Rookie Questions about Lovecraft

You may want to look at Chapter 34 of Frazer's book for starters. But, really, I think it is more a case of Lovecraft wishing to have the resonance (largely in relation to Catullus, but also reflecting an informed reading of Frazer as well), rather than too many specific details in this instance (unlike, e.g., the story of Bishop Hatto). This sort of reference allowed him to give an historical depth to the horrors he deals with in the tale by tying them to genuine practices of antiquity. Certainly, he held The Golden Bough in high regard, recommending it both in letters and in his "Suggestions for a Reading Guide" (which is actually a portion of the work he did for Anne Tillery Renshaw's Well-Bred Speech). You might also want to look up a copy of The Dark Brotherhood as well.

In the meantime, I will try to track down specific references, and post them once I have a chance....
 
thank you, i see. yes, he really dont use many historic details about the kybele and attis cult and their terrible practices in the story. While he references to a poem of catull(us), he doesnt mention anything of its content at all (a thing freudian psychoanalysis would be interested in i quess). But im sure youve allready know. One problem ive stumbled upon, that there is more than one Atys. Wikipedia knows:

* Atys (king) was a king of Alba Longa.
* Atys (King of the Maeonians) was an early king of Lydia, then referred to as Maeonia, and was the father of Lydus.
* Atys son of Croesus was the son of the later King Croesus of Lydia.
* Attis, a Phrygian/Roman deity

do you have any idea whos meant in the story? The deity is called AtTIs. was this a mistake of Lovecraft? Did he meant the deity but called him Atys instead of Attis?

In the meantime, I will try to track down specific references, and post them once I have a chance....
Click to expand...
That would be really great if you find time to do so
 
The last named is the one he is referring to... though there is, if memory serves, some evidence that there may have been an historical personage to whom much of this became attached. At any rate, the spelling Lovecraft uses is an archaic variant no longer used, but still recognized at the time.

By the way... have you had access to Prof. Barton L. St. Armand's The Roots of Horror in the Fiction of H. P. Lovecraft? He takes this story as his basic Lovecraftian text, and his analysis of it -- despite some Derlethian elements -- remains both challenging and fascinating nearly 40 years after it was written, and you would likely find much of use there as well....
 
thank you

no i dont have access to this book, ive only heard that one major finding in it was, that there is a dream of C. G. Jung, which has very interessting similarities to the story. at least ive found the original descripton of C. G. Jungs dream and his interpretation of it. :)
 
You might check and see if you can get it via an interlibrary loan service. Failing that, you may (possibly) be able to find an affordable copy via the 'net. It is certainly one of the best (if not the best) examinations of the story I've come across....
 
Amazon has a complete Lovecraft ebook for ninety-nine cents.

Having already read most of the stories; I've been using it more as a reference, than something to be read immediately. (eg when I had rats in my walls, It was nice to have a handy re-read of Rats in the Walls.)

So, I can't vouch for completeness or formating errors; but so far so good, and waddya want for a buck?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0057JQ8C8/?tag=brite-21
 
My problem is... does this use the older, often very corrupt texts, or the established texts that have been used since the 1980s? In several cases with HPL, this can make an enormous difference in the significance of a tale -- that is, what is actually being said, and how the cumulative effect changes as a result. If it is the older texts, in other words, as I found upon comparing the two, you're not really reading Lovecraft....
 
Alex said:
Amazon has a complete Lovecraft ebook for ninety-nine cents.

Having already read most of the stories; I've been using it more as a reference, than something to be read immediately. (eg when I had rats in my walls, It was nice to have a handy re-read of Rats in the Walls.)

So, I can't vouch for completeness or formating errors; but so far so good, and waddya want for a buck?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0057JQ8C8/?tag=brite-21
Click to expand...

It is NOT complete ("complete" Lovecraft collections never are, for some reason), and why pay a buck when you can get the stuff (yes, the complete stuff with the exception of the Eddy collaborations which you can't get legally anyway) for free at the H. P. Lovecraft Archive?
 
Ningauble said:
It is NOT complete ("complete" Lovecraft collections never are, for some reason), and why pay a buck when you can get the stuff (yes, the complete stuff with the exception of the Eddy collaborations which you can't get legally anyway) for free at the H. P. Lovecraft Archive?
Click to expand...

I have to add my voice in cheering the H. . Lovecraft Archive -- it is the finest Lovecraft site online, an amazing accomplishment. I have it bookmarked and go there often. It is simply fabulous. For example, they publish "The Thing in the Moonlight" side by side with the actual Lovecraft letter that the story's text is taken from, so that you can see what was added by other hands. This has convinced me that the greater portion of the wee tale is indeed by Lovecraft and should be included in works of HPL's tales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Guttersnipe Multiple Questions Regarding Ambiguous Endings in SHORT Stories Book Discussion 4
Draven Vertigo Had some questions about 1st Novel Writing Discussion 7
D Why mesh? (And other plot questions) SFF Lounge 6
C Questions about grocery store items as characters Writing Discussion 10
Extollager Researcher Needs Help with Questions about Foster's Guide to Middle-earth Book Discussion 0

Similar threads


Back
Top