Lovecraft Country (Novel & TV Series)

[ramonmercado]

Justin Bortnick on Lovecraft Country
Shoggoths in a Segregated America

WHEN DESCRIBING H.P. Lovecraft to friends of mine, I have often jokingly referred to him as “the most famous author you’ve never heard of.” Despite his relative lack of visibility — he’s not read in classrooms, nor will you find any of his books on a bestseller shelf — Lovecraft’s works of horror and science fiction in the early decades of the 20th century have had an outsized influence on popular culture. Everything from films like Alien andPirates of the Caribbean to the music of Metallica and Black Sabbath to writers ranging from Borges to Burroughs have a bit of the existential terror that permeates Lovecraft’s fiction.

Less highly regarded are Lovecraft’s ideas regarding race; a vehement believer in the superiority of white individuals over others, many of his stories were rooted in a fear of immigrants, miscegenation, and mixed ancestry. This mixed legacy has tarnished Lovecraft’s reputation. Even as recently as November of 2015, the administrators of the World Fantasy Award announced that they would no longer be using Lovecraft’s likeness on their award trophies, a bust of whom has been granted to winners for almost 40 years. This was the culmination of a debate that had been raging for most of this decade about how to, and if it was even possible to, separate Lovecraft from his racism. If nothing else, any appreciation of the author must be qualified with a condemnation of his racism.

Noted Lovecraft scholar S.T. Joshi condemned the move, writing that it was “craven yielding to the worst sort of political correctness and an explicit acceptance of the crude, ignorant and tendentious slanders against Lovecraft propagated by a small but noisy band of agitators.” Indeed, it seemed to ignore the evidence that Lovecraft had begun to abandon the racist views he held as a young man, becoming more tolerant and understanding of difference in his older age. Joshi also pointed out that criticisms of racism could be extended to individuals such as Bram Stoker (Dracula) and John W. Campbell, Jr. (The Thing), and yet the awards bearing their names have not capitulated on the value of their namesake’s art. While the decision was defended by others, such as Lenika Cruz, an associate editor at The Atlantic,the battle over Lovecraft’s racism has not yet concluded.

It is perhaps odd, then, that Matt Ruff’s new novel, Lovecraft Country, is set in Jim Crow America, long after Lovecraft’s death in 1937. Despite drawing the title from a term coined by Keith Herber to describe the fictional New England landscape in which Lovecraft set many of his stories, Ruff’s novel takes place primarily in Chicago; though there are excursions afield to locales both terrestrial and celestial, very little of the story is actually set in the eponymous Lovecraft Country. Nor do Ruff’s characters resemble the typical Lovecraftian protagonist — white, male, and with antiquarian tendencies. Atticus Turner is a black man and a veteran of the Korean War. Make no mistake: this is a novel about racism, told from the point of view of African Americans, written by a white man in the generic tradition of another, problematic white writer. It would be very easy to fall into traps of appropriation, but on balance Ruff avoids these pitfalls more than he stumbles into them. ...

https://lareviewofbooks.org/review/shoggoths-in-a-segregated-america

 

[AlchoPwn]

Given that I actually live in Lovecraft Country, I object to the notion that it is in the Deep South. Now, don't get me wrong, Lovecraft's racism was worthy of the Deep South, but he only ever visited the area.

 

[ramonmercado]

Given that I actually live in Lovecraft Country, I object to the notion that it is in the Deep South. Now, don't get me wrong, Lovecraft's racism was worthy of the Deep South, but he only ever visited the area.

Should be remembered that the real vitriol in his stories is reserved for hillbillies. He portrays them as inbred, subterranean cannibals.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Given that I actually live in Lovecraft Country, I object to the notion that it is in the Deep South. Now, don't get me wrong, Lovecraft's racism was worthy of the Deep South, but he only ever visited the area.

I've read the book, it's ok but not great, more like interconnected short stories. There's some references to Lovecraftian tropes (the Necromicon for example) and I think Lovecraft himself exists within the novel's "universe", Weird Tales magazine certainly does, if he's in it he's not referred to much.

It doesn't bare much resemblance to his work beyond being supernatural horror and his name has somewhat cynically been used in the title to sell copies. Much of the horror comes from the racism of 50s America, i understand that his name has been used partially as a subversion but the book doesn't really deal with his work at all and I found the title cheap. It may be a different beast but it's nowhere near as good as his best work.

 

[AlchoPwn]

It doesn't bare much resemblance to his work beyond being supernatural horror and his name has somewhat cynically been used in the title to sell copies. Much of the horror comes from the racism of 50s America, i understand that his name has been used partially as a subversion but the book doesn't really deal with his work at all and I found the title cheap. It may be a different beast but it's nowhere near as good as his best work.

That's sad. I will likely give it a look, but I won't hold out much hope that it will be another True Detective Season 1.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

That's sad. I will likely give it a look, but I won't hold out much hope that it will be another True Detective Season 1.

I've skim read a few reviews of the show and they've been mixed. It's possible it could improve on the book and use the premise to do something more interesting but I'm not optimistic.

 

[maximus otter]

I watched the first episode of Lovecraft Country yesterday evening. Despite my reservations before l began it, l was favourably impressed and will watch more.

