

Hardly. As Mr. Joshi pointed out, I'm not famous enough to have an opinion. I do have an idea though. If the World Fantasy Award ever actually drops the Lovecraft statue, maybe the Hugo Awards could adopt it. (In fact, I don't see why they don't simply switch statuettes.)
I mean have you seen some of the postings by the dude heading up that whole sad puppy faction?
“The women of America would do well to consider whether their much-cherished gains of the right to vote, work, murder and freely fornicate are worth destroying marriage, children, civilized Western society and little girls.”
He’s also spoken about the sort of attacks on women that have found their way into the news so often lately. “A few acid-burned faces is a small price to pay for lasting marriages.”
And this just leaves me speechless:
“A purely empirical perspective on Malala Yousafzai, the poster girl for global female education, may indicate that the Taliban's attempt to silence her was perfectly rational and scientifically justifiable.”
Let's see, what else. Ah! Here's a good one: "Homosexuality is a birth defect.”
And, finally, this:
“It is absurd to imagine that there is absolutely no link between race and intelligence.”
HPL would have felt right at home.

http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2015/...

http://skyseastone.net/jvstin/?p=4211

Nazis?

I'm generally not one who throws that word around but I read your post and asked myself if there already was a word that described people with a passion for racial purity who also were not merely malignant but also sought to influence and even control. Let me know if the word I came up with isn't apropos in this case.


Goodreads needs to start doing psych evaluations.

Remember Charles Baxter’s comment: “One would think... that I had attacked the object of a cult.”



When an editor for TOR voiced a critical opinion (on her personal Facebook page) of the Neo-Nazi trolls who derailed the Hugo Awards, her boss at TOR publicly censured her. My mistake? I assumed the boycott was in protest of the shabby way she’d been treated. (What? TOR employees may not speak out against racism? Or sexism? Or homophobia?) Silly me.
It turns out to be the other way around. The censure was in compliance with the demands of the trolls… who orchestrated a protest. Trolls like to do this sort of thing. It’s all about power and its abuses. (See some of the comments above.) Censure, in their opinion, isn’t enough. They want the editor fired. The essence of true bullying: miss no opportunity to do harm.
You can read more about it here: http://skyseastone.net/jvstin/?p=4211
I’m happy to report that their boycott has been completely ineffective. In my opinion, the person who should be censured is the exec who caved to the trolls (here called “puppies”) in the first place.
There’s a lovely “Boycott Backfires” article here:
http://www.starburstmagazine.com/book...


http://www.salon.com/2005/02/12/lovec...


It really is just that obvious, isn't it? Sad.


Or at least not good ones.

Yes, Lovecraft's personal views pervade his entire body of work, and his many abhorrent views are well-documented.
I'm not an apologist, and I won't try to rationalize it with the tired "Product of his times"/"Product of his Environment" argument. (In fact, I won't try to rationalize it all.)
BUT, that doesn't negate the value of his writings, or the stark vision that his work was founded upon (That mankind is but a mote in the cold & unfeeling universe), or the influence that his work has had on the weird fiction genre, or in the literary world in general.
His "Supernautral Horror in Literature" essay alone remains to this day one of the most valid and useful refernces an aspiring writer could ever want.
And personally speaking? That quote you used in your post DOES inspire me to read more works by him.

Many of the comments above echo that sentiment. Personally, I just don't see it. Like being colorblind, I suppose, or those sounds that only bats can hear. Give me Blackwood or Machen any day.



How does it seem impossible?
If you're talking solely about writing, couldn't you make the same statement about the Twilight saga (as an example) or ANY OTHER book out there? Some people view it as the "Greatest Thing Ever!" while others view it as "Crap on a Stick." (To me, that's the inherent joy of literature.)
"Bad Writing" is, of course, totally subjective. It's all a matter of personal taste, which everyone is entitled to. (Again, putting aside HPL's distasteful personal viewpoints, and focusing on the writing itself.)
As a gay man, I'm likely someone that Lovecraft, in his time, would have had nothing to do with, and yet I still can read and like his work without shame. (And let's not even open that "Lovecraft was likely a latent homosexual" box.)
(Full disclosure though; Though I try to be open-minded and speerate art from artist as best I can, there ARE a very few current-day writers that I am not likely to buy books from due to their personal/political views, so I guess I'm not COMPLETELY "Colorblind.")

Hmm. I often wonder about that. Certainly, enjoyment is subjective, a matter of personal taste as you say. But is quality?


https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Good point. Depressing as hell. But good point.
http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2...

Right on!!! This one gave me my first laugh of the day.
Good job, Rob.
https://www.facebook.com/nnedi/posts/...