Tag Archives: Interview

Bogsamlerne: Flemming R. P. Rasch

Her skal der åbnes en nye serie på bloggen, som forhåbentlig kan gå hen og blive et sjovt og lidt anderledes læsebekendtskab.

Der er ikke nogen tvivl om, at jeg samler på bøger. Faktisk hober bøgerne sig op hjemme hos mig, og det afspejles uden tvivl også på Fra Sortsand, der mere eller mindre udspringer direkte af min bogfascination. Det har imidlertid fået mig til at tænke på, om ikke det kunne være spændende at smugkigge lidt i andres bogsamlinger. Som sagt så gjort, og Flemming R. P. Rasch har således indvilliget i at være den første ”bogsamler”, der kan tage os ved hånden og føre os gennem sin samling.

Flemming skriver selv flittigt og kompetent, og han er en kendt skikkelse fra SF-miljøet herhjemme; SF-interessen fremgår også af hans lille artikel her. Det overraskende er imidlertid, at Flemming slet ikke er en bogsamler i traditionel forstand. Dermed er seriens koncept allerede blevet udfordret ved det første indlæg, hvilket jo kun gør tingene endnu sjovere.

Tanken er, at Bogsamlerne skal fungere som stafet, og Flemming har allerede sendt stafetten videre. Derfor skal det blive interessant at se, hvor vi havner næste gang. Hermed gives ordet således videre.

 

***

Mig og bøgerne

Af Flemming R.P. Rasch

 

Jeg har aldrig været nogen særlig god samler. En gang samlede jeg på tegneserier. Det gik så vidt, at jeg satte mig ind i hvilke der var sjældne og hvordan de skulle opbevares. Jeg købte også kataloger over tegneserier og bestilte hæfter hjem fra USA (som postordre – det var før butikkerne havde websites). Men når jeg tænker på det nu bagefter, så var det nok mere fordi at jeg følte at sådan burde man gøre, når man interesserede sig for tegneserier, end fordi jeg har et samlergen.

Flemming R. P. Rasch

Bøger har jeg aldrig samlet systematisk på, bortset fra når jeg lejlighedsvis fulgte med i en serie af bøger, efterhånden som de udkom. Måske man kan sige at jeg samler lidt på science fiction-klassikere, men der er meget lidt system i det. Men jeg kan lide at købe bøger. Og at gå rundt på biblioteker, i antikvariater og hos boghandlere og kigge på bøger. De seneste år har jeg af og til købt lydbøger eller ebøger. Men jeg er stadig mest til bøger som ikke kan forsvinde ved tryk på en knap, eller ved et mikroskopisk hak i en plade på en harddisk.

De fysiske bøger jeg har, står dels i forreste række på hylderne, dels i rækken bag, og (dem der ikke var plads til på reolerne) er dels gemt væk i skuffer og kasser. Der er ikke meget overordnet system i det, men jeg forsøger at samle bøgerne nogenlunde efter forfattere, genrer og emner. Gamle lærebøger jeg endnu ikke har nænnet at smide ud, ligger for eksempel i nogle bestemte kasser, på nær nogle stykker som jeg af og til læser i, der står på reolen.

Hvis jeg skal nævne tre bøger der betyder noget særligt for mig, tror jeg at jeg vil starte med Oprør fra Midten. Det er en debatbog fra 1970’erne. Dengang var den utopiske tænkning man kunne lave – uden at blive betragtet som idiot – ikke reduceret til glorificering af markedsøkonomi. Det var en umage trio som var gået sammen om at skrive bogen: Den radikale K. Helveg Petersen (far til netop afdøde Niels), forfatteren Villy Sørensen og fysikprofessor Niels I. Meyer. Som jeg husker det, blev den inddraget i undervisningen i gymnasiet af min fantastiske dansklærer Bo Kramer (I må have mig undskyldt et øjeblik mens jeg tørrer øjnene – jeg googlede lige Bo, og fandt ud af at han døde i 2010, kun 65 år gammel).

Senere, i et af mine mange forsøg på at tage en uddannelse, stødte jeg på Niels I. Meyer som underviser. Han gjorde dog ikke det store indtryk på mig. For ret nylig fandt jeg Oprør for Midten i et antikvariat, og genlæste den. Den første del af den, som jeg gætter på var skrevet med Sørensen som hovedforfatter, kunne næsten være skrevet i dag. Rigtig velskrevet og med meget stadig relevant kritik af vores samfund. Når vi bevæger os over i det mere utopiske, begynder det så desværre mere og mere at ligne et gammelt partiprogram krydset med en middelmådig dansk stil. En ting dog: Det er et meget tidligt forsøg på at få indført borgerløn i Danmark. Noget nutidens ultraliberale Radikale politikere næppe ville kunne læse uden at få kagen galt i halsen.

