Take a photo of a barcode or cover
molochthagod's review against another edition
5.0
Tremendous contribution to the human civilization. A thorough examination of the very nature of horror, not only as a genre, but as a phenomenon also.
some_okie_dude27's review against another edition
"The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." H. P. Lovecraft
Lovecraft's a writer that keeps pulling me in despite the fact that my issues with his work have been frankly clear. Many of my fellow horror aficionados have recommended me this essay that was written by Lovecraft in 1927 and so, after some hesitation, I decided to pick it up. I found that while it was helpful in understanding the roots and history of gothic and supernatural horror, I didn't get much out of it asides from Lovecraft's mere opinions on the authors discussed in the essay, as well as a history lesson on the makings and breakings of modern horror as we know it.
Now that's not to say that one's opinions are bad, criticism is, in essence, opinions. Well researched and informed opinions, but still opinions nonetheless and I found that Lovecraft's opinions on other horror authors and the state of horror literature as a whole to be utterly fascinating and quite modest in that he doesn't try to say that he's right and that's the end of the story or that because he's written horror that he's an authority on it, he allows you to decide if he's right and wrong, and considering the acclaim that he would later get for this essay, it seems that he did something right.
As for the people I have not read that Lovecraft mentions such as Machen, Blackwood, Dunsany, James, etc, I won't comment on, but for the authors I have read, I will comment on. Lovecraft's general analysis of Hawthorne's work is an apt description of his sense of mood and atmosphere, but I found that he was far too forgiving of Hawthorne's flaws, though then again this may be because of Lovecraft's own affinity for verbose, overwrought passages. There's also his analysis of Poe, which I also find to be rather apt in its description, though Lovecraft slides over Poe's deeper sense of dread and horror as well as his emotional sensitivity and the horrors of grief and insanity that Poe very much liked to explore in his works rather than a fleeting thought that he expresses. But then again it also plays into Lovecraft's fundamental misunderstanding of Poe's stories and his general lack of skill with character or with human beings in general. There then comes respectable paragraphs about horror classics such as Shelley's Frankenstein and Bram Stoker's Dracula, which are books that Lovecraft admired and for good reasons, as well as horror and gothic authors that I hadn't heard of or that I hadn't read.
But with all of his knowledge of horror and insights into authors that came before him and some of his contemporaries. There were also problems that I found in the piece, such as his somewhat dismissal of one of the more underrated horror authors of all time, one Ambrose Bierce as well as the fact that he's also dismissive and barely mentions Robert Louis Stevenson's classic horror novella The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, if not at all. He gives a Bierce a respectful send up, though he seems to think that Bierce's more lighter touch seems to be beneath his taste for the more verbose macabre that he seeks in his horror, but I'll happily admit that there may be some bias there concerning my fondness for Bierce.
With all of his faults, Lovecraft had an insight in horror that few could match, and this essay showcases Lovecraft's endless fascination with the macabre, and its one that I'm happy to endorse.
Lovecraft's a writer that keeps pulling me in despite the fact that my issues with his work have been frankly clear. Many of my fellow horror aficionados have recommended me this essay that was written by Lovecraft in 1927 and so, after some hesitation, I decided to pick it up. I found that while it was helpful in understanding the roots and history of gothic and supernatural horror, I didn't get much out of it asides from Lovecraft's mere opinions on the authors discussed in the essay, as well as a history lesson on the makings and breakings of modern horror as we know it.
Now that's not to say that one's opinions are bad, criticism is, in essence, opinions. Well researched and informed opinions, but still opinions nonetheless and I found that Lovecraft's opinions on other horror authors and the state of horror literature as a whole to be utterly fascinating and quite modest in that he doesn't try to say that he's right and that's the end of the story or that because he's written horror that he's an authority on it, he allows you to decide if he's right and wrong, and considering the acclaim that he would later get for this essay, it seems that he did something right.
As for the people I have not read that Lovecraft mentions such as Machen, Blackwood, Dunsany, James, etc, I won't comment on, but for the authors I have read, I will comment on. Lovecraft's general analysis of Hawthorne's work is an apt description of his sense of mood and atmosphere, but I found that he was far too forgiving of Hawthorne's flaws, though then again this may be because of Lovecraft's own affinity for verbose, overwrought passages. There's also his analysis of Poe, which I also find to be rather apt in its description, though Lovecraft slides over Poe's deeper sense of dread and horror as well as his emotional sensitivity and the horrors of grief and insanity that Poe very much liked to explore in his works rather than a fleeting thought that he expresses. But then again it also plays into Lovecraft's fundamental misunderstanding of Poe's stories and his general lack of skill with character or with human beings in general. There then comes respectable paragraphs about horror classics such as Shelley's Frankenstein and Bram Stoker's Dracula, which are books that Lovecraft admired and for good reasons, as well as horror and gothic authors that I hadn't heard of or that I hadn't read.
But with all of his knowledge of horror and insights into authors that came before him and some of his contemporaries. There were also problems that I found in the piece, such as his somewhat dismissal of one of the more underrated horror authors of all time, one Ambrose Bierce as well as the fact that he's also dismissive and barely mentions Robert Louis Stevenson's classic horror novella The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, if not at all. He gives a Bierce a respectful send up, though he seems to think that Bierce's more lighter touch seems to be beneath his taste for the more verbose macabre that he seeks in his horror, but I'll happily admit that there may be some bias there concerning my fondness for Bierce.