The characters - the black ones, at least - are well-drawn and engaging, the action sequences are effective and the non-human characters are well done. Any white character with more than two lines (so far) is not just a bigot, but a violent, heavily-armed and active bigot, but that was rather what l expected.

l’d give it a solid 7/10, and look forward to more.

maximus otter

 

[ralfy]

Same: something like 2.5 out of 4 stars. The critical portrayal of whites was at best crude, and references to racism annoying because they were overt (like the plump singer mocking white music the dialogue between Atticus and the passenger concerning weird tales and racism in the U.S.). Storywise they were jumping all over the place for a third or a fourth of the episode. There were also several instances of odd behavior, like the scene where Atticus finds his father's friend in a compromising position at the back of the bar, and then they talk about the former's father as if nothing happened. And there are also characteristics that are too convenient, from Atticus, his father, and his uncle who happen to be wide readers to Leti's brother who appears to be an expert on weird Americana to his younger sister who comes up with cartoon figures that resemble those pushed in mainstream media today to his aunt who turns out to be a stargazer.

The music is good overall, except for a weird insertion of rap in one scene. There are no problems with the acting and production design. That said, I think the cast and crew tried their best with a story that tries to combine Lovecraftian weirdness with racism in the U.S., resulting in something that's awkward and artificial.

 

[Naughty_Felid]

I watched the first episode of Lovecraft Country yesterday evening. Despite my reservations before l began it, l was favourably impressed and will watch more.

The characters - the black ones, at least - are well-drawn and engaging, the action sequences are effective and the non-human characters are well done. Any white character with more than two lines (so far) is not just a bigot, but a violent, heavily-armed and active bigot, but that was rather what l expected.

l’d give it a solid 7/10, and look forward to more.

maximus otter

Irony alert.

That's because there was A LOT of active bigots out there.

I've only watched the first episode so far and I've found the portrayal of racism has really freshened up what would have been another It or Stranger Things.

You got to ask why was it added and why are white people portrayed as bigots? KKK membership was actually on the rise during this time 40, 000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Second_Klan:_1915–1944

Lynchings were still common. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingyear.html


Whites Blacks Total

1940	1​	4​	5​
1941	0​	4​	4​
1942	0​	6​	6​
1943	0​	3​	3​
1944	0​	2​	2​
1945	0​	1​	1​
1946	0​	6​	6​
1947	0​	1​	1​
1948	1​	1​	2​
1949	0​	3​	3​
1950	1​	1​	2​
1951	0​	1​	1​
1952	0​	0​	0​
1953	0​	0​	0​
1954	0​	0​	0​
1955	0​	3​	3​
1956	0​	0​	0​
1957	1​	0​	1​
1958	0​	0​	0​
1959	0​	1​	1​

The everyday threat of injury or even death was a state black people had to live with even after WW2. Standing up for yourself - looking at a white woman, drinking from a white's only fountain - all these could easily destroy your life forever.

Here's what WW1 black veterans faced on their return from war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_veterans_lynched_after_World_War_I

Name	City	County or parish	State	Date	Accusation	Lynching	Ref
Unknown	Pine Bluff	Jefferson	Arkansas		Insult of white woman – refused to move off a sidewalk for a white woman	Tied to a tree with tire chains, and shot as many as 50 times	[2]
Private Charles Lewis	Tyler Station (near Hickman)	Fulton	Kentucky	December 16, 1918	Alleged robbery	Masked men stormed the jail, smashed the locks with a sledgehammer, and hanged him from a tree	[2] [7]
Black vet and a black woman	Pickens	Holmes	Mississippi	May 5, 1919	Insult of white woman – black woman wrote an "improper note" to a young white woman		[2]
Sgt. Maj. John Green	Birmingham	Jefferson	Alabama	June 12, 1919	Asking for change from a conductor aboard a segregated outbound Pratt-Endsley streetcar to Dozier Park	Shot three times in the head	[8]
Robert Truett	Louise	Humphreys	Mississippi	July 15, 1919	Insult of white woman – alleged indecent proposal to a white woman	Hanged Robert Truett, a veteran who was 18 years old	[2] [9]
Clinton Briggs	Lincoln	Washington	Arkansas	August 3, 1919	Insult of white woman – moved too slowly out of white woman's way	Chained to a tree, shot till dead	[2] [10]
L. B. Reed	Clarksdale	Coahoma	Mississippi	September 10, 1919	Suspected of having a relationship with a white woman	Hanged from the bridge across the Sunflower River	[2] [11]
Robert Crosky	Montgomery	Montgomery	Alabama	September 29, 1919	Alleged assault of a white woman	Shot by a mob	[12]
Miles Phifer	Montgomery	Montgomery	Alabama	September 29, 1919	Alleged assault of a white woman	Shot by a mob	[12]
Frank Livingston	El Dorado	Union	Arkansas	May 21, 1919	Alleged murder	100 people gathered to burn Mr. Livingston alive	[2] [13]
Bud Johnson	Pace	Santa Rosa	Florida	March 12, 1919	Alleged assault of a white woman	Chained to a stake, burnt alive his skull was split with a hatchet and pieces given to onlookers as souvenirs	[2] [14]
Lucius McCarty	Bogalusa	Washington	Louisiana	August 31, 1919	Alleged attempted assault of a white woman	Mob dragged his body behind a car killing him before burning his corpse in a bonfire	[2] [11]
Powell Green		Franklin	North Carolina	December 27, 1919	Allegedly shot R. M. Brown, the white owner of a movie theater in Franklinton	Rope tied around neck, dragged for 2 miles (3.2 km) behind an automobile, then hanged from a pine sapling	[2] [15]
Herman Arthur	Paris	Lamar	Texas	July 6, 1920	Alleged fatal shootout with sharecropper landlord and son over a dispute	Herman and his little brother, Ervie, tied to a stake and burnt alive	[16] [17] [18] [19]
Wilbur Little	Blakely	Early	Georgia	Spring 1919	Refusal to remove military uniform	Beaten to death in uniform by a mob

