Episodes 84-88 - The Shadow Over Innsmouth

[Bob Lovecraft]

I figure Olmstead just showed up on the wrong night and that the Deep Ones had some business on land that he happened to stumble into. Millions of Deep Ones coming up just for him is a bit far fetched, but if he stumbled onto Innsmouth just when they were conducting some eldritch rights, them maybe a convenient sacrifice would make things that much better for them. Though I still like the new theory of induction to the cult better now that I have heard it.

Bob

[T. Kelly Lee]

It seems that the local leadership simply ordered the heavies to grab Olmstead and bring him in.  We don't see that action, but there is clearly conspiracy afoot.  First the bus doesn't work, he's forced to stay, and there's a ton of guys there to round him up.  When this doesn't work, Marsh himself comes out to lead the posse.  This doesn't make sense if they wanted him dead.  They could have simply killed him when he first set foot into the hotel that night after he was told the bus was broken.  It's clear they wanted to grab him unharmed, not just walk in and kill him.  Also, Olmstead is clear at the end that's he's going back there along with his cousin.  So if he's planning to live with these guys, even he has come to the conclusion that they meant him no harm.  I think that's the real twist to the story.  If he'd stuck around he might have been rough handled, but I have a feeling he would have been taken directly to old man Marsh.  

It really does make sense to have a large posse chase Olmstead if he is 1) meant not to get away and 2) meant not to be harmed.  Remember, from the point he steps into the hotel after being told the bus is broken, anyone could have just jumped on him with a knife or shot him dead.  It seems clear they were waiting for a time when they could abduct him without hurting him.  

[Konrad Hartmann]

I don't really think that's the case, here though.  Plenty of other people have dropped in on Innsmouth over the years.  The mill inspector even, well, inspected their mill.  The grocery clerk works there everyday.  Those folks get left alone.  For some reason, almost from the beginning, Olmstead was marked out as a person of interest.  

But would everything have gone down if Olmstead had not gotten Zadok liquored up and talking? He was witnessed listening to Zadok, who was witnessed revealing the town's secrets.

On a different topic, Shadow is often discussed as an example of HPL's fear of race-mixing, and I wouldn't argue against that being the case. However, since this was written, what, six years after the Scopes monkey trial and since the idea of evolution continues to horrify some people, do you think this fear is reflected in the story? I suspect this has been discussed before. Many people become indignant at the idea of a genetic linkage between humans and other primates, let alone the aquatic origin of pre-mammalian species.

[T. Kelly Lee]

1.  On the Zadok thing - he is revealed by another outsider to be a guy that knows the scoop around town.  So clearly, he's gotten too chatty with other people in the past, otherwise characters wouldn't know that Zadok was a good source of information.  No one has any idea what Zadok and Olmstead are talking about - from outside appearances they're just sitting on the seawall boozing. 

2.  Evolution, I think, was a BIG part of HPL's thought processes.  However, I think he would have found it more amusing - as a part of his "cosmic joke" philosophy - to not that we humans are just more upright apes.  Clearly even that is a source of horror among some of his characters.  But HPL is acknowledging evolution in this story.  To paraphrase Zadok: we all come from the sea and it only takes a little change to allow us to go back.  Shockingly, how right HPL was!! 

Not to start talking religion here, but a recent poll indicates that a HUGE number of Americans still reject evolution - so that means the idea that humans are descended from "lesser" animals and not a special creation is still a very loathsome idea in this country. 

[Bob Lovecraft]

1.  On the Zadok thing - he is revealed by another outsider to be a guy that knows the scoop around town.  So clearly, he's gotten too chatty with other people in the past, otherwise characters wouldn't know that Zadok was a good source of information.  No one has any idea what Zadok and Olmstead are talking about - from outside appearances they're just sitting on the seawall boozing. 