Nu springer jeg så helt frem til mange år efter gymnasiet. Efter at have læst science fiction i bunkevis (mest biblioteksbøger) i en periode, og derefter store mængder fantasy (også mest lån – fra bekendte), var det som om min interesse for det fantastiske var blevet mæt. Men en bog jeg især husker fra den periode er Peter Høegs Frøken Smillas Fornemmelse for Sne. Jeg er ikke et blankt ark hvad angår det man i fantastik-kredse kalder mainstream-litteratur. Forfattere som Sartre, Dostojevskij og James Joyce var også med på den yngre Flemmings bog-menu. Men Høegs roman gav mig for første gang fornemmelsen af at den fantastiske litteratur og mainstream ikke er to forskellige ting, men kan sameksistere i en og samme bog. Det magiske, det utopiske og skræmmende ukendte findes også i litteratur som ikke bærer stemplet ”fantastik”.

Den tredje bog jeg vil nævne, stødte jeg første gang på i min periode som ivrig science fiction-læser. Det er Stanislav Lems Solaris. I samme periode var jeg også meget optaget af film, og var stor fan af Andrej Tarkovskij, som havde begået en filmatisering af Solaris i 1972. Så filmen og bogen var smeltet lidt sammen for mig, da jeg for omkring femten år siden nåede at se Steven Soderberghs version af Solaris i den korte tid den gik i biografen. Efterfølgende genlæste jeg Lems roman (den nye danske oversættelse, den engelske er efter sigende ret dårlig). Jeg fandt da ud af at den genre som jeg næsten havde opgivet mange år tidligere, ikke bare indeholdt rigtig god litteratur, men stadig kunne begejstre mig. Siden læste jeg det meste hvad der fandtes af Lem på engelsk, og blev igen science fiction-fan, og endnu mere mere glad for genren end da jeg var ung.

Mit seneste bogkøb er lidt svært at definere, da der er en bog som er på vej til mig med posten, og jeg impulskøbte en hel stak brugte bøger for kort tid siden. Så jeg vælger den seneste enkeltbog jeg målrettet gik efter at købe, og som jeg har fået leveret med posten.

Det er Simon Ings Hot Head. Jeg er ikke gået i gang med at læse bogen endnu. Men jeg kender forfatteren. Både manden selv, som jeg talte lidt med på Loncon i 2014, og hans bog Wolves, der er hvad man kan kalde slipstream, dvs. en bog der indeholder science fiction-elementer nok til ikke at være ren mainstream, men heller ikke er omhyggelig nok med genrekonventioner, til at alle science fiction-fans synes det er science fiction. Men hold op hvor den mand kan skrive! Hot Head er en af hans tidlige bøger, noget post-cyberpunk-halløj fra hans periode som mere ”ren” science fiction-forfatter. En tidligere biblioteksbog, i øvrigt, og læst mange gange. Men som sagt, jeg er ikke så meget samler. De bøger jeg har, er dem jeg ikke har fået læst endnu, dem jeg gerne vil læse igen engang, og så en del som jeg ikke har fået besluttet mig til om jeg vil beholde.

 

Mød også Flemming på bloggen her.

Reklamer

1 kommentar

Filed under Ikke kategoriseret

Et gammelt interview med rotternes herre

Jeg skriver lidt om James Herbert i øjeblikket, der døde tilbage i 2013. Det førte mig fordi dette lille, underholdende interview med manden, der er optaget i 1995. Interviewet stammer fra et tidspunkt, hvor Herberts forfatterkarriere i et eller andet omfang fortsat kørte nogenlunde på skinner. Det ændrede sig imidlertid hurtigt, for han var en af de relativt mange skrækforfattere, der havde været aktive siden 70’erne, som oplevede både kreative og salgsmæssige vanskeligheder ved udgangen af det gamle årtusinde.

Noget litterært geni var Herbert ikke, men underholdende var han, og debutromanen The Rats fra ’74 står stadig, som et væsentligt bidrag til skrækgenren.

Vi ses på søndag.

– Martin

 

Skriv en kommentar

Filed under Ikke kategoriseret, Video

En fin lille koncertfilm med Against Me!

Her kan du se en ganske fin film med Against Me! Der er både en koncertdel og en interviewdel, der fungerer godt sammen. Filmen fanger gruppens udvikling og lyd rigtig godt, men filmen viser også med al tydelighed, hvor meget gruppen har flyttet sig siden de første, fantastiske plader. Jeg er ikke nogen kæmpefan af Against Me! længere, men jeg kan alligevel ikke rigtigt lade være med at følge dem. Det må jo nok betyde, at jeg i et eller andet omfang stadig er ret begejstret for gruppen… også selvbom musikken har flyttet sig.

