goes There? is pulp garbage.)"

If you can say that then it is apparent that you've never read "Who Goes There?"

Gill Avila Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you can say that then it is apparent that
> you've never read "Who Goes There?"

Please elaborate. I am happy for any guiding you can offer.

I'm sure you meant "guidance." Anyway, in an oblique way I was suggesting that you read the story before dismissing it as "pulp garbage." In the science fiction field it is considered a classic. Here is a link, one of many if you Google "Who Goes There?"

[nzr.mvnu.edu]
Who%20Goes%20There/Who%20Goes%20There%20Index.htm

It's a pity HPL died almost 1 1/2 years before it was published. He would've appreciated the Antarctic setting, and something buried in ice for thousands of years like in his own ATMOM.

Gill Avila Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sure you meant "guidance." Anyway, in an
> oblique way I was suggesting that you read the
> story before dismissing it as "pulp garbage." In
> the science fiction field it is considered a
> classic. Here is a link, one of many if you
> Google "Who Goes There?"
>
> [nzr.mvnu.edu]
> ck/readings/manuscri/
> Who%20Goes%20There/Who%20Goes%20There%20Index.htm
>
> It's a pity HPL died almost 1 1/2 years before it
> was published. He would've appreciated the
> Antarctic setting, and something buried in ice for
> thousands of years like in his own ATMOM.


Alright, "guidance". I used "guiding" for variation, because I liked the sound of it. And it has an ambiguous energy here, between verb and noun. But it may be incorrect English.

Thanks for sharing thoughts on the book. I may read it. Reviews I had read found it melodramatic and lacking in setting descriptions, and inferior to the films based on it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11 Dec 11 | 03:01AM by Knygatin.

That's interesting, and I'd like to see some of these reviews. For my part, while I don't think it is an immortal classic of literature, "Who Goes There?" is anything but "pulp garbage". Though Campbell generally was not a great stylist, at times he could write some truly powerful atmospheric stuff, as in "Twilight", which is a tale HPL himself would probably have liked; and I think he also would have found "Who Goes There?" much to his taste as well.

As far as the setting... I'd say he handles it very well indeed, giving an intense feeling of isolation and the overwhelming realization of the harshness and alienness of the environment to human life; and the creature itself is certainly one of the most impressive elicited in early science fiction. I have a fondness for the older film, and think that Carpenter actually captured some of the paranoia of the tale, but I'd have to say that the story itself far outdoes either, rather than the other way around.

I don't know if it has ever been released as a book, but it is an often anthologized tale, being in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, vol. IIA (edited by Ben Bova, which also contains Wells' The Time Machine, certainly about as bleak a vision on the subject as one is likely to find), as well as numerous other anthologies; and can also be found in The Best of John W. Campbell, which also contains "Twilight" and other of Campbell's more memorable essays into fiction.

jdworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's interesting, and I'd like to see some of
> these reviews.

Well, "reader reviews" or "customer reviews" I saw for the book at US or UK Amazon. I know Amazon reviews can often be misleading and mostly expressions of subjective taste, but some are so ambitiously worded that it can be difficult not to be swayed.

> As far as the setting... I'd say he handles it
> very well indeed, giving an intense feeling of
> isolation and the overwhelming realization of the
> harshness and alienness of the environment to
> human life; and the creature itself is certainly
> one of the most impressive elicited in early
> science fiction. I have a fondness for the older
> film, and think that Carpenter actually captured
> some of the paranoia of the tale, but I'd have to
> say that the story itself far outdoes either,
> rather than the other way around.


Definitely sounds interesting.

I have now read Walter de la Mare's "All Hallows". He is obviously a writer who likes to linger in deep reflection. He has some fine writing skills to draw the reader in. I like his poetic relationship to Nature, and his interesting allegorical interpretations. In the first part of the story especially I had to rise and walk around after each section, in excitement over his inspiring revelations.

This is fine writing, for any reader, whether interested in the fantastic or not. But it only barely moves forward, it is almost resigned in worldly energy. It is a lonely pleasure.

I wouldn't really define this as weird or imaginative fantastic literature. Its focus is on exploring the human condition and perceptions.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12 Dec 11 | 03:40PM by Knygatin.

Quote:

Its focus is on exploring the human condition and perceptions.

I respectfully disagree. De la Mare does at times spend too much time in the "human aquarium", as I mentioned, but to interpret a story in which demons are reconstructing a lonely church as being about "the human condition and its perceptions"? I don't think so.

Absquatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its focus is on exploring the human condition and
> perceptions.
>
> I respectfully disagree. De la Mare does at times
> spend too much time in the "human aquarium", as I
> mentioned, but to interpret a story in which
> demons are reconstructing a lonely church as being
> about "the human condition and its perceptions"? I
> don't think so.

I think the supernatural elements are limited in description (mostly second hand retellings of impressions by the old verger), and very subtle and ambiguous. The story is more about describing impressions of the senses, the psychological interpretations of things that could be supernatural or could have natural explanations (for the most part), than taking us on a direct journey into the weird.

I would certainly agree that de la Mare is allusive, subtle, and implicit. Few of his tales--that I've read, at any rate--are explicitly weird. I don't mind that, at all, except when the psychology and characterization become too tight a focus. That's part of the bad influence upon him of Henry James.

As for natural explanations, the only possible one in "All Hallows" is that the verger is addled, mad, or going deaf, blind, and confused in his senses. The problem is that that sort of get-out is possible in any weird tale, under any circumstances. On the other hand, if anyone is open to diverse interpretations, then it would be de la Mare.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12 Dec 11 | 09:08PM by Absquatch.

It's unlikely to tell any one here much that they don't already know and it might be limited to UK only IP addresses, but on BBC Radio 4 today there was a short feature on Robert Aickman...

[www.bbc.co.uk]

...which might be of interest...