Lovecraft Unbound
Dec. 12th, 2009 15:46![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
starladyEpigraph: Best Science Fiction Books of the Aughts according to io9.com. It's not my list (more on that anon, maybe), but it's certainly a list.
Lovecraft Unbound. Ed. Ellen Datlow. Milwaukie, OR: Dark Horse Books, 2009.
I've never actually read any Lovecraft, and while I imagine that I consequently may have gotten less out of this book than your average Chthulu-head, I enjoyed it quite a lot nonetheless. (Question: Were I to read any actual Lovecraft, which Lovecraft should I read first?) Several of the authors in this collection mention in their notes that they like the Lovecraftian ethos without its racism and sexism, and while I'd say the stories generally succeed in their revisions of Lovecraftiana on that score, I do have to wonder how inextricably the Lovecraftian worldview itself is tied in to such execrable -isms. More on this below.
Since I read Robot Ghosts and Wired Dreams I've been sensitized to the sff trope of women being closer to the Other than men, which often is a derivation of the idea that women aren't people (the same thing goes for gay men in this view, due to gay men and women both not being corporeally contained subjects/both being sexually receptive. I know; isn't it stupid? but on such things do empires and civilizations found themselves). A lot of the stories in this collection--including all of the ones I mention above except for "Mongoose" and, arguably, "Commencement"--feature women as the ones who are the mouthpieces, prophets, instruments, allies of the Elder Gods or whatever. I find this troubling at a larger level than the stories themselves (with the possible exception of Chabon and the noted exception of Barron, who I find troubling at the story level), and it's why I tend to rate the stories that have men taking on this role higher on a conceptual scale, regardless of the gender of their protagonists.
These stories wouldn't work if the mouthpiece and the viewpoint character were the same (with the exception of "The Recruiter" by Michael Shea, which does work, but has to dissociate the protagonist from his body to do it), since to know the Other too closely is to diminish its dread. But I note that a lot of these stories depend on bringing the deep past to light (such as Holly Phillips' "Cold Water Survival", which has a female protagonist and a male mouthpiece character, and is awesome), and depending which past it is, there's potentially an exoticization which is troubling (such as the Miskahannock Indians, in Chabon). These thoughts are half-formed, obviously, but I'd be remiss not to mention them.
Finally, I'm not sure what it is about academia/the scholarly millieu that lends itself so well to horror, but a great deal of these stories feature academics, scholars, and scientists, most of which I found hilarious (particularly Chabon and Joyce, who aren't afraid to comment on the cutthroat nature of the academic enterprise) for entirely personal reasons. Just make sure, when you get an honorary degree, that there aren't any pyramids involved. And that you don't request The Necronomicon through interlibrary loan, because what would you do if it showed up? Here's hoping actual graduate school doesn't involve cannibals, anyway.
Lovecraft Unbound. Ed. Ellen Datlow. Milwaukie, OR: Dark Horse Books, 2009.
I've never actually read any Lovecraft, and while I imagine that I consequently may have gotten less out of this book than your average Chthulu-head, I enjoyed it quite a lot nonetheless. (Question: Were I to read any actual Lovecraft, which Lovecraft should I read first?) Several of the authors in this collection mention in their notes that they like the Lovecraftian ethos without its racism and sexism, and while I'd say the stories generally succeed in their revisions of Lovecraftiana on that score, I do have to wonder how inextricably the Lovecraftian worldview itself is tied in to such execrable -isms. More on this below.
- "The Office of Doom" by Richard Bowes is just great. No major argument in it, but it's perfectly pitched and executed, and funny.
- "Houses Under the Sea" by Caitlín R. Kiernan is phenomenal. I think her revision on the protagonist-as-writer trope--namely, protagonist-as-freelance-journalist--is brilliant, and the story itself no less so, matched perfectly by Kiernan's language. I'm definitely going to check out her books.
- "Leng" by Marc Laidlaw does a good job, I think, of telling a story about Western scientists in Tibet without condescending to either party. Bonus points for the mycological geekiness, as well as the sheer awesomeness of the plot.
- "In the Black Mill" by Michael Chabon is really good. Vis-a-vis my earlier thoughts on Chabon, however, I note with amusement and ire that the only person the unnamed male narrator expresses any regard for besides himself is an eighteen year-old high school student, on account of his physical beauty. Women aren't afterthoughts here. Instead, they're literal man-killers. Thanks, Michael.
- "Commencement" by Joyce Carol Oates is also brilliant, though very much of the literary fiction school of "something strange happened, let me tell you about it!" delivery. Bonus points for her scorn for "artificial barriers and unfortunate prejudices between genres."
- "Mongoose" by Sarah Monette and Elizabeth Bear is the reason I had my library buy this book, and I wasn't disappointed. It's set in the same universe as "Boojum", which appeared in Fast Ships, Black Sails, and might be even better than that story. Words have power, after all.
- "Catch Hell" by Laird Barron was the story I couldn't stand in this book. It starts out tedious and then veers into highly clichéd gender stereotypes, and has frankly incoherent worldbuilding in my opinion. In fact, while I was reading it I found myself wishing that it was a Kyle Murchison Booth story by Sarah Monette, because Booth would have been a much, much better protagonist and then the story wouldn't have been boring.
Since I read Robot Ghosts and Wired Dreams I've been sensitized to the sff trope of women being closer to the Other than men, which often is a derivation of the idea that women aren't people (the same thing goes for gay men in this view, due to gay men and women both not being corporeally contained subjects/both being sexually receptive. I know; isn't it stupid? but on such things do empires and civilizations found themselves). A lot of the stories in this collection--including all of the ones I mention above except for "Mongoose" and, arguably, "Commencement"--feature women as the ones who are the mouthpieces, prophets, instruments, allies of the Elder Gods or whatever. I find this troubling at a larger level than the stories themselves (with the possible exception of Chabon and the noted exception of Barron, who I find troubling at the story level), and it's why I tend to rate the stories that have men taking on this role higher on a conceptual scale, regardless of the gender of their protagonists.
