THE DEEP ONES: "In the Walls of Eryx" by H.P. Lovecraft and Kenneth Sterling
Talk The Weird Tradition
Join LibraryThing to post.
1gwendetenebre
"In the Walls of Eryx" by H.P. Lovecraft and Kenneth Sterling
Discussion begins on February 20, 2019.
First published in the October 1939 issue of Weird Tales.
ONLINE VERSIONS
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/In_the_Walls_of_Eryx
http://www.spacewesterns.com/articles/104/
BIBLIOGRAPHY
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?73121
SELECTED PRINT VERSIONS
Dagon and Other Macabre Tales
The Doom That Came to Sarnath
Black Seas of Infinity
The Tomb and Other Tales
MISCELLANY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Sterling
https://www.tor.com/2015/10/13/lovecraft-reread-in-the-walls-of-eryx/
https://lovecraftianscience.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/lovecrafts-venus-in-in-the-...
https://tinyurl.com/y3ld77xe
Discussion begins on February 20, 2019.
First published in the October 1939 issue of Weird Tales.
ONLINE VERSIONS
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/In_the_Walls_of_Eryx
http://www.spacewesterns.com/articles/104/
BIBLIOGRAPHY
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?73121
SELECTED PRINT VERSIONS
Dagon and Other Macabre Tales
The Doom That Came to Sarnath
Black Seas of Infinity
The Tomb and Other Tales
MISCELLANY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Sterling
https://www.tor.com/2015/10/13/lovecraft-reread-in-the-walls-of-eryx/
https://lovecraftianscience.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/lovecrafts-venus-in-in-the-...
https://tinyurl.com/y3ld77xe
4gwendetenebre
In I Am Providence, Joshi notes that "Sterling has stated that the idea of the invisible maze was his, and that this core idea was adapted from Edmond Hamilton's celebrated story (which Lovecraft liked), "The Monster-God of Mamurth" (Weird Tales, August 1926), which concerns an invisible building in the Sahara Desert." Additionally, he goes on to note that, "Sterling wrote a draft of 6000-8000 words; Lovecraft entirely rewrote the story ("in very short order, " Sterling declares) on a small pad of lined paper (perhaps similar to the one on which he had written "The Shadow Out of Time"), making it about 12,000 words in the process."
HPL still did a good job of keeping Sterling's ideas and style in the mix. It's a strange read, recognizably Lovecraftian and yet a step away at the same time.
HPL still did a good job of keeping Sterling's ideas and style in the mix. It's a strange read, recognizably Lovecraftian and yet a step away at the same time.
5paradoxosalpha
I remembered having been unimpressed with this story when I first read it in my teens, but not much else. I don't think it did more for me this time around.
The the Venusian jungle is a forgivable science error for 1939, and the "flame pistol" and lack of synthetic suit materials are not terrible failures of technological imagination. But it's pretty ignorant to think that a surveyor on an alien planet wouldn't have some sort of wireless comm setup. Two-way portable radios were invented in the early 1920s, and already in use by American police departments in the early 1930s.
Also, I thought that Stanfield was naive in his initial entry to the labyrinth, and even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him. If invisible, why not silent as well?
The the Venusian jungle is a forgivable science error for 1939, and the "flame pistol" and lack of synthetic suit materials are not terrible failures of technological imagination. But it's pretty ignorant to think that a surveyor on an alien planet wouldn't have some sort of wireless comm setup. Two-way portable radios were invented in the early 1920s, and already in use by American police departments in the early 1930s.
Also, I thought that Stanfield was naive in his initial entry to the labyrinth, and even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him. If invisible, why not silent as well?
6elenchus
>5 paradoxosalpha:
I have notes on the various "failures" evident in the text, but I won't add to what you've already listed. In the first place, it's part of the fun to see what the future looked like 80 years ago. And in any case, I don't insist that scifi / weird be strictly factual even according to contemporary understanding.
Those thoughts aside, then, my primary experience was that the narrator (Stanfield) was a thoroughly disagreeable fellow, and frankly was rooting for him to be eaten by a carnivorous plant or fragged by a lizard-man. Conrad's Heart of Darkness was an immediate referent for me; I wonder if also for HPL and/or Sterling.