Kast et blik på filmen. Vi ses på søndag, hvor der er akademiske gys på menuen.

 

Skriv en kommentar

Filed under Video

Digteren der gik i Lovecrafts fodspor: Et interview med Wilum H. Pugmire

Jeg har været så heldig at få lejlighed til at lave et lille interview med Wilum H. Pugmire, og det er store sager, i hvert fald i min verden. Der er et enormt antal forfattere, der på en eller anden måde påberåber sig inspiration fra H. P. Lovecraft i deres forfatterskab, men kun få har formået at skabe holdbar litteratur på den baggrund. Det har Wilum Pugmire imidlertid, og han må siges at være en af de stærkeste fortolkere af den gotiske tråd i Lovecrafts forfatterskab. Han er samtidig, i et bredere perspektiv, en fabelagtig arvtager af den dekadent-romantiske tradition, som Lovecraft til dels også selv var beslægtet med.

Pugmires poesi og poetiske fiktion har meget lidt at gøre med pulp, tentakler og store monstre. Han væver stemninger frem for os og skaber mystiske vrangbilleder, der efterlader sig som rungende, ofte foruroligende indtryk i læserens bevidsthed.

Selvom Wilum Pugmires fiktion efterhånden har optrådt i en stort antal antologier og selvstændige bøger, er han aldrig blevet en mainstream-forfatter. Det er en synd og skam, men han har konsekvent, uden klynk, valgt kunstnerens vej, og skaber værker, der ikke stræber efter stor almen anerkendelse. Det er en stolt og ædel tilgang til kunsten, som jeg kun kan beundre. Men ikke mere introduktion, lad os i stedet høre, hvad Pugmire har at fortælle os.

***

(Martin) Could you say a few words about your first encounter with the writings of H. P. Lovecraft?

(Wilum) My first encounter with Lovecraft came when I was a teenager. The man who lived across the street from me was a record salesman, and he knew that I loved monsters and so gave me records of readings of H. P. Lovecraft by Roddy McDowall and David McCallum. The first book of Lovecraft’s work that I purchased was a Panther paperback edition, THE HAUNTER OF THE DARK AND OTHER TALES OF HORROR, which I purchased while living in Northern Ireland.

You call yourself a “Lovecraftian writer” and when reading your fiction this certainly rings true, but when scrutinizing the term a bit closer it is not that obvious what it actually means. Lovecraft’s themes and style changed over time and so did his influences. And when reading your fiction it also quickly becomes apparent that you seem to have found the greatest inspiration in certain parts of Lovecraft’s production. Could you say a few words about both the term and what meaning you invest in it?

The term “Lovecraftian” is deliciously nebulous. For me, it’s like a kind of eldritch instinct that is alerted when I’m reading a horror story and come across something that seems to be a wink or nod to H. P. Lovecraft. And yet one single off-hand reference to the Necronomicon doesn’t make a story “Lovecraftian”. My own work is influenced far more by Lovecraft’s non-cosmic weird fiction than by “The Call of Cthulhu” or “The Shadow out of Time”.

Wilum Hopfrog Pugmire (born May 3 1951)

This approach is really important and something which, at least to me, brings a rare quality to your writing which is lacking from most “mythos fiction”. Could you say something about what you perceive as core elements in the poetics of Lovecraft and his use of language?

Now, I’m not a Lovecraft scholar and so I cannot speak conclusively on the poetics of Lovecraft’s language; but we know from his correspondence with other writers that HPL was obsessed with writing good prose that contained poetic beauty in its expression. Lovecraft was attuned to rhythm in prose, in creating a prose style that was concise and sculpted. Those who condemn Lovecraft for “overwriting” or “purple prose” don’t know what they’re talking about. It is because of the perfection of Lovecraft’s prose that S. T. Joshi has proclaimed him one of America’s great writers.

 

I personally find the term “Lovecraftian” rather good – not in the least when discussing your fiction – because it shifts the conversation away from the so-called “Cthulhu mythos” with all its pulpy trappings of cults, dusty tomes and tentacles, which more or less seems to be the general understanding in mainstream culture of the content in Lovecraft’s fiction. What are your personal thoughts on the tension between the reception of the actual writings of Lovecraft and the massive representation of “Cthulhu monsters” in almost all media today?