I know you won't respond as you never do when you are called out. These people are allowed to write about history as they see it and write about how the threat of white people would have effected their parents, grandparents, and grandparents.

Same: something like 2.5 out of 4 stars. The critical portrayal of whites was at best crude, and references to racism annoying because they were overt (like the plump singer mocking white music the dialogue between Atticus and the passenger concerning weird tales and racism in the U.S.). Storywise they were jumping all over the place for a third or a fourth of the episode. There were also several instances of odd behavior, like the scene where Atticus finds his father's friend in a compromising position at the back of the bar, and then they talk about the former's father as if nothing happened. And there are also characteristics that are too convenient, from Atticus, his father, and his uncle who happen to be wide readers to Leti's brother who appears to be an expert on weird Americana to his younger sister who comes up with cartoon figures that resemble those pushed in mainstream media today to his aunt who turns out to be a stargazer.

The music is good overall, except for a weird insertion of rap in one scene. There are no problems with the acting and production design. That said, I think the cast and crew tried their best with a story that tries to combine Lovecraftian weirdness with racism in the U.S., resulting in something that's awkward and artificial.

See my post above, it isn't a crude portrayal of whites as white people were a very real threat to black people in the era portrayed.

As I've said I don't think it's awkward and artificial - it's a show about racism with a horror background. Lovecraft was a racist nihilist who often portrayed inhuman, master races as ultimately in control. It's about time his views were challenged and discussed - this sort of show can do a lot to educate in a format that isn't going to turn people off immediately. This show should be celebrated and not criticized.

If it makes you uncomfortable then you need to be asking yourself why that's the case?

 

[escargot]

We saw it and enjoyed it all. I did an English degree with a strong American literature component and learned a lot about the terrible dangers of everyday racism in America. We Brits don’t know the half of it.

 

[ralfy]

See my post above, it isn't a crude portrayal of whites as white people were a very real threat to black people in the era portrayed.

As I've said I don't think it's awkward and artificial - it's a show about racism with a horror background. Lovecraft was a racist nihilist who often portrayed inhuman, master races as ultimately in control. It's about time his views were challenged and discussed - this sort of show can do a lot to educate in a format that isn't going to turn people off immediately. This show should be celebrated and not criticized.

If it makes you uncomfortable then you need to be asking yourself why that's the case?

The fact that you gave figures to prove that racism is a threat is itself ironic as that means the show is not necessary to do so, although you can probably argue that the purpose of the show is to explain that threat to viewers who enjoy horror and Lovecraft and not aware of that threat. Which brings me to my point:

By "crude", I mean lacking in artistic subtlety, i.e., "show, don't tell."

About the rest of your points:

There are many lines in the dialogue and scenes where whites are not only criticized but even mocked, from derision of "white" music to depiction of fantasy antagonists as not only white but also blonde. It's too early for me to tell, though, as there might be more complexities as the story unfolds, e.g., white characters who are sympathetic to the black protagonists, blacks characters who turn out to be just as bad as white antagonists, if not worse, and so on. Of course, that derails a supposed intention of bluntly showing the threat of racism, but why expect otherwise for a show that appears to make horror and even fantasy more than just a background?

Next, if the intention is to simply show that Lovecraft is racist, then wouldn't an hour-long documentary be more helpful than a TV series?

Similarly, if the other intention is to depict racism in the U.S., then again your charts and documentaries might be more effective. And if one want to do so using fiction, aren't there a lot of shows which do that in a more realistic manner, from Roots all the way to Green Book? If a horror, fantasy, or sci-fi background is included, that might distract the readers or viewers from the goal of the producer, which is to teach them about the threat of racism, and which I raised above.

Perhaps in the end one has to consider the idea of seeing the intentions of art as two-fold: to entertain and to educate. Does Horace say something like that: dulce et utile? If one emphasizes one side, the other is affected. Is the producer who once pointed out that he wouldn't cast a "white dude" simply because "I've seen that movie" capable of considering that?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jordan...see-himself-casting-white-dude-as-movie-lead/

 

[Yithian]

I've read a batch of reviews just to assess whether or not I should watch the series (I tend not to abandon things halfway through) and the consensus among viewers and actual criticis (not tendentious opinion piece writers) is that it's preachy, heavy-handed and uncomfortably gauche at time (too transparent in its intent), but for all that still surprisingly watchable as the acting and characterisation of the lead rôles are very good.