I did find it clever that the first part of the story closes with a bit of a twist. The opening paragraphs establish that we're reading a retrospective report, which implies the narrator survives whatever circumstances he is documenting. But at the end of that first section, the reader learns the report was not written all at one time! That is, it's a journal, not (necessarily) a completed report. It's an open possibility the narrator doesn't survive, and the unfinished report was found later by someone else. This literary device effectively ratchets up the tension -- unfortunately nullified by my wish for Stanfield's grisly demise.
even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him.
I predicted that bit, too, and thought the authors missed a trick. Saying the design was clever doesn't rule out moving walls, but if so why not just spell it out? Adds more irony to the fact the corpses were "so close" to the exit.
I have notes on the various "failures" evident in the text, but I won't add to what you've already listed. In the first place, it's part of the fun to see what the future looked like 80 years ago. And in any case, I don't insist that scifi / weird be strictly factual even according to contemporary understanding.
Those thoughts aside, then, my primary experience was that the narrator (Stanfield) was a thoroughly disagreeable fellow, and frankly was rooting for him to be eaten by a carnivorous plant or fragged by a lizard-man. Conrad's Heart of Darkness was an immediate referent for me; I wonder if also for HPL and/or Sterling.
I did find it clever that the first part of the story closes with a bit of a twist. The opening paragraphs establish that we're reading a retrospective report, which implies the narrator survives whatever circumstances he is documenting. But at the end of that first section, the reader learns the report was not written all at one time! That is, it's a journal, not (necessarily) a completed report. It's an open possibility the narrator doesn't survive, and the unfinished report was found later by someone else. This literary device effectively ratchets up the tension -- unfortunately nullified by my wish for Stanfield's grisly demise.
even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him.
I predicted that bit, too, and thought the authors missed a trick. Saying the design was clever doesn't rule out moving walls, but if so why not just spell it out? Adds more irony to the fact the corpses were "so close" to the exit.
7paradoxosalpha
>6 elenchus:
I also thought of Heart of Darkness, and what a mind-boggling genocidal imperialist tool Stanfield was. Sadly, I don't think we can be quite sure that the authors intended for us to root for his demise and see it as just desserts.
I also thought of Heart of Darkness, and what a mind-boggling genocidal imperialist tool Stanfield was. Sadly, I don't think we can be quite sure that the authors intended for us to root for his demise and see it as just desserts.
8paradoxosalpha
In light of the imperialist ideological framing of the story (and being opposed to it by sentimental disposition), I took what is perhaps a surprising impression from the coda, i.e. the report written by Wesley Miller at the end. Superficially it is a rather conventional way of resolving the narrative in the absence of the previous narrator, and bringing out ironies that might have been too subtle for a pulp audience. But I found it quite chilling, in the way it transitioned from the ineffective brutality of the independent surveyor Stanfield to the invincible rationalism of the bureaucrat Miller.
So I guess there was something of value here that I had missed in my original read.
So I guess there was something of value here that I had missed in my original read.
9elenchus
>8 paradoxosalpha: transition from ineffective brutality to invincible rationalism
Nicely observed. The chief source of horror in this story lies not with anything native to the alien planet, rather with the human capacity for impersonal conquest. Ironic that the story was published in October 1939, a month after the Nazi invasion of Poland.
Our political framing here reminds me of Heinlein's Starship Troopers, the politics of which story are equally fraught.
Nicely observed. The chief source of horror in this story lies not with anything native to the alien planet, rather with the human capacity for impersonal conquest. Ironic that the story was published in October 1939, a month after the Nazi invasion of Poland.
Our political framing here reminds me of Heinlein's Starship Troopers, the politics of which story are equally fraught.
10AndreasJ
I haven't found time to re-read the story (and am sort of giving up on doing so any time soon - it's nearing time to get started on next week's story!), but back when I originally read this years ago, I took paradoxosalpha's "chilling" take on the coda to be very much what the authors intended. Basically, I assumed that the reader was expected to share Stanfield's reevaluation of the natives, and then be horrified at the revelation his death is going to be instrumentalized into justifying their extirpation.
