Well,am going through L.W.Currey's fiction they have from 1800-1923 and have made many new finds.Among them is "The finding of Lot's wife",which is a weird tale and not a lost race,like acording to Violet Books.

I recently purchased a few books by the early twentieth century occult wrtiter Montague Summers ("The Vampire in Lore and Legend," "The Werewolf," and "A History of Witchcraft"), and I have to say I'm pretty taken with this fellow. And while it's hard to say how "obscure" he is, I'm curious to know if anyone in the forum has any opinions one way or the other about the man and his writings. I was looking through Smith's correspondence, and I noticed that he considers one of his Summer's books to be a "prized possession"--an interesting comment, at any rate.

If nothing else, I find the combination of Summer's vast erudition to be an amusing complement to his apparently literal belief in such things as werewolves, vampires, succubi and incubi, etc. (It's hard to say how much Summers actually believes in these things, and how much he is just playing along like Don Quixote, merely trying to make the world seem more interesting and palatable.) He appears on the whole to have been a thoroughly eccentric and fascinating character. There are all sorts of biographical details such as his conversations with Aleister Crowley (ostensibly the kind of bloke Summers would feel nothing but repulsion for!), that whet one's appetite to know more about this man.

Also, I know Lovecraft was reading "The Witch Cult in Europe" (Margaret Murray), which he liked. But that work is full of sloppy generalizations and factual errors, and Summers seems much more to Lovecraft's taste. But did he ever read any of his work or comment on him in the manner of CAS? Anyhow, I would love to know more about Summer's life and writings.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 8 Sep 09 | 03:35AM by Dexterward.

David Kartas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The original is,to my knowledge, superior,as it
> has all the original implications,dimensions,etc.
> and it doesnt feel as bad as neither of the I
> think two revisions existent.
>
> Also-anyone here read "The Dwellers in the
> Mirage"-I have and like with "The thing from the
> lake" am shocked theres no discusion about it
> anywhere.
>
> Also-would it be okay to post my reviews on this
> site,at least the Capes and Merritt related ones?

I'd love to read your Merritt reviews. He is sadly neglected today. CAS and HPL both thought highly of him. He possessed an incredible imagination.

Quote:

and like with "The thing from the lake" am shocked theres no discusion about it
anywhere.

The neglect of both The Hole of the Pit and The Thing from the Lake among aficionados of weird fiction is disgraceful. Perhaps if we stress that a woman wrote the latter, that fact will garner it additional attention? The (to my mind over-rated) Marjorie Bowen and many others seem to be profiting from that particular wave.

There have been a few poetry collections with W. H. Hodgson. What are his poems like? Can they be compared to CAS's poems, or to Lovecraft's? Do they have worthwhile fantastic and weird elements, beauty or wisdom beyond the conventional?

David Kartas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The original [The Metal Monster] is,to my knowledge, superior,as it
> has all the original implications,dimensions,etc.
> and it doesnt feel as bad as neither of the I
> think two revisions existent.


Merritt was not happy with the original magazine serialization, and cut away 10,000 words of text before allowing book publication. Perhaps this end result should be considered the absolute version.


What kind of text did he remove? Is it mostly pedestrian passages inbetween the fantastic elements?
(I can't make up my mind if I am going to read it for the first time in my old cherished Avon paperback, or buy the extended magazine version in the new Hippocampus publication which I think has an unsensitive and unaesthetic book-design which I don't long to hold in my hands.)

> David Kartas Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > Also-anyone here read "The Dwellers in the
> > Mirage"-I have and... am shocked theres no discusion about it
> > anywhere.

I enjoyed the early episode, with the Kraken. And remember the giant moss (Merritt is great at fantasy moss-environments!), the Little People, and the sylvan descriptions of Evalie (reminiscent of CAS's writing).
But inbetween I found the passages long-winded and boring. Same with The Moon Pool, the passages between the fantastic elements are downright painful getting through. And I bet the romance is even more saccharine than in Hodgson's The Night Land.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12 Sep 09 | 10:31AM by Knygatin.

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

> Merritt was not happy with the original magazine
> serialization, and cut away 10,000 words of text
> before allowing book publication. Perhaps this end
> result should be considered the absolute version.
>
>
> What kind of text did he remove? Is it mostly
> pedestrian passages inbetween the fantastic
> elements?
> (I can't make up my mind if I am going to read it
> for the first time in my old cherished Avon
> paperback, or buy the extended magazine version in
> the new Hippocampus publication which I think has
> an unsensitive and unaesthetic book-design which I
> don't long to hold in my hands.)

Merritt never was satisfied with this particular tale, even though he felt that parts of it were among his best writing. Hence, he continued to tinker with it for the remainder of his life. After reading this version (as well as the later novel version -- there was a third version as well, even less satisfactory, under a different title) I can see why. At times it feels too drawn out, and portions of the tale are somewhat confused in the telling... yet it holds together much better than the shorter version, is definitely much better atmospherically, and has a tighter-knit structure, whereas the standard version has a rather choppy feel at times, as some of the "connective tissue" has been cut out.

What Merritt removed was, on the whole, that which gives the story its unique feel of a genuinely alien world; most of what is missing are the more notably weird passages, largely because they are atmosphere and the "philosophical" underpinnings, leaving the novel version rather flat and unconvincing at times. In the latter, the action, the plot, remains, but the life in it has been diminished to a considerable degree.

For all its faults (and I agree with the author that it certainly has them), this really is the better version if you're looking for Merritt's at his atmospheric best.

Jdworth, thank you very much!

I guess I'm just gonna have to buy the Hippocampus publication.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the new Hippocampus publication which I think has
> an unsensitive and unaesthetic book-design

Really? At least the illustration, unless I am much mistaken, is by Virgil Finlay---than whom there are few better, if you ask me.

Jojo Lapin X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knygatin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > the new Hippocampus publication which I think
> has
> > an unsensitive and unaesthetic book-design
>
> Really? At least the illustration, unless I am
> much mistaken, is by Virgil Finlay---than whom
> there are few better, if you ask me.

Nothing wrong with Virgil Finlay! I just find the overall book design cheap looking, like a glaring supermarket sales sign.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12 Sep 09 | 12:28PM by Knygatin.

Knygatin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jdworth, thank you very much!
>
> I guess I'm just gonna have to buy the Hippocampus
> publication.

You're welcome. I'm not all that fond of the typeface, but having the Finlay illustrations (cover and frontispiece) is quite nice, and the book seems to be rather sturdy and durable... and I've got to admit that I'm just glad the originsl version is back in print.

I might add a warning to take it slowly, though, as otherwise it can be a surfeit of bizarre imagery with little actual story attached at times; taking it in "small doses" -- breaking off if you begin to feel the atmospheric tensity slackening and picking it up again later -- may enhance your enjoyment of the whole. (Then again, you may not have that problem with this one; a lot of people do, but by no means all.)

At any rate, I hope you enjoy it, and I'd like to hear your impressions....

Virgil Finlay did the greatest Lovecraft cover artwork ever, for THE OUTSIDER AND OTHERS. The fantastic HPL portrait. The cover for Marginalia. Among uncountable other things. He is legend, and beyond reproach from ordinary mortals.

Finlay's illustrations for George Sterling's poems are laughably bad. The blue-eyed vampire "flapper" on the front cover of The Thirst of Satan says it all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12 Sep 09 | 08:02PM by Kyberean.

Merritt's Creep, Shadow Creep??? Is it worthwhile? Good? Weird elements?

(Jdworth, I promise I'm eventually getting back about The Metal Monster.)