Has anyone else here read the following text by this idiot? [www.eldritchdark.com] . I assume that it's posted here for laughs. Comments?

I have, of course, and I have given it exactly the consideration it deserves. IMHO it has precisely the correct title for itself. I guess Our Boyd was having some fun with us.
On other matters: today I received a substantial essay on Clark's poetry by none other than Fred Chappell, Poet-Laureate of the Great State of North Carolina, author of the first mainstream Cthulhu Mythos novel, DAGON., and all-around darling of the mainstream literati. It is quite complimentary to Clark, and will appear in either the second or third issue of LOST WORLDS, depending upon space requirements. "What is this Sh*T?" will appear immediately after I have my brain scooped out and replaced by pureed jalopenos and cream cheese, garnished with nachos. YUuum--moy caliente!
Scott

Quote:

"What is this Sh*T?" will appear immediately after I have my brain scooped out and replaced by pureed jalopenos and cream cheese, garnished with nachos. YUuum--moy caliente!
Scott

LOL! That's good to know, even though the preface does advance CAS scholarship by leagues (insert *sarcasticon* here). I wonder, though, seriously, what was the purpose of such a preface for an otherwise welcome e-text of The Star-Treader? At first, I thought it really was a joke--and perhaps it is, after all, as it seems almost an exquisite parody of the sort of vulgarity and philistinism that CAS disdained and often lampooned. I'm afraid not, though!

"I wonder, though, seriously, what was the purpose of such a preface for an otherwise welcome e-text of The Star-Treader?"

Kevin, if we drew a map of Cyberspace, large areas would be marked "Here There Be Trolls." As obnoxious as this exsanguinating rectal orifice (ask Jim Rockhill for a translation) may be, he is a Rhodes Scholar in comparison to a certain batrachian denizon of alt.books.ghost-fiction. Let us give silent praise to Lord Thaisadon that we have not been afflicted with more cretins than this one. Best, Scott

Those who know me should know that I allow any one to air there opinion here - I have as much time for well constructed criticism as I do praise.

You have to admit there is no derth of sycophantic praise in this sort of Lit Field.

B.
(Ducking for cover)

But this is more serious than it seems. For example, does Mr Dorman know that a text he is legally in charge of is being distributed freely with the mention: "The text of The Star-Treader and Other Poems may be sordidly done in any number of ways: edited, mutilated, defaced, abused, mistreated, and cruelly whipt without permission of the publishers by rational people everywhere."? Scott, a few weeks ago, on another forum, you said that people shouldn't post HPL's texts on the web so that official publishers like Arkham House could still earn enough money to afford serious scholarly, annotated editions of the Old Gent. And we were talking about earnest HPL afficionados there, not literary morons...

Phil






.

I doubt I would have seen the above subjected topic but for you
gentlemen uncovering it - Is this a preface to a new Japanese issue of
the book? Mr. Ichigawa (I believe this is Japanese for a problem
relieved by Preparation H) does not write particularly well, and
commonly, persons for whom English is not native have great difficulty with the more archaic forms of our inexhaustibly rich language; likewise,
they commonly want everything to be easily accessible. I am reminded
of a line from Byron's "Thoughts on a College Examination" in which
he speaks of the student critics of his day who "prate 'gainst that
which they ne'er could imitate." Of course we know that CAS is enjoying a considerable revival in no small way legitimized by the interest of
Major Universities in the entire genre.

PS: small note for Boyd from tired old english teacher - "their" possessive pronoun; "dearth" not "derth" - probably typos done in
haste. Some other word than "sycophantic" is needed in your note,though
I'm sure most will get your intent. The "sycophant" requires a living
object of adulation from whom rewards are expected to flow - CAS is
not in a position to either say thank you or throw up in response to
gushing adoration; my recollection of the man suggests the latter
rather than the former -- Clark was always more interested in whether
his reader "got it" and how he verbalized his understanding of what
he had read - that was always the source of probing and incisive
conversation, and of far greater interest to him than effusive ravings.
since it could lead to deeper insights for himself as well as his
reader - - fine writers are usually eager for the well-conceived thoughts of others.

