DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Acolyte, v. 1, issue 1, Fall 1942

Transcribe
Translate

Acolyte, v. 1, issue 1, Fall 1942

Page 3

Excerpts from the Letter of H.P. Lovecraft
(Editors note) The following paragraphs are taken from previously unpublished letters written to Duane W. Rimel by the late H.P. Lovecraft dean of supernatural writers, who was also a unique prising over two hundred writers, weird fans, artists, and antiquarians; Mr. Lovecraft's letters frequently ran to 12000 words, and covered practically every subject known to mankind. We have picked out a few items which we hope will prove of general interest to fantasy fans.
November 19, 1934, 
Regarding the question of a preliminary synopsis---I have found that in most cases a very clear idea of what is going to happen pays extremely well; since after all every part of a story ought to be in harmony with every other part. The secret of perfect effectiveness is an atmosphere so thoroughly coordinated that every always helps to jot down the main points of a future story, although of course it would be just as good theoretically if every point were clear in one's head, even without being written. In practice, we are always apt to overlook some little point if it isn't written down. Common sense is the best guide as to what to do in each individual instance. Sometimes one has planned out a plot so thoroughly in one's head---changing and re-changing as days and weeks go by---that the story virtually exists in complete form before a word is actually written. In such a case, a formal synopsis can sometimes be dispensed with---but these cases are relatively rare, and not to be expected among beginners. And even then it is well to have a set of notes on the details, in order to avoid vagueness and contradictions. I have found that one extremely thing is a perfect time-schedule assigning a definite date for every event and a definite age for every character. Indeed, it is sometimes useful to have a brief biography---and even a partial genealogy---of every character drawn up in order to make all casual allusions consistent. Beginners usually bungle frightfully in handling the time element...The general principle is that one ought to know all about the imaginary events he has chosen to describe, before he begins describing them. In weird stories involving bizarre monster and forms of architecture and scenery, it is best to make an explicit  (even though crude) sketch of the strange shapes, with a list of all their dimensions, aspects, and properties. Thus, as I told you once, I had Cthulhu all down on paper before I tried to write about him---and likewise the curious entities of "At the Mountains of Madness". That's really the only way to be sure of avoiding vagueness and self-contradiction...
March 10, 1935, 
As for the "abstruse" comment, that evidently stems from his (Farnsworth Wright's) incurable dislike of any subtlety in a story, He wants everything spoiled by a diagram---which of course prevents the best stories from landing at all. It was only by a hairs-breadth that my "Randolph Carter" squeezed in a decade ago. Wright though my failure to explain what uttered those words at the last was well-nigh inexcusable. However, I guess he sometimes uses that pet word abstruse just on general principle. Another old standby of his is

Saving...

Excerpts from the Letter of H.P. Lovecraft (Editors note) The following paragraphs are taken from previously unpublished letters written to Duane W. Rimel by the late H.P. Lovecraft dean of supernatural writers, who was also a unique prising over two hundred writers, weird fans, artists, and antiquarians; Mr. Lovecraft's letters frequently ran to 12000 words, and covered practically every subject known to mankind. We have picked out a few items which we hope will prove of general interest to fantasy fans. November 19, 1934, Regarding the question of a preliminary synopsis---I have found that in most cases a very clear idea of what is going to happen pays extremely well; since after all every part of a story ought to be in harmony with every other part. The secret of perfect effectiveness is an atmosphere so thoroughly coordinated that every always helps to jot down the main points of a future story, although of course it would be just as good theoretically if every point were clear in one's head, even without being written. In practice, we are always apt to overlook some little point if it isn't written down. Common sense is the best guide as to what to do in each individual instance. Sometimes one has planned out a plot so thoroughly in one's head---changing and re-changing as days and weeks go by---that the story virtually exists in complete form before a word is actually written. In such a case, a formal synopsis can sometimes be dispensed with---but these cases are relatively rare, and not to be expected among beginners. And even then it is well to have a set of notes on the details, in order to avoid vagueness and contradictions. I have found that one extremely thing is a perfect time-schedule assigning a definite date for every event and a definite age for every character. Indeed, it is sometimes useful to have a brief biography---and even a partial genealogy---of every character drawn up in order to make all casual allusions consistent. Beginners usually bungle frightfully in handling the time element...The general principle is that one ought to know all about the imaginary events he has chosen to describe, before he begins describing them. In weird stories involving bizarre monster and forms of architecture and scenery, it is best to make an explicit (even though crude) sketch of the strange shapes, with a list of all their dimensions, aspects, and properties. Thus, as I told you once, I had Cthulhu all down on paper before I tried to write about him---and likewise the curious entities of "At the Mountains of Madness". That's really the only way to be sure of avoiding vagueness and self-contradiction... March 10, 1935, As for the "abstruse" comment, that evidently stems from his (Farnsworth Wright's) incurable dislike of any subtlety in a story, He wants everything spoiled by a diagram---which of course prevents the best stories from landing at all. It was only by a hairs-breadth that my "Randolph Carter" squeezed in a decade ago. Wright though my failure to explain what uttered those words at the last was well-nigh inexcusable. However, I guess he sometimes uses that pet word abstruse just on general principle. Another old standby of his is