I make three observations -
(i) We differentiate between imaginative and realistic fiction and place both Anderson and Lovecraft in the former category. Of course, Anderson wrote both realistically and imaginatively. Nevertheless, there is a clear distinction between merely realistic fiction on the one hand and fantasy or sf on the other. Anderson wrote realistic historical and detective fiction but is mainly known for his sf and fantasy.
(ii) Anderson could have turned his hand to Lovecraftian horror as to anything else and would probably have surpassed the original.
(iii) Lovecraft is known only for horror whereas Anderson's range of subject matters and genres is wider and deeper than the merely horrific.
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
An interesting idea, that Poul Anderson could have written excellent horror if he had chosen to do so. And probably have surpassed both Lovecraft and Stephen King. Alas, I've read far too little of Lovecraft's works (one or two short stories) to be able to contrast or compare Anderson with Lovecraft.
If you will look up my "Uncollected Works of Poul Anderson" article I think you will find a few stories he wrote classified as horror, such as "Ashtaru The Terrible." And Dahut the Siren's story in THE DOG AND THE WOLF comes close to being horror. But, that's about it.
Sean
Post a Comment