Quantcast
Channel: Tellers of Weird Tales
Viewing all 1176 articles
Browse latest View live

Black People and Africa on the Cover of Weird Tales

$
0
0
Now comes a not very pleasant part of categorizing the covers of Weird Tales. Black people are on the cover of nine issues of the magazine. Few if any of these covers show a black person in a positive light. Most depictions here are either neutral or negative. The first, from December 1924, shows a white guy pummeling a black man in the back of the head. Some would say that things haven't changed very much since then.

It might be worth noting that the first three covers shown here were published while Weird Tales had its offices in Indiana and that the 1920s were a high point in the power of the Ku Klux Klan in the state. I wouldn't make too much of that, though, for official or semi-official attitudes towards black people were pretty bad pretty much everywhere in the first few decades of the twentieth century. When I say official or semi-official, I mean within the offices of government, academia, magazine publishing, and Hollywood moviemaking, among other places. Few writers, artists, screenwriters, or directors demonstrated the imagination and courage necessary to depict black people truthfully and honestly as human beings. Popular culture was especially bad in that way. In other words, these covers for Weird Tales were not out of the ordinary for the time. I wish it could have been different.

Weird Tales, December 1924. Cover story: "Death-Waters" by Frank Belknap Long, Jr. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch. I don't know the story behind the illustration, but the implication is that the white men are the sympathetic characters and the black man is not. The complication here is that the depiction of the black man is naturalistic and does not rely on racial stereotypes. In other words, the artist Brosnatch did not dehumanize his subject in any way, even if he showed him being beaten up and abused.

Weird Tales, March 1925. Cover story: "The Last of the Teeheemen" by Arthur Thatcher. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch. I don't know who the Teeheemen are. I'm not sure they are Africans. But I have included this cover here just in case. Anyway, here is more violence against the dusky races, this time perhaps justified by the need for self-defense and for the protection of the woman.

Weird Tales, August 1925. Cover story: "Black Medicine" by Arthur J. Burks. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch. Black medicine is presumably the same as black magic, in which case the wizard (or is it a witch?) here is presumably a villain. I can't say that these are egregiously racialist depictions of black men (or women), but I can't say that they're especially favorable, either.

Weird Tales, February 1930. Cover story: "Thirsty Blades" by Otis Adelbert Kline and E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by Hugh Rankin. I can't tell who or what that is on the left. Is it a black man? Or a demon of some kind? Either way, he is standing over the woman, presumably protecting her. Or is the man in Arab dress protecting her? I don't know. Note that the figure of the woman is deemphasized by coloring her a neutral purple hue. Comic book artists of later years used the same approach for objects in the foreground or background.

Weird Tales, March 1930. Cover story: "Drums of Damballah" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. Despite the fact that he was European by birth, C.C. Senf more easily fell back on racial stereotypes than did his American-born counterparts Brosnatch and Rankin. Here, the black man is not much more than a minstrel-show type. The phallic imagery of the snake--which is the same color as the man and his loincloth and originates from near his groin--is almost certainly unintentional but nonetheless too obvious to ignore.

Weird Tales, June 1930. Cover story: "The Moon of Skulls" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by Hugh Rankin. Here is the first (obviously) black woman on the cover of Weird Tales. The image here is pretty small and hard to see, but she looks okay. Hugh Rankin seems to have been more interested in her as an element of design or as a decorative element than as a racial stereotype.

Weird Tales, July 1932. Cover story: "The Phantom Hand" by Victor Rousseau. Cover art by C.C. Senf. Here is the second (or third) black female figure in this category of covers. Although the depiction is not an extreme racial stereotype, the type of character shown here--the black witch-woman--is somewhat stereotypical. (Other, more recent examples: Gloria Foster as Oracle in The Matrix [1999] and Carmen Ejogo as Seraphina Picquery in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them [2016].) If she were a man, we could say that the snake once again represents something more than a snake.

Weird Tales, March 1934. Cover story: "The Black Gargoyle" by Hugh B. Cave. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. The theme of a creature ogling a woman is a common one. Again, I can't say that this is an egregious racial stereotype. The black character here looks more like a puppet, almost like a character from an animated cartoon. The whole effect is somewhat comical.