I have a feeling that a lot of people who have never read HPL’s fiction have heard of Cthulhu and could described what that Great Old One looks like. I love Lovecraft because of his writing and so cannot understand the towering impact of his most infamous monster. I’ve scanned over many Cthulhu stories that were entirely lacking in any element that could be called Lovecraftian.

 

Paperback, Panther Books 1974, with a cover by the always great Ian Miller

To many horror writers and horror readers ‘The Monster’ in whatever form it may have is critical. The hands-on confrontation with some sort of malevolent non-human force is basically the core dynamic of quite a lot of genre fiction. I guess the emphasis on Cthulhu and all the other mythos beings is a way to shoehorn this part of Lovecraft’s fiction into this particular, popular understanding of horror fiction which has to have a recognizable enemy monster. What are your own thoughts on these beings Lovecraft invented and their use in fiction? At times I personally feel that it would have been better if HPL had not invented all these entities and instead focused his creative vision solely on the reception of Gothic tropes.

I think Lovecraft invented his monsters so that they were representations of cosmic chaos, of something completely unearthly. This was also his reasoning behind inventing the name “Cthulhu,” which was to be a clumsy human articulation of a word that no human tongue could correctly enunciate. Some of his races indicate the far reaches of the past, a past beyond human comprehension. Lovecraft’s monsters are fascinating, and they are frightening.

A slightly younger Pugmire

In a sense you write very specialized fiction but the interest and marked for this clearly exists. The amount of works published with Lovecraft or Cthulhu mythos in the title is mind boggling. How do you experience this growing fan enthusiasm and how has being a “Lovecraftian” writer changed over the last decades?        

Over the years I’ve noticed more anthologies that include the name Cthulhu in their book title, and that indicates a growing market for “Cthulhu stories”. I think a lot of Cthulhu fans are disappointed with my own stories because I try not to write typical Mythos fiction, wanting to emphasize the grim Gothic side of Lovecraft. The one thing that confuses me is the growing number of people who think that I write like Lovecraft. I don’t understand this, because I certainly don’t TRY to write “like” HPL. Lovecraft’s work is but one of many influences evident in my writing.

I think you represent one of the strong voices in modern weird fiction who takes the reader on a different path away from the general understanding of Lovecraft’s writing and into other realms of much more subtle fiction where you clearly have created your own literary space. Could you see yourself cutting lose the ties or references to Lovecraft’s fiction?    I have no desire to cut ties with Lovecraft in my weird fiction. Indeed, the main reason I write is to be identified as a writer profoundly influenced by Lovecraft. I am Lovecraftian to the core of my aesthetic soul. My personal belief is that we can be inspired by Lovecraft’s work and yet be true to ourselves as literary artists.

Wilum H. Pugmire and literary scholar and editor S. T. Joshi

I reread your book Dreams of Lovecraftian Horror from 1999 some time ago; a wonderful volume filled with small vignettes of haunted beauty. On reading through these brief tales ‘vagueness’ struck me as a crucial component. Vagueness not only as to what is actually happening in the stories but also in the language, where your prose builds these moments of intense, ambiguous encounters with the irrational. Stephen King famously stated in his Danse Macabre that Lovecraft prudishly kept his monsters in the closet, but he (King) wanted to take the monsters right into the living room of the readers. This is very much the opposite of your approach. Could you say a bit about vagueness, which clearly is an important poetic tool for you?

I think part of what affects my work is boredom with normal people, and thus my characters are usually freakish in some way. The societies in which I feel most comfortable are the drag queen and punk rock scenes, where normality is almost a taboo. It’s more important in my mind to be a prose stylist than a story-teller, and thus I concentrate on what some consider an affected writing style. I may indeed be a poseur as an author, but the pose is absolutely genuine as an expression of my soul. Too, I like my horrors to be ambiguous rather than baldly depicted. I would much rather suggest horror than shew it nakedly.

As far as I know your published career as a writer began in the mid-1980s (correct me if I’m wrong). This I find interesting, because it was a time of great renewal in horror fiction in general. The old bestseller authors from the 70’s were suddenly challenged by younger authors with a much more fierce vision of horror. Clive Barker and the splatter punks are obvious examples. On one hand your fiction seems out of tune with this development, but on the other hand the themes of alienation, punk subculture and existence outside the norm seems contained within your works – for instance in the tale “Pale Trembling Youth” (1988) you wrote Jessica Amanda Salmonson. Nevertheless if I should situate your writings within some larger trend, it would be couched next to the works of authors like Kathe Koja, Poppy Z. Brite (as he was called then) and Caitlín R. Kiernan who all had their debuts in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Are these names for you? And do you have any thoughts on your place in horror or genre fiction in general?  

