Saturday 14 May 2011

Blogging the Hps 1: Dagon



This is the first story by HP Lovecraft that I ever read (and one of the earliest tales he published). Possibly it was the first adult anthology that I ever bought, with a grisly cover by Tim White (pictured left). I had never read or bought anything like it.

Yet somehow Lovecraft’s name always gave me a profound sense of recognition. Perhaps I saw it written down somewhere and consciously forgot about it, or maybe it is even due to some dysfunction in my ID or something. But for whatever reason the book which I bought in Orkney on a holiday had a strong fascination for me.

So I read it on the shore, which was thick with seaweed, bones, dead birds: a similar scene to Dagon’s setting.

And what did I make of it?


Can’t remember to be honest, but I read the anthology so must have liked it.

Now I think it is in some sense a difficult story to reread because having read The Call of Cthulhu, one might see it as better than it is. The strong imagination, the confidence to deal with titanic subjects and the narrative ambiguity are all there.

However, perhaps more subtly, it is curious that there is an entirely down to earth expression of his anti-humanist apocalyptic outlook. Set against the backdrop of WWI, the thought that giant monsters of the deep could invade land and destroy human civilisation is seen merely as logical conclusion to the ravages that humanity was inflicting upon itself.

Indeed WWI was a continuing theme in HP’s works. Both The Rats in the Walls and Reanimator refer to this conflict. Whilst Lovecraft strongly supported WWI and assimilated this conflict into his cultural Anglophilia, for someone with such a strong interest in science, and who was so profoundly racist, this must have been rather more philosophically challenging than his breastbeating poems and essays on the subject would appear. If whites, and specifically North Europeans, were capable of such madness and cruelty, then what did this say for humanity in general? Given that Lovecraft was also a Darwinist then what genes would be passed on after wholesale killing? He kept a veneer of agreeing with the pseudo-racist ideas that the 'Huns' somehow had Asiatic genes which post-dated their colonisation of England, but even by the standards of early 20th Century racism, these ideas were very foolish (the Hunic empire had fallen apart before the Saxons had conquered England). Lovecraft probably knew that (ironic as it may sound) racist attacks on Germany were a false comfort.

Lovecraft does not approach these themes in a didactic way, yet anti-humanist apocalypticism was a recurring theme in his works.

Another theme (Ancient 'fantastic' Texts with a degree of truth) is also treated in a surprisingly deft way:

Once I sought out a celebrated ethnologist, and amused him with peculiar questions regarding the ancient Philistine legend of Dagon, the Fish-God; but soon perceiving that he was hopelessly conventional, I did not press my inquiries..

A less gifted writer might have strained too hard to tie in the monster in the story to the mythical Dagon. Yet Lovecraft probably knew that to rely heavily on an existing myth would ruin the cosmicism and truly alien qualities of his creation.

Thursday 5 May 2011

90s Zeitgeist Summed Up

I was looking on Play.com to see if they had any good deals on John Carpenter related products and came across this 90s boxset.

The weirdest thing is that Vampires is the one DVD there that I wouldn’t be ashamed to own. Wolf may have Jack Nicholson, Michel Pfeiffer and James Spader. But it reeked of middle class smugness. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein might have had Kenneth Branagh, Helena Bonham Carter and Robert ‘greatest actor on earth’ DeNiro, but… just too, well, 90s horror. Not a bad film, but something slightly unclean about the ‘we’re decorated middle class thesps who’ll bestow glory upon the horror genre by making a thoroughly mediocre work’ spirit of the thing. Not merely horror films for people who don't like horror films, but either films made for a target audience that the makers looked down on or films made to destroy the target audience by widening the appeal. Trying to show you don't have to be a weirdo to appreciate horror.

But you do have to be a weirdo to appreciate horror, you dastards, and John Carpenter’s Vampires is glorious evidence of the fact! Most definitely a horror film made by someone who loves horror films as well as being pure cheese. James Woods as a tough loner who killed his own father (a joke about Freudianism?), one of the flabbier Baldwins (probably the one who’s an evangelical Republican) turns into a vampire , Maximillian Schell is a cross between Captain Hook and Cardinal Richelieu, there's even a climax in a monastery in the middle of the New Mexico Desert, utterly unmissable… and utterly awful actually, but in an enjoyable and sincere way. You'd probably need to be a horror fan to understand.

Somehow to me that sums up the weird heritage of the 90s. The critics gave a pass to those forgetable horror films which managed to buttress their own values, whilst the less mainstrream culture had a strong vitality and was (perhaps rightly) overlooked by them, whilst in its sincerity having a lingering appeal.

This view was later reinforced by my finding this guy on Youtube. 'They Live' uploaded by a conspiracy theorist.

Whilst I'm hoping that well-funded efforts to make mainstream horror films have failed to convince people that you don't need to be a weirdo to enjoy horror, I do not believe that obversely horror fans cannot have more mainstream interests. I read about a variety of things, and I suppose that my rather dour political outlook is to some extent influenced by horror films.

I suspect that for my generation so-called conspiracy theories are attractive for a number of reasons. I don't regard myself as a conspiracy theorist, but some things to me seem quite apparent: that AIDS and Alzheimers are man-made diseases, that the CIA considered launching a Fascist coup in Britain and then helped to assassinate the British politicians that were involved, that the bombing of Serbia had everything to do with economic liberalism and nothing to do with human rights, that there is a centralised effort to take civil liberties away from people, that the Freemasons are very real and have vast power, that TV presenters and musicians knowingly use hypnosis and many other weird things.

These are just my views; I don't want to convert anyone here. Yet people of my generation have never been exposed to politicians or a media that have really deserved our trust. I feel bemused by the eye rolling and sighing that mainstream journalists adopt when talking of conspiracy theorists, and their unconscious narcissism of doing so 'ah, these poor deluded fools who think we are too cowardly, stupid and lazy to want to investigate the rich and powerful that we generally praise in our writing, sigh'.

Maybe it seems I'm drifting from the point a bit here, yet I cannot imagine any conspiracy theorist really being attracted to any mainstream film. Even the film called Conspiracy Theory. Maybe as such this demonstrates how so many maverick, offbeat films (such as the 'it would be utterly crap if it wasn't genius' They Live) have a sub-cultural life of their own that many of their more well-funded contemporaries did not have.

Wednesday 4 May 2011

Hello

Born in 1981, my blog title is a reference to my attempting to understand a culture that was changing even as it formed me. It's also an awful pun if you say it aloud.

I've been blogging on politics for several years, but prefer writing about culture and art. Subsequently, I want to focus on several series:
-Interesting Horror Films.
-Interesting Horror Fiction
-Action Films of the 80s and 90s
-Blogging the HPs. I hope to review every short story and novella by HP Lovecraft
-Miscellaneous Authors
-Photography
-Philosophy
-Book Covers

And hopefully avoid political ranting.