What do you think?
Rate this book
The Age of Lovecraft
Co-winner, Ray & Pat Browne Award for Best Edited Collection in Popular Culture and American Culture
Howard Phillips Lovecraft, the American author of “weird tales” who died in 1937 impoverished and relatively unknown, has become a twenty-first-century star, cropping up in places both anticipated and unexpected. Authors, filmmakers, and shapers of popular culture like Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, and Guillermo del Toro acknowledge his influence; his fiction is key to the work of posthuman philosophers and cultural critics such as Graham Harman and Eugene Thacker; and Lovecraft’s creations have achieved unprecedented cultural ubiquity, even showing up on the animated program South Park.
The Age of Lovecraft is the first sustained analysis of Lovecraft in relation to twenty-first-century critical theory and culture, delving into troubling aspects of his thought and writings. With contributions from scholars including Gothic expert David Punter, historian W. Scott Poole, musicologist Isabella van Elferen, and philosopher of the posthuman Patricia MacCormack, this wide-ranging volume brings together thinkers from an array of disciplines to consider Lovecraft’s contemporary cultural presence and its implications. Bookended by a preface from horror fiction luminary Ramsey Campbell and an extended interview with the central author of the New Weird, China Miéville, the collection addresses the question of “why Lovecraft, why now?” through a variety of approaches and angles.
A must for scholars, students, and theoretically inclined readers interested in Lovecraft, popular culture, and intellectual trends, The Age of Lovecraft offers the most thorough examination of Lovecraft’s place in contemporary philosophy and critical theory to date as it seeks to shed light on the larger phenomenon of the dominance of weird fiction in the twenty-first century.
Contributors: Jessica George; Brian Johnson, Carleton U; James Kneale, U College London; Patricia MacCormack, Anglia Ruskin U, Cambridge; Jed Mayer, SUNY New Paltz; China Miéville, Warwick U; W. Scott Poole, College of Charleston; David Punter, U of Bristol; David Simmons, Northampton U; Isabella van Elferen, Kingston U London.
Howard Phillips Lovecraft, the American author of “weird tales” who died in 1937 impoverished and relatively unknown, has become a twenty-first-century star, cropping up in places both anticipated and unexpected. Authors, filmmakers, and shapers of popular culture like Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, and Guillermo del Toro acknowledge his influence; his fiction is key to the work of posthuman philosophers and cultural critics such as Graham Harman and Eugene Thacker; and Lovecraft’s creations have achieved unprecedented cultural ubiquity, even showing up on the animated program South Park.
The Age of Lovecraft is the first sustained analysis of Lovecraft in relation to twenty-first-century critical theory and culture, delving into troubling aspects of his thought and writings. With contributions from scholars including Gothic expert David Punter, historian W. Scott Poole, musicologist Isabella van Elferen, and philosopher of the posthuman Patricia MacCormack, this wide-ranging volume brings together thinkers from an array of disciplines to consider Lovecraft’s contemporary cultural presence and its implications. Bookended by a preface from horror fiction luminary Ramsey Campbell and an extended interview with the central author of the New Weird, China Miéville, the collection addresses the question of “why Lovecraft, why now?” through a variety of approaches and angles.
A must for scholars, students, and theoretically inclined readers interested in Lovecraft, popular culture, and intellectual trends, The Age of Lovecraft offers the most thorough examination of Lovecraft’s place in contemporary philosophy and critical theory to date as it seeks to shed light on the larger phenomenon of the dominance of weird fiction in the twenty-first century.
Contributors: Jessica George; Brian Johnson, Carleton U; James Kneale, U College London; Patricia MacCormack, Anglia Ruskin U, Cambridge; Jed Mayer, SUNY New Paltz; China Miéville, Warwick U; W. Scott Poole, College of Charleston; David Punter, U of Bristol; David Simmons, Northampton U; Isabella van Elferen, Kingston U London.
296 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2016
13 people are currently reading
592 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
December 12, 2016
Long overdue serious critical study of Lovecraft as he is viewed through the lens of popular culture, film, posthuman philosophy, and an array of other disciplines. If you can get through the philosophical jargon (such as "the salience of Lovecraft's fiction for contemporary posthumanism that the monism Lovecraft derived from German biologist and naturalist Ernst Haeckel, and on which his own indifferentist philosophy of mechanistic materialism was partly premised") there's something interesting on almost every page. A wealth of material, ideas, references and analysis that will make the reader view Lovecraft in a variety of different lights. - BH.