With all of his faults, Lovecraft had an insight in horror that few could match, and this essay showcases Lovecraft's endless fascination with the macabre, and its one that I'm happy to endorse.
deepfreezebatman's review against another edition
3.0
great introduction and overview of horror fiction and weird tales. Like everyone, I wish this essay was longer and went more in depth, but the amount of stories and authors Lovecraft discussed is amazing. It's a mini-sized Danse Macabre.
jorgernestom's review against another edition
3.0
Salvo el primer y si acaso el segundo capítulo y algunos arrojos ilustradores, no me agradó del todo. Sirve más como antología y recorrido histórico con reseñas de obras que tienen elementos de terror que como un ensayo teórico. Asimismo, es excesivamente severo con los libros tratados, reseco con los que son buenos, pero no hable de Poe porque llena de poesía y halagos todo el capítulo que le dedica. Por ejemplo, en el inicio del capítulo "Las secuelas de la ficción gótica" escribe lo siguiente con mucha soltura y sin ánimos de desarrollar sus ideas —que es lo que entiendo como el defecto de su severidad: no está interesado en desarrollar su punto ni abrir diálogo—: "Entre tanto, otros escritores no habían cesado en su actividad, así que más allá de la espantosa plétora de porquería como 'Horrid Mysteries' del marqués von Grosse [...]". Respecto al segundo punto, cuando habla y reconoce que "Frankenstein" es una gran novela, escribe lo siguiente —sin mencionar que habla de Mary Shelley como "la mujer de Percy Shelley—: "la crítica ha fracasado a la hora de demostrar que las mejores partes se deben a Shelley más que a ella".
Ya ni se diga que arroja sentencias que me parecen problemáticas para tomarse como verdad absoluta, ya desde el inicio, que es famosísimo: "La emoción más antigua y poderosa de la humanidad es el miedo, y la clase de miedo más antigua y poderosa es el miedo a lo desconocido". O por lo menos yo me planteo la pregunta, ¿no se le tiene más miedo a lo conocido, en un estado primitivo y más elemental, como los depredadores?
Sin embargo, los pocos apuntes teóricos son ilustradores y pueden dar un apartado para enfrentarse a obras que ya has leído o quieres leer. Y sobre todo, reconoce que para que el terror funcione, por mejor que sea la obra, depende del público, sus realidades y creencias.
Ya ni se diga que arroja sentencias que me parecen problemáticas para tomarse como verdad absoluta, ya desde el inicio, que es famosísimo: "La emoción más antigua y poderosa de la humanidad es el miedo, y la clase de miedo más antigua y poderosa es el miedo a lo desconocido". O por lo menos yo me planteo la pregunta, ¿no se le tiene más miedo a lo conocido, en un estado primitivo y más elemental, como los depredadores?
Sin embargo, los pocos apuntes teóricos son ilustradores y pueden dar un apartado para enfrentarse a obras que ya has leído o quieres leer. Y sobre todo, reconoce que para que el terror funcione, por mejor que sea la obra, depende del público, sus realidades y creencias.
erichart's review against another edition
5.0
I first read Lovecraft's landmark essay about 20 years ago. Going back to it after re-reading all of his stories as well as S. T. Joshi's biography gave me new insights into Lovecraft's understanding of the genre. Joshi's notes help to identify the influence these works had on Lovecraft's writing, and add context and information about the works covered.
ruben_franz's review against another edition
3.0
Disclaimer:
read in german translation (Michael Koseler), reviewer is not a native speaker
Clear recommendation for people who would like to put more books on their reading list, or who are interested in which shoulders one of the greats of his art sees himself on. The one or other recommendation and praise may surprise, but the overall elitist tone less so. Not many writers also write scholarly treatises, nor do all literary scholars have the ability to convey their views entertainingly and forcefully. Lovecraft moves on this threshold with great dexterity and persuasiveness, finding sentences of literary quality even in his thoroughly detailed and critical analysis of individual figures or works of the uncanny-supernatural (as he aptly names the unifying commonality). I like the basically exclusive approach less and some statements have not aged well, nonetheless the book definitely moved me forward in terms of content and gave me some new perspectives on ancient literature, its interpretation and fascination. Not a recommendation for people hoping for a short story collection or similar here.
read in german translation (Michael Koseler), reviewer is not a native speaker
Clear recommendation for people who would like to put more books on their reading list, or who are interested in which shoulders one of the greats of his art sees himself on. The one or other recommendation and praise may surprise, but the overall elitist tone less so. Not many writers also write scholarly treatises, nor do all literary scholars have the ability to convey their views entertainingly and forcefully. Lovecraft moves on this threshold with great dexterity and persuasiveness, finding sentences of literary quality even in his thoroughly detailed and critical analysis of individual figures or works of the uncanny-supernatural (as he aptly names the unifying commonality). I like the basically exclusive approach less and some statements have not aged well, nonetheless the book definitely moved me forward in terms of content and gave me some new perspectives on ancient literature, its interpretation and fascination. Not a recommendation for people hoping for a short story collection or similar here.
estherbismarck's review against another edition
2.0
https://sustherlibros.wordpress.com/2017/08/12/resena-el-horror-sobrenatural-en-la-literatura-y-otros-escritos-de-h-p-lovecraft/
daphne_'s review against another edition
3.0
Disfruté mucho más el prólogo de esta edición que el contenido en sí del libro. Resulta muy bueno como recorrido histórico de ciertos momentos del género y listado de recomendaciones, pero no consigue analizar a profundidad las obras de las que se habla ni explorar lo que es el terror y la manera en que la literatura consigue mover lo suficiente como para provocarlo.