Weird Tales, April 1934. Cover art: "Satan's Garden" by E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. The whipping covers get to be pretty tiresome. I just don't understand the fascination with whipping and torturing women in popular culture, but that's another thing that has changed little in the eighty years since this cover was published, for moviemakers love to kill, maim, mutilate, dismember, torture, rape, and otherwise torment members of the female sex. Why? I suppose it reveals a deep-seated hatred, dread, or resentment of women. In any case, I should point out that Margaret Brundage was a friend and associate of black people in her native Chicago. Strangely, she was part of the crowd that gave us our current (though rapidly diminishing) president. Her depiction here of a black man, though somewhat poorly handled, is not what I would call racist or racialist, even if he is using violence against a white woman.

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

Cavemen and Jungle Women on the Cover of Weird Tales

$
0
0
Cavemen and jungle women or jungle girls are and were everywhere in popular culture. That popularity isn't really reflected in the illustrations that appeared on the cover of Weird Tales, for only two showed characters of that type. It strikes me now (the way a stone axe strikes a caveman's skull) how old-fashioned--and static--was the artwork on the cover of Weird Tales. Even J. Allen St. John, who created some very dynamic compositions, was an artist from another time. Despite the innovation of being the first fantasy magazine in America, Weird Tales seems to have been stuck in the nineteenth century, at least by its covers.

Weird Tales, March 1925. Cover story: "The Last of the Teeheemen" by Arthur Thatcher. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch. I showed this cover the other day. I still don't know anything about the story. That could be a cavewoman on the right, but I'll call her a jungle woman instead, one of the earliest of a type that became very popular in the 1930s through the 1950s.

Weird Tales, April 1932. Cover story: "The Red Witch" by Nictzin Dyalhis. Cover art by C.C. Senf. 

Weird Tales, August 1938. Cover story: "The Wolf-Girl of Josselin" by Arlton Eadie. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. Mike Tuz pointed out that this cover from 1938 shows what is essentially a jungle girl. (See his comment below.) Thanks for the addition, Mike. I should point out that a jungle guy, Tam, Son of Tiger, appeared on the cover of four issues of Weird Tales. I'll cover Tam in a later entry on series characters on the cover of the magazine.

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

Dwarves on the Cover of Weird Tales

$
0
0
In his book Danger Is My Business: An Illustrated History of the Fabulous Pulp Magazines: 1896-1953 (1993), Lee Server recounted the story of the weird menace magazines of the 1930s, titles that included Dime Mystery Magazine, Terror Tales, and Horror Stories. Despite the shared word "weird" (and despite some overlap between the two), weird menace and weird fiction were separate genres. Mr. Server explains:
The "terror" or "Weird Menace" stories, as they came to be known, had many of the trappings of the horror genre, but there were distinct differences. Unlike the traditional scary story, the new form eschewed the supernatural. . . . No ghosts or vampires or black magicians, but equally creepy types out of real life, the mutilated and the psychotic, renegade scientists and crackpot cult leaders. (p. 106)
Weird menace was inspired by a trip that pulp publisher Henry Steeger made to Paris, more specifically to the le Théâtre du Grand-Guignol, where he saw theatrical violence, cruelty, and gore in abundance. "We could do a magazine like that," Steeger realized, "with the same sort of emphasis." (Quoted on page 106.) Lee Server sees other possible influences, writing:
Steeger may also have had an eye on such contemporaneous movies as Island of Lost Souls, Mystery of the Wax Museum, and Freaks, each offering similar modern-dress horrors--vivisectionists, deformed maniacs, denizens of the carnival sideshow, all staples of the Weird Menace world. (p. 106)
He continues:
Villains, when they did materialize, were a mix of scheming psychopaths--mad scientists, religious cultists, vengeful old crones--and their repellent assistants--gnarled dwarves, brainless mutants, horny hunchbacks. They invariably came equipped with a panoply of elaborate devices for torture and slow death, bubbling vats, buzz saws, iron maidens, branding irons, or flame throwers. (p. 109)
Note the phrases "gnarled dwarves" and "horny hunchbacks."

Now, I can't say that Weird Tales was influenced by the weird menace magazines in its depiction of dwarves. After all, three of the seven covers shown here predate the arrival of Dime Mystery Magazine, the first of that type, in 1933. Instead, it seems to me that weird fiction and weird menace both drew from popular culture, folklore, fairy tales, and other sources in how they treated dwarves, hunchbacks, and other people not deemed of normal stature, build, or appearance. I suppose the idea was that sin or moral failings are expressed in the physical appearance of sinners. Even Tolkien's dwarves, heroes that they are, are sometimes lacking in moral fiber. Writers and artists of the pulp era fell too easily into stereotyping not only black people (as seen in a previous posting) but also dwarves. One difference is that black stereotypes in art are often about appearance, whereas stereotypes of dwarves seem to be about their moral character or about their role in the human drama. Either way, the pulps were not always kind to little people.