Probably will take a look.

 

[maximus otter]

l regard the series as watchable SF/horror, and try to filter out the preachiness.

lt occurs to me that it would be like making a telly series out of David Copperfield, but set in the mid-1930s East End with all the characters depicted as Jewish, in order to labour the perception of Dickens as antisemitic.

Did Lovecraft have views on ethnicity etc. that are a photocopy of today’s? Not by a long chalk. Was he enough of an outlier for his time that he should be singled out to have his work used as an exercise in finger-wagging? IMHO, no.

Still, l suppose that anyone pitching a telly show to executives these days needs to ensure that it ticks a few PC boxes, just to try to ensure that their project goes forward.

maximus otter

 

[Naughty_Felid]

The fact that you gave figures to prove that racism is a threat is itself ironic as that means the show is not necessary to do so, although you can probably argue that the purpose of the show is to explain that threat to viewers who enjoy horror and Lovecraft and not aware of that threat. Which brings me to my point:

By "crude", I mean lacking in artistic subtlety, i.e., "show, don't tell."

About the rest of your points:

There are many lines in the dialogue and scenes where whites are not only criticized but even mocked, from derision of "white" music to depiction of fantasy antagonists as not only white but also blonde. It's too early for me to tell, though, as there might be more complexities as the story unfolds, e.g., white characters who are sympathetic to the black protagonists, blacks characters who turn out to be just as bad as white antagonists, if not worse, and so on. Of course, that derails a supposed intention of bluntly showing the threat of racism, but why expect otherwise for a show that appears to make horror and even fantasy more than just a background?

Next, if the intention is to simply show that Lovecraft is racist, then wouldn't an hour-long documentary be more helpful than a TV series?

Similarly, if the other intention is to depict racism in the U.S., then again your charts and documentaries might be more effective. And if one want to do so using fiction, aren't there a lot of shows which do that in a more realistic manner, from Roots all the way to Green Book? If a horror, fantasy, or sci-fi background is included, that might distract the readers or viewers from the goal of the producer, which is to teach them about the threat of racism, and which I raised above.

Perhaps in the end one has to consider the idea of seeing the intentions of art as two-fold: to entertain and to educate. Does Horace say something like that: dulce et utile? If one emphasizes one side, the other is affected. Is the producer who once pointed out that he wouldn't cast a "white dude" simply because "I've seen that movie" capable of considering that?

https://www.cbsnews.com/ne
ws/jordan-peele-says-he-doesnt-see-himself-casting-white-dude-as-movie-lead/

The taking the piss out of white music, (I actually didn't notice the comment and wasn't taking notes as I was enjoying the show), was probably due to early rock and roll being lifted from black music, i.e jazz, blues, R and B, boogie-woogie - which is completely justified. Two of the tracks played from the first episode were covered by white musicians to greater commercial success later on. Jerry Lee Lewis and The Crew Cuts respectively.

I believe the show is written by a black woman and the excellent Jordon Peele, also black, who is an executive producer so if they want to write about racism in their country's very recent history than I believe they can that. If they want to write this against the backdrop of an inhuman, cold, uncaring, alien master-race well that's up to them too. If it makes you uncomfortable then you don't have to watch it.

Also, the show is based on a book which was written by a white man.

But you'd like it if they just kept to documentaries? Tucked away in a little corner? It's a well-known fact that Americans have a very limited understanding of or exposure to their racist history, (the Tulsa Race Massacre spring to mind), is why mainstream TV is exactly the right place to show people what it was actually like for black people.

Also, Peele's quote was "Not that I don't like white dudes. But I've seen that movie." - That's a fair comment to make.

 

[Naughty_Felid]

l regard the series as watchable SF/horror, and try to filter out the preachiness.

lt occurs to me that it would be like making a telly series out of David Copperfield, but set in the mid-1930s East End with all the characters depicted as Jewish, in order to labour the perception of Dickens as antisemitic.

Did Lovecraft have views on ethnicity etc. that are a photocopy of today’s? Not by a long chalk. Was he enough of an outlier for his time that he should be singled out to have his work used as an exercise in finger-wagging? IMHO, no.

Still, l suppose that anyone pitching a telly show to executives these days needs to ensure that it ticks a few PC boxes, just to try to ensure that their project goes forward.

maximus otter

Nope, as Peele said he has earnt enough influence that he doesn't need to pitch his ideas anymore,

"The way I look at it," he said, "I get to cast black people in my movies. I feel fortunate to be in this position where I can say to Universal, 'I want to make a $20 million horror movie with a black family.' And they say yes."

Lovecraft is probably the most influential horror writer, (apart from King), of the last 30 years. He had extreme views even for his time. The only way we can get to grips with that is to acknowledge it and bring it out in the open.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

I'm not certain how much Lovecraft's racism needs to be "addressed", it's acknowledged more often than not and it's explicit enough in the stories where it raises its head that even a fool could spot it. The bloke's been dead for over 80 years at this point, he was rightly replaced as the award statue for the World Fantasy Award but what else do you want to do? People love Cthulhu et al, they aren't reading him for the racial slurs and bigotry.

