The second of six blog posts exploring the literary and philosophical significance of the weird tale, the occult detective story, and the ecological weird. The series suggests that the three genres of weird fiction dramatize humanity’s cognitive and evolutionary insignificance by first exploring the limitations of language, then the inaccessibility of the world, and finally the alienation within ourselves. This post introduces the mismatch between conception and reality.
Weird Tales
I concluded part I by endorsing literary critic S.T. Joshi’s definition of the weird tale as essentially rather than superficially philosophical in virtue of presenting or representing a fully-fledged and fleshed-out worldview and identifying the canon of weird fiction as the work of: Arthur Machen (1863-1947), Algernon Blackwood (1869-1951), William Hope Hodgson (1877-1918), Edward Plunkett (1878-1957, writing under his aristocratic title Lord Dunsany), and H.P. Lovecraft (1890-1937). Joshi’s definition also restricts the weird tale to fiction published within a sixty-year period that begins in 1880 and ends in 1940 and he deals with subsequent publications in The Modern Weird Tale: A Critique of Horror Fiction. The ‘modern’ or ‘new’ weird and its relation to the ‘ecological’ weird will be discussed in part V. Benjamin Noys and Timothy Murphy concur with Joshi’s dating and identify the source of the name of the genre as the pulp magazine Weird Tales. Before introducing this magazine, I want to mention three of Lovecraft’s less-talented contemporaries. Edgar Rice Burroughs (1875-1950, writing under the penname Norman Bean) is best known for Tarzan of the Apes (serialised in The All-Story in 1912), but also authored the John Carter series, which began with Under the Moons of Mars (serialised in The All-Story in 1911). Similarly, Robert E. Howard (1906-1936) is best known for Conan the Barbarian (short stories published in Weird Tales from 1932), but is also the creator of Solomon Kane (short stories published in Weird Tales from 1928). Finally, Fritz Leiber (1910-1992), is best known for Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser (short stories published in Unknown from 1939), but published some outstanding weird fiction, beginning with the collection Night’s Black Agents (1947).
Weird Tales was founded in 1922, during the peak of the pulp era and two years after its famous crime fiction counterpart, Black Mask (which launched the career of Raymond Chandler). Its first issue (pictured) was published in March 1923 and within a decade the magazine was publishing the Lovecraft Mythos, Solomon Kane, Conan, and Seabury Quinn’s Jules de Grandin, an occult detective series that would run to nearly one hundred instalments. The first Lovecraft Mythos story published was ‘The Hound’, in February 1924. Aside from the significance of the magazine in naming and consolidating the type of narrative we now refer to as the weird tale, it is also significant in indicating the need for a supplement to Joshi’s definition. Weird fiction not only explores, expresses, and experiments with the worldviews of its authors, but is also essentially rather than superficially hybrid in character, crossing, slipping, and bending between and among genres. The Carter, Kane, and Fafhrd and Mouser series are all weird fiction, but Fredric Jameson regards Carter as the origin of American science fiction, Fafhrd and the Mouser are (along with Conan) acknowledged as inaugurating fantasy fiction, and Kane is as much history as fantasy. The pulp era died a slow death after the Second World War, initiated by first a wartime paper shortage and then the rise of television as the dominant medium of light entertainment in the nineteen fifties. Weird Tales published its final issue in September 1954.
In-Between Old and New
The five decades between the folding of Weird Tales and the coining of the label ‘New Weird’ (by John M. Harrison in 2002 or 2003) are complex when it comes to the development of weird fiction and I make no pretence to insider knowledge or even of being able to produce convincing evidence of my take on this period. That take has two key features: the influence of August Derleth and a second division of the genre into US and UK traditions. Derleth was a pulp fiction author and correspondent of Lovecraft who, along with Donald Wandrei (another pulp fiction author and Lovecraft correspondent), founded Arkham House in 1939 in order to publish Lovecraft’s work posthumously and self-publish their own work. Joshi is particularly critical of Derleth, who invented the ‘Cthulhu Mythos’, and his misrepresentation of Lovecraft’s work and worldview. I am once again largely in agreement, but we must also accept that if Derleth had not appropriated Lovecraft’s legacy he would be as unknown now as, for example, Quinn is. While Lovecraft imitators thrived on both sides of the Atlantic following the Weird Tales era, I think it helpful to identify two traditions of canonical weird fiction, understood as having unquestionable literary merit (however one chooses to define that quality).
In the UK, a tradition influenced less by Lovecraft and more by Machen and Blackwood – as well as Walter de la Mare – emerged in the work of John William Wall (1910-1989, writing under the penname Sarban) and Robert Aickman (1914-1981). Wall published very little and is best known for his novella, The Sound of His Horn (1952). Aickman is best known for the forty-eight stories he referred to as ‘strange’ tales, the first three of which were published in We Are for the Dark: Six Ghost Stories (1951, the other three in the collection were by the novelist Elizabeth Jane Howard). To these two, I shall add J.G. Ballard (1930-2009). Although Ballard, to whom I shall return in part V, is usually considered to be a literary rather than popular fiction author (a dichotomy I regard as not only erroneous, but malicious), he began his career as a science fiction writer, part of the ‘New Wave’ of experimental and political science fiction in the nineteen sixties and seventies. The novella The Wind from Nowhere (1961) and the collection The Terminal Beach (1964) are exemplary weird fiction.