I count seven covers of Weird Tales showing dwarves or other little people. Five of the seven show dwarves as bad guys, or suggest that they are. One is neutral. And only one, the last, is positive. Note that the first dwarf cover following the advent of the weird menace magazines, from May 1937, could easily pass as one among that genre. The blurb on the cover--"a powerful tale of weird horror"--should remove any doubt that Weird Tales, usually "The Unique Magazine," was in this case imitating rather than standing alone.

Weird Tales, March 1926. Cover story: "Lochinvar Lodge" by Clyde Burt Clason. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch. You could call this the classic image of the dwarf in fantasy. He could easily have been one of J.R.R. Tolkien's inhabitants of Middle Earth. Unfortunately, it looks like the dwarf here is a villain. On top of that, he is about to be walloped.

Weird Tales, April 1926. Cover story: "Wolfshead" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by E.M. Stevenson. I'm not sure that this is a depiction of a dwarf, but he looks pretty small in stature. Whatever he is, the man here is a villain, and he appears to be animated by the spirit of a wolf.

Weird Tales, March 1927. Cover story: "The City of Glass" by Joel Martin Nichols, Jr. Cover art by C.C. Senf, another bizarre cover by the artist. The dwarf's bodily distortions make it almost like something from a hallucination or a dream. I still can't figure out what is that thing on his foot. Update (Dec. 21, 2016): Now I've got it. That's not a thing on his foot. It's a stool. Apparently the woman has been sitting. Upon getting up, she has upset the stool and his foot is behind it. I'm an artist and even I had a hard time reading that picture.

Weird Tales, July 1930. Cover story: "The Bride of Dewer" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. The dwarf here is not obviously a bad guy. The depiction here appears to be neutral at worst.

Weird Tales, May 1937. Cover story: "The Mark of the Monster" by Jack Williamson. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. I'm not sure that the male figure here is a dwarf, either, but again, he looks small in stature. Even if he is a normal-sized man, he has physical deformities, making him a suitable weird menace villain. Margaret Brundage drew a lot of pictures of women being tormented by men. She was no shrinking violet, and maybe the reading public demanded it, but I wonder if she felt that way herself sometimes.

Weird Tales, July 1938. Cover story: "Spawn of Dagon" by Henry Kuttner. Cover art by Virgil Finlay. Here is the typical Virgil Finlay Tor Johnson-like muscleman or eunuch and the typical moping face on the dwarf in front of him. Note that his skin is green, like that of two of the preceding dwarves. I take the color green to be a signifier of alienness. Plants are green. So are snakes and frogs. So, too, are many monsters, like Cthulhu.

Weird Tales, May 1940. Cover story: "The City from the Sea" by Edmond Hamilton. Cover art by Hannes Bok, who created the only obviously positive image of a dwarf on the cover of Weird Tales. It looks to me that the image of dwarves, like that of black people, softened as Weird Tales matured in the late 1930s and 1940s.

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

I'm Dreaming of a Weird Christmas . . .

$
0
0
Or
Scenes of Winter, Snow, and Ice on the Cover of Weird Tales

Tonight is Christmas Eve, and for the occasion I would like to show the covers of Weird Tales in which there are scenes of winter, snow, and ice. There are five of them, and they're a mixed bag to be sure. The first, by R.M. Mally, isn't bad. I'm actually intrigued and would like to read about Joe Scranton and his amazing adventure. The second, by Andrew Brosnatch is also intriguing. C. Barker Petrie's cover from January 1927 is my favorite. In fact it's one of my favorite of all Weird Tales covers. And from there it's downhill again to the last cover, from May 1939. So here they are, and . . .

Merry Christmas to Readers of Weird Tales!

Weird Tales, October 1923. Cover story: "The Amazing Adventure of Joe Scranton" by Effie W. Fifield. Cover art by R.M. Mally. An icebound ship makes me think of "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" by Samuel Taylor Coleridge . . .

Here illustrated by Gustave Doré. This episode from the poem is set in the South Atlantic, so there shouldn't be any polar bears. Oh, well.