Alan Moore's Providence is a better take down (and appreciation of) Lovecraft than the Lovecraft Country novel is. The programme might do better, as I've said above, as they can use it as a launch pad for potentially better things, however, TV and film are collaborative and full of compromise, including budget so I'm not too optimistic.

Those that have seen it thus far, are there at least hints of Lovecraftian, Cosmic Horror type entities? There's little of that in the book.

 

[Naughty_Felid]

I'm not certain how much Lovecraft's racism needs to be "addressed", it's acknowledged more often than not and it's explicit enough in the stories where it raises its head that even a fool could spot it. The bloke's been dead for over 80 years at this point, he was rightly replaced as the award statue for the World Fantasy Award but what else do you want to do? People love Cthulhu et al, they aren't reading him for the racial slurs and bigotry.

Alan Moore's Providence is a better take down (and appreciation of) Lovecraft than the Lovecraft Country novel is. The programme might do better, as I've said above, as they can use it as a launch pad for potentially better things, however, TV and film are collaborative and full of compromise, including budget so I'm not too optimistic.

Those that have seen it thus far, are there at least hints of Lovecraftian, Cosmic Horror type entities? There's little of that in the book.

Because we've always known that Lovecraft was a racist, people discovering him for the first time not so much. Like it or not this is the first major Lovecraft TV show. Lets just put it out there and move on.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Because we've always known that Lovecraft was a racist, people discovering him for the first time not so much. Like it or not this is the first major Lovecraft TV show. Lets just put it out there and move on.

Moving on:

I'm in the "not" category, without having seen it and this has nothing to do with politics of any sort. TV as I stated above is replete with compromise and I can imagine that any adaptation would be defanged or inept. Despite is influence being everywhere as you state above and even his actual tropes being endlessly replicated (hello cuddly Cthulhus!) he has mercifully been left alone in this age of IP mining. It was only a matter of time until this changed and I think the recent Colour Out of Space adaptation (with further ones planned) and this in particular mark the end of that. There's been rumblings of a Lovecraft anthology show for some time and I suppose that mutated into this, I was also worried that Cthulhu would turn up into the Godzilla/Kongverse being developed by Legendary/WB, that seems to be on the way out though.

Ultimately I'd prefer it if Lovecraft were left alone and I think people are better off making films and TV that have some his influence, conscious or otherwise: Twin Peaks, Stranger Things, The Endless, The Thing etc than attempting to adapt his actual material.

 

[ralfy]

The taking the piss out of white music, (I actually didn't notice the comment and wasn't taking notes as I was enjoying the show), was probably due to early rock and roll being lifted from black music, i.e jazz, blues, R and B, boogie-woogie - which is completely justified. Two of the tracks played from the first episode were covered by white musicians to greater commercial success later on. Jerry Lee Lewis and The Crew Cuts respectively.

I believe the show is written by a black woman and the excellent Jordon Peele, also black, who is an executive producer so if they want to write about racism in their country's very recent history than I believe they can that. If they want to write this against the backdrop of an inhuman, cold, uncaring, alien master-race well that's up to them too. If it makes you uncomfortable then you don't have to watch it.

Also, the show is based on a book which was written by a white man.

But you'd like it if they just kept to documentaries? Tucked away in a little corner? It's a well-known fact that Americans have a very limited understanding of or exposure to their racist history, (the Tulsa Race Massacre spring to mind), is why mainstream TV is exactly the right place to show people what it was actually like for black people.

Also, Peele's quote was "Not that I don't like white dudes. But I've seen that movie." - That's a fair comment to make.

The phrase "taking a piss" is appropriate, as the virtue signalling was indeed jarring whether or not it is justified.

Jordan Peele is an interesting comedian, especially in light of skits like this:

but I think he belongs to light, pop entertainment. And I think that's the problem with this series: it attempts to go beyond that, can't, and those flaws show. More on that later. Meanwhile, why do you keep repeating the statement that I shouldn't watch the show if it makes me uncomfortable?

I have not read the book, so I cannot judge the show based on that, and I don't understand why it matters that a white man wrote it.

My point isn't that they should stick to documentaries. Rather, if the purpose of producing a show is to depict the harsh realities of realism, then it's better to do so through those, similar to your posts containing charts and other details. If the purpose is to depict that through entertainment, then my advice in my previous post stands.

Meanwhile, back to an earlier point: why melodramatic statements like "tucked away in a little corner"? My criticism is not based on fear of such but that the show doesn't portray that or horror very well.

Anyway, I just saw the second episode, and it contains another set of problems: in addition to some more virtue signalling (which is minor in this case), it jams too much content into only one episode. I think the content of the first two episodes could have been developed better across six or more. Also, I would have made characters and characterization more realistic. I'll give more details later, but for now I still give it an above-average rating, with the point above average thanks to effort.

 

[gordonrutter]

I watched the second episode after I recorded it. At one of the ends of a commercial break I kept checking to see if I had missed a bit as there was a major jar and change from where they had been prior to the start of the commercial break.

 

[Naughty_Felid]

The phrase "taking a piss" is appropriate, as the virtue signalling was indeed jarring whether or not it is justified.

Jordan Peele is an interesting comedian, especially in light of skits like this:

but I think he belongs to light, pop entertainment. And I think that's the problem with this series: it attempts to go beyond that, can't, and those flaws show. More on that later. Meanwhile, why do you keep repeating the statement that I shouldn't watch the show if it makes me uncomfortable?

I have not read the book, so I cannot judge the show based on that, and I don't understand why it matters that a white man wrote it.

My point isn't that they should stick to documentaries. Rather, if the purpose of producing a show is to depict the harsh realities of realism, then it's better to do so through those, similar to your posts containing charts and other details. If the purpose is to depict that through entertainment, then my advice in my previous post stands.

Meanwhile, back to an earlier point: why melodramatic statements like "tucked away in a little corner"? My criticism is not based on fear of such but that the show doesn't portray that or horror very well.

Anyway, I just saw the second episode, and it contains another set of problems: in addition to some more virtue signalling (which is minor in this case), it jams too much content into only one episode. I think the content of the first two episodes could have been developed better across six or more. Also, I would have made characters and characterization more realistic. I'll give more details later, but for now I still give it an above-average rating, with the point above average thanks to effort.

Who are you to dictate what people make? Really who makes you the man who tells other people what they should or should not do?

Off the top of my head. Films that shouldn't have been made:

The Godfather I and II - shouldn't have been made as the portrayal of Mafia being part of American life should be restricted to documentaries.

Schindler's List - shouldn't be made as it's about the war, and most of that stuff should only be discussed in docos. Screw you Lee Marvin, John Wayne, James Stewart, Richard Widmark, etc for all those films you lot made.

Alien - Should not have been made as it highlights a socioeconomic disparity between Parker and Brett and the rest of the crew - documentary, please. It's a horror film just remove that part of the film. - just remove Harry Dean out of the film.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers? You must like that one?

Instead, let's just have a rerun of the Waltons except it isn't 1979 anymore.

Do you honestly believe mainstream, popular entertainment has no educational value? I'm guessing you're not a fan of Sesame Street?

 

[Frideswide]

In case anyone missed the recent months of announcement and memos...

This is not a place to rehash the genuinely tedious Virtue Signalling wars. It doesn't matter if the phenomenon of Virtue Signalling actually exists. It's an easy and knee jerk reaction.

Find another phrase, say exactly what you mean rather than relying on an over-used popular tag which is designed to get a reaction.

This isn't the place for either the trailing bait or the reaction to it. Or, indeed, any more discussion about why this is so - we have been there, done that, got T-shirts, lost T-shirts and all promised to leave this alone. If any further of that appears here I'll be deleting it.

Stay on topic without igniting the next Culture Wars instalment.

Please get back to Lovecraft Country (Novel and TV Series).

Frideswide

 

[Mythopoeika]

It's a horror film just remove that part of the film. - just remove Harry Dean out of the film.

Blasphemer! Wash your mouth out for uttering such heresy.

 

[ralfy]

Who are you to dictate what people make? Really who makes you the man who tells other people what they should or should not do?

Off the top of my head. Films that shouldn't have been made:

The Godfather I and II - shouldn't have been made as the portrayal of Mafia being part of American life should be restricted to documentaries.

Schindler's List - shouldn't be made as it's about the war, and most of that stuff should only be discussed in docos. Screw you Lee Marvin, John Wayne, James Stewart, Richard Widmark, etc for all those films you lot made.

Alien - Should not have been made as it highlights a socioeconomic disparity between Parker and Brett and the rest of the crew - documentary, please. It's a horror film just remove that part of the film. - just remove Harry Dean out of the film.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers? You must like that one?

Instead, let's just have a rerun of the Waltons except it isn't 1979 anymore.

Do you honestly believe mainstream, popular entertainment has no educational value? I'm guessing you're not a fan of Sesame Street?

Criticism is not the same as dictating.

I liked the Godfather films, but as I grew older became more appreciative of works like Donnie Brasco. But I still enjoy the former, together with films like Rififi, High and Low, Pele el Moko, and more.

Schindler's List is very good, but I found the end with Spielberg distracting. My favorites include The Pianist, Playing for Time, Holocaust, and the documentary Shoah. The description of the underground complex was particularly depressing.

Alien was actually very good precisely because of characters like those played by Harry Dean Stanton; actually, all of them did very well. I particularly appreciated the scene where the crew woke up and had dinner; you could see the different characters developed effectively, and how they were essentially the equivalent of space truckers. Aliens does well for similar reasons, and more: the pacing and buildup is very good, and rarely seen today, where spectacular action takes place within the first few minutes. It's as if producers need to cram as much as possible into more than two hours so that viewers can argue to themselves that the money spent was worth it.

The 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is fantastic, especially the tragic relationship between Matthew and Elizabeth, and the director manages to pull it off not particularly through dialogue but through facial expressions. And to this day I have no idea how they managed to depict the city in such a bleak light.

I very much like to re-watch the Waltons, together with Little House on the Prairie, as shows like those are rarely made today. But I still don't forget works like Doomwatch, Sandbaggers, and many that are barely mentioned today, like Roots (did I mention that earlier?), Shogun, and Dekalog.

About Sesame Street, I actually grew up watching that, together with many other children's shows.

Finally, I don't remember stating that pop entertainment has no educational value. Rather, following Horace, art serves to entertain and to instruct. In this case, Lovecraft Country attempts to do both but does not succeed because it crams both into too little time, thus ending up with half-baked characterization and rushed storytelling and views of racist America before the Civil Rights movement, i.e., the journey and the story of Atticus' ancestry require more than two episodes. In addition, as I pointed out earlier, the show crew, especially the producers, are too heavily invested in fostering political agenda that end up showing such as a matter-of-fact or jarringly.

One more thing: I speak English as a foreign language, so I hope I am not stating things incorrectly. I want to clarify that I am not against depictions of racism or horror or works meant solely to entertain. Rather, I want them done in a well-crafted manner. Also, that's what I've been realizing not only in works like Lovecraft Country but also in shows like Star: Trek Discovery and the endings of Devs and the first series of True Detective.

 

[Yithian]

One more thing: I speak English as a foreign language, so I hope I am not stating things incorrectly.

You need have no concern on that score; we would never have known.

 

[ralfy]

Here are some ways of dealing with the problem of lack of development due to too much content crammed, the artificial qualities of some of the characters, virtue signalling, and jarring elements in the show, and hopefully in a generic manner so as not to spoil things for those who haven't seen it:

Start with the main character's past more than a year earlier for one episode. This develops his character readily and explains what others have been saying about him later. Find out how to bring out Lovecraftian elements in that episode, but do it in a subtle manner.

Take the first half of the original episode and extend it into one episode. Water down positive abilities of secondary characters and bring in more vulnerabilities and flaws in order to make them more realistic. In fact, do the same for the main character and the opposite for would-be or actual antagonists in order not to turn them into caricatures.

Take the second half of the original first episode and develop it into a full episode. Bring in not only antagonists but even sympathetic characters of various races who aid the protagonists in achieving their goal. In addition, develop some more background of that goal.

Take the first half of the original second episode and develop it into a full one. This time, develop the antagonists in order to avoid turning them into cardboard cutouts. Introduce their vulnerabilities and foreshadow events involving Lovecraftian elements in a slow, unfolding manner.

Develop the second half of the original second episode into at least two more because the background of the main character looks very important. Introduce the growing verbal tensions between protagonists and antagonists, with a climax brought about in the last half of the second additional episode. This allows for suspenseful build-up and, in the manner of Lovecraft's tale, even introduce feelings of morbidness and terror.

 

[ralfy]

I apologize for posting too much in this thread, but I'm not sure if I'll be posting more because I'm considering postponing further viewing until the end of the first series. With that, I'd like to mention one more point, that is, the idea of "Lovecraftian horror."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovecraftian_horror

It is connected to a view called "cosmicism,"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmicism

which is linked in the first Wiki entry and can be briefly described as such:

The philosophy of cosmicism states "that there is no recognizable divine presence, such as a god, in the universe, and that humans are particularly insignificant in the larger scheme of intergalactic existence."[4] The most prominent theme is humanity's fear of their insignificance in the face of an incomprehensibly large universe:[5][6][7] a fear of the cosmic void.[8]

It is said to describe Lovecraft's works, where any protagonist (like those in Gothic fiction) at best survive to tell their tale. Beyond that, the universe is seen as essentially neutral, with Lovecraft's fantastic creatures used to entertain readers but also to express to them in a subtle manner that the universe is faceless, neutral, and nothing more than a "void," and human beings insignificant in such.

In relation to that is the idea of nihilism and even anti-natalism, where humanity itself is depicted as not just insignificant but pointless. More details can be seen in the Wiki entry on that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism

and in works of writers like Tom Ligotti:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Ligotti

One recent non-fiction work to consider in light of that is The Conspiracy Against the Human Race:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conspiracy_Against_the_Human_Race

Fans of True Detective will appreciate that in light of Rust Cohle's character, as seen in these selected clips from the show:

Given that, one can only imagine what Lovecraft Country would have looked like if Lovecraftian horror unrealized by many of Lovecraft's fans and as described above is developed in that show.

 

[AlchoPwn]

Well, I was reluctant to comment, but I have now watched the first 2 episodes of Lovecraft Country.

Firstly, I want to point out that many people have said that the setting is somewhere in the US Deep South. This is incorrect. It is set in Massachusetts, my home state, as it should be. What seems to have confused people is the sheer racist hostility of the setting, as the portrayal is hardly a flattering one, and is easily mistaken for the Deep South. The area featured in the plot is in eastern Massachusetts, supposedly close to the site of Salem, which was of course, Lovecraft's basis for Arkham. In the show, "Ardham" is portrayed as effectively an isolated and unincorporated settlement lying on an untraveled road. What people don't "get" about the Lovecraft Country setting, and why I suspect they mistake it for the South is that in the North there were "sundown towns", where the black population were under threat of eviction and violence up to and including lynching, if they were within a sundown town's limits after dark. To this effect, black travellers generally carried sleeping gear in their cars to avoid altercations. This is historically factual and racism was widespread, but not specifically limited to black people, but directed at all immigrant populations as a form of American Nativism, the USA's national pro-xenophobia political movement, also famously called the "Know-Nothings". Without a doubt, Lovecraft himself was "informed" by their politics... Or perhaps dis-informed would be a better description.

As to the show itself, well, it is fair to say that it is as racist as anything that Lovecraft himself would have written, had he been a black xenophobe, instead of a white xenophobe. In that sense, the show seems unable to reconcile that xenophobia itself is the problem, regardless of the race of the xenophobe. For example, we see a sum total zero sympathetic white characters, just as in Lovecraft's writing we see zero sympathetic black characters. There is no breakdown of stereotypes, no nuance, and no possibility of reconciliation between the races, only repeated confrontation and mutual victimization. Or at least that is the case so far. The occult mystique of Lovecraft's black voodoo practitioners is transferred to white fraternal orders. Thus, so far, I see Lovecraft Country as being as faithfully reactionary as Lovecraft's own work, and perhaps moreso, as inter-racial hostility was not continuously front and center in his fiction. I would describe this as being part and parcel of the steep decline in HBO's writing over the last few years. While the led the charge in bringing us many excellent shows in the "noughties", now we are into the teens of the new century, HBO has badly dropped its quality.

Now what about the themes of cosmicism that actually made Lovecraft's fiction intellectually memorable ? Has the show addressed them? The short answer is no. Any existential dread and cosmic hopelessness is limited to the subtext of the way the show handles the theme of race relations. It treats the supernatural with the subtlety that one might expect from an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and perhaps less subtlety than that so far. There is definitely monster action, and magical rituals, but we are given zero insight into what is going on that might lead to any sense of cosmicist philosophy.

I haven't given up on the show just yet. I always give a show 4 episodes unless it is notably bad. It is fair to say that the acting itself is actually good and the main characters are sympathetic, which is a necessary basis for good horror, as the audience needs to feel invested in the protagonists. The production values are also very good, including the monsters, in my estimation. In many ways I would give the show high marks if it weren't for the poor writing, so I am going to hope it improves and give it another few episodes.

 

[EnolaGaia]

Firstly, I want to point out that many people have said that the setting is somewhere in the US Deep South. This is incorrect. It is set in Massachusetts, my home state, as it should be. What seems to have confused people is the sheer racist hostility of the setting, as the portrayal is hardly a flattering one, and is easily mistaken for the Deep South. ...

Perhaps the reason it's so confusing is that the American North's cover-up of its own shameful antebellum history with regard to slavery and race relations has been more effective, and far more institutionally reinforced, than those analogous elements of the so-called "Lost Cause" orientation for which the South and Southerners have been - and are to this day - mocked and pilloried.

This cover-up involves an official narrative insinuating no slavery and no citizen-terrorist racial suppression existed in the North, which is thus recast as a wholly enlightened place for which the Civil War was a holy crusade solely motivated by and focused upon liberating southern slaves from conditions neither known nor ever tolerated north of the Mason-Dixon Line and the Ohio River.

This narrative is as much a bullshit post hoc rationalization as southerners' romanticized Lost Cause mythologizing.

As it happens this recent article in Smithsonian Magazine:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smit...erases-long-history-white-violence-180975661/

... provides a timely overview of historical facts - facts which shame New England as much as the rest of the antebellum North, and facts in light of which the TV series' geographical setting makes more sense.

 

[AlchoPwn]

Perhaps the reason it's so confusing is that the American North's cover-up of its own shameful antebellum history with regard to slavery and race relations has been more effective, and far more institutionally reinforced, than those analogous elements of the so-called "Lost Cause" orientation for which the South and Southerners have been - and are to this day - mocked and pilloried.

This cover-up involves an official narrative insinuating no slavery and no citizen-terrorist racial suppression existed in the North, which is thus recast as a wholly enlightened place for which the Civil War was a holy crusade solely motivated by and focused upon liberating southern slaves from conditions neither known nor ever tolerated north of the Mason-Dixon Line and the Ohio River.

This narrative is as much a bullshit post hoc rationalization as southerners' romanticized Lost Cause mythologizing.

As it happens this recent article in Smithsonian Magazine:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smit...erases-long-history-white-violence-180975661/

... provides a timely overview of historical facts - facts which shame New England as much as the rest of the antebellum North, and facts in light of which the TV series' geographical setting makes more sense.

I would be the last person to suggest that the Northern states have clean hands on this issue. Many of the most horrific lynchings in US history were conducted North of the Mason-Dixon line, often with the excuse of "protecting property values" or "protecting jobs" from a perceived black threat. During the Civil War, a great many northerners were on record in newspaper columns as being immensely unimpressed about going to war with the south, over what they saw as the cause of abolitionism. which they actively disagreed with. This was a prime reason why Abraham Lincoln was a very unpopular president during his time in office; a fact that most historical commentators utterly ignore. Many communities of Northerners violently objected to having blacks living anywhere near them, and this persisted well into the 20th Century. In more ways than anyone really likes to admit, this is the reason why Detroit is a bankrupt basket case, for example. It is also the true reason behind the deliberately engineered failure of the Pruitt-Igoe estate complex in St Louis. It might even be argued that the South is more integrated and tolerant than the North these days, but that isn't entirely true either. It is a little disturbing when elements of the KKK are on record as saying that the Tea Party are right wing extremists and they are disavowing all connection to them and their ideology, for example.