I first began seriously writing fiction in the early 1970’s, right after I first started reading Lovecraft. I wrote a bunch of rather bad stories for a number of small press journals, but eventually became disgusted with what my fiction lacked and stopped writing for a number of years. I’ve never had any interest in splatterpunk or graphic horror, it completely bores me. “Pale, Trembling Youth,” although it features a modern punk lad as a character, is a traditional ghost story in every way, just as the majority of my Lovecraftian fiction is traditional in a Weird Tales fashion. I don’t feel that I have a place in genre fiction, because I am far too minor a writer and most of my work has appeared in the small press.

Paperback, Mythos Books 1999

I would be interested in hearing more about these early tales. Could you say a bit more about them? Where were they published and what was our focus at the time?

When I first began to write fiction I was utterly enamored with the Cthulhu Mythos, and all I wanted to do was writing Mythos fiction. I was keenly influenced by two British writers, Ramsey Campbell and Brian Lumley; and I loved the Mythos fiction of August Derleth, and the Mythos anthologies he edited. I felt I had to invent my own version of Dunwich, and so I created Sesqua Valley. I invented my own Great Old One –Ny-Rakath– and placed him in Ireland. Very few of those early tales were published, and the manuscripts for most of them have since been destroyed. Graeme Phillips recently published a wee chapbook of my early tales, SESQUA RISING, through his Cyaegha Press, but thankfully he printed only 50 copies and most of those were distributed in the Esoteric Order of Dagon apa. In the early days I wrote for the small press horror journals such as GRUE, DEATHREALM, and FANTASY MACABRE. Then Jeffrey Thomas collected some of my Sesqua tales for a chapbook he published. I then had a hardcover collection from Delirium Books published in 2003.

When the stars are right: Pugmire and Lovecraft meet

Do you read horror fiction?

No, I don’t read horror. I read classic literature, poetry, and biographies of writers.

 

How would you describe the developments in horror and weird fiction through the decades where you have been publishing fiction?

Because I read so little horror, I haven’t paid any attention to genre development. Most of the writers I have known are or were horror writers. Billy (Poppy) was my all-time favorite living horror writer, but he seemed to dislike being thus classified. He once bragged to me that in Europe his books are found in the literary section of stories, not in the horror section. I have absolutely no idea if horror is still a widely-selling market or who the modern authors are.

Paperback, Dark Regions Press 2016

What is on the horizon for you? Could you tell us something about what you are currently working on and where we will have a chance to read your fiction next time?  

I’m not doing too much writing of late. I’ll have two new books out this year, one a collaborative novel set entirely in Lovecraft’s dreamlands, and the other a major hardcover collection of my more recent work. Over the past couple years I’ve written for a number of mostly Lovecraftian anthologies, the newest-published of which is THE CHILDREN OF GLA’AKI. I’ve been hoping to write a book of stories influenced by the tales of Clark Ashton Smith, but so far I haven’t finished one story for it. I’ve had so many books published I feel that I can take a nice long break.

Thanks Wilum for taking your time for this talk.

Cheers

Martin

4 kommentarer

Filed under Ikke kategoriseret

Douglas E. Winter, Stephen King. The Art of Darkness (1984): Kongen blev hyldet før han faldt

 

paperback-new-american-library-1986

Paperback, Signet 1986. Bogens anden, reviderede udgave

 

Douglas Winter er en vigtig skikkelse i 80’ernes genrehistorie, fordi han med stor ildhu kastede sig over at dokumentere den litterære gyserscene, som den tog sig ud på det tidspunkt. Vel at mærke på et tidspunkt, hvor gys og gru fortsat var ekstremt populær, og familien af forfattere med mindst én skræk-bestseller i bagagen var voksende. Winter lagde imidlertid heller ikke skjul på, at hans største oplevelse med skrækfiktionen kom, da han i ’74, i et venteværelse, faldt over en novelle af en ”Stephen King”. Et navn, der var ham totalt ubekendt, men historien gjorde indtryk, og Winter gik på jagt efter mere. Og mere, det fandt han, for kun få måneder senere slog King igennem med debutromanen Carrie. Det blev startskuddet til en lavine af fiktion, som forandrede skræklitteraturens vilkår for bestandig, og Douglas Winter var med fra begyndelsen.

Winter skrev flere artikler og anmeldelser af Kings bøger i 70’erns anden halvdel, og efter et møde med forfatteren på en kongres blev det også til en form for venskab og arbejdsfællesskab. Winter fik nemlig lov til at lave en række timelange samtaler med King, der resulterede først i en lille biografi om King (1982) og efterfølgende bogen Stephen King. The Art of Darkness, der så dagens lys i ’84.