Weird Tales, July 1925. Cover story: "The Werewolf of Ponkert" by H. Warner Munn. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch.

Weird Tales, January 1927. Cover story: "Drome" by John Martin Leahy. Cover art by C. Barker Petrie, Jr.

Weird Tales, March 1933. Cover story: "The Thing in the Fog" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, May 1939. "The Hollow Moon" by Everil Worrell. Cover art by Harold S. De Lay.

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

A Retreat of the Totalitarian Monster

$
0
0
Take a deep breath.

Now begin reading.

I like to listen to Mountain Stage, a radio show that originates in the Mountain State of West Virginia. On a Saturday night a few weeks ago, I thought about West Virginia and about fantasy and science fiction. More than a few writers for Weird Tales were born in, lived in, or died in the state. Fitz-James O'Brien received his mortal wound in what is now West Virginia, not long before it was admitted to the Union. (West Virginians can proudly claim theirs as the only state to secede from the Confederacy.) As I thought about West Virginia, I remembered a science fiction or fantasy story I read many years ago. In it, a man living in a West Virginia holler gets fed up with Hitler. In a mad vision, he gets in his car and drives to Nazi Germany to deal with his country's most hated foe. I wish I could remember the author and title of that story.

We had an election not long ago. If you remember, it was a little contentious. Only one state (Wyoming) had a wider spread, in terms of the percentage of the vote, separating the winner from the loser than did West Virginia. The loser has since gone home. Like a sasquatch, she is sometimes seen in the woods or on a hiking trail. The winner of the race is moving into the White House this month. In other words, person for person, West Virginians did more for their country than almost every other state did on November 8, not necessarily by voting for one candidate but by voting against the other so decisively. They helped to assure that she--an unindicted criminal, an aspiring tyrant, and one of the most mendacious and corrupt presidential candidates in American history--was flushed down the toilet along with her equally mendacious and corrupt husband. They also helped to prevent at least one constitutional crisis by denying her the presidency.

Two thousand sixteen was a bad year in general for Western-style tyranny, meaning tyranny of the leftist-socialist-statist variety. The United Kingdom voted in favor of its own sovereignty and independence in June. An unhinged socialist was defeated in the American presidential primaries earlier that month. (Small comfort there considering who defeated him.) We can hope that another is nearing the end of his reign in Venezuela. Still more are set to go down in flames in 2017.

Fidel Castro died last year, too, at an entirely too-advanced age. He was praised and his loss lamented by what Lenin is supposed to have called the useful idiots of this world. They are idiots, so of course they are incapable of understanding even the simplest of things, one of which is that Castro, like tyrants everywhere, was a monster. Here is an excerpt from an article called "Credulous Western Dupes and Castro" by John Fund, posted on November 27, 2016, on the website of the National Review (here):
Lastly, for all of Castro’s ranting about the exploitive nature of capitalism, it takes a truly mercenary mind to come up with the schemes his regime employed to garner hard currency--from drug-running, to assassinations to, well, vampiric behavior. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights reported in 1966 that 166 Cuban prisoners were executed on a single day in May of that year. But before they were killed, they were forced to undergo the forced extraction of an average of seven pints of blood from their bodies. This blood was sold to Communist Vietnam at a rate of $50 per pint. Those who underwent the bloodletting suffered cerebral anemia and a state of unconsciousness and paralysis. But that didn’t stop the executions; the victims were carried on a stretcher to the killing field where they were then shot.
One of the themes of this blog is the manifest monstrousness of human beings in general and of totalitarian leaders in particular. People can be monstrous as individuals, as we all know. People involved in mass movements, of which totalitarianism is the all-too-common end point, practice a special kind of monstrousness, though, one backed by political or intellectual ideas that not only justify their actions but actually require the totalitarian and his minions to murder, starve, torture, imprison, or, as in Castro's case, drain their life's blood from his fellow human beings.

Richard Matheson, a teller of weird tales, doesn't get much credit for an innovation in popular culture: In his novel I Am Legend (1954), he invented the zombie horde, what we might recognize now as another kind of mass movement. Matheson didn't call them zombies. He used the word vampires instead. It was George Romero in Night of the Living Dead (1968) who turned the zombie, previously a solitary slave created by a fellow human being, into one of a mass of men infected by an indifferent pathogen. Richard Matheson's hordes of vampires were the direct inspiration for Mr. Romero's hordes of zombies, which have come down to us in the present day in movies and television shows such as The Walking Dead. More on that in a bit.

