K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But a warning to the
> curious: James is much better.

For an evening's entertainment. *hehe*


I must be curious. It's strange how the best writers are the least known. All you ever hear in the thickheaded media megaphone regarding supernatural literature is "Stephen King! Bradbury! Lovecraft!", over and over. In recent time I have suddenly discovered, thanks to you guys on the Eldritch Dark, and from diligient research, several writers who are about as vital and central to me as my discovery of Lovecraft when I was a teenager. And they are largely unknown!

K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But a warning to the
> curious: James is much better.

I am not sure it makes much sense to compare them; they aim to achieve very different things. Onions's stories are psychological. James would never have attempted anything like the careful study of mental breakdown that is "The Beckoning Fair One"---it would not have gone down well with the boys at Christmas.

I would agree with Jojo on this. James' stories are genuinely stories of supernatural occurrences, generally "ghosts" of one type or another, and fine examples of that genre. But Onions walks the borderline between the supernatural and mental disturbance or those delicate mental states which are extremely difficult to pin down or describe, and he does this with consummate artistry. With James, you come away with little or no doubt that you've encountered some form of malevolent supernatural entity; with Onions you have taken a walk in the shadowland lying between the real and the unreal; and, to the mind receptive to such impressions, this can be considerably more disturbing, because it is an area which any of us may, at odd moments, be prone to experience.

Sounds to me like Onions is closer to de la Mare and Aickman, than to James.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sounds to me like Onions is closer to de la Mare
> and Aickman, than to James.

Indeed he is, though the bulk of his work preceded either.

Re: Less Familiar Weird Literature
Posted by: jdworth (IP Logged)
Date: 13 February, 2012 06:14PM
I would agree with Jojo on this. James' stories are genuinely stories of supernatural occurrences, generally "ghosts" of one type or another, and fine examples of that genre. But Onions walks the borderline between the supernatural and mental disturbance or those delicate mental states which are extremely difficult to pin down or describe, and he does this with consummate artistry. With James, you come away with little or no doubt that you've encountered some form of malevolent supernatural entity; with Onions you have taken a walk in the shadowland lying between the real and the unreal; and, to the mind receptive to such impressions, this can be considerably more disturbing, because it is an area which any of us may, at odd moments, be prone to experience.

JDWorth, this sounds very much like a hypnogogic trance. I've been fortunate to experience them twice in my life thus far, both during turbulent periods marked by a disrupted sleep cycle. It felt like an angel or demon had come to tug my soul out of my body to take me on an astral journey. Having never done drugs other than alcohol I have to assume this is what an LSD trip would feel like, and it's easy to understand how someone who experiences such a trance would believe they've been 'touched' by a divine or malign supernatural agency. Wonder how many world religions were started based on some similar experience ... Fortunately my sister is a doctor of psychology and was able to explain this most peculiar occurrence.

Sandor Szabo

I did not mean to compare Onions to James--but I could not resist my crude 'warning to the curious' joke :) Indeed, they are very different writers. Personally, I like James much more--but that is only a reflection of my taste.

Yes, The Beckoning Fair One was a pretty good tale--I can't deny that :)

Not sure I like Aickman either--though I must admit I've only read a handful of his tales.... Subtlety is good, and I'm certainly not part of the blood-'n'-guts camp--but too much subtlety can turn me off of a writer--and from what I remember, Onions and Aickman are that sort of writer.

K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure I like Aickman either--though I must
> admit I've only read a handful of his tales....
> Subtlety is good, and I'm certainly not part of
> the blood-'n'-guts camp--but too much subtlety can
> turn me off of a writer--and from what I remember,
> Onions and Aickman are that sort of writer.

Is it the same for you with de la Mare?

jdworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would agree with Jojo on this. James' stories
> are genuinely stories of supernatural occurrences,
> generally "ghosts" of one type or another, and
> fine examples of that genre. But Onions walks the
> borderline between the supernatural and mental
> disturbance or those delicate mental states which
> are extremely difficult to pin down or describe,
> and he does this with consummate artistry. With
> James, you come away with little or no doubt that
> you've encountered some form of malevolent
> supernatural entity; with Onions you have taken a
> walk in the shadowland lying between the real and
> the unreal; and, to the mind receptive to such
> impressions, this can be considerably more
> disturbing, because it is an area which any of us
> may, at odd moments, be prone to experience.


