Talk:H.P. Lovecraft

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Hmm, I think we need a Lovecraft/Cthulhu subcategory in roleplaying. --Myomoto 14:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I approve of this motion, although I think it should be its own category, not a subcategory - CoC, ToC are both RPGs, but Arkham Horror and Dark Corners of the Earth are not. -Destro
Yeah, that's true, I wasn't really thinking about anything but the RPGs, I know there's a card game as well. --Myomoto 14:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Correct, at least two CCGs in fact. And a number of other vidyagames. -Destro


The article seems overly invested in calling Lovecraft a racist. More than half of it is fully devoted to a litany of hate against him, and isn't really relevant to his work as a horror writer (which is to say, the portion of his influence actually related to /tg/).

If you think it's extreme feel free to tone it down, but he was most certainly a racist, the whole innsmouth thing was basically saying interracial marriage brings about monsters, and it's important to leave the fact that he was a racist on there, otherwise you're skewing who he was. -- Triacom (talk) 04:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
This needs more than a simple tone-down. If he was racist, I would agree that that is worth mentioning, but there are only six lines in the article that actually speak of any aspect of his life that isn't racism. The rest of the article (which is to say, the vast majority of it) is barely more than hate-sperging. This needs a full re-write, and the "stub" tag in lieu of that.--Asorel (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Bro, are you just "racism-cleansing" this entire wiki? 'Cause that's just as sad as the PC-tumblrites you're doing it to spite. Especially when the racism here was both in the service of the joke, about Lovecraft being a prototypical Internet nerd when you get down to brass tacks (complete with marrying a Jewish woman), and a massive theme of his entire body of work, without exception. --SpectralTime (talk) 08:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I must have missed that particular portion. A good part of that section was arguably not humor. Either way, the new version is much more informative. I would have written an alternative, though I was irritable and sleep deprived earlier.

This article is cluttered with irrelevant social diatribes that have nothing to do with tabletop gaming or /tg/. Requesting permission to clean up and refocus the article to Lovecraft's influence on tabletop gaming and games directly inspired by his works. Just because there are worse examples doesn't mean we should just ignore this one. -- (talk)

A statement of objective fact (that Lovecraft's writing was inspired in no large part by the values of his time) hardly qualifies as a diatribe. It's not judging or criticizing him by standards that didn't exist until long after his death, it's just stating facts. If you want to gut out genuine information about him because you don't like the fact that he lived in different times with different values, you're just as bad as any SJW. They try to rewrite history too, you know. You may however add information on said influence on gaming and games, as long as you don't try to censor his biography.--Newerfag (talk) 23:14, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not trying to censor anything. I simply want this article to be about Lovecraft's influence on tabletop gaming as is the purpose of this wiki. Wikipedia is the wiki for a biography of Lovecraft. Why is there any need for any kind of biography on Lovecraft at all here? -- (talk)
  • I would agree with the above. As it stands, there's almost twice as much written on Lovecraft's racism than on his mythos and /tg/ influence.--Asorel (talk) 00:04, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
    • As would I. Perhaps I was too quick to judge in that respect. --Newerfag (talk) 00:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
I would re add the portions talking about how he wrote many letters to several authors at the time, it is not dealing with racism and is instead showing how he and other writers influanced each others work, such as portions of the cthulu mythos existing in the connan universe. Maybe even expand on that a tiny bit.Dragoon508 (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
  • i also agree. he was a product of his time and its kinda fucked up to judge him by modern standards. Abraham Lincoln would be, be todays standards, and unbelievable bigoted racist. If we made an article about how much of a racist Lincoln was, it would completely miss the context and the achievements of his life, and would be utterly unfair. --Kapow (talk) 03:21, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
    • There's a hundred years of history you're glossing over there, and Abe Lincoln wasn't racist towards other white people! Nonetheless, I'll fold with the current on this one. If no one else finds mocking his racism funny or informative, so be it. --SpectralTime (talk) 04:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
  • being discriminatory against other white people would probably qualify as nationalism, not racism, and we are all aware that the late 1800s and early 1900s had hardcore nationalism as the zeitgeist. Again, a product of his time.
        • No, he literally thought that Italians were "degenerate" in terms of their genetic makeup. And he was an Anglophile who hated his home country of America for splitting off. Again, he was the prototypical "weirdly fixated Internet nerd," and one of the many, many things he fixated on was race. Remember when the Big Horrific Reveal in one of his stories was that the protagonist's ancestors included... a black woman? This shit was already archaic when he did it! Everyone was racist then, sure, but not everyone was that racist. Besides, I find it hilarious that his wife often had to remind him to stop ranting hatefully about the Jews in front of her, because she was Jewish. --SpectralTime (talk) 04:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
  • most of that sounds like nationalism to me. and most of it sounds completely in line with the the way people were back then. remember, this is a time period where the kkk is running around and "irish need not apply" and the catholic church still blamed jews for killing christ and tensions from italian immigration were high. none of it is good, but that more a commentary on the society as a whole than each individual. if this was a board dedicated to critical theory then the subject might have a place here, but its a board dedicated to /tg/.
              • plenty of European groups weren’t considered white at the time (hence, for example, Frank Sinatra’s Democrat membership and stance on immigration and the like). White until recently meant Northern European in the USA. Anyway, I thought Lovecraft was atheist? How does that qualify as normal for the time? He was best known for writing on the fear of the unknown and barely left his various properties, whether he lived with his wife or his mother.

Why do you care so much about this shit? It's like you're all from ~tumblr~

I don't know how old this discussion is but I do recall that Lovecraft's views on foreignors lessened in his later life. Tyranid Memestealer (talk) 03:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)