 

paperback-new-american-library-1986_bagside

Paperback, Signet 1986

 

Bogen er en lidt sær sammensyning af interview, biografi, litterær analyse og bibliografi. I de glade dage før internet og Google har bogen utvivlsomt været guld værd for Stephen King-samleren på jagt efter hans romaner og spredt publicerede noveller. I dag har den omfattende bibliografiske del af Winters bog desværre overlevet sig selv, og de fleste ville nok nu ønske, at der i stedet havde været et par kapitler mere med bogens andre aspekter, men det kan man jo ikke ændre på.

Fra første side er det tydeligt, at Douglas Winter elsker Stephen Kings værker, og The Art of Darkness er en lang og komplet ukritisk hyldest til Kings forfatterskab. Det gør bogen til en ganske ensidig affære, der har det dobbelte formål dels at udlægge Kings tekster for hans mange interesserede fans, dels at modgå den etablerede presses lunkne modtagelse af King. Winter går dermed til kamp for Kings litterære kvaliteter og demonstrer meget tydeligt, at der skam er alvorlige tematikker hos King, der i Winters univers sidestiller King med en skikkelse som eksempelvis Mark Twain.

 

douglas-e-winter-anno-1985

Douglas E. Winter (født 30. oktober 1950)

 

Jubelbegejstringen kender med andre ord ingen grænser, men Winter har blik for litterær analyse. Han formår derfor at trække de bedste og stærkeste elementer frem i forfatterskabet. Bogen er således interessant læsning, selv for den, der ikke har synderlig megen begejstring for Kings bøger, fordi Winter faktisk beriger forståelsen af King.

Mens Winter lægger vægtige argumenter for Kings litterære kvaliteter, kan man samtidig læse en række mildest talt problematiske udsagn fra forfatteren selv i bogens interview-dele. Her sammenligner Stephen King sin egen skrivestil med intet mindre end en Big Mac. Han ser sig selv som et brand, en stil eller et udtryk, som læseren præcis ved, hvad er. Hvordan Winter kan arbejde for Kings litterære status, når forfatteren selv tydeligvis bevidst sigter ganske lavt med sit arbejde, er lidt af en gåde for mig.

 

paperback-new-american-library-1984_1ed

Paperback, New English Library 1984. Bogens 1. udgave

 

King beskriver et andet sted sine bøger som hængekøjer, som læseren kan slænge sig i. Igen fornemmer man den komplette mangel på kunstneriske ambitioner hos King, der tydeligvis hellere vil omfavne og behage sine læsere med det, de forventer, end at udfordre dem med noget uventet. En anti-intellektuel og anti-kunstnerisk selviscenesættelse fra Kings side, som også vil være bekendt for den, der har læst hans Danse Macabre.

Winter får ganske enkelt ikke enderne til at mødes i sin bog, fordi alt ved King synes at modsige den litterære forfatterperson, som Winter gerne vil ophøje ham til. Men at King alligevel gerne selv vil ses i det litterære lys, kunne måske ligge antydet i nogle af hans mere ambitiøse bøger (eksempelvis The Stand og It), men det er gætværk fra min side og under alle omstændigheder irrelevant, fordi Kings bøger i min verden er og bliver den Big Mac, han sammenligner sig selv med.

 

stephen-king

Stephen Edwin King (født 21. september 1947)

Winters fascination af King og bogens udgivelsestidspunkt er også interessant at se nærmere på. The Art of Darkness udkom, som sagt, i 1984, og på det tidspunkt gik Kings kurs stadig mod stjernerne. Han havde udgivet stort set alle de romaner, der i dag betragtes som hans hovedværker, og King var for længst blevet et verdensomspændende synonym for horror.

Det fører Douglas Winter til, i et lille efterskrift, at filosofere over, hvad fremtiden mon vil bringe for King. Winter er ikke i tvivl om, at der ligger store ting ude i horisonten, men her skulle han vise sig at tage fejl. Der lå ikke store ting i vente, snarere det modsatte. Der kom bare mere af det samme, og Kings forfatterskab overlevede ikke 80’erne med kreativiteten i behold. Ved indgangen til det nye årti – 90’erne – var han blevet en forstenet dinosaur, der var blevet overhalet af yngre, kreative kræfter på skrækscenen. Kings bogsalg gik fortsat fint, men hans popularitet har været faldende lige siden storhedstiden i 80’erne.