11paradoxosalpha
>10 AndreasJ:
Ah, that's a little different than how I read it. I don't think Stanfield would have been horrified at their extermination. His reevaluation didn't extend to genuine sympathy, from what I could tell.
Ah, that's a little different than how I read it. I don't think Stanfield would have been horrified at their extermination. His reevaluation didn't extend to genuine sympathy, from what I could tell.
12WeeTurtle
>11 paradoxosalpha: Having just finished it, I got the impression that Stanfield's switch was more one of the Lovecraftian 'certain things are better left alone' habit that follows a lot of his works. I certainly didn't envy his manner of death, though I think I was more bothered by the later reporter's decision that Stanfield's later sympathy was the result of delusion and that the suggested species wipe-out was far more rational. We never do know why the venutians worship the stones.
>5 paradoxosalpha: Also, I thought that Stanfield was naive in his initial entry to the labyrinth, and even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him. If invisible, why not silent as well?
That's more polite than I would put it. Too often horror stories ride on stupid choices (or so it seems to the audience).
That the walls moved wasn't something I thought about for too long, possibly because I didn't really care as much how the labyrinth was being confusing once it was apparent that it was. Getting visually messed up is a decent explanation as well. What I did wonder was that there weren't actually two (or more) entrances into the labyrinth and his over-focus on the corpse (helped along by the clustering natives) was what got him. I can't remember if he made a full circle of the building first, or if the later group only found one entrance. (I was listening to an audio book so it's hard to check.)
>5 paradoxosalpha: Also, I thought that Stanfield was naive in his initial entry to the labyrinth, and even more naive for not imagining that the walls might be moving around him. If invisible, why not silent as well?
That's more polite than I would put it. Too often horror stories ride on stupid choices (or so it seems to the audience).
That the walls moved wasn't something I thought about for too long, possibly because I didn't really care as much how the labyrinth was being confusing once it was apparent that it was. Getting visually messed up is a decent explanation as well. What I did wonder was that there weren't actually two (or more) entrances into the labyrinth and his over-focus on the corpse (helped along by the clustering natives) was what got him. I can't remember if he made a full circle of the building first, or if the later group only found one entrance. (I was listening to an audio book so it's hard to check.)
14alaudacorax
For me, this story was just wrong from very near the start. You have a culture so technologically advanced as to make travel between Mars and Earth a fact. You have this power source such that a piece 'no larger than a hen's egg' contains 'enough power to keep a city warm for a year'. And yet the only investment they lay out for such a fabulous return is a solitary man on foot? My suspension of disbelief failed.
15alaudacorax
An unexplained mystery often adds to a story's power. This story abuses that, though--there were simply too many things left unexplained.
16alaudacorax
... and I'm actually a Lovecraft fan ...
17alaudacorax
>7 paradoxosalpha: - ... what a mind-boggling genocidal imperialist tool Stanfield was. Sadly, I don't think we can be quite sure that the authors intended for us to root for his demise ...
Yes, for the life of me I can't make up my mind if the authors intended Stanfield as a caricature or not. Perhaps I'm just hoping that they did ...
Yes, for the life of me I can't make up my mind if the authors intended Stanfield as a caricature or not. Perhaps I'm just hoping that they did ...
18WeeTurtle
I tend to give technology issues in "future" stories, a rather large pass because it is really hard to predict what the future might have and also, and what we have now might seem like an obvious thing to invent in hindsight, but perhaps not at the time. Or, perhaps the author just wasn't that creative a thinker when it came to certain things.
>16 alaudacorax: I very much like Lovecraft and perhaps use him as comparison too much, but I'm always leery of any story that touches more than one authors' hands. I'm inclined to think that Sterling had more to do with the nuts and bolts of the story, and Lovecraft with the outer casing. He's a very wordy fellow.
