Episode 68 - The Dunwich Horror - Part 4

[Chris Lackey]

@Kryptych Wow! Well put!

[Kryptych]

@Kryptych Wow! Well put!

Thank you, Mr. Lackey.

[Aristide Torchia]

This is the inherent moral problem with Lovecraft's cosmic view; and why I and many people take issue with Derleth's modifications of the Mythos... I hate to make it a matter of religious predilection, but Derleth was a lapsed Catholic whose views were steeped in notions of good vs. evil, black and white, something either is or isn't.

As much as I don't want to create a religion thread, I have to ask if this is a common conclusion? I have to confess that I have only recently started to delve into external analysis of Lovecraft's work. I ask this because that was the first thing that popped into my head when I read a little background on A.D. I don't mean to pigeon hole the guy, it just seemed like a piece of the puzzle that fell right into place and I literally went "Ahhhh". I was raised Catholic myself, and lost what little faith remained when I was in my early teens. What is funny is that in a very indirect wacked out way that had nothing to do with his actual work, I owe my atheism to Lovecraft. I'll spare everyone, but It's actually a pretty funny story. Maybe I'll stick it up in General Discussion.

<SNIP>
 ...all of these were points that Mr. Price has made in his Dunwich Cycle publication, yet he didn't mention any of it in the Podcraft. Lack of time I suppose.

Hhrm, they did an entire episode with the stuff that didn't fit in when Joshi was a guest. How about an episode (or a gift for donating) that is a collection of conversations with guests that didn't make it in due to time constraints? Is there enough material?

[Kryptych]

Also, I just thought of something...

I've recently re-read several of Lovecraft's later/primarily post-return to Providence works, including The Shadow Out of Time (still my favorite), The Thing on the Doorstep, The Dunwich Horror, The Call of Cthulhu, and The Case of Charles Dexter Ward.

It does seem like in these later works, Lovecraft's characters - while condemned to madness at the knowledge of "unknowable" or "sanity-blasting" things - ARE more prone to taking action for what we as human beings would commonly refer to as "the greater good," or at the very least "survival." Before The Call of Cthulhu, it did seem like Lovecraft's prose and the voice of his protagonists were simply relaying their experiences; "I saw this strange thing and then went mad." Messieurs Fifer, Lackey, and Leman did touch on the text of The Call of Cthulhu being a document that Thurston left to his executors, asking why he would write it down for others to read if his whole point was that nobody read it, with Mr. Lackey theorizing that it may be his hope that somebody will be able to combat Cthulhu and/or its minions. While I don't personally believe that to necessarily be the case, it is an interesting point - along with Johansen's driving the Alert into a collision with Cthulhu itself... he actually took action where it's fair to say had Lovecraft written the story earlier, that would've been the point where Johansen faints, awakens days later aboard the Vigilant with no recollection of what happened.

In another thread, I'd made the point about Randolph Carter not actually being the mollycoddle that Harley Warren makes him out to be, and that even while he doesn't do anything in The Statement... he still "tries" to move into action, while in The Dream-Quest... he actually DOES take action several times, the most glaring example being that quote, "And in that hideous second stark fear drove him to something his reason would never have dared to attempt..."

I think we all can see how Armitage and co. take action in The Dunwich Horror, so no need to go into that detail. Dr. Willett in The Case of Charles Dexter Ward learns the spell and confronts Curwen, while in The Thing on the Doorstep Upton confronts his friend... or rather the entity inhabiting his friend (not giving spoilers for those who haven't read it, although the beginning of the story does establish that he shoots him... six times, in typical Lovecraft fashion, hehe). Even in the de Castro stories, as terrible as they are (and I'm not sure if any of this had to do with de Castro), his characters take some action, albeit in a more *snicker* intellectual manner -  Ultimately, these characters are taking decisive action in lieu of going insane at what they've uncovered or been faced with.

Granted, none of these examples are to the extent to which Lumley took Titus Crow or any of his characters in his own fiction. Few (if any really) of them had the heroic bravado and confrontational machismo of Crow or his ilk, but I think it's fair to say that Lovecraft was at least in some small regard in his later works looking to improve his characters' mental faculties and give them just the slightest touch of action.

[fishy]

As the example of Johansen driving a boat through the head of Cthulhu: I do not think that Lovecraft lessen the impact with his characters try to fight back instead of fainting.
But because in the end it does not matter what humans do or if they occasionally "wins" (like in the Dunwich Horror) or breaks down (in Call of Cthulhu).

You may fight back all you want, it does not matter.
The cult/worshippers of the Old Ones are still out there doing their bidding and keeping it a secret by any means they can.
In the end The Old Ones will win.

If that is not a scary thought, then nothing is scary.

[Kryptych]

As the example of Johansen driving a boat through the head of Cthulhu: I do not think that Lovecraft lessen the impact with his characters try to fight back instead of fainting.
But because in the end it does not matter what humans do or if they occasionally "wins" (like in the Dunwich Horror) or breaks down (in Call of Cthulhu).

You may fight back all you want, it does not matter.
The cult/worshippers of the Old Ones are still out there doing their bidding and keeping it a secret by any means they can.
In the end The Old Ones will win.

If that is not a scary thought, then nothing is scary.

Indeed, Fishy. I think that's another reason I never got into Lumley's contributions to the Mythos... I am much more fascinated with the hopelessness of it all. As you say, "fight back all you want, it does not matter." But then again, Lumley's point may be that humans are just as stubborn and determined... our drive for survival and self-preservation - i.e. the human impulse - is just as strong. But hey, whatever... not what Lovecraft was about.
Still, it's fun to think that even his characters would - if only occasionally - fight before faint.