World Fantasy Awards may drop H.P. Lovecraft's likeness from award statuette due to author's racism.

[Mad as a Hatter]

Before anyone wants to defend Lovecraft as a product of his time, read some of his poetry first. He was pretty far out there, even for the 20's and 30's.

Got one in particular in mind? I pulled my copy of The Ancient Track: The Complete Poetical Works of H.P. Lovecraft out from between the Arkham House 3 volume set and a cheap printing of The Challenge From Beyond when I saw the thread and have been lightly browsing.

He wrote a poem called "On the Creation of Niggers" it goes as follows.

"When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******."

 

[Schadrach]

Before anyone wants to defend Lovecraft as a product of his time, read some of his poetry first. He was pretty far out there, even for the 20's and 30's.

Got one in particular in mind? I pulled my copy of The Ancient Track: The Complete Poetical Works of H.P. Lovecraft out from between the Arkham House 3 volume set and a cheap printing of The Challenge From Beyond when I saw the thread and have been lightly browsing.

He wrote a poem called "On the Creation of Niggers" it goes as follows.

"When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******."

I mostly read the fantasy and horror sections, and rarely the occasional poetry. It's in my copy on page 393 in the politics and society section, it also has ****** capitalized.

 

[Nurb]

it also seems like nothing but a superfluous change with no other reasoning than political correctness.

You don't see any potential wrongs in giving the statue of a virulently racist man, both in his social life and in his writings, as an award to people of the same races he consistently railed against as an award for literary achievement?

"He thought you and your family were vice filled mongrels. It says so in his writing! Anyway here's his likeness as an award for your writing. Hey don't be so sensitive, it's an honor!"

Does Jefferson's owning of slaves negate everything he wrote and spoke about in other subjects such as seperation of church and state?

 

[Irick]

It's not in the novels, but neither are Lovecraft's racist rants.

Bluh? Racism is all over many of Lovecraft's stories. The "horror" of non-WASPs "race mixing" can be found in his stories. As has been pointed out several times.

I've read his stories and have never seen or picked up on it until i was told to interpret them in this way. As all interpretations are valid, this means that the stories are not inherently about racism.

See my long post presenting the full logical argument as well as sources on page 3.

 

[mecegirl]

it also seems like nothing but a superfluous change with no other reasoning than political correctness.

You don't see any potential wrongs in giving the statue of a virulently racist man, both in his social life and in his writings, as an award to people of the same races he consistently railed against as an award for literary achievement?

"He thought you and your family were vice filled mongrels. It says so in his writing! Anyway here's his likeness as an award for your writing. Hey don't be so sensitive, it's an honor!"

Does Jefferson's owning of slaves negate everything he wrote and spoke about in other subjects such as seperation of church and state?

Why would it? Why wouldn't it just negate everything he wrote about freedom and human rights? Like, how is your Jefferson example relevant? What about the depiction of the chracter Buck Robinson within Herbert West: Re-Animator? Its not like he hasn't put questionable things into his speculative fiction. Reanimated corpses with a dash of racist stereotyping. Wooo!

 

[Mad as a Hatter]

Before anyone wants to defend Lovecraft as a product of his time, read some of his poetry first. He was pretty far out there, even for the 20's and 30's.

Got one in particular in mind? I pulled my copy of The Ancient Track: The Complete Poetical Works of H.P. Lovecraft out from between the Arkham House 3 volume set and a cheap printing of The Challenge From Beyond when I saw the thread and have been lightly browsing.

He wrote a poem called "On the Creation of Niggers" it goes as follows.

"When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******."

I mostly read the fantasy and horror sections, and rarely the occasional poetry. It's in my copy on page 393 in the politics and society section, it also has ****** capitalized.

Just giving you the facts he made lots of this type of shit. Stop feeding people bullshit how he was not racist.

 

[Ratty]

it also seems like nothing but a superfluous change with no other reasoning than political correctness.

You don't see any potential wrongs in giving the statue of a virulently racist man, both in his social life and in his writings, as an award to people of the same races he consistently railed against as an award for literary achievement?

"He thought you and your family were vice filled mongrels. It says so in his writing! Anyway here's his likeness as an award for your writing. Hey don't be so sensitive, it's an honor!"

In that case, we can't have anything using Thomas Jefferson's face

False equivalence. This is an award given for writing, not "everything". I think it would be inappropriate to give out awards for, say, public service with slave owners on them. I admire a lot of what Thomas Jefferson did, but I think it's wrong to raise the man, who raped (Did she really have a choice in the relationship? Think about it.) one of his slaves into having as many as 6 children as an example of the best government workers can strive for.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

A lot of people seem to be missing the point that HP Lovecraft was pretty damn racist for his time as well. Is the new standard going to be excusing the racism of someone so long that their attitudes would have been permissible at some point in history? "Sure author X ran a zoo filled with native Africans, but there was a time when that was okay! Now please explain to me why this black guy's not thrilled about putting X's face on display in his trophy shelf?"

