F#@k H.P. Lovecraft

Michael Barnes wrote: I just started reading Lovecraft Country and this early passage really struck me. Atticus is the main character, a black sci-fi fan in the 1950s. His uncle, George, is too. The racism of Burroughs, Lovecraft, and other pulp writers is a subject of family debate:

“I do love them,” George agreed. “But stories are like people, Atticus. Loving them doesn’t make them perfect. You try to cherish their virtues and overlook their flaws. The flaws are still there, though.” “But you don’t get mad. Not like Pop does.” “No, that’s true, I don’t get mad. Not at stories. They do disappoint me sometimes.” He looked at the shelves. “Sometimes, they stab me in the heart.”

I don’t think I’ve ever encountered anything that strikes right at what white privilege means when reading a book, watching a movie, or playing a game where non-whites are either under- or mis- represented. The love for the stories is there...but an awareness of the tragedy of racism is too. I can imagine that a lot of People of Color who are genre fans relate directly to this passage and the sadness it expresses.

Lovecraft Country is a great book. It manages to capture the zeitgeist of an era from a neglected perspective. I found the racism to be more harrowing than the occult elements. I am looking forward to Jordan Peale and HBO's interpretation of the book.

I suppose Lovecraft keeps getting dragged over the coals here because his mythos has become a popular setting for modern boardgames. And he is conveniently dead and unable to either defend himself or make amends. Meanwhile, an apparent pedophile like Piers Anthony is never criticized here, even though his perversion is more prominent in some of his writing than Lovecraft's.

I've said it before and I will say it again here: Lovecraft was a despicable racist but his creativity and writing are too influential to be ignored. I realize it is easier to simply hate a creator and all of his works for racism, but I believe it is equally possible to despise the flawed human creator while still appreciating his work. Unless, as others have said here, the racism is central to the work. Also, I don't believe that consumers or fans have a duty to thoroughly examine the beliefs of every artist and writer that they appreciate. I'm a big fan of Michael Moorcock, but I can't tell you much about him aside from the fact that he is English and he played in a band called Hawkwind. Maybe he is a closet Nazi or an anti-vaxxer or a member of the Flat Earth Society.

Racism is an easy target, but what about misogyny? I am willing to be that an awful lot of popular male actors, directors, writers, musicians, etc have treated women poorly and in a sexist manner at some point in their lives. Or to make it more personal, I would be amazed if nobody at this site ever did something worthy of criticism by the #MeToo movement. Do we start throwing out our possessions by the shovel load in protest? Mass bannings here? Or do we recognize that men in general have treated women poorly throughout history, and then simply try to do better from here on out?

Not to derail too much, but how much of Lovecraft's writings is in an actual game of, say, Arkham Horror? The few things of Lovecraft I tried to read about the only thing they had in common with the game was an emotion, not any actual content.

I think I heard years ago most of the content from these games actually comes from the RPG in the 80s (70s?).

Honest question as I never actually read anything but the shortest of his stories and they were far removed from any "lovecraft" game I've ever played.

Lots of great points and food for thought here- this is why TWBG is the best place to talk about games and gaming-related issues. Even politics.

Shell's comment about misogyny is especially important. If we cleanse misogynistic content and creators from the cultural canon...wow. Goodbye Led Zeppelin, NWA, any number of pre-20th century authors and painters, Tolkien, many composers, etc. etc. etc. I don't think anyone is willing to cut that deep, and we start to run into that issue where we _shouldn't_ be cutting that deep.

I don't think this is an absolute issue to be honest. It is about determining what your comfort level is and what you are willing to trade with creators that are less than paragons of virtue and decency. I've decided that what Lovecraft gives me today- which is, as many have pointed out, incredibly -boring- at this stage- is not worth the racist baggage it comes with. I can enjoy the things that Lovecraft influenced - such as, in fact, Lovecraft Country - and appreciate the sense of moving the elements I like forward from hatefulness and troublesome politics.

Nobody is saying "Lovecraft sucks". At The Mountains of Madness is an incredible genre story...written by a racist and informed by his racist worldview. It's not on the consumer to police creators and scrutinize every aspect of their personal lives and psyches to search for -isms, -phobias, and other negative positions. But I do think it is on the consumer to be aware of established knowledge and understanding of the contexts into which these creations were birthed.

One thing I was thinking about, unconnected to the political issues here, is just how incredibly LAZY it is to attach Lovecraft anything to a game now. Back during the Spirit of '06 when the Ameritrash thing was roaring, there was a lot of railing against Eurogames for repeating the same subjects and concepts. But now, I'd be willing to bet there are actually more gaming SKUs with Lovecraft subject matter than renaissance trading or classical monument building. Imagine if that stupid giant Cthulhu game were a completely new IP instead of yet another rehash and it had a giant NEW monster of some kind...I'd be much more interested in that if it were telling a new story instead of cloning the FFG mythos, which is fundamentally based on racist fiction.

mtagge wrote: Not to derail too much, but how much of Lovecraft's writings is in an actual game of, say, Arkham Horror? The few things of Lovecraft I tried to read about the only thing they had in common with the game was an emotion, not any actual content.