September 5, 2017
This was a book of selected essays by various authors. While I enjoyed most of the essays, i did not love them all. (And that's ok) There was some really good writing on the topic of Lovecraft and there was a lot here that was not simply regurgitated fluff. Even the articles that did not thill me were all well written.
of most value were some of the bits talking about Lovecraft in Pop culture, and I found out about some reasources I was not aware of.
This work is a must for any Lovecraft Fan.
of most value were some of the bits talking about Lovecraft in Pop culture, and I found out about some reasources I was not aware of.
This work is a must for any Lovecraft Fan.
April 4, 2017
The Age of Lovecraft attempts to consider the implications of the current popularity of H.P. Lovecraft as an author and cultural figure from a variety of largely academic viewpoints, considering the philosophical, formal, and historical dimensions of the work. In addition, the collection engages with Lovecraft's impact on fan culture and the cultural uptake of his work. A lot of the work is focused on the arguments produced by Graham Harman's book on the topic, which frames Lovecraft as a posthumanist thinker. The question of Lovecraft's racism is dealt with, but unfortunately tends to get sidestepped to deal with other considerations. However, it's a pretty enjoyable set of essays and the work provides a number of useful interpretations of the Lovecraft phenomenon. I'll probably pick it up, and recommend the book.
March 22, 2016
Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book via a Goodreads giveaway.
An interesting collection of essays regarding Lovecraft and the relation of his work to modern culture and philosophy. Particularly concerning/through a lens of speculative realism/posthumanism/object-oriented ontology.
An interesting collection of essays regarding Lovecraft and the relation of his work to modern culture and philosophy. Particularly concerning/through a lens of speculative realism/posthumanism/object-oriented ontology.
November 25, 2019
All of the essays that this book hosts are highly intriguing and approach Lovecraft with a variety of philosophical, psychological and historical perspectives. The novelty behind these essays makes this book a must-read for anyone interested in a wider, academic outlook on ideology and lines of thought around Lovecraft.
February 24, 2017
Both fascinating and frustrating, the essays collected in his captivating anthology tackle the philosophical and artistic ideologies of H.P. Lovecraft with considerable, even overwhelming, depth. I would definitely not recommend this work for anyone unfamiliar with Lovecraft's works or anyone looking for a casual analysis of his stories. A publication of the University of Minnesota, the articles collected here are written in a distinctly academic voice presupposing a casual familiarity with such terms as weltanshauung, correlationism, and heuristics that could bog down as well as reward the deeply nuanced interpretations requiring much thought and reflection from the reader.
In Age of Lovecraft, the editors and contributors strive to answer the question of “why Lovecraft, why now?,” discussing why the nearly forgotten, archaic pulp horror tales of the early 20th century New Englander have captured the imaginations not only of the popular culture but of several nascent schools of philosophy as well. I have found myself fascinated by this myself, what this current wave of Lovecraftiana, with all its weirdness and dark, reactionary underbelly say’s about the current state of popular culture. In the end, the essays only scratch the surface here; though I found much food for thought, I also found myself questioning some of the authors approaches. However, for devotees, there would certainly be enough food for thought to make reading these essays well worth it, whether you would be in total agreement with every argument or not.
A few of my favorites focused on how Lovecraft’s writing style contributed to his appeal to what could now be called “nerdism,” such as David Simmons’ “Lovecraft and Real Person Fiction” and Jessica Georges’ “A Polychrome Study,” which explore how, in specifically opening his fictional universe to other writers, Lovecraft presaged the collaborative themes prevalent in “fandom.” Also, in Punter’s “Lovecraft: Suspicion, Pattern Recognition, and Paranoia,” he argues that Lovecraft’s idiosyncratic writing style, rather than being simply the awkward purple prose of a hack was instead integral to the weird vision that made him such an influential voice in America, an argument seen particularly in James Kneale’s “Ghoulish Dialogues,” which discusses how Lovecraft used the “drama of proof,” in drawing the supernatural into the real world so effectively.
