SecondCircle
Sin Cara
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,410
I realize that the title of this thread holds nearly limitless homonymous possibilities of meanings, but never mind all that. And before anyone gets any ideas, I'm talking H.P. Lovecraft, the writer of strange and horrifying short stories
Now hear this. There's always some debate over what is "correct" when writing and what is not. And there's a point where you could eventually pull out a text book and shove it under someone's nose and say, "look here's the rules of grammar and sentence structure and creative writing." Of course, by anyone's account, the textbook style of flawless writing and edited material is absolutely correct. So like many arguments that happen here on the boards can tell you, there is a literarily correct way of writing. Stray from these common rules and it is easily deemed wrong. We all agree.
I was reading a Lovecraft story the other day (Howard Phillips) and like usual I was sucked in. I also read the forward written by Robert Bloch. Now if you've never read anything of Lovecraft's work, it is strange both in content and style. He chooses to write about things that humans cannot understand, and therefore find grossly terrifying. "We fear the unknown," so to speak. His writings involve creatures from beyond our world or dimension, that are so strange and alien to us that it disturbs the very mind to think of them.
Of course if I told you that The Shadow Over Innsmouth was about a guy that visits a town full of people turning into fish hybrids, you'd laugh at the idea that it was scary or creepy or dreadful. But the manner in which Lovecraft weaves the tale does it all. From the very first time the narrator sees the bus driver with his big unblinking eyes and other human yet repulsive features, you can't help but be filled with a morbid sense of wonder and revulsion. And Lovecraft describes it as such.
But this is leading me to what I'm trying to get at. Lovecraft's openings would be all but shunned here at Lit, and in any other medium. Sometimes he leads in with first person POV and showers the reader with a shit ton of back story and character details that most would find tiresome, over informative, and uncreative. It also takes quite the literary mind to understand his writing. His vocabulary is vast and he laces his words into the most complex of compound sentences that would drive an editor to shoot his face off. It's daunting indeed to start and read one of his short horror tales.
Then Robert Bloch pointed something out to me about Lovecraft's very style of writing. When you're reading, his usual narrator leads in with an almost "let me tell you what happened" kind of deal, which most would definitely say is bad writing. But Bloch says he uses this technique almost purposely. Its like you're sitting down and having a beer and a smoke with the narrator, and you're comfortable and attentive to hear what has got him talking. This narrator loads you with back story and all, and it can be droning and boring because of the lengthy compound sentences and tricky word play that has you saying WTF.
That's where most people would call him misguided. But his narrator speaks with an air of intelligence and superiority. In other words, the guy telling the story sounds smart as shit because of the way its written, and calm and sure of himself and the world around him. So then you're write there with him. Subconsciously, you're trusting the narrator is of sound mind and supreme intelligence.
Then after you wade through the seemingly dry intro, shit starts to look stranger and stranger until something completely out of this world happens. All the while, the narrator, having been deemed of sound mind and intellect, finds that his resolution crumbles away at the sight of some impossible and wretched thing from some place between time and space. And you're there with him.
Its happened to me several times. I'm reading Lovecraft, blah blah intro intro, I get what the guy's saying, and then I get pulled deeper. Like quicksand. Before I know it I'm breathless and reading about some insane horror or event that has suddenly sprung up. I never thought that a story involving the correspondence of two men talking of disturbances in a remote region could disturb me and give me chills. The way its written, and the shocking things they disclose to each other in their letters (which you read as letters) grows more and more suspenseful until you find yourself actually worried for one man's well being. I speak of The Whisperer in the Dark of course.
At long last I say this. The writing style and literary structure should have been wrong. Lovecraft was never famous in his time, and maybe it was the way he wrote. And by anyone's standards, I guess it was wrong. But by doing it the way he did, it seems like he knew something, and that writing the way he chose to write (though it may not have been as intentional as it seems today) he achieved a powerful overall effect. A creepy, eerie, disturbing, and on some level, downright terrifying collection of stories.