Scott:

Although I tend to avoid newsgroups, I know all too well about trolls. What's odd in this case is that this a preface to a PDF file of The Star-Treader. I cross-posted my inquiry to Zothique Nights, and the consensus there seems to that this is some sort of joke. The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to agree. It just seems to be too extreme in its stupidity to be for real. There's still room for doubt, though, and only "Ken" knows for certain. If it is a joke, then my opinion is that it's a pretty witless and ill-conceived one.

Boyd:

Quote:

I have as much time for well constructed criticism as I do praise.

Ummm, well, yeah, but...wouldn't the operative phrase here be "well constructed"??? By the way, on the "Biographies" page, I noticed that the articles and their authors' names are mismatched.

Phil:

I understand your concerns, but I believe that, under U.S. copyright laws, The Star-Treader would be in the public domain now.

I would be inclined to think that it is a joke, if for no other reason than the fact that it doesn't present any arguments against CAS's work. However, this "it isn't even worth the time to think about" attitude is all too often adopted by academia toward any work produced after 1904 that doesn't fall in line with the tenets of "high modernism" or post modernism. As an undergraduate English major, I often find myself struggling with this mindset. For instance, why is so much modernist and post-modernist work obsessed with demonstrating the limitations of fiction? And if fiction is limited in its ability to portray reality, why does realistic fiction have any inherent worth over fantastic fiction? You would think that a bunch of intellectuals who value arguments about the limitations of fiction wouldn't be so obsessed with Updike (I shudder with revulsion at the name) and like fish in the "human aquarium." It seems to me that in writers such as CAS and Lovecraft, this whole concern with capturing "the real world" is preempted early in the game so that the author can go on to subjects that matter, so why isn't fantastic literature given any credit?
Also, the article tacitly assumed that if something isn't accepted by mainstream academia or widely read by pseudo-intellectuals in an effort to appear intelligent (ala Joyce or Pynchon), it is not worthwhile fiction. This narrow-mindedness with regards to fiction outside the academic tradition is my biggest pet peeve with the current intellectual establishment. Why are authors such as Peake, CAS, Schulz, Aickman and Grabinski neglected just because hundreds of doctoral students haven't written dissertations on them?
Anyway, sorry for the rant, but this article reminded me of all the problems I have with the modern literati. Thank God for "Lost Worlds" and other such outlets for criticism that bypass the ridiculous pedantry and pretension of the literary establishment.
-Daniel Harris

The smug idiocy of this supposed introduction is difficult to understand, but there are worse excuses for criticism on and off the internet than this. We need to thank every power we know that this site has not been plagued by certain coprophagous trolls disrupting discussions elsewhere on usenet.

Jim

Atropos:

Quote:

However, this "it isn't even worth the time to think about" attitude is all too often adopted by academia toward any work produced after 1904 that doesn't fall in line with the tenets of "high modernism" or post modernism. As an undergraduate English major, I often find myself struggling with this mindset.

I've been there, and I feel your pain--seriously! That's one large reason why I declined to continue for my Ph.D.

Quote:

And if fiction is limited in its ability to portray reality, why does realistic fiction have any inherent worth over fantastic fiction?

A question that I've often asked, as well. Here's my answer, sort of, in the form of a little essay that I wrote a couple of years ago.


Many persons separate horror or weird fiction from its mainstream, "respectable" variety. Most perceive it as being formulaic, repetitive, or ritualistic. Of course, horror or weird fiction is no more repetitive or ritualistic than any other literary genre. The more interesting question is, "Except for matters of convenience and ease of communication, why is weird fiction perceived as a separate genre; indeed, why does the idea of 'genre' exist at all?"

