I Boycott World Fantasy

[Vladd67]

I'm left scratching my head at the suggestion that a bust of Olivia Butler was apparently nominated to replace the one of HP Lovecraft - isn't she normally known as a science fiction writer??

Yes but she was a black woman so she won't offend anyone.

 

[Hex]

Because the "World Fantasy Award" is actually for the "best fantasy or science fiction works of the previous year" so Octavia Butler is a perfectly reasonable suggestion.

Of course, as @Vladd67 suggests, using a bust of her will upset a lot of people.

It's sad when people get upset but people who are upset because someone is non-white and female don't attract my sympathy in the same way as people who are upset because someone's terrifyingly racist.

 

[Randy M.]

Hey, Ray, I'd just suggest not giving up on HPL until you read "The Colour Out of Space." I also like "The Rats in the Walls" but it's closer to a conventional horror story; TCOoS is closer to s.f. and Lovecraft adopts as close to a reportorial tone as he can. which I think makes the story quite effective.

Really?
I think maybe some impact on horror. I struggle to see much impact on Fantasy. Incalculable seems a bit of hyperbole?

Horror isn't necessarily a genre, and really wasn't until the late 1970s and early 1980s under the influence of Stephen King's enormous commercial success. Horror can cut across genres: Mystery, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (at least Ellery Queen claimed if for the genre) and The Hound of the Baskervilles; s.f., "Sandkings," "Who Goes There?" and maybe as much as a quarter of the stories in the S.F. Hall of Fame volumes; fantasy, a good deal of Robert E. Howard and Clark Ashton Smith, as well as works like Our Lady of Darkness.

HPL wrote a fair portion of Dunsanian fantasy, not least The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath (included in the Ballantine Adult Fantasy Series edited by Lin Carter), and short stories like "The Cats of Ulthar." He also wrote some s.f., notably At the Mountains of Madness and "The Shadow Out of Time." Most of his work sits in that area of weird fantasy that's pretty much horror, but has features that differentiate it from ghost stories.

As for HPL's influence on fantasy, he championed and/or mentored Robert E. Howard, Clark Ashton Smith, and Fritz Leiber among others. His influence on them branched out through them into S&S (Smith's Zothique stories inspired Jack Vance and Gene Wolfe; Howard inspired Karl Edward Wagner; Leiber has inspired countless other writers in sf, fantasy and horror -- and outside; Michael Chabon has praised him -- and is arguably the only writer Lovecraft dealt with whose work across those genres is on a par with Lovecraft's own).

In spite of being called the World Fantasy Convention and offering the World Fantasy Award, looking down its list of winners since the beginning note some of the names,
Fritz Leiber (lifetime award, also for "Belson Express," a fine late horror story)
Robert Bloch (lifetime award)
Manly Wade Wellman (lifetime award; also for Worse Things Waiting, a fantasy/horror collection)
Robert Aickman (for a vampire story)
Russell Kirk (for a ghost story)
Hugh B. Cave (lifetime award)
Ramsey Campbell (lifetime award; also for a retrospective collection)
Frank Belknap Long (lifetime award)
Charles Grant (for a horror story and as editor of an anthology of horror)
C. L. Moore (lifetime award)
Roald Dahl (lifetime award)
Karl Edward Wagner (for a vampire story)
Peter Straub (lifetime award)

And just to highlight HPL's influence, this year's winner of novella, We are All Completely Fine is Lovecraftian fiction.

I think WFC's recognition of fantasy has evened off over the years and broadened (though fans of epic/heroic/high/Tolkeinesque fantasy always feel they get the short end of the stick from WFC, thus the Gemmell), but the award began with the rise of horror as a genre and was inspired by that. HPL made sense at the time.

I don't think you can read HPL's fiction without acknowledging his racism -- I've heard his letters are worse and some of the quotes, like those Theresa gave, are painful reading. And I'm not sure we can brush it off as him being a man of his time. But if we concentrate on the fiction, he opened subject matter that no one had quite gotten to before him, moving the supernatural away from magic and toward science.

For more, track down Leiber's "A Literary Copernicus."

As for renaming the Howards and offering a new statue, I'm saddened but I agree the WF was in a lose-lose situation, some fans incensed at the change and others incensed if there was no change. But given the expansion of fantasy across media, these kinds of growing pains are inevitable. Things change. Remember, when the Award was cooked up in the 1970s, there were less than a handful of movies based on HPL's fiction, there was no Library of America volume (or Library of America, for that matter), no academic criticism just fan criticism, and Lovecraft's name was only known among a relatively few readers at a time when reading was more prevalent across the population.