On the other hand, many of the essays, Punter and Kneale’s included, put much focus on the philosophical attraction of Lovecraft’s cosmic horror on the development of several rather bleak schools of philosophy, which I found a little tedious. While it was interesting to learn more about such provocative schools as posthumanism, speculative realism, and object-orientated ontology, I found the arguments posited by them to be questionable at best. In addition, I was hoping to see more analysis of Lovecraft’s deep, pathological racism, and how this is reflected in the current popularity of Lovecraft’s creations in “nerdism,” in spite of (or perhaps because of?) his ugly, genocidal white supremacist beliefs.
The editors and contributors don’t exactly shy away from mentioning these disturbing implications and argue that critiquing Lovecraft's works cannot ignore this, though the paragraph in the introduction detailing Lovecraft’s xenophobia takes up less space than their surveys of Lovecraftian appearances in comics, music, or movies.
Because of this, I found W. Scott Poole’s article, “Lovecraft, Witch Cults, and Philosophers” the most interesting in the book. Poole, writing from the perspective of a historian (my own discipline), argues that Lovecraft’s racist conceptions of the “witch cult” myth are integral to both his appeal and the vision that he presents. The other authors put much more energy in detailing his purely philosophical ramifications, analysing that to me, as an affirmed humanist, seem quite divorced of anything really interesting to say of Lovecraft or humanity in general. I found myself in total agreement with China Mieville, in his intriguing interview with editor Weinstock in the conclusion to evaluate these theories with some suspicion, that they are “unconvincing.” In any case, an interesting collection, though I find myself craving more analysis of Lovecraft’s popularity in our world, as someone both drawn into his dark, detailed worlds and horrified by his personal beliefs.
In Age of Lovecraft, the editors and contributors strive to answer the question of “why Lovecraft, why now?,” discussing why the nearly forgotten, archaic pulp horror tales of the early 20th century New Englander have captured the imaginations not only of the popular culture but of several nascent schools of philosophy as well. I have found myself fascinated by this myself, what this current wave of Lovecraftiana, with all its weirdness and dark, reactionary underbelly say’s about the current state of popular culture. In the end, the essays only scratch the surface here; though I found much food for thought, I also found myself questioning some of the authors approaches. However, for devotees, there would certainly be enough food for thought to make reading these essays well worth it, whether you would be in total agreement with every argument or not.
A few of my favorites focused on how Lovecraft’s writing style contributed to his appeal to what could now be called “nerdism,” such as David Simmons’ “Lovecraft and Real Person Fiction” and Jessica Georges’ “A Polychrome Study,” which explore how, in specifically opening his fictional universe to other writers, Lovecraft presaged the collaborative themes prevalent in “fandom.” Also, in Punter’s “Lovecraft: Suspicion, Pattern Recognition, and Paranoia,” he argues that Lovecraft’s idiosyncratic writing style, rather than being simply the awkward purple prose of a hack was instead integral to the weird vision that made him such an influential voice in America, an argument seen particularly in James Kneale’s “Ghoulish Dialogues,” which discusses how Lovecraft used the “drama of proof,” in drawing the supernatural into the real world so effectively.
On the other hand, many of the essays, Punter and Kneale’s included, put much focus on the philosophical attraction of Lovecraft’s cosmic horror on the development of several rather bleak schools of philosophy, which I found a little tedious. While it was interesting to learn more about such provocative schools as posthumanism, speculative realism, and object-orientated ontology, I found the arguments posited by them to be questionable at best. In addition, I was hoping to see more analysis of Lovecraft’s deep, pathological racism, and how this is reflected in the current popularity of Lovecraft’s creations in “nerdism,” in spite of (or perhaps because of?) his ugly, genocidal white supremacist beliefs.
The editors and contributors don’t exactly shy away from mentioning these disturbing implications and argue that critiquing Lovecraft's works cannot ignore this, though the paragraph in the introduction detailing Lovecraft’s xenophobia takes up less space than their surveys of Lovecraftian appearances in comics, music, or movies.