I think I heard years ago most of the content from these games actually comes from the RPG in the 80s (70s?).

Honest question as I never actually read anything but the shortest of his stories and they were far removed from any "lovecraft" game I've ever played.

This is very true! And it gets back to the notion that the Chaosium/FFG mythos is actually a different strand.

But the sublimated racist content is still there- suspicious black people, evil foreigners, barbaric/subhuman non-whites...

That was a fantastic post Barnes, thanks a lot for writing it. I'm not saying much directly related to the topic because I dont really have a position on it but I do understand you. It's not really the same, but I suppose it's how I feel about games with Nazis in them. I'm just too aware of the baggage and the "oh, but they are the bad guys", "it's satire" and the like become very tiring, even if they are true and logical explanations.

Michael Barnes wrote: This is very true! And it gets back to the notion that the Chaosium/FFG mythos is actually a different strand.

But the sublimated racist content is still there- suspicious black people, evil foreigners, barbaric/subhuman non-whites...

This reminds me that Arkahm Horror has a Gypsy Camp which lays all the typical prejudice against them. They steal from you, they cast evil eye on you, they read your future/your palm, that kind of stuff. It's glaring because the game is very "Progressive" in other ways, putting all women into anti-stereotypical roles denoting power and featuring black characters but then it has this very dated, unexplored prejudice in it.

Lovecraft’s works is bigger than he is, they outgrew him. And he’s long dead so fuck him.

Guy was an asshole by today’s standards, and likey on the extremist side in his own time and place. But he died mostly alone and miserable, so there’s a lesson to be learned!

MattDP wrote:

Sevej wrote: But I'm also curious. Both your writing, and the dudette on the other site show no example.

Heap of racist garbage.

Woah, THAT's bad. I mean, I thought it'd something like James Clavell style of writing, in which European and Chinese describe their counterpart as beneath them (unlawful liars/uncultured human trash--but me and some of my Chinese friends actually feel this is very, very accurate!).

I thought a lot of games used Lovecraft Country because he fucked up all his copyrights and they lapsed so it was free. IP costs money, usually. That's why DUNE is awesome and REX is shit. I know there's some grumbling about Derleth's stuff, but most of this stuff is free-as-in-Robinson-Crusoe. Go for it.

I am confronting something similar with my kids, who adore the collected works of Carl Barks. His Donald Duck comics and Uncle Scrooge comics are fucking stellar. They are also racist as fuuuuuuuuck. I mean, look at this shit:


There's some coding, and ME NO RIKEY level accents, all kinds of problematic stuff. And that's how I talk about it with my kids. It's racist. That's the word I use. I call this out. I call out the dog whistles in Ted Cruz's ads, I call out folks that talked about getting "gypped" or even "JEWED" which, I mean, holy shit. The kids go visit (Saint!) Junipero Serra's mission on a field trip and we talk about enslaving locals and genocide by cultural annihilation.

When we play Lovecraft stuff, I call out how narrow the world can be. A whole continent of the most diverse cultures on the planet is reduced to "oogah-boogah" bullshit. The guy was born, lived, and died between Providence and Brooklyn.* He was not a worldly man. Should I throw ARKHAM HORROR out the window because he was a racist shitbag? I hope you don't drive a Ford, I guess.

*(which terrified him, natch).

If you drive a Ford, racism is the least of your problems. Your F150 is about to have its entire electrical system shit out.

jeb wrote: When we play Lovecraft stuff, I call out how narrow the world can be. A whole continent of the most diverse cultures on the planet is reduced to "oogah-boogah" bullshit. The guy was born, lived, and died between Providence and Brooklyn.* He was not a worldly man. Should I throw ARKHAM HORROR out the window because he was a racist shitbag? I hope you don't drive a Ford, I guess.

*(which terrified him, natch).

To play a little devil's advocate, isn't the "oogah-boogah" bullshit the theme? Even in AH the library and science center have the same mystical stuff, it is just mad scientists instead of a gypsy.

I mean I do see the larger point, but AH is nothing without theme (as tainted as it might be). Cthulhu Wars is a bit different, but don't have the same level of taint.

I dunno, I just think it is pulp more than there is intent in the modern stuff. The writings however are horrible, but I wasn't even a fan of his writing style.

Jeb, I've been reading a lot of Asterix and Tintin with my kids, and I'm experiencing the same thing. It has required a lot of discussion about racism and white attitudes toward other cultures, as well as discussions on alcoholism. I think they've been able to understand some of the context, but I sometimes find myself seeing deeper associations with colonialism, as well as overt sexism that sneaks into some of the later Asterix books. (Looking at you, Asterix and the Secret Weapon.)

That said, in the case of Herge especially it's also been an opportunity to discuss learning about other cultures. As the Tintin series went on it became a much more global series, with a sense that other cultures and ethnicities are not scary or "other". There are faults with some of those characters, but they generally aren't tied to their race or ethnicity. It's not a perfect transition of course. The Africans in "The Red Sea Sharks" are still pretty bad, and the portrayal of the Japanese in "The Blue Lotus" makes me a little uncomfortable, although in that case they don't have the "me no rikey" portrayal (in English anyway). There's room to learn, and I'm thankful that some of that is present in the comics.