I need not ramble more. I just wondered if sometimes the wrong way achieves certain results that an author is going for even if that old textbook says they were shitty writers.
Now hear this. There's always some debate over what is "correct" when writing and what is not. And there's a point where you could eventually pull out a text book and shove it under someone's nose and say, "look here's the rules of grammar and sentence structure and creative writing." Of course, by anyone's account, the textbook style of flawless writing and edited material is absolutely correct. So like many arguments that happen here on the boards can tell you, there is a literarily correct way of writing. Stray from these common rules and it is easily deemed wrong. We all agree.
I was reading a Lovecraft story the other day (Howard Phillips) and like usual I was sucked in. I also read the forward written by Robert Bloch. Now if you've never read anything of Lovecraft's work, it is strange both in content and style. He chooses to write about things that humans cannot understand, and therefore find grossly terrifying. "We fear the unknown," so to speak. His writings involve creatures from beyond our world or dimension, that are so strange and alien to us that it disturbs the very mind to think of them.
Of course if I told you that The Shadow Over Innsmouth was about a guy that visits a town full of people turning into fish hybrids, you'd laugh at the idea that it was scary or creepy or dreadful. But the manner in which Lovecraft weaves the tale does it all. From the very first time the narrator sees the bus driver with his big unblinking eyes and other human yet repulsive features, you can't help but be filled with a morbid sense of wonder and revulsion. And Lovecraft describes it as such.
But this is leading me to what I'm trying to get at. Lovecraft's openings would be all but shunned here at Lit, and in any other medium. Sometimes he leads in with first person POV and showers the reader with a shit ton of back story and character details that most would find tiresome, over informative, and uncreative. It also takes quite the literary mind to understand his writing. His vocabulary is vast and he laces his words into the most complex of compound sentences that would drive an editor to shoot his face off. It's daunting indeed to start and read one of his short horror tales.
Then Robert Bloch pointed something out to me about Lovecraft's very style of writing. When you're reading, his usual narrator leads in with an almost "let me tell you what happened" kind of deal, which most would definitely say is bad writing. But Bloch says he uses this technique almost purposely. Its like you're sitting down and having a beer and a smoke with the narrator, and you're comfortable and attentive to hear what has got him talking. This narrator loads you with back story and all, and it can be droning and boring because of the lengthy compound sentences and tricky word play that has you saying WTF.
That's where most people would call him misguided. But his narrator speaks with an air of intelligence and superiority. In other words, the guy telling the story sounds smart as shit because of the way its written, and calm and sure of himself and the world around him. So then you're write there with him. Subconsciously, you're trusting the narrator is of sound mind and supreme intelligence.
Then after you wade through the seemingly dry intro, shit starts to look stranger and stranger until something completely out of this world happens. All the while, the narrator, having been deemed of sound mind and intellect, finds that his resolution crumbles away at the sight of some impossible and wretched thing from some place between time and space. And you're there with him.
Its happened to me several times. I'm reading Lovecraft, blah blah intro intro, I get what the guy's saying, and then I get pulled deeper. Like quicksand. Before I know it I'm breathless and reading about some insane horror or event that has suddenly sprung up. I never thought that a story involving the correspondence of two men talking of disturbances in a remote region could disturb me and give me chills. The way its written, and the shocking things they disclose to each other in their letters (which you read as letters) grows more and more suspenseful until you find yourself actually worried for one man's well being. I speak of The Whisperer in the Dark of course.
At long last I say this. The writing style and literary structure should have been wrong. Lovecraft was never famous in his time, and maybe it was the way he wrote. And by anyone's standards, I guess it was wrong. But by doing it the way he did, it seems like he knew something, and that writing the way he chose to write (though it may not have been as intentional as it seems today) he achieved a powerful overall effect. A creepy, eerie, disturbing, and on some level, downright terrifying collection of stories.
I need not ramble more. I just wondered if sometimes the wrong way achieves certain results that an author is going for even if that old textbook says they were shitty writers.