Because of this, I found W. Scott Poole’s article, “Lovecraft, Witch Cults, and Philosophers” the most interesting in the book. Poole, writing from the perspective of a historian (my own discipline), argues that Lovecraft’s racist conceptions of the “witch cult” myth are integral to both his appeal and the vision that he presents. The other authors put much more energy in detailing his purely philosophical ramifications, analysing that to me, as an affirmed humanist, seem quite divorced of anything really interesting to say of Lovecraft or humanity in general. I found myself in total agreement with China Mieville, in his intriguing interview with editor Weinstock in the conclusion to evaluate these theories with some suspicion, that they are “unconvincing.” In any case, an interesting collection, though I find myself craving more analysis of Lovecraft’s popularity in our world, as someone both drawn into his dark, detailed worlds and horrified by his personal beliefs.
September 26, 2016
The book is a collection of essays that looks at how Lovecraft's work has been interpreted and how it had affected representations of modern horror.
"The age of Lovecraft is therefor a moment when the ancient coexists with the new, when the style of Poe meet stories involving submarines, telephones, and modern mathematics. It is the age, perhaps, of weird fiction or the "modern fantastic," And then age in which we are clearly still living." 45
"Harman's insistence on the importance of Lovecraft's style is echoed by Roger Luckhurst, Who argues that "the power of the weird crawls out of the sentences because of the awkward style," 50
"As objects bear meaning, they also act asked forms of media; the material artefacts found in weird fiction, like the Cthulhu bad-relief, are similarly mysterious bearers of meaning." 53
"Lovecraft is now "not so much a clearly defined biographical entity… But rather at the discursive entity, constituted and framed by fans for academics or filmmakers..." 55
"As James Campbell observes, citing Donald R. Burleson, "The horror in a Lovecraft tale resides not in some physical manifestation of terror, but rather in man's recognition of his own mote like on importance in a blind and chaotic universe." 99
"The spread of the tentacle a-limb-type with no Gothic or positional precedence (in western aesthetics) from a situation of near total absence in Euro-American teratoculture culture open till the 19th century, to one of being the default monstrous appendage of today, signals the epochal shift to a Weird culture." 127
"The age of Lovecraft is therefor a moment when the ancient coexists with the new, when the style of Poe meet stories involving submarines, telephones, and modern mathematics. It is the age, perhaps, of weird fiction or the "modern fantastic," And then age in which we are clearly still living." 45
"Harman's insistence on the importance of Lovecraft's style is echoed by Roger Luckhurst, Who argues that "the power of the weird crawls out of the sentences because of the awkward style," 50
"As objects bear meaning, they also act asked forms of media; the material artefacts found in weird fiction, like the Cthulhu bad-relief, are similarly mysterious bearers of meaning." 53
"Lovecraft is now "not so much a clearly defined biographical entity… But rather at the discursive entity, constituted and framed by fans for academics or filmmakers..." 55
"As James Campbell observes, citing Donald R. Burleson, "The horror in a Lovecraft tale resides not in some physical manifestation of terror, but rather in man's recognition of his own mote like on importance in a blind and chaotic universe." 99
"The spread of the tentacle a-limb-type with no Gothic or positional precedence (in western aesthetics) from a situation of near total absence in Euro-American teratoculture culture open till the 19th century, to one of being the default monstrous appendage of today, signals the epochal shift to a Weird culture." 127
November 18, 2017
The Age of Lovecraft is a welcome treat. A critical look at the writings of H.P. Lovecraft. Lovecraft is typically the scholarship of English Literature, Folklorists, Antiquarians or of Theologians.
Finally Lovecraft in the form of peer reviewed papers by way darkest Academia. A foreword by author Ramsey Campbell, mostly about HPL’s influence on culture.
Next we are treated to several pieces on Lovecraft and his writing. Topics vary from Realism, to sexuality in HPL’s writings. Comparisons to Neil Gaiman and Ridley Scott are made. Lovecraft gets compared to visual artists of his era and philosophers of his time as well.
I Highly recommend this book for people interested in thinking more critically about Lovecraft. This is a really great collection of different thoughts from many different angles about one of the Twentieth Century’s greatest authors.
Finally Lovecraft in the form of peer reviewed papers by way darkest Academia. A foreword by author Ramsey Campbell, mostly about HPL’s influence on culture.