I think the main idea here is that Zadok was seen as the "crazy towny" by anyone not in the know, like the clerk. The way I always viewed it was that that cleerk sends Olmstead to Zadok to get a good bit of local color with no real idea what he is getting Olmstead into. The clerk is as ignorant of Zadok's true affiliations as anyone who never took the old drunk seriously would be. Honestly, living in Innsmouth is wierd enough without actually believeing what Zadok is always spouting about monsters. So I certainly see Zadok as more of an object of ridicule than as a serious source of information.

Pretty much everyone knows a guy or gal like Zadok Allan in thier life. Now imagine taking the guy seriously for once, and see what kind of wiredness that would mean for you if you did. Take that one step further and imagine the monsters that guy is talking about actually WERE listening to him when he started spouting his crap to outsiders and finding out that he actually spilled the beans for once to someone who might actually believe him and take action based on the things he said. I think the narative at this point in the story holds together pretty well from a logical standpoint.

Bob

[Konrad Hartmann]

1.  On the Zadok thing - he is revealed by another outsider to be a guy that knows the scoop around town.  So clearly, he's gotten too chatty with other people in the past, otherwise characters wouldn't know that Zadok was a good source of information.  No one has any idea what Zadok and Olmstead are talking about - from outside appearances they're just sitting on the seawall boozing. 

2.  Evolution, I think, was a BIG part of HPL's thought processes.  However, I think he would have found it more amusing - as a part of his "cosmic joke" philosophy - to not that we humans are just more upright apes.  Clearly even that is a source of horror among some of his characters.  But HPL is acknowledging evolution in this story.  To paraphrase Zadok: we all come from the sea and it only takes a little change to allow us to go back.  Shockingly, how right HPL was!! 

Not to start talking religion here, but a recent poll indicates that a HUGE number of Americans still reject evolution - so that means the idea that humans are descended from "lesser" animals and not a special creation is still a very loathsome idea in this country. 

1. But Zadok is screaming by the end of his rant. I always pictured Deep Ones lurking out in the surf with one sound organ sticking out of the water, eavesdropping.

2. The recent Gallup poll indicates that 46% of Americans believe "God created humans in present form within last 10,000 years." That shows not just a disbelief in evolution but also a disbelief in human prehistory (e.g., the flutes and carvings found in Hohle Fels).

[Bob Lovecraft]

Well, Konrad Hartmann, as this is a Monday morning, and I had a really crappy night, and I can't stand my job, it is really, REALLY hard for me not to comment on the second point you made. But as I don't want to let me aggravation get the better of me and thus post a terribly scathing comment about religion/archeology/faith/common sense, I will simply say, "good post".

Bob (Discretion sucks...)

[T. Kelly Lee]

2. The recent Gallup poll indicates that 46% of Americans believe "God created humans in present form within last 10,000 years." That shows not just a disbelief in evolution but also a disbelief in human prehistory (e.g., the flutes and carvings found in Hohle Fels).

I think it comes down, simply, to the American notion that knowledge is subject to the democratic process.  We're used to voting on things in this country and, thus, we like to think that we can legislate reality as well.  "10 Million Chevrolet Owners Can't Be Wrong!"  Etc.  Sure they can.  At the time HPL was writing belief in evolution would have marked you out as a pretty serious dissenter and a member of a fairly tight club within the intelligentsia.  And for a lot of people now, as then, the notion that humans are not a special creation is scary stuff.  A movie like Prometheus shows that we still prefer the idea of being created by aliens to being evolved from slime. 

I think that's where the "cosmic joke" of HPL's fictional universe plays best.  Belief is a powerful psychological tool, but it's not more powerful than reality - ever.  And the great common theme of HPL's writing is the story of characters trying to hold onto their comfortable worldviews in the face of an onslaught of cold reality.  A reality which often drives them mad.  As Tillich stated, faith is the will to believe against the odds of unbelief.  HPL is kicking back and saying look, suckers, if you knew what I know it'd drive you crazy.  I also think that's why the religious among us like to build sacred space around even the discussion of their faith...it's even impolite to talk about it in our culture.  Bob Price, the great Lovecraftian, is a Biblical scholar by day and he often points out that interested non-believers typically have a better knowledge of the Bible than the faithful.  I think we see these same concerns reflected in HPL's fiction even of almost a century ago!  It's the cynics like Henry Armitage that win the day.