This post was well put and memorable. I believe those "odd moments" may happen when the mind is very weak and in serious crisis, when the intellectual, emotional, and material walls that we have built up to handle life stably collaps. The mind at those moments stand wide open like a barndoor, vulnerable to outside influences. Normally we are protected from these kind of "supernatural" experiences, because of the material comforts and stability we have buit up in the industrial society, warding off many threats, and keeping up a stablity even if it ultimately may be illusory. I think brushes with the "paranormal" were more common in the more uncomfortable 1800s and older times. But it certainly still happens, when some individual's life is dressed bare.

Thank you for the kind words.

I think the feeling described above is why I do so enjoy writers such as Onions, de la Mare,
Aickman, some (at least) of Kirk, Campbell, and so on, including some of the tales of L. P. Hartley. "A Visitor from Down Under", for instance, always feels to me like a special sort of fever dream, where the dream is actually a rupture of those "fixed laws" Lovecraft talks about, allowing the presence of the truly "Outside". And, of course, one of the attractive aspects of this experience is that while not diminishing the feeling of menace and the terrible one whit, there is also that sense of the sublime and/or the numinous as well. A convincing portrait of the "slipping" of reality ever-so-little... just enough for the readeer to experience something of that mystical experience which blends both terror and ecstasy. Certainly, at his best, Lovecraft does this for me (and even in his lesser tales, he often approaches it surprisingly often, as a close reading of these tales may show); and his blurring of the lines between reality and dream (which he more than once posits as a different form of reality, even as early as "The Tomb") is, to me, a fascinating part of his work. Smith approaches this sort of thing with great skill as well in several tales, albeit from a different perspective, and often with a good deal of pathos as well.

Incidentally, I've been listening (again) to the readings of some of James' ghost stories by Derek Jacobi, which I think is a very good rendition. It took a bit of getting used to at first, but I think his presentation of these tales adds even more layers of subtlety and horror to them. I especially like "A View from a Hill", where his rendition of the more "comic" elements of the characters, dialogue, etc., work to increase the effect exceptionally well....

I have some favorites by James, but "A View from a Hill" is perhaps his finest moment.

I too enjoyed "A View from a Hill"--but his best? I think I'd have a hard time singling out just one.... I need to reread James already....

K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I too enjoyed "A View from a Hill"--but his best?
> I think I'd have a hard time singling out just
> one.... I need to reread James already....

I was referring, in this instance, to the reading by Jacobi; I feel this is perhaps the best of the set offered on this recording... though all are quite good, and "The Ash-Tree" runs it a very close second. Still, this is a matter of personal taste in this case, rather than a measured critical judgment. I'd be interested in hearing from anyone else who has listened to these, and is willing to share their impressions....

K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I too enjoyed "A View from a Hill"--but his best?
> I think I'd have a hard time singling out just
> one.... I need to reread James already....


Well, in a subtle sense, even if it's not his most striking and easily memorable story.

The reason I think this story is his finest moment, is because it makes such a harmonious beautiful whole out of perfectly fitted parts falling in place and locking into each other.

And also because the black magic artifact (the binoculars) is so original and deliciously morbid. I wonder how ever James could come up with such a "sick" idea.

K_A_Opperman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Subtlety is good, and I'm certainly not part of
> the blood-'n'-guts camp--but too much subtlety can
> turn me off of a writer--and from what I remember,
> Onions and Aickman are that sort of writer.

Clark Ashton expressed something similar about Walter de la Mare, so I think you share your view on subtlety with him, and to a certain extent with Lovecraft.

As I have argued before, I see it as the difference between American and European perspective. Americans are more practical-minded, and want to see tangible concrete results. CAS is not at all a subtle writer, I find him the opposite, working with clearcut, colorful, and dynamic contrasts. That is his genius.