Next we are treated to several pieces on Lovecraft and his writing. Topics vary from Realism, to sexuality in HPL’s writings. Comparisons to Neil Gaiman and Ridley Scott are made. Lovecraft gets compared to visual artists of his era and philosophers of his time as well.
I Highly recommend this book for people interested in thinking more critically about Lovecraft. This is a really great collection of different thoughts from many different angles about one of the Twentieth Century’s greatest authors.
June 11, 2016
I love seeing HP Lovecraft get more academic attention, and this is a collection that does a pretty good job giving it that necessary look while still keeping a light-ish touch. If you're into literary criticism and Lovecraft, this is worth the time both for the really good essays and interviews and even for some of the more questionable stuff. It also doesn't shy away from the more controversial topics surrounding the current Lovecraft discussion, which was good to see handled in a worthwhile way.
Necessary reading for lovers of Lovecraft for sure.
Necessary reading for lovers of Lovecraft for sure.
January 10, 2021
I do not usually carry out real-time reviews on anything but fiction, and I have tried, in this review, to draw out a texture rather than an acrimony. I may or may not have some skill in dreamcatching pure fiction, but I make no claims about reviewing academic literary-criticism, biography, history, philosophy, science, religion, sociology…
The detailed review of this book posted elsewhere under my name is too long or impractical to post here.
Above is one of its observations at the time of the review.
The detailed review of this book posted elsewhere under my name is too long or impractical to post here.
Above is one of its observations at the time of the review.
December 10, 2016
Good to read some significant and modern thinking on Lovecraft that isn't too in thrall to ST Joshi and is willing to run with the racism and misogyny arguments. Enjoyed almost all the essays here. In fact only one stank of self-indulgent academia caked in twisted gibberish. Which is pretty good going.
February 3, 2019
Minulle vähän epätasainen teos. Jotkut jutut haastavat ajattelemaan uudella tavalla Lovecraftista ja/tai maailmasta, osa on luettelomaisia juttuja asioista joita on tehty. Esim. Mignola ja Hellboy mainitaan mutta ei heistä saada mitään irti, mainitaan vaan että tällaistakin on tehty. Toisaalta liikutaan filosofian sfääreissä, toisaalta rämmitään genren hetteikössä.
Lovecraft löydetty uusien filosofisten liikkeiden (weird realism, object-oriented philosophy, kai näitä termejä on ehkä käännetty suomeksi, mutta ei ole osunut silmiin), jossei esikuvaksi, niin ainakin esimerkiksi. Näissä on kai ideana jonkinlainen antifenomenologia, ihmisen kokemuksen merkitys halutaan mitätöidä ja tässä lovecraftin kosminen näkökulma on näppärä. Mutta myös fiksusti argumentoidaan, että onkohan tämä nyt sittenkään niin hyvä idea. Lovecraftin rasismia pohditaan, sitä ei voi enää lakaista maton alle, mutta kovin erilailla siihen suhtauduttu.
Käydään myös läpi Lovecraftin juttuja. Olin osittain vaikuttunut ja muutin mieltäni. Nyt olen sitä mieltä, että Lovecraftin tapa olla kuvaamatta asioita, tai tarkemmin kuvata asioita negaation avulla niin että mitään ei jää jäljelle, on ihan nerokas tai ainakin taitava tapa toimia.
Osa jutuista on hyvinkin ymmärrettäviä, osa ei todellakaan. Yleensä historioitsijoiden jutut ovat helpompia kuin filosofien. Mutta sanakirja eli google on hyvä olla käden ulottuvilla.
Mitä tästä nyt jäi käteen? Onko Lovecraft tämän kaiken huomion arvoinen? Pitäisikö vähän katsoa laajemmalta? Herran kosminen ote on jännä, mutta voisihan sen pohjalta päätyä toisenlaiseen maailmankuvaan. Noh, hän kirjoitti kauhua, joka tietysti rajoittaa tarinoita. Mutta toisaalta näyttää vähän siltä, että hänen siviiliminänsä oli aika samanlainen kuin kirjailijaminä.
Täältä saa myös viitteitä ja vihjeitä uusiin Lovecraftia käsitteleviin kirjoihin ja
kirjoihin, joiden fokus olisi vähän laajempi. Vaan mitähän on julkaistu ihan viime vuosina?