Even before I Am Legend, there were writers who recognized that zombies might represent certain political ideas. I don't usually provide links to videos, but here's an excerpt from the 1940 film The Ghost Breakers, starring Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard:


Here is a transcript of the exchange:
Lawrence [Bob Hope]: You live here?
Montgomery [Richard Carlson]: Yes.
Lawrence: Well, then maybe you know what a zombie is.
Montgomery: When a person dies and is buried, it seems there are certain voodoo priests who . . . who have the power to bring him back to life.
Carter [Paulette Goddard]: How horrible!
Montgomery: It's worse than horrible because a zombie has no will of his own. You see them sometimes walking around blindly with dead eyes, following orders, not knowing what they do, not caring.
Lawrence: You mean like Democrats?
That exchange may have been written by the screenwriter, George Marshall, but the punchline could easily have come from Bob Hope himself.

Even before that--long before that--there were suggestions of the monstrousness of the tyrant. Here is a quote from the eighteenth century:
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
Note the word swarms, more or less equivalent to hordes or masses. Note especially the purpose of sending those swarms out into the world: to harass and eat out the substance of the people. Sounds a lot like a horde of zombies (or vampires or orcs or any number of monster types). The quote by the way is from the Declaration of Independence, written by the founder of what is now the Democratic Party. History is nothing if not full of ironies.

Now back to The Walking Dead. Before I go on, I have to admit that I'm a minority of one: I'm the only person in America who has never seen The Walking Dead. I can't really say much about the show. What I can say is what I have said before, that zombies in the Matheson/Romero mode can be interpreted as representing the great masses of men, or at the very least the fallen nature of man. Those great masses may be men living in a primitive state of nature, or men as ciphers in a contemporary mass movement, or anything in between. Whatever they are, zombies are monsters. They can also be used to symbolize men, who, too often, when they assemble into masses, act as monsters.

So in Castro we had a totalitarian monster acting as a vampire. He was also the leader of masses, or what he hoped to turn into masses--great numbers of people rendered without identity or autonomy and driven by a ravening desire to devour the free people of the world. In short, zombies. It didn't work of course. Nor has the leftist-socialist-statist program worked anywhere, although it often holds on for decades, in the process laying waste to people's lives. Anyway, that leap, from zombie horde to mass man and back again, is one I have sometimes made in this blog. Is it too big of a leap? Maybe. But I'm not the only person to see zombies and the zombie story as symbolic of things in the real world.

I recently read an article by Sean T. Collins called "The Shameful Fascism of The Walking Dead." It was posted on the website The Week on December 17, 2016, here. It's not a very long article; it will take you only a few minutes to read. What you'll find soon enough is that the author of the article sees The Walking Dead as fascist and more or less representative of America under our current president-elect. That's a fair enough interpretation. After all, I have made my own interpretations here and elsewhere. To each his own. I should add that my interpretation of the zombie horde doesn't necessarily clash with that of Sean Collins. He sees the show's human characters as fascists. I see zombies as representative of mass man, a category that includes communists and socialists. Fascism was a reaction to communism. The two go together. From the 1920s into the 1940s, they were locked in mortal combat. However, I don't see the human characters in a zombie story as representing fascists for a simple reason: they are free individuals acting freely--though not always admirably--in a state of nature, thus in the absence of a controlling State.

In his article, Sean Collins writes a good deal about the characteristics of fascism. His emphasis is on "a triumph of will" and "show[s] of force." What he leaves out is that fascism is a statist political system and a form of totalitarianism. That is its essence. Or, in Mussolini's words: "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." One characteristic of a post-apocalyptic setting is that there is no controlling State. At best, people are reduced to tribal living. In addition, fascism arose from and was a variation on socialism. In other words, it was just another mass movement, equal and in opposition to communism but not very much different from it or any other totalitarian system. (All leave a trail of blood.) If the human characters in The Walking Dead are fascists, then the conflict in the show is between two mass movements--opposing movements to be sure but mass movements nonetheless. So do the human characters in The Walking Dead exhibit the qualities of a mass movement? Are they driven by an intellectual or political idea? Are they burning with a holy fire? Do they wish to be subsumed by their movement? Do they yearn to surrender their individual identities and their autonomy to their cause and to an overarching State? More to the point, are they willing to die for it? Or do they wish to live as free, autonomous, and individual human beings, or failing that, to die so that others might live?

