Type Organization

[Tinsel]

There certainly is a difference here in these story types a grouped:

This group feels similar, Group (A):
1. "The Picture in the House".
2. "Beyond the Wall of Sleep".
3. "The Dunwich Horror".

This group feels similar, Group (B):
1. "The Outsider".
2. "Celephais".
3. "The White Ship" (not read it in full yet)


Well, I am still very new to Lovecraft. I find that these different types of stories provide a completely different reading experience. In group A, I am left asking questions and wanting to find the rational behind events that took place in the story. In group B, I don't want to know why anything happened, but it reads more like poetry.

I sense that there is at least one more type of group but I can not define it in any way yet. I don't mind reading group B, but I'd like to know before hand and read it when I just want to relax and follow the dream, while group A is more strict reading where you can miss details and clues if you are not focused. Group A can leave you damaged.

In this first book of the Penguin set, the story types are mixed, so unless you have read the stories already, there is no way to be prepared for them.

 

[Fried Egg]

I think that you're group B is what is generally regarded as his "Dunsanian" tales. Although I don't think "The Outsider" is usually classified in this manner, "Celephais" and "The White Ship" definitely are. Perhaps "The Outsider" would be considered more in the style of Poe?

This Wiki article is interesting as it suggests that Lovecraft's tales can be broken down into three groups: Dunsanian, Arkham, and Cthulhu cycles:

The Dunsanian stories are those that are written in the vein of Lord Dunsany (and may include Lovecraft's so-called Dream Cycle tales), the Arkham stories include those that take place in Lovecraft's fictionalized New England setting, and the Cthulhu cycle stories are those that use Lovecraft's cosmic story-cycle (the Lovecraft Mythos).

Although the "Arkham and "Cthuhlu" groups seem to more concerned with setting (and perhaps theme) than style which distinguishes the "Dunsanian" group.

 

[j d worthington]

While a useful classification for some purposes, it's a very limited one, and doesn't apply outside a very specific use. Lovecraft's Dunsanian tales, for instance, also use elements from his "Cthulhu cycle", and vice versa; while the Arkham cycle (setting, etc.) can be found in tales of just about any type ("Herbert West"; "The White Ship" -- Kingsport; "The Dunwich Horror", etc.).

The fact is that he did do different types of tales, but they are almost all interconnected in some way, either through setting, elements of his mythos, connections to the prose-poetic, more Dunsanian type of tale, or thematically... or several things at once ("The Strange High House in the Mist" being an example of the latter, as is The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath and At the Mountains of Madness).

I'd be interested in hearing more of a definition of your groupings, Tinsel, as I'm not sure I quite see the connections you are making there. If I were, I might be better able to suggest which would (for you) fit into what category, so you could read them "in the proper mood".

(Oh, and I'll respond to your latest post on "The Picture in the House" when I return from work this afternoon. Got to dash....)

 

[Tinsel]

Thanks for the website article. I will read it soon. It might serve as an alright guide.

I than agree with the Dunsanian group, and perhaps the other two groups need better classification, I can not say yet. I would include "The Outsider" in the group with "Celephais" because they feel the same. On the other hand when I read "The Picture in the House" it felt like I has hit by a cold pale of water, and that is why I think that grouping them is not a bad idea. I am going by the way that I feel when I read the stories. I was wondering if I was going to walk blindly into another "The Picture in the House". I'm not suggesting that I dislike those stories, but it would be nice to be prepared.

 

[j d worthington]

I'm still not at all sure I follow you on your classifications here, given that it is a feeling you get from the stories, but... would you classify "The Rats in the Walls" as belonging to group A, for instance?

If so, then I would say that "In the Vault", with its rather grisly aspects, probably belongs there, as well; as would "The Thing on the Doorstep" and perhaps at least some parts of At the Mountains of Madness.

If it is something completely different, then the above may simply not apply at all....

 

[Tinsel]

None of those stories that you mentioned are in the first Penguin book, "The Call of Chthulhu...". The story "The Picture in the House" was completely brutal. I was wondering if there are any more of his like it. These other stories are childs play, but still nice to read because of his use of language which is attractive. Those damn brothers. That might be what this is all about.

What I thought of "The Rats in the Wall" was that it was well written. It was not as shocking as "The Picture in the House" but it raised a number of questions focused on paganism. I will talk about it in the near future since it is one of the stories in the first book.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Re: Brutality, the only other tale I can think of, offhand, that is as viscerally nasty is 'Herbert West - Reanimator' although Lovecraft was consciously slumming it in that one. 'The Hound' also has a higher than usual percentage of grue, what with the macabre 'museum' the two main characters have amassed in their home in England.

 

[Tinsel]

I started Herbert West but I couldn't get into it, but now I started it again and I like it better this second attempt. Yes it is a little bit evil. I just read the part where the undead was shot and found to have a baby's hand sticking out of it's mouth. I wouldn't call this one exceptional however, unless it gets better. I'm guessing that I'm only half way through. The truth is that even in this story which does not create a detailed atmosphere because it hasn't described many setting details, there still is plenty of well organized thought. I now have to finish it.

I read "The Hound' but found that it was too short. It wasn't very scary, although it was good in some parts. I need to read it again because I know more about his writing now and I probably read it very quickly. I might like it a lot more the next time I read it which apparently will be soon because I think that it is in book one of the Penguin set.

Something like "The Shadow Over Innsmouth" was not very scary but it was written so well that it is hard to imagine how someone could write like that. If you lived near the ocean it might of course hold more relevance.