 

 

paperback-plume-1986

Paperback, Plume 1986

 

Douglas Winters bog er først og fremmest et tidsbillede af Stephen King på toppen, da han enerådigt regerede skrækscenen. Et billede på den entusiasme og friskhed, som en generation af læsere oplevede, da de mødte værker som The Shining og ’Salems Lot for første gang. Den begejstring er bestemt ikke uberettiget eller ubegrundet, men Kings momentum forduftede hurtigt, mens han sled sig op på tusindsiders romanfortællinger. Winters bog er derfor et bittersødt gravskrift; en lettere løgnagtig ligprædiken, der pynter på Kings forfatterskab ved at ignorere alt det, der umuliggør at måle hans bøger på den kunstneriske vægt, som Winter gerne vil anbringe King på.

Man taler ikke ondt om de skindøde.

 

paperback-new-english-library-1989

Paperback, New English Library 1989

 

 

Skriv en kommentar

Filed under Nonfiktion

Flabede punks på slap line i ´78

Jeg faldt over det her lille program forleden fra 1978. Det er et stykke smukt undergrunds-TV fra New York, hvor Sid Vicious fra Sex Pistols (som han havde forladt på det tidspunkt), Nancy Spungen, Stiv Bators fra The Dead Boys og en Cynthia fra bandet The B Girls, som jeg ikke kender, bliver interviewet. I første del af programmet er de fire i samtale med værten, men så begynder det for alvor at blive sjovt – seerne kan nemlig ringe ind til programmet. Det udvikler sig til en ret underholdende affære, hvor den ene mere outrerede seer efter den anden retter overraskende mange sjofle spørgsmål og beskidte kommentarer mod punkerne. Alt imens opfører de fire punks sig som snotunger, hvilket de vel egentlig også er.

Alt i alt en fest, som man ikke må snyde sig selv for. Og som værten Efrom Allen, der har lagt programmet online, selv skriver, så var tre ud af fire deltagere døde inden for nogle måneder efter optagelser.

Vi ses på søndag, hvor zombierne indtager bloggen.

 

Skriv en kommentar

Filed under Video

Når al latter forstummer: En snak med Kathe Koja om The Cipher

For nogle uger siden skrev jeg lidt om Kathe Kojas fantastiske bog The Cipher. En milepæl, som kom til at definere tonen for en hel genre af skræklitteraturen i 90’erne. Nu har jeg været så heldig at kunne udveksle nogle spørgsmål med Kathe om hendes debutroman og det at skrive. Resultatet er blevet en sjov lille samtale, der måske stedvist er lidt indforstået for dem der ikke har læst bogen. Ikke desto mindre kan det måske inspirere dig til at få fat The Cipher, for det er en roman, som absolut bør læses.

Nuvel, her med går vi over til det lille interview. På snarligt genhør.

Could you tell a bit about your original thoughts or ideas for the book?

Everything I do begins with a character, a person I see in my mind’s eye and begin to follow. Nicholas was the seed of THE CIPHER: talented, aimless, resentful, self-deluded. And on his heels came Nakota/Jane/Shrike/etc., who was everything he wasn’t, and a lot more, too. And the story was off and running.

I was delighted to hear you call THE CIPHER funny – I’ve always thought it was, on one level, a very black comedy, the laughter at the edge of the pit; and Nicholas is always using humor as a deflecting weapon. And the thing itself is called the Funhole, you can’t have a funhole without fun .

I can’t say I set out to write “a horror novel” with CIPHER, as I didn’t set out to write “a historical novel” with the UNDER THE POPPY trilogy, or “YA books” with my novels for FSG, or “a biographical novel” with my current Marlowe project, CHRISTOPHER WILD. I write the book and then my agent Christopher Schelling and I figure out what kind of book it is, though everything I write is solidly situated in the Kathe Koja genre.

I think genre itself can be a wonderfully helpful construct if the writer wishes to use it so; and genre readers are, across the board, quite welcoming, extending the courtesy of their interest to a new voice in their field—I’ve found that to be true over and over.

Kathe Koja (født 1960)

Kathe Koja (født 1960)

Any works of other authors that inspired you?

Shirley Jackson was a guiding star in the lands of the discomforted and disturbing, and Flannery O’Connor, too. Writers whose work I love and whom I respect and revere include Christopher Marlowe, the great Emilys (Bronte and Dickinson), Arthur Rimbaud  . . . Too many to list, so many who have helped and inspired along the path.

 

You very much circle around the classic notion of art and pain as being entwined. What are your thoughts on this aspect of the book today?

is pain necessary to the making of art? They are so often concommitant that it would be hard to say no. But pain is concommitant to life; is it necessary for life? That’s a dreadful question for the ill, the refugee, the tormented . . . My answer today is I don’t know.