These stories wouldn't work if the mouthpiece and the viewpoint character were the same (with the exception of "The Recruiter" by Michael Shea, which does work, but has to dissociate the protagonist from his body to do it), since to know the Other too closely is to diminish its dread. But I note that a lot of these stories depend on bringing the deep past to light (such as Holly Phillips' "Cold Water Survival", which has a female protagonist and a male mouthpiece character, and is awesome), and depending which past it is, there's potentially an exoticization which is troubling (such as the Miskahannock Indians, in Chabon). These thoughts are half-formed, obviously, but I'd be remiss not to mention them.
Finally, I'm not sure what it is about academia/the scholarly millieu that lends itself so well to horror, but a great deal of these stories feature academics, scholars, and scientists, most of which I found hilarious (particularly Chabon and Joyce, who aren't afraid to comment on the cutthroat nature of the academic enterprise) for entirely personal reasons. Just make sure, when you get an honorary degree, that there aren't any pyramids involved. And that you don't request The Necronomicon through interlibrary loan, because what would you do if it showed up? Here's hoping actual graduate school doesn't involve cannibals, anyway.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 21:48 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 21:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 22:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 22:34 (UTC)I will definitely keep DW updated on my status with the whole thing.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 23:53 (UTC)But what I remember is that they were sort of...permeated with a shut-in conservative outlook on the world, where real adventures and discoveries were things that happened to/because of white men (which often was not good for them; uncovering The Forbidden Knowledge leads only to madness and/or death -- which is a related problem, I think, to the more mundane xenophobia). Women tended to be peripheral or just absent entirely; men who weren't academic white New Englanders were often written in with a lot of reflexive stereotype shorthand.
...In unrelated news, actual graduate school didn't involve any cannibals or elder things for me, and I hope the same holds true for you! *fingers crossed for acceptance letters*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-13 18:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-13 14:54 (UTC)On a happier note: Good luck!
Also:ACADIA? FUCKING REALLY?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-13 18:58 (UTC)And thanks!
I think avoidance is a completely valid strategy. I spent my formative middle school years, though, seeking out books with cool girl protagonists (oh, the riches of YA!), so my habits are different. Now that I'm older, though, I have a more refined nose for the problematic, so sometimes I'm disappointed even in something that seemed promising.
It's one of the things I like about Susanna Clarke, honestly--"The Ladies of Grace Adieu" is just so perfect a rebuke to Strange, who is so awesome but just isn't even aware of the existence of what he's missing. And even in the novel, Lady Pole is not shy to blame her problems on men in general, though the book is obviously much more about men.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-15 05:32 (UTC)Haha, whoops!
It doesn’t really have a deal, as such. It’s a perfectly acceptable, well-written, alternative-geography fantasy novel which promulgates, among many other tedious ideas, the insidious notion that positive cultural change can only be affected by warfare. Which is, you know, terrible and all. But necessary! It was, for me, more or less the “grown-up” Harry Potter and the. It bored me to tears, and I didn’t finish it.
It is, in fact, so very conventional that I was shocked it had somehow gotten elected the most influential fantasy novel of the decade. Unless by “influential” they meant “lullaby-like.”
Hm. I did not find Strange awesome in the least? I found him intolerable. I was willing to give him a pass because he advanced the novel’s plot nicely, but I was very glad to be rid of him in the end. I found him somewhat gentleman-like, but without all the lulz. Also, I understood Strange & Norrell to be an imaginary history set in an androcentric European environment, so I didn’t give the boys’ club a second thought. Which probably says more about me as a reader than anything else :[
+1 Middle-school gurl powaa! My favorite was The Girl with the Silver Eyes. (Also Madeleine L’Engle.)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-16 03:01 (UTC)Um, Strange as awesome. I don't actually think that Strange is awesome, except how he is in comparison with Norrell, at least for me (I really dislike Norrell. I give Childermass major props for enduring him as long as he did). One of the things I like about Clarke is how her characters are so obviously flawed-but. Not enough writers, unequivocally, have truly flawed protagonists, I think; even Childermas, who's probably my favorite character, doesn't recognize John Uskglass when the king is standing in front of him. Which strikes me as far more true to life, and far more interesting on a narrative level, than magical protagonists who never fail or doubt, let alone are, well, unpleasant people. (Sidenote: I think Neal Stephenson can do this, too, now that I think about it.) See above, re: middle-school girl power. XD Though I think there's a place for those protagonists, because stories have power, I think there should be more space for more nuanced characters, too, at least in sff. So, circling back around to Strange, what I should have said is that "Ladies" criticizes Strange for entirely different reasons than the narrative does in the novel. He's an excellent magician, but still is just oblivious of so much.
One of the reasons I desperately want more, post-novel, is because of the incipient egalitarianism in English magic that I saw in Childermas' meeting.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 21:53 (UTC)The first Lovecraft I ever read was At the Mountains of Madness. It left me with a permanent fear of Antarctica in the same way that Assignment #4 of Sapphire and Steel makes me afraid of getting my picture taken. I know it's irrational and stupid, but I still get freaked out.
If you want to read some Lovecraft all of it is free and can be found online. Not sure I'll be picking up this collection though.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 21:56 (UTC)I need to start using Project Gutenberg more. *makes note*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-12-12 22:05 (UTC)This is the site I've always used, although the white on black writing will give me a headache so I need to download them. I hadn't thought to check out Project Gutenberg.