Lovecraft owned the genre so hard he's still a central figure a century later. That happened in part due to the very reasons you're criticizing him
This attack isn't aesthetic, it's ideological. Progressivism leads to stillborn art—and you want to charge writers for this lmao
This attack isn't aesthetic, it's ideological. Progressivism leads to stillborn art—and you want to charge writers for this lmao
The sustained act of delaying satisfaction to the reader is the core of drama, the hardest art of storytelling. It is especially true of horror, where the imagination is provoked to run wild and overwhelm all reason
You're a hack and an ideologue
You're a hack and an ideologue
The *entire point* of Lovecraft's mythology is these monsters are
a) beyond human comprehension
b) any enduring contact with them that might let you *start* to comprehend them will drive you insane, unable to describe them: that's how inhuman they are
a) beyond human comprehension
b) any enduring contact with them that might let you *start* to comprehend them will drive you insane, unable to describe them: that's how inhuman they are
Imagine you're Lovecraft in 1925, and the editor at Weird Tales says to you, "No, this story is stupid. You know what's way more scary? When you tell the reader just what the cosmic horror looks like."
You take this advice.
Think this will make you more successful?
You take this advice.
Think this will make you more successful?
"Being told exactly what you're up against" is the aesthetic of a story where human logic and analysis of its weakness means you triumph over the monster in Act 3
"Unable to process what you're even looking at" is the aesthetic of a story where you have no chance to win
"Unable to process what you're even looking at" is the aesthetic of a story where you have no chance to win
An editor who doesn't understand the aesthetic difference between works like Aliens and A Quiet Place (victory through reason!)—and Lovecraft and Cloverfield (forces beyond human horror!)—is either an idiot, or driven by something much more dangerous to your career than idiocy
So OP's criticism of Lovecraft isn't aesthetic, it's political. Aesthetics is above politics. Those attempting to control aesthetics through politics aren't improving art—they're degrading it
While trying to make you pay them to degrade it.
That's the state of 21st century art.
While trying to make you pay them to degrade it.
That's the state of 21st century art.