The fact that most consider the weird to be a separate genre is highly revealing. It implies that one form of literary representation represents the norm, and that everything else is a deviation from that norm. This notion also implies that the norm is superior to the deviation. Why do so few seem to question these classifications? Why--outside the general designation of "the novel"--are the works of Dickens or Proust not considered to be part of a "genre"? They are, in fact, highly generic: To be specific, they belong to the genre of anthropocentric fiction that values above all else the "realistic" depiction of human social relationships, whether this "realism" be that of action, psychology, or both. It is only in our modern age that such a genre became primary. In wiser and more ancient days, it was horror and fantasy that were primary, especially in ages before the invention of literature proper, the days of poetry and myth. Unlike our decadent (Post-) Moderns, such peoples realized that fantasy and horror--and the sense of the numinous that accompanies them--were woven inextricably into the fabric of daily life. For them, anthropocentric, "realistic" fiction would be the deviant "genre", not horror or other forms of what we would today call "fantasy".

Now, of course, the genre of so-called "realistic" fiction is dominant--that, or coy Post-Modernist navel-gazing. Not, however, that many would even notice. As Foucault and other Nietzschean thinkers have shown, not only does the dominant discourse of the age marginalize other equally valid, but deviant, discourses, it also makes itself invisible in the process. For instance, if someone were to go to any university literature department and state that Dickens wrote genre fiction, most professors would greet him with either uncomprehending stares or gales of laughter. As a coda to this observation, need one add that this phenomenon is hardly confined to the notion of literary genres?

Chipougne Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But this is more serious than it seems. For
> example, does Mr Dorman know that a text he is
> legally in charge of is being distributed freely
> with the mention: "The text of The Star-Treader
> and Other Poems may be sordidly done in any number
> of ways: edited, mutilated, defaced, abused,
> mistreated, and cruelly whipt without permission
> of the publishers by rational people everywhere."?
> Scott, a few weeks ago, on another forum, you said
> that people shouldn't post HPL's texts on the web
> so that official publishers like Arkham House
> could still earn enough money to afford serious
> scholarly, annotated editions of the Old Gent. And
> we were talking about earnest HPL afficionados
> there, not literary morons...
>
> Phil

I said that people shouldn't post texts without permission; you might notice that both the Smith Estate and Arkham House have given Boyd permission to use the CAS texts on line here. Unfortunately, THE STAR-TREADER was published before 1922, so under U. S. copyright law it is considered in the public domain. It may be under copyright protection in some Berne Convention and EU countries where the standard is life of the author plus 75 years. I will discuss this with Bill Dorman and with Arkham House's agent, Joshua Bilmes, especially since that edition may be originating from a country where TST may in fact be under copyright. On the other hand, it just might not be worth the time and effort. Why bother giving this troll the attention he wants, which is no doubt why he did it in the first place. Morally he is on the same level as skinheads painting swastikas on Jewish grave markers, he is just in it for the shock. Unlike the skinheads, though, we can't arrange for him to become the jailhouse concubine of a 250lb body-building ghetto denizen whose favor Smith poem is "'Oh Golden-tongued Romance'."
Best, Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .

Unfortunate indeed, Scott, though I have a friend who can make things happen...
Seriously, though, by granting him any attention at all we are probably gratifying his pathetic ego.
Kevin, I thought that your arguments concerning the rationale behind separating the weird from mainstream fiction were quite interesting. The fact that any author who deviates slightly from mainstream literary tradition (such as Proust or Faulkner) is regarded as a revolutionary just demonstrates how formulaic and clichéd mainstream fiction is. No true devotee of weird fiction would argue that there aren't any talentless hacks crowding the horror bookshelves. However, the members of the realism-obsessed establishment who constantly harp on genre fiction clichés are pointing out the mote in their brother's eye while ignoring the beam in their own.

I'm just catching up on this thread, and having read the thing in question, I have to put in my two cents. (please excuse me if I mention things which have already been covered) The sad truth is that many ignorant people will ridicule that which they don't understand, usually in an effort to distract others from noticing their ignorance. It is confusing though: why did this person undertake the task of scanning or transcribing the text if they had this opinion of the quality of the work? Strange . . .
Kudos to Boyd on this: Its tough to be fair and even all the time, but he does an admirable job in this regard.
-Ron

Well it's all a matter of taste at the end of the day I suppose, but it's always better to celebrate what you love and ignore what you don't as far as artists go. It's not like CAS is an overwhelming cultural presence - I'm sure there's an unpleasant psychological archetype at work there somewhere with this chap. Poor bloke!