Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

I own two volumes out of four of Jean Ray's complete fiction in French and I promised myself that I shall be reading him in the original language (since not much supernatural fiction that interests me was written in French), but this collection looks so nice I'm really having doubts I will be able to refrain myself from ordering a copy one day!

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

The Jean Ray looks particularly attractive; I've ordered one on the basis of having seen the wonderfully bound Reggie Oliver volume. The Claude Seignolle looks very promising too.

It's pleasing to see a publisher promote European writers; no offence to my Transatlantic cousins, but there has been some less than accurate or wholesome revisionism in the horror genre, mostly because reference books are published by American universities and academics, who are understandably keen to promote their own.

Yet the horror story has its roots founded very firmly in the European Gothic tradition; English ghost stories dominated the late Victorian and Edwardian period, when Colonialism was at its height. After WW2 horror fiction became grimmer, more realistic and more psychologically disturbing. With the exceptions of writers like Poe, Lovecraft, Hawthorne and Bierce, the vast majority of horror writers have been British and European - yet you wouldn't think so to judge from the modern-day genre reference book. Mediocre American writers past and present are now more highly praised than their superior European counterparts, either because the editor has a commercial interest in promoting them, or because they are cronies.

Ex Occidente Press seems to going some way towards correcting this absurd revisionism. Their approach to production quality and subject matter reminds me greatly of the Ghost Story Press (I discount Tartarus purely because of the uniformity of their books, and partly because some of their books aren't quite up to scratch on the production front; but they score reasonably well on subject choice, even if they often reprint already-widely available work).

There probably isn't an American small press operating today that would publish Robert Aickman were he unknown. The same would probably go for Reggie Oliver. In many ways Thomas Ligotti has a very European / British approach to writing. That's probably why such writers are proportionately more popular in the UK than in the US, where the Stephen Kings and Stephanie Meyers reign supreme. Europeans produce the more obscure and innovative artists - and nurture them more attentively - than the bigger, brasher more middle-brow USA. That's not to say that there aren't a significant number of astute, intellectual, appreciative American readers out there, just that the publishing and reading climate is subtly different, and for me, that is most visible through the average small press horror book which gets produced in the States, and the bizarre revisionism which is occuring in many reference books.

JK










JK

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

I'm quite happy to get some overlooked European writers out.

There are so many significant American writers today that I doubt your sentiments above to a certain extent.
Of course, weird fiction sprang from Europe at first, and dominated weird fiction up until at least the 1930's, possibly up until the 1950's or 1960's. But in the lat 50 or so years, I think there has been so many great American writers of weird fiction in the latter half of the 20th Century that I am uncertain that you completely right.

It would be interesting if you would name names?

Which academics write up which mediocre American writers and write down which brilliant European writers? Which reference books?I think it's a very interesting subject, but I don't follow the politics of the scene too closely.


Still, there do seem to be far more European small presses of quality; it seems that many American small presses are more interested in SF and Fantasy, though I haven't looked too closely at the subject, only following the Tartarus-, Ex Occidente- and Ash-Tree Presses (though, to a certain degree, PS Publishing too) regularly.

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

I think reading habits between the UK and the US are more similar than you think. A casual look at the UK's Sunday Times reveals that one of Stephen King's recent books, Cell, held the #1 position in the "Hardbacks: Fiction" section. That's pretty popular. Also on the Sunday Times list, Stephanie Meyer held four of the top five positions in the Children's / Young Adult list; Twilight was #1 with New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn in second, third and fifth place, respectively. It appears these authors "reign supreme" in the UK as well. So it seems they're not just an American phenomenon, for better or worse.

The Sunday Times bestsellers - Times Online

http://www.littlebrown.co.uk/NewsEve...stseller-sweep

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

In Denmark, it's luckily only Stephenie Meyer who rules supreme. King doesn't sell anymore.
Some years ago, an Englishwoman ruled supreme. That is, if anyone remembers Harry Potter?

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

I very rarely read modern writers. They just don't compare to the 'golden age' masters and mistresses.

Oh, I don't doubt that since WW2 that there have been a great many commercially successful US horror writers, but few can stand comparison to Walter de la Mare, William Hope Hodgson or M R James.

Unfortunately many superb writers from the pre WW2 era are becoming increasingly neglected in reference books to make way for decidely inferior modern writers. Perhaps the most glaring and extreme example of this pernicious revisionism is Wikipedia which has become more advertorial than encyclopediacal. Wikipedia is used by the vainglorious to promote themselves; its objectivity is almost as flawed as its accuracy.

I like EF Bleiler's and Donald Tuck's reference books because they are opinionated, authoritative and they don't personally know the authors they are writing about; in contrast, I despise the reference books of Joshi, Dziemianowicz et al because they are cronies and work colleagues of many of the people they claim to objectively study.

Good grief, I might be able to provide an interesting insight into the work of Reggie Oliver because we are friends who have often worked closely on various projects, but I'd be the last person to ask for an objective critique of his work. For a person to accurately analyse and judge another person or that person's work then they (the judge) need to be suitably qualified in addition to being suitably distanced from the subject matter.

For example, Michael Dirda is according to Google a highly respected journalist with one or two decent awards under his belt. However, how can we be expected to take his judgmental introduction of Barbara Roden's forthcoming book as objective when Mrs Roden has beeen posting messages like this to his Washington Post message board for several years?