This is intended to be an award that someone would want to display in their house. Can you emphasize for why a black or jewish person, or hell even just someone who thinks that stuff is horrid, would not want a statue of him on display in their house? I realize that an author's political views shouldn't by any means be the primary factor in deciding who shows on awards, but maybe when it's to the point they write about black people being an evil, beastial mockery of real humans that should be a consideration.

Seriously, I wish that Hitler was depicted on some sort of award for artistic excellence. Just to watch the people of the Escapist get angry about all of the "PC crowd" getting offended by it.

 

[Schadrach]

Before anyone wants to defend Lovecraft as a product of his time, read some of his poetry first. He was pretty far out there, even for the 20's and 30's.

Got one in particular in mind? I pulled my copy of The Ancient Track: The Complete Poetical Works of H.P. Lovecraft out from between the Arkham House 3 volume set and a cheap printing of The Challenge From Beyond when I saw the thread and have been lightly browsing.

He wrote a poem called "On the Creation of Niggers" it goes as follows.

"When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******."

I mostly read the fantasy and horror sections, and rarely the occasional poetry. It's in my copy on page 393 in the politics and society section, it also has ****** capitalized.

Just giving you the facts he made lots of this type of shit. Stop feeding people bullshit how he was not racist.

Did I ever say such a thing? I don't recall it. I think I asked for a particular example of him going above and beyond the degree of racism common to those born at the end of the 19th century (in his case 1890) since I happen to have a complete collection of his poetry on hand (specifically http://www.amazon.com/The-Ancient-Track-Complete-Lovecraft/dp/1892389150 in hardback), you gave an example and I noted that it simply wasn't in a part of that tome that I frequently read (for someone who's not especially well known for his poetry [compared to his prose], he wrote a *lot* of it).

 

[Mad as a Hatter]

Before anyone wants to defend Lovecraft as a product of his time, read some of his poetry first. He was pretty far out there, even for the 20's and 30's.

Got one in particular in mind? I pulled my copy of The Ancient Track: The Complete Poetical Works of H.P. Lovecraft out from between the Arkham House 3 volume set and a cheap printing of The Challenge From Beyond when I saw the thread and have been lightly browsing.

He wrote a poem called "On the Creation of Niggers" it goes as follows.

"When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******."

I mostly read the fantasy and horror sections, and rarely the occasional poetry. It's in my copy on page 393 in the politics and society section, it also has ****** capitalized.

Just giving you the facts he made lots of this type of shit. Stop feeding people bullshit how he was not racist.

Did I ever say such a thing? I don't recall it. I think I asked for a particular example of him going above and beyond the degree of racism common to those born at the end of the 19th century (in his case 1890) since I happen to have a complete collection of his poetry on hand (specifically http://www.amazon.com/The-Ancient-Track-Complete-Lovecraft/dp/1892389150 in hardback), you gave an example and I noted that it simply wasn't in a part of that tome that I frequently read (for someone who's not especially well known for his poetry [compared to his prose], he wrote a *lot* of it).

Here is little game that brings light to your hero's racism.
http://www.beesgo.biz/horp.html

 

[OrokuSaki]

As with most people I don't disagree with the fact that they're changing the statue, but why they're changing the statue. Can we all just calmly agree that all human beings are flawed and that if you study any one of us hard enough you'll find a reason to discredit us?

Some people are racist, some people are sexist, some people are homophobic, some people are pedophiles, this does not magically take away their ability to do great things. If the novels of H.P. Lovecraft were really so great that you decided to base the statue for best fantasy novel after one of his creations, then that should stand as an accomplishment unto itself, regardless of what the author's personal quirks.

There is a difference between art and artist, true art can exceed its author, just as many artists can exceed their art, let's all just appreciate what we like and whine about what we hate like civilized peoples of the internet.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Seriously, I wish that Hitler was depicted on some sort of award for artistic excellence. Just to watch the people of the Escapist get angry about all of the "PC crowd" getting offended by it.

Sorry but that equivalence is false. For starters, for all his rantings, Lovecraft never actually did anything about it (as far as we know). He didn't run around murdering blacks due to his racism, while Hitler murdered millions of Jews (among many other groups). Having bad thoughts and actually acting upon those thoughts are two very different things.

Likewise, Lovecraft's views were fairly common and accepted by much of the world in the time period in which he was living, while very few gave Nazi Germany and Hitler a big thumbs up when the full extent of the horror of the Holocaust was revealed.

Again, looking at people in the distant past through the prism of our morality is very difficult, because it's impossible to say "well I would have known better" if you didn't go through the same experiences and live in the world at the time they did. It's almost like saying "well if I grew up in the 1300s, I would have known that the world wasn't flat".