Lovecraft löydetty uusien filosofisten liikkeiden (weird realism, object-oriented philosophy, kai näitä termejä on ehkä käännetty suomeksi, mutta ei ole osunut silmiin), jossei esikuvaksi, niin ainakin esimerkiksi. Näissä on kai ideana jonkinlainen antifenomenologia, ihmisen kokemuksen merkitys halutaan mitätöidä ja tässä lovecraftin kosminen näkökulma on näppärä. Mutta myös fiksusti argumentoidaan, että onkohan tämä nyt sittenkään niin hyvä idea. Lovecraftin rasismia pohditaan, sitä ei voi enää lakaista maton alle, mutta kovin erilailla siihen suhtauduttu.
Käydään myös läpi Lovecraftin juttuja. Olin osittain vaikuttunut ja muutin mieltäni. Nyt olen sitä mieltä, että Lovecraftin tapa olla kuvaamatta asioita, tai tarkemmin kuvata asioita negaation avulla niin että mitään ei jää jäljelle, on ihan nerokas tai ainakin taitava tapa toimia.
Osa jutuista on hyvinkin ymmärrettäviä, osa ei todellakaan. Yleensä historioitsijoiden jutut ovat helpompia kuin filosofien. Mutta sanakirja eli google on hyvä olla käden ulottuvilla.
Mitä tästä nyt jäi käteen? Onko Lovecraft tämän kaiken huomion arvoinen? Pitäisikö vähän katsoa laajemmalta? Herran kosminen ote on jännä, mutta voisihan sen pohjalta päätyä toisenlaiseen maailmankuvaan. Noh, hän kirjoitti kauhua, joka tietysti rajoittaa tarinoita. Mutta toisaalta näyttää vähän siltä, että hänen siviiliminänsä oli aika samanlainen kuin kirjailijaminä.
Täältä saa myös viitteitä ja vihjeitä uusiin Lovecraftia käsitteleviin kirjoihin ja
kirjoihin, joiden fokus olisi vähän laajempi. Vaan mitähän on julkaistu ihan viime vuosina?
September 25, 2019
As these books with collections of essays tend to be, this is a bit of a mixed bag. There are a couple of (for me) 5 star essays in there, but also some not that great. It is not so much the content that I have a problem with, most essays hade something quite interesting in them. Its how some of them are written.
I have a theory about this, its not applicable one everyone, but I have found it to be a tendency in academia. To start of, its really hard to Write an academic text that also is easy to read. Its a craft but I also think its kind of an art. Not all are equal in this, but most can learn to write a decent text. And People that are fresh out of their PHDs seems to have the most problem with that. Head full of theory and not that much excperience with writing have a tendency to produce quite "heavy to read" texts.
And this book have a couple of those texts, the once that could have been written better, and by that made them easier to read. I have a duality in my view of academic language. I agree With Wittgenstein that the boarders of my language is the boarders of my world, and specific terms must sometime be used to be able to say specific things. But I also agree With an old swedish poet that said something in the lines of if you cant clearly say what you mean, you do not really understand it. 20 years later, I am still not sure who that I agree more with.
In any case, if you have an academic (or very deep) interest in Lovecraft I would recomend this book. If you do not, I would read something else. A strong three stars book, with quite a few 4 star essays.
I have a theory about this, its not applicable one everyone, but I have found it to be a tendency in academia. To start of, its really hard to Write an academic text that also is easy to read. Its a craft but I also think its kind of an art. Not all are equal in this, but most can learn to write a decent text. And People that are fresh out of their PHDs seems to have the most problem with that. Head full of theory and not that much excperience with writing have a tendency to produce quite "heavy to read" texts.
And this book have a couple of those texts, the once that could have been written better, and by that made them easier to read. I have a duality in my view of academic language. I agree With Wittgenstein that the boarders of my language is the boarders of my world, and specific terms must sometime be used to be able to say specific things. But I also agree With an old swedish poet that said something in the lines of if you cant clearly say what you mean, you do not really understand it. 20 years later, I am still not sure who that I agree more with.