In the US, a tradition more obviously influenced by Lovecraft and either
explicitly part of his mythos or self-consciously an extension or revision
thereof emerged in the work of Thomas Ligotti (b.1953), Caitlín R. Kiernan
(b.1964, pictured), and Victor LaValle (b.1972). Ligotti has published
relatively little and I return to his work in the next section. In contrast,
Kiernan has published a vast oeuvre since 1995, including more than ten novels
and over two hundred and fifty works of shorter fiction. Their Tinfoil
Dossier (2017-2020) trilogy of novellas is my favourite at the time of
writing, but The Drowning Girl: A Memoir (2012) demonstrates an
all-too-rare ability to extend the weird tale to novel length without
stretching either quality or credibility. LaValle has published a dozen or so
novels, novellas, graphic novels, and short story collections since 1999. His
novella, The Ballad of Black Tom (2016), is a magnificent reimagining
of Lovecraft’s ‘The Horror at Red Hook’ (first published in Weird Tales
in January 1927) and, in my opinion, far superior to Matt Ruff’s
similarly-themed Lovecraft Country, published in the same year.
Conception and Reality
In my review of Songs of a Dead Dreamer and Grimscribe (2016), I described Ligotti as exploring, expressing, and experimenting with a worldview that could be called deconstructive, after the French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004, pictured). There has been a great deal of nonsense written about (and some would say by) Derrida, who developed the approach in the nineteen sixties and was a global public intellectual by the time of his death, but the basic idea behind deconstruction is simple: human beings (subjective experience) can only gain access to the real world (objective reality) through concepts, which are articulated through language. The worry, which stems from curiosities such as the fact that languages not only use different words for the same concept, but have different concepts that cannot be translated in their entirety, is that no human language and therefore no human conception maps perfectly onto reality. There is obviously plenty of overlap – otherwise we would not be able to build bridges, cure diseases, invent the internet, and fly to the moon – but there is no identity relation between concept and reality. This insight about the limitations of language, the way in which words fail to make the concrete and abstract objects they identify present, originated with the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913). Derrida’s innovation was to demonstrate that the system of signs constituting a particular language (such as Modern English) is unstable because that system is inconsistent over both space (such as the differences between contemporary UK and US English) and time (such as the difference between Shakespeare’s early Modern English and contemporary Modern English in the UK).
The upshot of this is that there is a difference between the world as we think it is and the world as it really is, where aspects of the latter remain permanently inaccessible to us. I shall have more to say about this inaccessibility in part IV. In consequence of language failing to provide direct access to reality, the world in which we live is co-constructed by human intelligibility and inaccessible reality, a dichotomy very roughly equivalent to the distinction between culture and nature. This space between the world we create for ourselves and the real world is both frightening and liberating. If much more of our reality than commonsense suggests is a question of culture rather than nature, then much more of our reality can be changed for the better. I emphasised this emancipatory potential in my own introduction to literary theory, but Ligotti focuses on the fear and disgust the mismatch between conception and reality evokes. He scrapes away at the difference between subjective perception and objective reality to make it larger and more frightening and this is the worldview that emerges in Songs of a Dead Dreamer and Grimscribe, My Work Is Not Yet Done: Three Tales of Corporate Horror (2002), Teatro Grottesco (2006), The Spectral Link (2014), and his other work. Ligotti’s short stories are not only the most disturbing I have ever read, but distil and hone something was present to a lesser extent in Machen, Blackwood, Hodgson, Plunkett, and Lovecraft. With Ligotti in mind, I propose a further amendment to define weird fiction as: philosophical in virtue of presenting or representing a fully-fledged and fleshed-out worldview, generically hybrid in character, and foregrounding the difference between the world as we think it is and the world as it actually is. This latter quality is precisely what the references to the uncanny or unhomely mentioned in part I are trying to convey, but ‘weird’ seems a much more accurate description to me.
Recommended Reading
Fiction
Thomas Ligotti, Teatro Grottesco, Durtro Press (2006).
Caitlín R. Kiernan, The Drowning Girl: A Memoir, Roc Books (2012).
J.G. Ballard, The Crystal World, Jonathan Cape (1966).
Nonfiction
H.P. Lovecraft, Notes on Writing Weird
Fiction, Amateur
Correspondent (1937).
Alan Moore, Preface, The Call of Cthulhu and Other Weird Stories, The
Folio Society (2017).
Mark Bould & Steven Shaviro (eds.), This is Not a Science Fiction
Textbook, Goldsmiths Press (2024).
No comments:
Post a Comment