From: cje@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Cthulhu's Jersey Epopt)
Newsgroups: alt.horror.cthulhu
Subject: August Derleth (was Re: What's the deal?)
Date: 14 Oct 92 13:47:44 GMT
Organization: Miskatonic U. Computer Operations & User Services

>>In <1992Oct9.210952.15538@javelin.sim.es.com> KHATCH@130.187.170.178 (kh) 
>>righteously complains:
>>> What's the deal with these paperback novels that have Lovecraft's name on 
>>> them but on closer inspection are written by August Derleth?

There's only one such novel that I'm aware of: THE LURKER AT THE THRESHHOLD.
Says "Lovecraft" only on the front cover, but says "Lovecraft and Derleth" on
the back.

Blame Carroll & Graf for this sleazy marketing gimmick.  I don't recall
exactly, but I believe their edition of THE WATCHERS OUT OF TIME, which is a
collection of short stories and not a novel, does credit both Derleth and
Lovecraft.

>In article <aldavi01.718863880@starbase.spd.louisville.edu>
>aldavi01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Arlie Davis) writes:

>> Apparently, August Derleth was a big HPL fan, and deliberately copied his
>> style.  What came of it are some truly dreary stories -- I couldn't finish
>> them, they were so bad.

Yes, Derleth was a big fan, and a correspondent of HPL's, and pretty much
single-handedly rescued HPL after his death from the pulp obscurity he thought
he was destined for.

Basically, he started Arkham House in order to publish HPL in hardcover.  When
AH hit hard times, he cashed in on the Lovecraft name either by incorporating
HPL fragments into an otherwise original story (LURKER) or by writing an
original story based on a note in HPL's notebook (most of the stuff in
WATCHERS).  He also wrote Lovecraftian stories under his own name alone.  

Derleth was primarily a formula writer, saving his truly original work for his
"Sac Prairie" stories and novels, for which he has gained a deserved, if minor,
literary rep.  But some of his formula stuff is *very good*: virtually all his
horror stories are formula, yet some are acknowledged classics ("Bat's Belfry",
"Mr. George"), and his Sherlock Holmes pastiches, the Solar Pons series, are
recognized by most Holmesians as the best non-Doyle "Holmes" stories.  Too bad
his Lovecraft pastiches are so miserable.  Still, I like two of his original
Mythos stories: "The Thing That Walked on the Wind" and "The Keeper of the
Key".

One of the things that most annoys me about Derleth, though, is his inability
to keep to a chronology.  When citing the government takeover of Innsmouth, in
three different stories, he gives three different dates: September 1927,
February 1928, and June 1927 or '28.  Only the Feb. date is close to Lovecraft,
who said the takeover occurred in the *winter* of 1927-28, with the public only
*learning* about it in February '28.  But that's not as bad as LURKER, in which
characters in part 3 refer to events in part 2 as happening only a few days ago
(which should be the case, according to the plot), and yet part 2 takes place
in 1924 and part 3 in 1928.  Someone didn't proof-read...

Derleth's sins are legion and well-known, but he also did many good things, not
the least of which was keeping Lovecraft in print.  

smmcafee@mtu.edu (Sean McAfee) writes:

> When I read the anthology "Tales of the Cthulhu Mythos", Derleth's stories
> were my favorites.  I even kind of liked them more than Lovecraft's (oh,
> heresy!).  The story (can't remember the title) about Nyarlathotep in the
> northern Wisconsin wilderness had me on the edge of my seat, as did the one
> about Ithaqua ("Beyond the Threshold"?).  The only real bad one in that
> anthology was (IMHO) "Cement Surroundings".

The Nyarlathotep story, which also introduced Cthugha, is "The Dweller in
Darkness".  

And I really enjoy Lumley's "Cement Surroundings".  No arguing taste...


-- 
Yog-Sothoth Neblod Zin,

Chris Jarocha-Ernst			Rutgers University Computing Services
Internet: cje@gandalf.rutgers.edu       BITnet: JAROCHAERNST@ZODIAC