Paperback, Dell 1991. Romanens 1. udg. med forside af Rick Lieder - Kathe Kojas mand

Paperback, Dell 1991. Romanens 1. udg. med forside af Rick Lieder – Kathe Kojas mand

The Cipher seems to address the inability to communicate and latch on to the world emotionally and creatively. This fear of existing without engaging or creating something was that particular concerns for you at the time or were you projecting feelings, I guess, we all share?   

I think everybody who ever lived or ever will has a funole with his or her name on it. We’re all a few steps away from our own bottomless fears or anxieties, that’s the human condition, but the ways we choose to confront or flee or smother these fears and anxieties are as varied as we are, as toxic or beneficial.

 

Could you say a few words about the two main characters?

Oh, what a couple! I have a great fondness for both Nicholas and Nakota, since each of them are so entirely who they are: and of the two, I have far more sympathy for Nakota, as dreadful as she is, because she’s trying so hard, she sees so clearly what Nicholas refuses to see: it doesn’t work without him, the Funhole’s generative process and his own are somehow intertwined. It’s all been given to him, and all she can do is . . . react.

And I can’t hate any of my characters, no matter how much I might dislike them or deplore their actions—hatred tends to produce caricature, in real life as well as on the page, and I want to write about actual people.

Paperback, Dell 1992

Paperback, Dell 1992

The artistic milieu, in which the novel is set, albeit perhaps slightly exaggerated, rings true. Was (or is) it your own circles you mirrored in the book?

No, but I didn’t have to. We all know those people and those scenes.

 

Could you have written the same story set in a suburban middleclass neighborhood with the Funhole appearing in a backyard or garage? What I’m asking is really how important it was to you that this takes place among artists of a sort living on the fringe?  

It would certainly be a different book if it were set in that suburb, but there’s no way either Nicholas or Nakota would have been living there. And since the story followed them, and not the other way around, it could only have happened where it did, on that grimy, frightful, dangerous fringe.

I personally have am affinity for the fringes, the outskirts, the odd places—the places where lines cross, the liminal spots. Things get in that shouldn’t, escapes are successful, the authorities aren’t looking too hard (until they are). Things happen there that the safer places can only guess are true. And the most interesting people always pass through.

 

The tone of The Cipher is extremely bleak and you continued to explore that vein for some time, but then you (to my knowledge) stopped. Had you exhausted this atmosphere creatively or was it simply time to move on? 

To my thinking, KINK is maybe the bleakest, most claustrophobic book I’ve ever written – certainly deluded Jess and deluded Nicholas are brothers in self-inflicted misery. http://www.kathekoja.com/blog/archives/we-all-have-a-kink/

Hardcover, Henry Holt 1996

Hardcover, Henry Holt 1996

We learn at some point that Nakota is reading a lot of Ben Hecht and you have this wonderful Hecht quote at the end. Did it all spring from that quote? I cannot really get my head round the idea of Nakota reading Hecht though. Could you tell us a bit more about this Hecht-element in the novel?

Hecht passed jauntily through the room, but that was all—no greater resonance. But what a quote!

 

The Cipher was deservedly a huge success but it’s an intense, draining piece and also a very youthful work with a strong misanthropic strain and the youngish cast of characters. How do you feel about the book today? Do you still identify with the book and its characters? Could you write The Cipher today?

I don’t know that we need to be young to be misanthropic . . . The characters in my books are not linked to the life stage I currently find myself in – I recently completed a new novel, THE BALLROOMS OF MARS, whose man character is just turning 18, and Christopher Marlowe’s life was cut short at 29.

Could I write THE CIPHER today? No. Not because it’s dark, but because darkness means something else to me now, represents itself in much different ways. Will I always be glad I wrote it? Oh yes.

Hardcover, Roadswell 2014

Hardcover, Roadswell 2014

Finally, what are you working on now?

I just finished directing a commissioned performance based on Bosch’s “Garden of Earthly Delights”, to celebrate his 500th anniversary  https://vimeo.com/178860595 Here’s the making-of video: https://vimeo.com/172790364

I have a performance entity called nerve, to create immersive/performative events: http://gonerve.com/gonerve/

http://www.kathekoja.com/blog/events/

Right now I’m working on an adaptation of Marlowe’s FAUSTUS that we will perform in January 2017, called  “Night School.” It’s a companion piece to my Marlowe novel, CHRISTOPHER WILD http://boingboing.net/2016/03/11/get-inside-kathe-kojas-chris.html

 

Thanks for your time Kathe and the best of luck with your future activities.

 

 

Skriv en kommentar

Filed under Ikke kategoriseret, Roman