Randy M.

 

[Vladd67]

Wasn't Lovecraft used as the first event was held in Providence and was some celebration of his work?

 

[Randy M.]

I believe you're right. It set a precedent, the award continuing with that statuette (or similar ones). It also acted as a signal of what the WFC was about, being inclusive of the old pulp fantasy/horror writers like Cave and Long, as well as newer writers like King and Straub, as well as fantasists outside weird fantasy/horror like McKillop, Elizabeth Lynn, Poul Anderson, Avram Davidson, Stephen Donaldson and on and on.

Again, the award appeared just as horror was taking off, when writers drawn to it were showing the most creativity -- 10 to 12 years later and genre horror was exhibiting brain drain -- and a little ahead of that first burst of Tolkein-inspired epic/heroic/high fantasy, and editors like T. E. D. Klein, Karl Edward Wagner, Charles L. Grant, Kirby McCauley (as agent, as well as editor) and Stuart Schiff (sp?) were influencing the direction of short fiction.

Note Donaldson's Thomas Covenant books lost to Leiber's Our Lady of Darkness, which combines Lovecraft with an M. R. Jamesian ghost story, which I think indicates the mind set of the judges (if not the fans) at the time.

Go a bit further and note the first -- and I believe, only -- anthology to come out of the awards:

I'm not finding confirmation and I'm not where I can check my copy, but I think I recall a section of illustrations by Lee Brown Coye, the last great illustrator to emerge from Weird Tales. Also indicative of the early direction of the convention and awards.

Again, with time that has smoothed out and broadened. But I believe the initial impetus, or a fair percentage of it, for WFC came from the horror/weird fantasy fans of the time.

Randy M.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

"The Rats in the Walls" but it's closer to a conventional horror story

Didn't think much of it,
but I decided about early 1970s don't actually like "horror genre".

Hounds of the Baskervilles in my mind isn't horror genre.

 

[Randy M.]

It's Gothic and part of its effect, for the reader if not Holmes, is the suggestion that there might be a hound and the hound might just be supernatural. Part of the Gothic tradition includes the rationalized supernatural and as I recall the first Gothic, The Castle of Otranto, rationalizes the supernatural and one of the next writers to take up Gothic, Ann Radcliffe, pretty much specialized in that form of story-telling, so the line of descent is, roughly, ...Otranto to The Mysteries of Udolfo (for example) to The Hound of the Baskervilles to Scooby Doo.

(May be slightly exaggerated, but it's close.)


Randy M.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Horror isn't necessarily a genre, and really wasn't until the late 1970s and early 1980s under the influence of Stephen King's enormous commercial success.

That's a really good point, actually - fantasy as a genre is huge now, but for most of the 20th century was arguably the little kid compared to science fiction and what we might now regard as horror. Sometimes it's hard to comprehend just how radically fantasy has grown and outstripped its siblings in so short a time.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Though for 100s of years most fiction was more like Fantasy as we define it now. It was only in the 1930s that Science Fiction started to be comparable to Fantasy. Then from the 1960s Fantasy started to become more popular again.

I think for most of the 20th C, Fantasy was bigger than SF. 1940s to 1980s was really the peak of SF.

 

[chopper]

personally i don't believe HPL's reputation or readership will diminish just because an award is no longer named after him. i think changing the award is needed and progressive - make it something writers of all stripes will aspire to winning (me, i'd love an Argonath...or a Luggage ). throwing toys out of the pram in response to change isn't the way to show that you're particularly in tune with the times...

 

[J Riff]

Oh, I am with WHP all the way. The whole thing is blown way out of proportion. There's no way to approach the HPL subject anymore, so blah. He used to just be an obscure horror/SF writer who had a fanbase, now he's some kind of icon of 'racism' to be hacked at forever, without the real facts being available, and no way for HPL to reanimate and tell us what he was really on about. I've heard a lot of stories, from the olde ones, about HPL, and it's a huge can of worms that should be buried and forgotten. Many, many famous people were overt 'racists' - even in the fifties as I recall, but NeverMind that, I'm never talking about it again. Great writer, his personal opinions on anything-at-all are irrelevant, that's my position, forever, so there. *

 

[lynnfredricks]

When this issue started to smolder last year, I didn't really give it much thought because while I think HPL is a major contributor to the fantasy genre, he isn't my first choice to represent it. In terms of modern horror fiction and science fiction, he's a better fit (certainly modern horror!).