Like I said earlier, who's to say that, 200 years from now, people won't look back at us and talk about how barbaric we were for eating meat, or having the death penalty, or laughing at comedy that relies heavily on stereotypes (such as Dave Chappelle)?

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Seriously, I wish that Hitler was depicted on some sort of award for artistic excellence. Just to watch the people of the Escapist get angry about all of the "PC crowd" getting offended by it.

Sorry but that equivalence is false. For starters, for all his rantings, Lovecraft never actually did anything about it (as far as we know). He didn't run around murdering blacks due to his racism, while Hitler murdered millions of Jews (among many other groups). Having bad thoughts and actually acting upon those thoughts are two very different things.

I wasn't intending to equate the two. I'm just curious at what point someone is allowed to be upset about being awarded something commemorating a historic figure they might be at odds with.

I don't think it's so simple as saying that having bad thoughts and acting on them are entirely distinct. A large portion of the racism in the 1900's wasn't just limited to violence and physical oppression, it was in the form of laws. When a law gets passed every, person who supported it is responsible for it. Writer's are particularly influential, and HP Lovecraft was strongly promoting the idea that black people were less than human. Which is pretty significant, because every horribly oppressive regime has centered around dehumanizing its victims. The things people are willing to do when they see animals instead of people are horrifying. I'd say that the moment he took his pen to paper or submitted his ballot he was acting on those beliefs.

For the record, not even on the same scale as Hitler, but it bothers me how utterly inconsequential people consider opinions when they carry far more impact than a single act of violence.

Likewise, Lovecraft's views were fairly common and accepted by much of the world in the time period in which he was living, while very few gave Nazi Germany and Hitler a big thumbs up when the full extent of the horror of the Holocaust was revealed.

Again, looking at people in the distant past through the prism of our morality is very difficult, because it's impossible to say "well I would have known better" if you didn't go through the same experiences and live in the world at the time they did. It's almost like saying "well if I grew up in the 1300s, I would have known that the world wasn't flat".

Like I said earlier, who's to say that, 200 years from now, people won't look back at us and talk about how barbaric we were for eating meat, or having the death penalty, or laughing at comedy that relies heavily on stereotypes (such as Dave Chappelle)?

That very well may be. There's definitely varying levels of responsibility you have for your beliefs based on the society that you grew up in. HP Lovecraft wasn't just going with the flow of society though, by the sounds of it he was bearing the flag and cheering. While he probably would not have if he grew up in today's society, it still was a part of who he was and it lives on in his writing.

I'm not going to for a second claim that any racist opinions invalidates the quality of an artist's work (although it would definitely lessen the parts that are influenced by it). It also doesn't make him any less of a horror writer. This isn't a statue of Cthulhu just representing his work though, it's a statue of him and that comes with baggage. And since all races of individuals are eligible to win this award, it'd be nice for the statue you want to put on display is of someone who thought you qualified as a person.

 

[Dollabillyall]

To deny he was racist is to lie.
To assume not near everyone from that time was racist is also a lie.
It was a matter of upbringing and the reality of the time.
Why do people work so hard to scrub the lessons from our past out of the history books?

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

I don't agree with changing it NOW if it was ok before, and its not like we are just NOW discovering a stack of hate poems under his old couch cushions.


Now if anything Lovecraft was EXTREMELY racist towards DOGS. I mean really, really, gratuitously against dogs. He was a cat person, as evidenced by the following http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/essays/cd.aspx

And I totally agree with him :3

I had thought I had read the vast majority of his work, but the only poem I had read of his was Nathicana. I really like it, and I typically hate poetry.

So reading that one posted here was somewhat of a surprise, but not a total shock given that I already knew he was racist. Before reading that, I had thought that he was more xenophobic, that he was just paranoid about peoples he didn't know and suspicious of entities and places he was not 100% familiar with and so on. He lived a weird life, filled with strain and tragedy and I just kind of gave him a pass on his racism due to sympathy as mine own life has been much the same.

But after reading that poem... yo das rascist!

However, I have recently acquired The Best of Clark Ashton Smith, and The Horror Stories of Robert E, Howard (his contemporaries) and having read them not only was I SEVERELY underwhelmed I was also much more forgiving of Lovecraft's racism because WOW those two were pretty damn racist.

De La Poer's cat was named ******-Man because he was a black cat, and it was an old timey and I assume affectionate moniker. I can't say it was a common name for a pet in that time, but its not like he called it that and the thing was a lazy nasty no good cat. It was just a cat. His ancient cults being mostly Oriental or otherwise non-white I had felt was more to do with their terrible antiquity and altogether foreign nature being more readily aligned with cultures far older than America or England, and more easily accepted as being not normal by your average white person which was likely to be reading it. I don't recall specifically that he ever stated that ALL of these "others" in their racial totality were a plague upon the world. Just the crazy ones up to no good.

