All quiet in the Haunted River ops centre. Dysfunctional clock ticks in
background but at seventy-something minutes to the hour. Radio Four streams
gently from the speakers. The operational manager is busily engaged upon
biscuit-dunking: to wit, the careful suspension of four digestive biscuits
into a large tankard of china tea. The biscuit possesses impeccable ethical
credentials: it is organic and low in both salt and sugar. Yet this poses a
serious problem to the professional who is engaged upon soaking the
aforemention foodstuff in hot liquid, since the binding qualities of
foodstuffs farmed without the use of pesticides or chemicals is poor.
Immersion for an unknown but precise length of time, intuited only by
experience, individual biscuit composition and realtime assessment, must be
achieved. Under-estimation can lead to an uninspiring dry-biscuit
experience, in which much effort of mastication is called for (...watch
it!); over-dunking can lead to awful scenes of tea-splashment and tea
ruination. But at the exact moment when maximum safe exposure to tea has
been accomplished, the computer chimes to signify than an emal message has
been posted to the ghost-fiction newsgroup. Foolishly glancing up, the ops
manager casts his eye upon what appears to be....no, it can't be! - it
is!* - an on-topic post of an uninflammatory nature!
Splash!
"Awww, Christ, not on my keyboard!"
"nomis" <ghostbrain.DeleteThis@oozingbrain.com> wrote in message
news:ghostbrain-FD80CD.15041028062003@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> At the risk of starting a conversation with Chris that doesn't involve
> the hurling of abuse...
>
> Chris,
> I just finished reading the Tartarus edition of Elizabeth Jane Howard's
> stories and was quite impressed. i seem to recall you had some feelings
> about her, re: in comparison to Aickman, but I can't recall quite what
> they were. Knowing you're a big Aickman fan, I was wondering if you'd
> like to mention again your feelings on Ms Howard's work?
>
> The first tale in the book, "Three Miles Up", struck me as quite akin to
> ol' Bob's stuff... as did "Perfect Love".
>
> Of course, I'm not just interested in Mr Barker's opinion on this one,
> but I would like to hear what he thinks.
>
> Cheers,
>
> nomis
>
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.oozingbrain.com</font" target="_blank">http://www.oozingbrain.com</font</a>>
>
> home to _Withered Spirits: The Works of Terry Lamsley_
> and _The Big F Webpage_ (diehards unite!)
I haven't procured the new Howard collection because (ducks) I didn't
believe it was worth the expense, giving the inclusion of only one extra
story (thus making four, I believe). The other three are already available
in the WE ARE FOR THE DARK collection and the occasional anthology.
I therefore do not know what Glen C had to say about Howard in his
introduction. I am sure that Glen's piece would have been well-informed,
given his professional credentials and genre interest. Glen thoroughly
researched Phyllis Paul for a piece lined up for Weirdly Supernatural, and
he offered suprising insights which were thoughtfully argued. Perhaps he has
done the same for Howard?
Notwithstanding GC's essay or introduction, perhaps Howard's autobiography
SLIPSTREAM is more useful to Aickman enthusiasts. I feel rather sorry for
her, she seems to suffer from the fate many great women are subjected to:
over-shadowed by famous men. Howard is usually mentionned in a sentence
which contains the names Amis and Aickman, where she is invariably given
second-billing. Yet there is a strong case to be made for the claim that she
only dabbled in ghost stories to appease and assist Aickman, who at that
point in time was having trouble getting into print. If that is the case,
then it just goes to show that had she stayed on course, she would have made
a very good author of strange tales in her own right.
I do indeed think that there are interesting comparisons to be drawn between
Aickman's and Howard's supernatural tales. More importantly, between their
lives and *Aickman's* tales. I was hoping that these sorts of issues would
have been considered in Gary Crawford's recent book on Aickman, but alas
that seems (ducks again) to have been quite a pedestrian affair, almost as
though Crawford was trying to reserve domain rights rather than offer a new
or penetrating insight. I suspect that a huge sigh of relief was uttered by
several researchers when Mr Crawford's book arrived on their doormats, since
it is clear Aickman still needs to "be done".
But all this is on-topic beating-about-the-bush. I regret than I cannot
directly answer your question because a controversial five-page essay on
this subject is scheduled for the next issue of SUPERNATURAL TALES,
alongside a new story of mine called "The Thing In The Tree". I referred the
essay to two distinguished parties, both knowledgable on Aickman, before
submitting it to David Longhorn, and received very positive feedback, which
emboldened me to "go public".
I think David L is publishing the next issue of ST later this year, and I
will happily refer to the issue after that time, so as not to query David's
proprietorial pitch.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