I can't say that the human characters in The Walking Dead represent free people. Again, I have never seen the show. But I can't see zombies as representing free people in their struggles against fascist oppressors, either. That would be an absurdity. Yet here is Mr. Collins' expert, Stephen Olbrys Gencarella of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst:
"The zombie trope in the United States emerged with the zombie-as-slave phenomenon around the turn of the 20th century, when American capitalism and colonialism led to ethical conflicts about labor and human rights." 
I'm not sure how historically accurate that assertion is. As I understand it, the idea of the zombie entered American culture in the 1920s and early '30s, not at the turn of the century. (I'm not sure when the first zombie story was published, but it seems to have been contemporaneous with the rise of fascism, i.e., in the 1920s.) As for that business about "American capitalism and colonialism"--well, that's typical leftist claptrap that can be disposed of without further regard.

Dr. Gencarella goes on, citing Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead as examples of a shift in the so-called zombie trope:
"[M]any zombie flicks of the late 20th century could be seen as critiques of consumerist desires, or calls for cooperation between disparate groups."
In his view, The Walking Dead
"is part of another shift, post-9/11, in which the ghouls fill in for presumed 'outsiders' to the nation--but a nation that is limited only to a worthy few." 
I have heard that argument before, that the humans in The Walking Dead are part of "a worthy few." You could fairly say that the creators of The Walking Dead have cast the zombies as representing people you're allowed to kill without compunction. Still, that doesn't get away from the idea that zombies are a mortal threat to humanity, not only because they want to kill humans but also because to die is to become a zombie. The comparison of zombie hordes to mass man seems to me unavoidable, for men who take part in mass movements, whether it be fascism, communism, or radical Islam, seek recruits before dead bodies. The bodies pile up only when people refuse to convert. The difference here is that to die is to become one of the enemy. The only alternatives are to live or be eaten, or to destroy yourself or be destroyed before you can be converted. In any case, to see zombies as people--especially to see them somehow as victims of a fascist movement afoot among the human characters--is to identify with them, or at least to have some sympathies with them. It is, more or less, a wish to see human beings destroyed or rendered into an undifferentiated, soulless mass, because that is the zombies' goal, or more accurately, the goal of the pathogen that animates them. That is also of course the goal of the totalitarian leader in control of a mass movement. There is of course one other alternative to interpreting the zombie story: that it is a simple entertainment and that if there is any symbolism at all, that it represents the human condition in the harshest of all possible worlds.

Not long ago I asked the question: Whom do leftists root for in movies and television? For people or for monsters? I sense now as I did then that they may actually identify or sympathize with the monsters rather than with the people. The admiration leftists express for men like Fidel Castro, whom we know to have been a monster, leads me to believe that their identification or sympathy with monsters extends into the real world. What they don't seem to understand--Sean Collins seemingly among them--is that the real fight in this world is not between fascism on one side and leftism or socialism on the other. It is a neverending fight between freedom and tyranny. Fascism and leftism or socialism are essentially the same thing. Both are for the all-controlling State and against the individual and his free exercise of his unalienable rights. For as long as leftists detach themselves from that reality, their thinking will be stunted and their cause will continue to see defeat as it did so well in 2016. If it weren't for all the pain they cause in the process, I might wish them to go on in their detachment from reality. In any case, here's to further retreats by the aspiring tyrants among us and to the further expansion of the cause of freedom in 2017.

Happy New Year!

A drawing by Hungarian cartoonist Victor Vashi, a refugee or escapee from the two great socialist-statist systems of the twentieth century, nazism and communism. Vashi drew cartoons of both. This drawing, showing a Soviet officer as a kind of monster perched on a midden of skulls, is from Red Primer for Children and Diplomats (Viewpoint Books, 1967), published on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the Russian Revolution. This year, 2017, will mark the centennial of that revolution, one that carried communists to power so that they might commence a century of political murder. I have no doubt that leftists in the West will celebrate that centennial and lament the passing of their creed.