Not all of his antagonists were "ethnic" either. In "From Beyond" the evil guy was actually an upstanding white guy who did the evil stuff. In "the rat's in the walls" the whole family of well to do white people were up to no good. The same goes for "The Lurking Fear." In "The case of Charles Dexter Ward" Joseph Curwin was a dead ringer for Ward, a white guy. In "Herbert West: Reanimator" West is a white guy, and a fine young doctor. "The Shunned House" features what amounts to a French vampire.

Even in the stories he helped write, he helped women like Zealia Bishop/Hazel Heald, and other people I assume were Hispanic or at least not Anglo-Saxon from their names. In stories like "The Mound" the protagonist was a Spaniard. In "The Final Test" its essentially Herbert West again. In "Winged Death" its another white guy bent on revenge etc.

"Medusa's Coil" does have a racist ending that is almost laugh out loud funny at how absurdly incongruous it was with the rest of the story, which is actually quite good.

Now compare any of that to Smith and Howard, and if we grade on a curve Lovecraft's racism lessens considerably. seriously Robert E. Howard's racism is comparatively off the charts and ruins the curve entirely.

But assuming there are loads more Lovecraft writings like that poem posted here, I'm probably just ignorant and I freely admit it. I'll continue to believe he was afraid of and repelled by most of humanity in general that he was not already intimately acclimated to, and not that he considered all non Aryans to be subhuman troglodytes that should be rounded up and exterminated freely because the "White Christ" wills it so.

Oddly enough, as lackluster and horribly racist as I found Howard's stories to be, I did like his poems peppered in that same collection.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Now compare any of that to Smith and Howard, and if we grade on a curve Lovecraft's racism lessens considerably. seriously Robert E. Howard's racism is comparatively off the charts and ruins the curve entirely.

Assuming that he wasn't as racist as Howard (not sure about that), it isn't setting the bar high.

I'll continue to believe he was afraid of and repelled by most of humanity in general that he was not already intimately acclimated to, and not that he considered all non Aryans to be subhuman troglodytes that should be rounded up and exterminated freely because the "White Christ" wills it so.

He did outright state that a certain district of a city would be improved by use of poison gas, due to all the PoC living there. I believe it was Asians he was talking about, but it might have been some other non-white ethnicity.

 

[default]

He was a fucked up bloke from a fucked up time. He lived in poverty and pain and died an agonising death. Leave the guy alone, let a likeness of his face be carved into a little piece of copper for the far-reaching creations he brought to the world. Guess what? He never lived to know that. He died slowly thinking no one would ever care about the things he made.

 

[JimB]

Again, I don't disagree with the points about H.P. Lovecraft, but why exactly should I be okay with politicizing this award? Why should I care as to how people feel about H.P. Lovecraft?

Why should anyone be okay with not politicizing it? Why should anyone care about how you you feel about him? If you're going to insist that your viewpoint is the only valid one that must be catered to, then why oughtn't everyone else to do the same until no one can talk to anyone because we're all too busy declaring a need to be treated as primary?

H.P. Lovecraft is still one of the most influential authors of all time and there is really nothing that anyone has said on the matter that has even begun to address the fact that this has no basis in literary merit or accomplishment, which is what the award purportedly celebrates.

When the influence being celebrated is one that was and is used to reinforce hatred of real people, the value of celebrating that influence becomes suspect.

The fallout of being offended by the beliefs of a man dead long before you were born?

The fallout of racist ideas being immortalized and perpetuated.

Should we remove references to offensive material so that people don't have to deal with the fallout of it?

It's not just a reference. It's an endorsement.

And yet it's still traditional to give doctors busts of Hippocrates whilst adorning private and state medical facilities with religious iconography harkening back to a mercantile god. These things violate the separation of church and state.

Not according to Antonin Scalia, though I confess I don't know what any of the other justices think.

Busts and symbols become detached from the real and instead stand in for an ideal.

And the problem with that is, symbols are inherently subjective. Their meaning cannot be dictated, only argued. Lovecraft as a symbol will not mean to others what it means to you.

It's still not remotely consequential, so, I don't much care for it.

Then I question why you're involved in the conversation at all, is you're not willing to approach your opponents on their own ground. Is it just to preach?

Casting historical views against modern morality is an act of revisionism.

You're right, I did misunderstand the definition of "revisionism." I apologize. However, I don't see why revisionism itself is somehow inherently bad. Are we not allowed to disapprove of slavery in America because that would revise the historical belief that white people had a divine duty to elevate the mud-people? Are we not allowed to disapprove of the second war in Iraq because there was a historical (contested, but historical) belief that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction?

Yes, this is a form of censorship.

No, it isn't. If the state isn't doing it, then it's not censorship. It's a choice, not a mandate.