I actually liked Anchorhead very much, because it was (I thought) well written, engaging, and not too difficult. I did rely heavily on hints toward the end, because I was so absorbed in the story that I couldn’t stand to leave it hanging. I zoomed through the last chapter late at night, in a dark house, and definitely got some chills.
My take on Lovecraft: like a lot of genre groundbreakers, he wasn’t as good as some of his imitators. We all admire the guy’s ideas, but ye gods, not his prose. I don’t think I would like to have dinner with the poor fellow, he was probably nuts and depressive to boot, but the Mythos is very interesting stuff, if you like a bit of memento mori in your life.
I’m no expert on the genre, but there’s horror and there’s horror and there’s horror. There’s alien creepy monsters, and there’s human insanity in all its forms, and there’s slasher violence, and probably a few more I’m forgetting about, and everybody likes a different mix. If you don’t care for Lovecraft, are you looking for more along the lines of Stephen King? (But shorter, I’m assuming…) Or, um, something squishier? It seems you aren’t into purely psychological thrills. (Neither am I, for a few reasons.)
by the way, have you played Vespers? I’d definitely categorize it as horror IF.
Lovecraft’s prose may not have been pure poetry, and no doubt it was a little purple, but that was fairly standard for his time. Narratively, he was a master of suspense. And he exhibited flashes of great descriptive prowess; I particularly enjoy his penchant for describing something creepy by describing what it is not. I just searched the web for a particular passage that I remember, but I can’t find it now. It was an entire paragraph describing some creature by listing all the gruesome things it isn’t, that never quite got around to describing what it is. And yet left me in abject horror. I cannot but bow to such wonderful sleight of hand — and it’s a technique he shared with Kafka, another favourite of mine. Kafka could string a reader along in suspense using no plot information at all: just by altering the sequence of grammar — like riding a bike with no hands. Lovecraft came close that same magical ability. They are both excellent prose craftsmen; I feel that this cannot be in any doubt, but of course there is nothing beyond doubt.
To my mind, calling Lovecraft purple is like calling this famous rant purple-- it goes on, perhaps, but it’s expressive. Where Clark is upset, Howard is horrified. One might not think his prose is “pure poetry,” but f*ck poetry. It was too easy for HPL… if his letters are to be believed, he could compose sonnets in 10 minutes and spat heroic couplets at the drop of a hat. If you want poetry, read his poetry, not his prose. How about Fungi from Yuggoth? But no doubt readers will find his formalism “affected”…
I don’t know. Sometimes when I talk about HPL with people, I get the feeling we’re talking about two completely different authors. I probably can’t or shouldn’t continue in this conversation if I’m to keep my stress levels in check.
Sometimes, I go weeks without remembering how hot Beverly D’Angelo was in those movies, and that’s a mistake. Thank you, sir, for reminding me earlier than I would have reminded myself.
Which Lo Pan? Little old basket case on wheels or the ten-foot-tall roadblock?
Dude, you might want to consider the idea that you might be too attached to HP Lovecraft if you are having trouble even identifying people who are on your side. I said his prose was purple but that it didn’t matter and that it was normal — so there is no need to focus on that word and generate from it an insult where none was intended. I also said it wasn’t pure poetry but that was meant to place views that he should aspire to something ‘poetic’ in context; not to imply that he should be writing poetry. And in your eagerness to pull words out of context so you could properly take umbrage at them, you entirely overlooked a heap of praise I ladled. I do not look down upon Lovecraft, not even a little bit. But your reactionary stance that leads you to say something like ‘Fuck poetry’ is probably ripe for re-examination on your part: that phrase does not place your literary opinions in a very credible light. Imagine for a moment that you just met yourself for the first time (as I just did), and you read yourself saying something like ‘Fuck poetry’ — how much value would you expect out of the rest of this new acquaintance’s opinions? In any case, you are preaching to someone who is clearly also a fan of Lovecraft here; any debate between the two of us over who loves him better is not going to amount to much more than just a clash of personalities, so it’s probably not worth having. 8)