[Jape]

I'm amazed I never actually tried to break down the logic of the mob chasing him. The idea they are trying to grab a 'lost prince' of the Deep Ones for a family reunion before he leaves is cool and does have a logical base to it. Also my image of Innsmouth is narrow streets and tall, leaning town houses with eyes human and not peering out from behind shutters. I always assumed Zadok's ramblings were indeed overheard.

I think that's where the "cosmic joke" of HPL's fictional universe plays best.  Belief is a powerful psychological tool, but it's not more powerful than reality - ever.

Indeed, the reason I've always loathed Derleth's 'moralisation' of the Mythos. I'm grateful for Arkham House but the idea of good and evil in Lovecraftian fiction is anathema to me. Big bad Dracula is comforting as it implies there must be an intervening good to counter balance the evil monster, a cold universe full of entities that only appear godlike to us as we would to a worm simply suggests infinite chaos and uncaring death. I don't read horror to be consoled.

I think it comes down, simply, to the American notion that knowledge is subject to the democratic process.

An interesting notion but speaking as an Englishman I don't think its quite that particular. Human beings like symbols of stability. As the Queen's Diamond Jubilee has proven over here. The handful of republicans (myself included) were ridiculed for pointing out logical ideas of government we're very happy for 90+% of the world to use (indeed I find it unlikely we'd be any keener on a new monarchy being established in say, Brazil, than Americans would be). However its our symbol so its good. Notably a big criticism of British republicanism is that we're "no fun" which I think gets to the core, whether its nationalism or paternalism or simply apathy, the present system is comforting and to change could be hard and scary.

Call it the human condition if you like, but basically humans have the logical maturity to recognise entropy and mortality but not the emotional maturity to deal with it, and the cosmic insignificance that comes with. That's the rich vein Lovecraft mines oh so well.

[T. Kelly Lee]

I really think I have to stick with the Americanized notion of knowledge being democritizable.  I travel a good deal in Europe and have lived in the UK, myself - I plan to go back in a few years for a longer stint.  I have a lot of friends over there, most of them liberals and republicans.  (And they are fun, btw.)  But a characteristic of British culture I have noticed that we lack in the USA is that most Brits (and greater Europeans, for that matter) are willing to accept an authoritarian epistemology.  In short, if scientific consensus says it - it must be true.  We see this in a wide range of issues, from the debate over global warming to the belief in evolution.  And this is NOT a recent thing - de Tocqueville noticed this when writing Democracy in America.  He explicitly stated his fear that Americans had made a fetish out of democracy - that once the "majority had spoken" then dissenters were expected to just shut up and go along.  Even if the dissenters were actually right. 

We see this all the time when policy issues get politicized in the states - as I stated above it's considered impolite in the US to even discuss, say, matters of religion and politics out of fear of committing offense.  The majority has spoken, so shut up about it.  Whereas within fifteen minutes of sitting down at the pub in the UK you can get into a great discussion with almost anyone over their thoughts on politics, religion, moral philosophy.  (I only avoid talking football, because, frankly it's boring as all hell and I just don't care.)  But in this country the very discussion of belief is seen by a large number of people as offensive.  For instance, I work in a political office but we're banned from openly talking politics! 

And I think you see this reflected in HPL's writings.  Lovecraft was ahead of his time and he had glimpses into future revelation regarding the potential for science to deconstruct some of our most basic institutions.  Therefor the Big Revelation of a lot of his stories is meant to turn the comfortable opinions of the majority right on their heads!  That's why I agree that the moralizing of the Mythos is just no good.  Derleth needed to stop writing and read a little - HPL was a Nietzschean.  He embraced the transvaluation of morality and that is explicit in his writing.  Azathoth doesn't give a damn about good or evil - Azathoth just IS.  There's no point to him.  HPL would find that funny - whereas it kicks the bottom out of Derleth's whole world. 

