At the same time, the appearance of the Old Ones in the story can be seen as a weakness, detracting from their wholly sympathetic portrayal in At the Mountains od Madness. They serve no real purpose to the story, they do not advance it, and their appearance here detracts from the pathos of the earlier novel.
Phillip -- I'm not sure I quite agree with you on some of these points. While I would agree that the perception of the Old Ones is altered in "Witch House", I'm not convinced that "[t]hey serve no real purpose in the story". I've indicated some of the reasons I see above. I do feel that Lovecraft was not explicit on some points -- either through a desire to suggest rather than spell out, or because he himself was acting on more-or-less unconscious reasoning when including them -- but personally I get the feeling that the link between the two tales is more than is apparent on the surface. Part of that is the idea that Gilman is not traveling only in space, but
Time -- we may be seeing the Old Ones not as they are now, but millions or even billions of years ago, perhaps in their place of origin. If this is the case (the time-traveling aspect) then this would also explain some odd aspects concerning Keziah Mason's survival for such a long period. But I'd also say that he wanted beings that (for him, at least) had become sympathetic -- they certainly did not begin with a sympathetic potrayal in Mountains, becoming so only gradually... the real turning point being when he used "unhuman" instead of "inhuman" to describe their actions -- that were nonetheless completely and totally alien, and would have the effect on Gilman they did: to me they symbolized Gilman's (and humankind's) reaction to an alien universe as menacing, without it actually being so. There are other points here, but -- as many of the people here are only beginning to read HPL, I won't go into more at this point, as I'd rather not spoil anything for them -- or influence their own take on stories they've not yet read by having my views out there ahead of time.
At the same time, Lovecraft errs in making Keziah Mason, even Brown Jenkins into almost pulplike figures of conventionalised evil. She can traverse time and space, but for what? To kill babies at superstitious occasions.
Although Lovecraft's conception does redeem the tale, the bulk of it is lacklustre, and goes against his brand of cosmic indifferentism. This is actually one of his weaker stories, for the cod-evil of the witch only serves as a plot device to lead to Gilman's (admittedly gruesome) death.
Also, though I, too, find this to be one of Lovecraft's weaker efforts, I think there's more to his use of Keziah Mason than is given credit for. For one thing, I think she is used as part of that fusing of the older tales of witches (from Ainsworth's The Lancashire Witches -- or even earlier -- on, including elements of Hawthorne) with his own approach to science fiction-style horror. She is also, despite her peculiar abilities, a product of her time, and carries it with her. Thus, I would say, the controversial note about the crucifix. Yes, it does come across as conventional and even stereotyped. Yet I'd say this is more because of the way it is handled rather than in concept. One thing to keep in mind is that, no matter how much she's experienced since then, early emotional reactions on a near-instinctive level, things instilled pre-speech in her Puritan environment, will still kick in momentarily. This ties in with something I've been debating with others on about Heinlein's The Puppet Masters -- Mary's reaction to Sam's ordering her back in the car. My contention there is that there would be at least a momentary (and more-or-less instantaneous) flash of anger because of a normally independent personality who had a lifetime of learned survival techniques predating even verbalization skills, and these were being overridden by a man who was still relatively new to her life, however important. It might be on an almost subliminal level, but
it would be there. Human beings simply do not alter such reactions soon, if at all. That they can entirely "unlearn" such gut-level reactions is a very debatable point. They may not even be consciously aware of their reaction... but it is almost certainly there. So with Keziah Mason and the crucifix. I've always seen that as a
very brief flash from a mental/emotional level that goes to a very early learned fear response from that stern, Calvinistic upbringing, but enough to give that momentary chance for Gilman to break her grip. In Lovecraft's words, she "seemed struck with panic, and her grip relaxed long enough to give Gilman a chance to break it entirely...." But "the claws received a fresh acces of strength and closed in again." Now, to me, that indicates (given the speed of the action of that particular moment) only an immediate, sub-cognitive emotional reaction of very brief duration, almost immediately overridden by her conscious mind. The problem is that the description becomes so lengthy that it gives the impression of taking much longer, so in turn Keziah seems affected longer than she actually is. I may well be stretching a point, but that is how it has always struck me, and that impression is certainly backed up by realistic psychology.
On her use of such powers -- there I'm rather on the fence. Again, the question comes down to how her psychology works: does she understand the actual advanced concepts she's using, or does she still see them in the framework of witchcraft, with all its superstitions, rituals, and reliance on supernatural forces (which would, again, have something to do with Nyarlathotep's appearance as the traditional Black Man of the coven... something also reinforced by Gilman's own coming to an understanding of these concepts via a connection -- albeit by no means as limited -- with the witchcraft beliefs as well).
However, this is one of those cases where the deemphasis on characterization works against him, and she does not come across as significant as she perhaps should.
On the "cosmic indifferentism" -- here I would largely agree with you, though I don't think it's entirely absent. I do believe that Lovecraft erred (where that is concerned, at any rate) in having Gilman see the Black Man as taking such an
active role in the malignancy. Had it been simply Keziah and Brown Jenkin (who can be seen as yet another debasement of the human self-image... perhaps even a wryly humorous one [Hugo the Rat, anyone?
]), then it would not have altered the vision of an indifferent cosmos, as all the actual maleficent actions would have been via
human (or partially human) characters. But on this one, I think he slipped into something much like he did with "The Dunwich Horror", coming a bit too close to the traditional dichotomy in presentation, at least, which marred that aspect of the tale.