"On which note, thank you to everyone here for providing such a delightful haven and recommending so many wondrous books. Special thanks, of course, to our gracious, erudite, and witty host; I'll spare his blushes and not mention his rugged (yet sensitive) good looks. Imagine Bob Hope singing 'Thanks For the Memories' as the light fades and the curtain falls.

Barbara Roden, Ashcroft, B.C."


Mr Dirda's credibility as a critic and a judge of her work has to be called into question. Now, had he never known Mrs Roden, but was so impressed by her work that he offered to endorse it with an unsolicited introduction, it would obviously carry more weight.

Similar subterfuges exist in the case of Joe Hill (son of Stephen King). Much is made of the lie that "no one" knew who Hill really was when he started garnering favourable reviews and awards for his horror stories, but this is a lie. Quite a lot of people knew who he was - well-connected people who both wrote the praiseworthy reviews and recommended him for awards. Yet this fact has been quietly air-brushed out from history lest people dare speculate that Mr Hill has been given preferential treatmet; certainly it isn't mentioned in reference books or on Wikipedia. No, the lie that no one knew whose son the mysterious Mr Hill realy was has been cleverly spun instead, creating a false urban myth.

It's this sort of cynical revisionism and duplicitous behaviour that for me undermines the contemporary horror scene. Reference books have gotten worse as has the writing (although there are always exceptions).

JK

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

It's this sort of cynical revisionism and duplicitous behaviour that for me undermines the contemporary horror scene. Reference books have gotten worse as has the writing (although there are always exceptions).

I seem to recall some remarks by William Burroughs about how the UK literary scene was disgustingly incestuous, with a handful of writers inviting each other onto their respective radio shows and reviewing each other's books.

I think the best way not to become disgusted with a scene or genre is to limit yourself to reading the texts, and certainly not to try and write and publish them, or take an interest in the 'personalities'.

Sometimes, however, it seems as if the only people left in the world who actually read anything anyway, are writers, making incest, to some degree, inevitable. I'm always very glad and grateful when I meet a reader who doesn't write or try to write. They are the only ones who save literature from being utterly disgusting.

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

Part of that at least has been the tenet of 'Nemonymous' since 2001 and my interest in 'The Intentional Fallacy ' since 1967.

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

Good point. It reminded me of that refrain from the end of The Smiths song: "Everybody's clever nowadays."

My personal concerns first started with fans of M R James authoring appalling Jamesian pastiches in the pre-internet days, but at least many of those were tongue-in-cheek and the authors didn't take themselves too seriously. But then along came the internet, and discussion groups sprang up everywhere, where fans could cluster around their favourite authors in the hope of launching their own careers. Soon even a cat with an eye-patch and an internet connection could start its own blog and publish its own website, which it would then market and plug in a succession of similar genre-specific message boards. As the costs of publishing tumbled each cat could take it in turn to publish its fellow felines to such an extent that now almost every discussion group is crammed full of furiously scribbling kittens each jostling for a back rub.

Good God, it's got to the stage now where some cats have worked out how to use a microphone and a tape recorder so they are inflicting their dreadful nocturnal caterwauling upon us via blogs, as if they were also genius musicians.

If I come across as ailurophobic it's probably because I am. For me the bottom line is this: anyone can get published these days, but unless an independent publisher (small press or mainstream) is prepared to shell out a few thousand quid to produce or market your work, rather than your mate running-off twenty copies at a time via a POD service, then you probably don't deserve to call yourself a writer or a musician.

A laptop, a keyboard and an internet connection does not make you an artist.

JK

Re: Ex Occidente Press
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Karswell (Post 19384) Quote: Originally Posted by qcrisp (Post 19376) It's this sort of cynical revisionism and duplicitous behaviour that for me undermines the contemporary horror scene. Reference books have gotten worse as has the writing (although there are always exceptions). I seem to recall some remarks by William Burroughs about how the UK literary scene was disgustingly incestuous, with a handful of writers inviting each other onto their respective radio shows and reviewing each other's books. I think the best way not to become disgusted with a scene or genre is to limit yourself to reading the texts, and certainly not to try and write and publish them, or take an interest in the 'personalities'. Sometimes, however, it seems as if the only people left in the world who actually read anything anyway, are writers, making incest, to some degree, inevitable. I'm always very glad and grateful when I meet a reader who doesn't write or try to write. They are the only ones who save literature from being utterly disgusting. Good point. It reminded me of that refrain from the end of The Smiths song: "Everybody's clever nowadays."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Karswell (Post 19384) My personal concerns first started with fans of M R James authoring appalling Jamesian pastiches in the pre-internet days...

Damn right. Working on one of those right now - I shall be sure inflict it on the internet when its done – possibly even in audio format.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Karswell (Post 19384) Good God, it's got to the stage now where some cats have worked out how to use a microphone and a tape recorder so they are inflicting their dreadful nocturnal caterwauling upon us via blogs, as if they were also genius musicians. If I come across as ailurophobic it's probably because I am. For me the bottom line is this: anyone can get published these days, but unless an independent publisher (small press or mainstream) is prepared to shell out a few thousand quid to produce or market your work, rather than your mate running-off twenty copies at a time via a POD service, then you probably don't deserve to call yourself a writer or a musician. A laptop, a keyboard and an internet connection does not make you an artist. JK

Technically it does- whether the cat/author is very good at what they do is another matter entirely (a very objective one at that). On a more serious answer I think the increase in such publications is connected with the seeming decrease in the old fashioned small scale horror and science fiction magazines.