Lovecraft and his works have aged excellently, to the point that he still defines an entire genre that holds his name: Lovecraftian horror.

@forest LOL that's like saying Dickens has aged excellently because we have a word "Dickensian"..., or that Shakespeare is 100% current because we have the word "Shakespearian". Where is the "Lovecraftian aisle" at the bookstore? Nah, you need to make a better case than that.

There's no need to become aggressive. And both Dickens and Shakespeare have aged excellently as well. They are both famous and classic authors. While Lovecraft is more niche (not everyone likes existentialist horror), he's still a well-regarded author who is hugely influential to the horror genre.

Doesn't make it less racist. Bro. The problem with his work isn't the existentialism.

Some of his work was racist, as was true for virtually everyone of his time. However his works primarily describe all humans as insignificant, not even fit to be noticed by the Outer Gods. Not to mention, much of the Cthulhu mythos doesn't even come directly from Lovecraft. We don't focus on the works that are racist anymore than we focus on the racism of any other extremely popular authors.

LOL Dude, take a nap. Go ask Google if Lovecraft is racist.

Please stop getting so confrontational. You are coming off as condescending. Again, I am not claiming that he was not racist. He was born and raised in an era where that was common, so he did hold views that, today, we recognize as racist. Most of his writing is not racist, however, and it is not his views on race that made him famous. Also remember that it was only early on that he was particularly racist. His views softened up over time, although they still held some aspects of classism common in his society. Regardless, these views do not impact the majority of his works.

You are being confrontational. This is not SciFiFantasySE, we are not the fanboy site. This is WritingSE and we are talking about what the limits of that particular style of horror is. It is a limited world view. You have to understand what motivates it or it becomes "squids in spaaace" which is silly. I'm willing to have the grown up critical discussion with you, but I'm not going to accept fanboy suckup as criticism of this discussion post. Stay on topic or stay off.

I am here.

I am not intending to appear confrontational and if I am, I apologize. My issue was with your condescending attitude while I am trying to have a civil discussion. I am happy to discuss this if you refrain from derisive or condescending comments.

Let's do this. :)

Now, my point is not that the Lovecraftian genre is awesome or objectively good, just that he, as an author, has aged well. Were some of his views in the early 1900s racist? Yes, they were. Does that make the Cthulhu mythos any less influential? No.

Neither.

you have the floor

Is it fresh? No, it's a century old. Is it dated? No, it continues to influence writing.

...

but does it? what is current?

What do you mean?

Are you asking how it still influences writing?

Like, reanimator rocked… but

what works today works as satire

the over-the-top scale.

I don't think the "going mad" thing really happens any more.

The Lovecraftian horror genre need not include the Cthulhu mythos.

sure.

His genre is far more than "going mad because things are crazy".

I guess you are right, that has become the campy end of it.

Even the famous video game Skyrim is very heavily influenced by it.

I like the Myskatonik stuff. That mythos could fill in. It's been done with rgp.

With one of the major deities being based off of (I think) Azathoth.

rpg

but is that the real thing, or is it "neo-lovecraft?

What do you mean by "real thing"? As in does it use the canon Cthulhu mythos?

like just taking the style and discarding the substance?

Like squidpunk

What is the book that is all mythos, he goes down a grave into an undregound city and he looks for the face of god...

The Necronomicon?

Mountains of Madness?

err…

Oh the story.

it's been a while.

I remember, I just don't recall the name of that story.

it's long… It's like his Lord of the Rings.

his epic

The Dunwich Horror?

no.

lol that one is classic

but that's the problem, like is it mainstream Lovecraft that everyone knows? because that IS the most racist Lovecraft.

Oh no, the most racist Lovecraft is "On the Creation of N*****s".

Which is really remarkably offensive.

omg how did I miss that one?

Can you guess the word that follows?

wow.

Yeah, I just don't have a problem putting a disclaimer on that.

That was one of his earlier works back when he was extremely racist.

before he got better? lol

Yes. He softened up significantly.

Brooklyn will do that to you...

But he's not famous for that poem.

no

He's famous for the mythos which created such an influential genre.

Not for his personal views.

So I have been disecting this, though. Trying to figure out if there is a polarity to "fix" the issue.

I think the way HE did it, it is regressive. It is a diminishing reality.

A man's world gets smaller.

My overall point is that, if Lovecraft as an author hasn't "aged well", then why is the genre so exceptionally popular and getting even more popular in SciFi?

But I certainly do not claim that he was not racist.

but where is this "getting more popular"?

Well just look at some of the most popular series on Netflix.

A large amount of them are heavily influenced by Lovecraft, e.g. Stranger Things.

???

we are not talking monsters, we are talking story. Themes.

structure.

And video games are using the genre now so often that it's almost cliché.

Right, I am talking about the story and themes, not monsters.

explain?

> The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little;

> but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

His genre is about things so vastly beyond our comprehension:

> [finding a structure which is] abnormal, non-Euclidean, and loathsomely redolent of spheres and dimensions apart from ours.

Yes, waah, I am NOT the golden prince. Boo hoo!

?

That is the problem. That's entitlement, not horror.

His genre is a horror genre.

The quotes I gave are not, on their own, sufficient to convey horror.

I am not the center of the universe? Where is my fainting couch!

Well, he was an atheist and did not believe humans should be so proud.

well, obviously I am being reductive...

And he fought against that by pointing out how inconsequential humans are.

But what is "horror" in that concept? Why is that not "wonder"?

Like what is the difference in Lovecraft and Gene Roddenberry?

Gene Roddenberry was heavily influenced by Lovecraft. :P

lolololol

His tone is amazing.

Wait I was thinking of Rod Serling.

I always mix them up for some reason.

Yeah no I don't think Roddenberry was influenced by Lovecraft.

It is purple prose, but yes, the tone, he is a writer's writer.

LOL oh, I thought you were being funny.

Nah, I just suck at names. :P

:D

Anyway, my overall point is not that Lovecraft is awesome (even if I personally like the mythos), just that he "aged well" and continues to be influential.

I don't mean to defend his racism which was quite blatant at times.

But you see my point?

Ehh, ok. I think we agree to disagree.

But both like Lovecraft.

A bit of a thought-stopping cliché, but the timing is perfect since someone is demanding food and I have not prepared anything for them.

So I'll be back in a bit. :p

@forest I would contend that it isn't Lovecraft's writing that has/has not aged well, but his and his cliques' cosmic horror and general approach to horror. There is a lot in even horror stuff that one would consider "troublesome" in our day and age and I would argue that that taints a lot of his writing, hence "not aged well". There are a few pretty good article on the topic on NPR.