In any case, if you have an academic (or very deep) interest in Lovecraft I would recomend this book. If you do not, I would read something else. A strong three stars book, with quite a few 4 star essays.
May 4, 2020
Like any essay anthology, there are some in here I really enjoy and others I don't care for at all. There are some interesting pieces regarding the relationship between HPL's work and the speculative realist/OOO schools of thought, but really the good stuff comes in the later essays that focus on Lovecraft's racism alongside less overt topics such as his work's relationship with gender and sexuality. I will say that this book is worth checking out solely for Patricia MacCormack's brilliant essay on Lovecraft's "cosmic ethics," which utilizes the ideas of several thinkers (i.e. Luce Irigaray, Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, and Michel Serres) in order to establish a claim that Lovecraft's works actually celebrate otherness rather than condemn it: "Lovecraft's tales teach us two lessons: all order is chaos, and chaos is gracious in the gifts it offers in allowing us to combine its wondrous expressions into orderings."
September 15, 2018
This isn’t a Joshi or Price edited collection of essays that’s for sure.
Some of these essays were alright, but some others were just pure…. I’ll just say they felt like a bit of a stretch to me. Could be because I find object oriented ontology a bit hard to swallow, which a lot of the essays in here seemed to focus on. The interview with China Miéville is actually not too bad.
The essay on the Prometheus movie and the Alien franchise just reminded me of how cool that movie could have been.
Might be of interest to a Lovecraft fanatic who wants to try everything Lovecraft nonfiction related, but there are much better essay collections you can read instead.
This does have a pretty dope cover though.
Some of these essays were alright, but some others were just pure…. I’ll just say they felt like a bit of a stretch to me. Could be because I find object oriented ontology a bit hard to swallow, which a lot of the essays in here seemed to focus on. The interview with China Miéville is actually not too bad.
The essay on the Prometheus movie and the Alien franchise just reminded me of how cool that movie could have been.
Might be of interest to a Lovecraft fanatic who wants to try everything Lovecraft nonfiction related, but there are much better essay collections you can read instead.
This does have a pretty dope cover though.
August 4, 2020
This book covers a great range of topics, covering a lot of the quintessential theory surrounding Lovecraft. The essays are short and readable, though often stopping just short of where they might like to lead. There's a good amount of differing interpretations, laid out almost as a debate. For the most part, the essays were well written, some more than others.
All up, it has a good bit more depth and variation than a lot of other Lovecraft criticism I've come across.
All up, it has a good bit more depth and variation than a lot of other Lovecraft criticism I've come across.
May 7, 2021
A collection of fascinating, deep, thought provoking and well written (minus maybe a couple) essay on various aspect about the presence and influence of HPL on the current cultural landscape
Read
March 10, 2017813.52 L8978Xa 2016
Read
August 30, 2016I checked out this book not because I'm a fan of Lovecraft, but because I love Night Vale and they have stated that they pull heavily from his work-- and I've always heard Lovecraft mentioned but paid no attention to who he was or what he did. Then I saw an article that called him "notoriously anti-Semitic" and finally had to research what his deal was-- how can he be both racist, and highly revered? Well, I didn't need to read this whole book to get the gist. What I got was, yes, he was racist and a horrible person, but he also wrote some really weird shit. And it's the weird part, not the racist part, that apparently people consider a great influence. Not entirely sure what to do with that, but, there you go. I also learned through calculation that Lovecraft preceded Franz Kafka slightly, and it almost seems like Kafka might have been influenced by him. Is that possible? If so, let's just all like Kafka instead to get our weird/brilliant fix. But, really, let's hope that Kafka was totally original and that their concurrent interest in the weird was just the cosmic mind at work. It's funny, the acrobatics we can go through to try desperately to avoid accidentally having a racist hero.
December 18, 2016
I rarely get to say this, but... I cannot review this book here because I have a review of it coming out in a journal in the coming year. I will say, though, that many of the essays are worth looking into, the interview with China Mieville is excellent, and there are (sadly) a higher proportion of poorly argued/researched articles in the book than there should be.
Read
June 30, 2017Good examination of Lovecraft and his place in contemporary philosophy and critical theory. Helps to shed light on the larger phenomenon of the dominance of weird fiction in the current century.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews