Archive for October, 2017

The Angelic Monster

Posted in Uncategorized on October 19, 2017 by marksamuels

I can’t claim the credit for this pointer, rather, the linked article is down to my old friend Karl from the TLO, but it’s very much worth sharing. Moreover, it’s from David Bentley Hart, whose superlative book, The Experience of God, I would definitely recommend to all and sundry of whatever philosophical persuasion. It’s one of those few books to survive my recent momentous upheaval and transition.

Anyway, here is DBH’s take. And God Bless good old Leon Bloy :

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/10/angelic-monster

Mark S.

Welcome to the New Age

Posted in Uncategorized on October 8, 2017 by marksamuels

Weird fiction is going through an awful time. Granted, there are those who will happily advise you that its foothold in our culture has never been as secure. I disagree. Weird fiction cannot be sustained by anything other than improving its standards through upholding it as literature. It certainly cannot be transfigured by a simple checklist of ‘vibrant’, ‘diverse’ or ‘socially relevant’ themes derived from contemporary identity politics. Those who maintained this have shown themselves up to be a cadre organised on social media out to make, as Americans say, a quick buck (after which most lose interest and start writing crime fiction, which is much more lucrative – hint). Their opportunistic tsunami has already spent itself, leaving behind a mass of rotting seaweed of Cthulhu Political Nonsense Vol. XVII and Wreckonomicon IV that this cadre owns. And one can only marvel at their remarkable online attempts at fingers-in-ears denial (c.f. the P-O-X model of balance theory) of the truth when it comes to another writer lately on their radar, namely the highly conservative, and traditionalist, Robert Aickman.

I have long prophesied that the likes of Thomas Ligotti (our greatest living author of weird fiction) will sooner, rather than later, come in for the same treatment from the same Leftist cadre and its camp-followers. When they get the chance his every utterance, whether in private correspondence, in reported behaviour, in his associations and collaborations, will be ruthlessly dissected as they project their own insecurities into his work. Political vivisection and character autopsies constitute their raison d’etre. Only the very naïve still harbour the delusion that those who are “of the Left” are never nasty (even towards “their own”) and will not desperately attempt to rend to pieces any perceived deviation from the next ‘progressive’ diktat of compulsory moral relativism.

Their goals are invariably ideological and monetary; never genuinely artistic.

Mark S.