I just don't care for the shallow, flawed logic and narcissism that seems to be behind many of the arguments that have seeped through the cracks into academic discussions. I am certain that's what STJ is referring to in regards to social justice warriors.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I just don't care for the shallow, flawed logic and narcissism that seems to be behind many of the arguments that have seeped through the cracks into academic discussions. I am certain that's what STJ is referring to in regards to social justice warriors.

Could you give us examples of some of these arguments or provide links to where they might be found? Was this a general observation, or is it directly related to the topic at hand? If the former, I don't see how it adds to this discussion. If the latter, examples might prove enlightening.

 

[lynnfredricks]

Could you give us examples of some of these arguments or provide links to where they might be found? Was this a general observation, or is it directly related to the topic at hand? If the former, I don't see how it adds to this discussion. If the latter, examples might prove enlightening.

Both: the inability to separate a current, socio-political-cultural view from the observation of some historical element within the context in which the historical element occurred. Couple that with a strong need to express those views to discredit the academic or intellectual value of a work, or those who recognize the value of the work.

This post by Noah Berlatsky covers a lot of territory as an example. Please note especially his characterization of ST Joshi.

 

[Hex]

I think it's only polite to avoid a repeat of the situation in which a great writer is handed an award that is intended to recognise their achievements but that also commemorates someone who thought he or she was subhuman and disgusting.

re Noah Berlatsky: He characterises ST Joshi as "probably the world’s leading Lovecraft scholar." Is there another way he characterizes him that I missed (I did skim a little)?

This is what I don't understand: we believe some things are right. We believe, for example, that race, sex, age or disability should not determine people's worth, and that no one should be insulted or made to feel uncomfortable because of what they are.

When Lovecraft was writing, some people believed that the colour of someone's skin or their sexual preferences made them inhuman and worthy only of death. These beliefs led pretty directly to mass murder, where millions of people were killed in an industrialised genocide.

We now think that those kind of beliefs are wrong. Lovecraft espoused many of those beliefs quite enthusiastically. We therefore believe that Lovecraft's beliefs were wrong.

Am I a social justice warrior?

 

[WaylanderToo]

Because the "World Fantasy Award" is actually for the "best fantasy or science fiction works of the previous year" so Octavia Butler is a perfectly reasonable suggestion.

Of course, as @Vladd67 suggests, using a bust of her will upset a lot of people.

It's sad when people get upset but people who are upset because someone is non-white and female don't attract my sympathy in the same way as people who are upset because someone's terrifyingly racist.

personally I would have thought that the fact that OB is African-American is irrelevant - what should be relevant, surely, is how well known she is? Not popular mind, though that should also be a factor. HPL is known worldwide, probably even to those who dislike or don't even know anything about the genre and so c/would be a suitable name for an award, if we are going to change the name of the award then surely people as well known (or moreso) should be chosen (eg Wells, Tolkien, CS Lewis, Dahl, Wyndham) or, probably a less contentious idea, a 'thing' award (eg the rocket award, Cthulu award, The Wizard, a Morlok, a meekon etc etc)

 

[Hex]

I'm not sure being well-known has to be the deciding factor -- I'm sure there were better-known writers than Lovecraft when the award was set up (though I see upthread why he was chosen). In fact, I thought Octavia Butler was quite well known, but I agree there could be other candidates.

Shame Andre Norton already has an award, but I think someone like Lois Mcmaster Bujold, who writes both fantasy and science fiction, might be a good choice, or Ursula le Guin, who is someone else who writes across genres. Better yet, how about Tanith Lee?

 

[Toby Frost]

I've got to say, I'd be pretty unnerved with that statue on my mantlepiece. It's hardly the most flattering depiction. I think I'd prefer Cthulhu, or one of those crystal dragons that you get at gift shops. Perhaps not a Morlock, though. That might be asking for trouble.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

See, I don't think the central argument is about whether or not Lovecraft was a great writer, and whether or not his views were appropriate and normal for the time (I do agree they seem extreme, however).

The question is does he represent fantasy and sci fi today? And that, for me, is no.

If we can't review as a genre where we are, and where we're going, and if we're still valid, how can we call ourselves a genre that invites the eternal 'What if...'

On another note, HPL is very entwined with Fantasy and the title of the con is the WFC, someone reflective of both genres would get my vote, too. Although I'd also mention Pat Cadigan as someone who has given a huge amount to the genre and conventions. But I like Pat very much.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Better yet, how about Tanith Lee?

+1
Just read her kids book, Dragon Hoard.

• Broad writer
• Well known
• Good
• Dead

But I think a generic creature or obelisk of some kind is better than a person. Something not specific to one author.