As for Lovecraft, I don't have any particular attachment so I don't have many strong feelings either. I do get why someone would want to just leave the whole thing behind though, and don't blame anyone for making that call.

In 2015, I was fortunate enough to have a story published in a horror anthology. That anthology won a World Fantasy Award for its editors. My pride in that award was compounded, because that was the year the WFA stopped featuring an image of Lovecraft on the statuette.

Lovecraft's mere likeness, transformed into a totem of worthiness, truly "shaves the rough edges off," as BaronDonut put it. The open fascists (do yourself a favor and don't google the name Vox Day) who opposed the change against made this same argument, the whatabouitist cultural argument; that by throwing out the bad with an artist like Lovecraft, we throw out the supposed good. Bullshit.

Lovecraft is an important writer to me because, in his privilege, in his exposure of the maze in his cowardly little soul, in his fear of the alien, in his pure, shuddering reaction against the progression of human progress and knowledge, he is perhaps the only coherent far-right-wing writer who's ever written. That's valuable. The horror I get from Lovecraft--that any white man gets from him--is that, but for some trauma or life change or twist of inner cruelty, I might have become the same sort of mincing, racist coward. There's pleasure in trying on Lovecraft's coat, and, for people who aren't shitbags, a greater pleasure in rejecting it. I wouldn't impose that rare and weird pleasure on anyone who wasn't a white man.

Shaving the rough edges off of Lovecraft, making it all "just monsters," makes it all worse. Like all incoherent right-wing thinking, it uses the twin prophylactics of spectacle and sentimentality to make it easier to wear Lovecraft's coat and not take it off.

Monsters can become humanized. Lovecraft's mission was to monsterize humans. That can't be sanitized. I wouldn't erase it from history, and I wouldn't erase Mein Kampf or Atlas Shrugged either. I'd just put it in a section of the library called, "Read Something That's Not Bullshit First."

...

PS I like the Arkham Horror LCG from a mechanical standpoint, but I'm glad it can be played solo. The idea of introducing any friend outside of my immediate circle to Fantasy Flight's embarrassing, jazzmen-and-voodoo-princesses idea of "multiculturalism" makes me shudder. It's an obvious byproduct of the sanitation of an irredeemable source.

By the same token:

- Renounce your citizenship because you paid for innocents to be murdered by people you voted for, and those same people allowed people to be tortured, and immigrant families to be separated, and the entire world to be spies upon

- Renounce Puerto Rico (the game) as it is a simulation of the enslavement of tens of thousands and the exploitation of the Táino.

- Renounce printed board games as they were made using oil plucked from the ground by despots who murder their people for the simple belief that it’s OK to not believe in a religion, or to love a person of their same sex (or to drive a car, not wear a hood, etc)

- Renounce film as Hollywood culture propagates misogyny and rape culture


You see my point yet? It’s all connected. Taking a stand on a guy who was a cunt, but a cunt in an endless sea of cunts, is far less sensible than rejecting your own nation, or cars, or plastics, or many, many other things.

I’m not being snarky, I’m dead serious. The world is and shall remain a fucked up place, and renouncing one man who was absolutely a product of his time for not being more forward thinking is arguably ludicrous. It’s certainly more ludicrous than renouncing your citizenship in an immoral nation NOW.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

You see my point yet? It’s all connected.

With respect, the world is full of interconnections and contingencies. I can be against the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and still be in favor of programs that protect veterans. We can get rid of Lovecraft and Vox Day and still (whatever, take your pick) eat beef in full knowledge that beef production is a major factor in deforestation and climate change. We have become a culture that points out enormous hypocrisies in order to circumvent practical solutions. At best, it's apathetic. At worst, it's a form of nihilism.

So where are you moving to, Pete?

Or is the logical endgame there "accept HP Lovecraft or you can't call yourself an American?"

I realize GG pushed some buttons with the term "right-wing". I don't really agree with that analysis at all, I just think HPL was shockingly fucking racist. Even within his time, this was an abnormal level of fear and hatred. However, the Southern Democrats at the time were busy electing Woodrow Wilson, who could give HPL a run for his money in the racism stakes. History isn't pretty. We should all leave the left/right stuff in the "thread we shall not name, because you know where to find it"

Now, it's okay to say "I don't want to engage with that, it's shockingly fucking racist". Barnes isn't putting HPL out of print, or even demanding anyone else stop buying Cthulhu Wars. It's just his personal take. I mostly agree. Everything I liked about the Cthulhu settings was really just pulpiness more than anything.

For people who enjoyed Lovecraft Country, the book, I also highly recommend The Ballad of Black Tom, which is a Mythos story written by a black writer. There's an interesting NPR transcript of an interview here, where the author (Victor LaValle) discusses reading HPL as a kid, and how the racism just sort of passed over him until he got to a certain age: www.npr.org/2016/02/29/468558238/the-bal...ritique-of-lovecraft

Interesting stuff, and I think BBT is mentioned in the thank-yous of Lovecraft Country as well.