[Konrad Hartmann]

There also tends to be a great deal of identity, polarization, and hostility involved in religion and politics in the States. I've met Democrats, Republicans, atheists, and Christians who all assume that anyone not of their own position is a complete idiot. There often isn't a lot of room for discussion because everyone's so tied up in their own thing. And if someone likes you, they may become horrified to learn that you don't agree with them on everything.

Regarding evolution, yeah, it's a funny thing but people often seem to feel that choosing not to believe in something suffices to make it go away. Also, I still hear people use the phrase, "They still haven't found the missing link." Or I hear arguments that there aren't enough transitional species to establish evolution. There's an attitude that, if you don't agree with something, you can dismantle it just by being really ignorant of it.

I know the idea of humans evolving from blue-green algae repulses many people, but I personally find the concept far more beautiful and inspiring than, "Yeah, well, God just made you this way. Sorry about the whole excretory system thing, but there was really no other way for an infinitely powerful being to make it."

(And yes, I do realize that I fulfilled my own criticism in the first paragraph.)

[Graf von Altenberg Ehrenstein]

Who likes to be told that he is the retarded offspring of five monkeys having butt sex with a frog-squirrel? No one does!
This creationist movement has reached us just lately und I was quite bewildered when some two years ago a german polititian proposed to teach the Genesis in biology classes at school. Luckily she faded to obscurity. There seems to be some religuluous roll-back attempts.
That Gallup poll you mentioned was much discussed around here, too. Most people made fun of those „unenlightened creationists“ and so on, but the funny thing I observed is that many of them just believe in Evolution as others believe in Creation. Simply reproducing what their teacher, their dad, the TV said, without any factual knowledge. So the believe in Evolution is not really progress. Just like one superstition replaced by an other other one. The fact that this new „superstition“ is most likely closer to the the truth than it `s predecessor does not reconcile me at all.

I really think I have to stick with the Americanized notion of knowledge being democritizable.   

Around these parts it `s almost exactly the opposite. People believe anything a stated authority tells them, an authority being anyone presented as such by a serious looking news anchor. No matter if the guy is telling the most stupid rubbish and the most obvious reasons prove him wrong, as long as he wears a decent suit and some other suit-wearer adresses him as an expert everything is fine. "Even if the dissenters were actually right." It `s like a madhouse at times.
What I `m trying to say is: Don `t feel bad about that American peculiarity, our equivalent can be just as annoying.

[Konrad Hartmann]

When discussing science, I try not to say that I "believe" in anything. I may say that some things are likely to be the case by virtue of overwhelming evidence, or that a particular theory is strongly supported by data. I would say that evolution seems to be the most effective means of explaining how things happen. But, sure, we have to be careful of rejecting new knowledge based on old beliefs. 10 or 20 years ago, arguments for a pre-Clovis American culture were laughed at, as was the notion of H. sapiens interbreeding with Neanderthals.

[Inner Prop]

I just listened to the story again at Voices in the Dark.  Cracking good story that.

I too assumed that the mob was after him because they knew what he was.  I also thought that they wanted to keep him there to help in his transformation.  I don't know that the transformation is a given thing, I think it needs to be nourished and encouraged.  Or mabye they knew even more, they knew that if they left him to start changing on his own then he would kill himself.

I agree that there are non-fishy folks in the town that don't get bothered because they are non-fishy and don't cause trouble.  Had the grocery boy actually tried to join a church in town he would probably been turned away.  If he persisted then he would have been dealt with harshly.

It seemed that the fishy folks accepted sacrifices, but they didn't take them.  I don't think we ever hear of them abducting anyone.  They take those that were sacrificed to them on the islands, but they didn't even ask for them.  The people struck up that bargain from their side, right?

Interestingly, the people of the islands worshiped the fishy folk as gods, and the fishys worshiped Dagon, Hastur and Cthulhu as gods.

Do you think that the virgins that the islanders sacrificed were then "re-gifted" as it were?

[HeirophantX]

"re-gifting"  Noyce!