Part Eight of the CONTROVERSIES thread which continues from Part One HERE and Part Two HERE and Part Three HERE and Part Four HERE and Part Five HERE and Part Six HERE and Part Seven HERE.
Further discussion will hopefully be made in the comment stream below. Everyone is welcome to contribute on any aspect of book reviewing controversies and related matters in the hope that we may be able to cauterise them.
H.P. Lovecraft, S.T. Joshi, Ellen Datlow…
HPL is/ was execrable, provocative, with sometimes inspiring imagination, disarming hydromoronic fiction style, and he warned us about Trump with his Azathoth and about Brexit with his own deep dark xenophobia.
HPL does not belong to Joshi on 22.8.17 (nor to which versions of HPL’s texts are the most important for readers and for the cosmos itself that worked with and against HPL to produce such texts), nor to Datlow, nor to others too numerous to mention, nor to NecronomiCon 2017 (and nobody has yet answered my question on how his birthday was celebrated there this year).
HPL belongs to the cosmos that has given us, say, Brexit-Trump and to the long-seasoned literary theory of the Intentional Fallacy that I hoped to embody in Nemonymous during the Noughties. He belongs to, say, William H. Gass’s Omensetter’s Luck (my review) and to Trump’s punishment by an ostensible God or Devil via storms and mayhem for his views on climate change etc. (not to belittle the tragedy of some of these events.)
It is ‘THE AGE OF LOVECRAFT’, for good or ill, but mainly as a symbol for the literary power of fiction to provide catharsis, and I used this my original photo on my review of that book, possibly before Nicolay publicly talked about pissing on HPL’s grave.
HPL should be pissed on and adored in equal measures.
Any future relevant literary and small press controversies that may occur will be linked or commented upon in the comment stream below as and when they happen…