What gets me more than the tech, and even the habit of sending only one dude (which does seem pretty silly if this this stuff is so valuable and getting it often means hostility) is that the lizard things are said to worship these stones such that they will prostrate themselves in the mud if they even see one. Why are they using one stone (and a big one, apparently) seemingly casually as bait for a trap, if that's what they really are doing? I'm getting a little wordy here, too. (Or perhaps just not concise.) I get the feeling that if these stones were a Lovecraft invention (or just his) that we'd already have some manner of explanation or reveal, or at least enough to see if planetary genocide is a good idea or a bad idea.
(And then my 5am no-sleep brain has to ruin things by imagining a spread of tanks trundling along the muddy plateau and every once in a while one going "bonk" and hitting something invisible. Cue the record skip in the triumphant military music. The drivers swear and start trying to navigate around it.)
>16 alaudacorax: I very much like Lovecraft and perhaps use him as comparison too much, but I'm always leery of any story that touches more than one authors' hands. I'm inclined to think that Sterling had more to do with the nuts and bolts of the story, and Lovecraft with the outer casing. He's a very wordy fellow.
What gets me more than the tech, and even the habit of sending only one dude (which does seem pretty silly if this this stuff is so valuable and getting it often means hostility) is that the lizard things are said to worship these stones such that they will prostrate themselves in the mud if they even see one. Why are they using one stone (and a big one, apparently) seemingly casually as bait for a trap, if that's what they really are doing? I'm getting a little wordy here, too. (Or perhaps just not concise.) I get the feeling that if these stones were a Lovecraft invention (or just his) that we'd already have some manner of explanation or reveal, or at least enough to see if planetary genocide is a good idea or a bad idea.
(And then my 5am no-sleep brain has to ruin things by imagining a spread of tanks trundling along the muddy plateau and every once in a while one going "bonk" and hitting something invisible. Cue the record skip in the triumphant military music. The drivers swear and start trying to navigate around it.)
20alaudacorax
>18 WeeTurtle: - I get the feeling that these stones were a Lovecraft invention ...
On this idea of which of the writers invented what: as the work stands, the maze and the lizard men really clash for me--they don't seem to belong together in one story.
Incidentally, and this is probably nit-picking, if humans have no common language with the lizard men, why does the planet's wildlife have such peculiar names?
On this idea of which of the writers invented what: as the work stands, the maze and the lizard men really clash for me--they don't seem to belong together in one story.
Incidentally, and this is probably nit-picking, if humans have no common language with the lizard men, why does the planet's wildlife have such peculiar names?
21WeeTurtle
>20 alaudacorax: Whoops, that's a typo there. I mean to say "if" in that sentence.
The funny names don't surprise me, if only because, as someone that spends a lot of time dwelling in fantasy/geeky things, unusual names just give things a feeling of mystery or alien influence. I know I can hand-wave things at times if I feel that they were done as a writing device rather than intended as an informative detail. Naturally, I'm horribly guilty of using unusual spellings, elaborate sounding titles, and words that made no cultural or linguistic sense back in my teen fantasy writings and D&D adventure plans. Gods forbid that a fantasy hero should ride a "horse."
The funny names don't surprise me, if only because, as someone that spends a lot of time dwelling in fantasy/geeky things, unusual names just give things a feeling of mystery or alien influence. I know I can hand-wave things at times if I feel that they were done as a writing device rather than intended as an informative detail. Naturally, I'm horribly guilty of using unusual spellings, elaborate sounding titles, and words that made no cultural or linguistic sense back in my teen fantasy writings and D&D adventure plans. Gods forbid that a fantasy hero should ride a "horse."
22JuliaFrench
"Why are they using one stone (and a big one, apparently) seemingly casually as bait for a trap, if that's what they really are doing?"
My guess would be that the creatures knew they could safely recover the stone once the human was dead.
My guess would be that the creatures knew they could safely recover the stone once the human was dead.
24WeeTurtle
>22 JuliaFrench: My snag with that is why would they bow to something they then allow to be manhandled (no pun intended), unless they actually never touched it and just put up the maze. Still, the lizards watching don't seem to be caring about the stone now. Could just be a lapse in story continuity.