Text copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Pavane pour une infante défunte

$
0
0
Before I let go of 2016, I have to remember a princess. Carrie Fisher died on December 27, bringing to an end a dream of life. I first saw her in Star Wars in 1977. Like boys everywhere, I fell in love with her. She was very beautiful, and though she was young, she was also tough. She could handle her words and, when needed, a blaster. She was a princess but you could also very easily imagine her as a senator and someone high up in an organization devoted to freedom in the galaxy. Girls loved her, too, my youngest sister among them. I drew a picture of Princess Leia for her on her school folder. There were two more movies in the series. There should have been more and they should have come earlier. Too many years passed before Carrie Fisher was once again in Star Wars, and by then there was a new cast and a new spirit. She will be in Star Wars again but I can't help but think she will haunt the movie rather than star in it. There have been and will be attempts to digitize her, but you can't digitize life, or beauty, or romance, or dreams.


I saw Carrie Fisher in life, once, in 2015 at a comic book convention in Indianapolis. I saw her from a distance, but I can say at least that I saw her. On the night before she died, we went to see Rogue One: A Star Wars Story at the theater. If you don't want to know something about the movie, stop reading now, but her likeness is in it, a likeness lacking in life and spirit to be sure. Hers is the last character to appear on screen. The next morning, Carrie Fisher, the real person, was gone. A strange valediction.

The subtitle of the movie is accurate, I think: it is a Star Wars story, told in the same universe of course but also in the same spirit, though somewhat darker in tone than the original. There are problems with it. Most can be overlooked. An obvious one that can't be is this: If you can cast a shield around a planet, why can't you cast a shield around your shield generator? A more subtle problem: More and more movies are being made by people who seem to have grown up playing computer games rather than reading literature or watching movies. The computer game aesthetic is more and more in film. There are contrived complications, objects to procure, puzzles to solve, obstacles to jump over or through, mazes to traverse. (One of the obstacles in Rogue One reminds me of the "choppy, crushy things" in Galaxy Quest. When you're evoking memories of a science fiction parody, you could have a problem with your movie.) In Rogue One, there are even digitized human characters, just as in a computer game. They are creepy and lifeless and distracting. I stopped listening to the dialogue when they were on screen. There is also a problem that has plagued science fiction since its beginnings, namely, the use of characters as mere plot devices rather than as representations of genuine human personalities. There is no one in the movie with the personality or allure of Carrie Fisher or Harrison Ford or even Billy Dee Williams or puppet master Frank Oz as Yoda. The exception might be the robot K-2SO, a kind of cross between Mr. Spock, R2-D2, and Marvin from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Finally, as in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, the lead character--in fact the strongest character and the driver of the action--is a woman. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It only shows what has happened in our culture since 1977 (forty years ago!). Then it was a boy who lived on a backwater planet, worked as a farmer, drank blue milk, watched his parental units die at the hands of the empire, and set off on a quest to avenge them, learn about the force, have a great adventure, and destroy the Death Star. Times change.

* * *

On New Year's Eve, we saw Passengers, starring Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence. From watching the preview, I thought it would be some kind of conspiracy movie. It's not. (I told you to stop reading if you don't want to know about the movie.) Instead it relies on two science fiction tropes: flight from an overpopulated planet and a meteor strike in deep space. The first is ridiculous. Unless something really changes, we're going to be rushing towards each other on an underpopulated planet rather than rushing away from each other on an overpopulated one. The second one is ridiculous, too. Both tropes, however, are used to set up a situation of "what if?", which is what science fiction is about, and in that, and in the intriguing situation, the gorgeous design, the fine special effects, and the perfectly fine performances by the four main actors, Passengers is worth a couple of hours of your life.

Copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Fiends and Murderers of the 1920s

$
0
0
I have started this year writing about the undead and the dead. The dark tone will continue for a while, beginning today with the first of a three-part series on fiends and murderers on the cover of Weird Tales. I'll try to find a way to brighten things up in the next few weeks, although I still want to find out and write about the origins of zombies in American popular culture.

When I was in South Korea, I was a member of the 36th Tactical Fighter Squadron. We were called the Flying Fiends. Our unit patch showed a creature wearing an old-fashioned aviator's helmet. Some of the guys called him "the slobberin' dog." I thought then that a fiend is simply a monster of some kind. Then my friend Joe told me that he looked it up and that a fiend is a sexual deviant. I just looked it up again. My dictionary says that a fiend is "a diabolically cruel or wicked person" or "an evil spirit." That doesn't get away from the depiction of fiends on the cover of pulp magazines, including the seven covers on display here. Each shows a man attacking, threatening, or abducting a woman. The sexual connotations are unavoidable. I tend to think that my friend Joe was right and that a fiend is sexual deviant or a sexual predator on women.


Showing or telling about women in peril is as old as storytelling, of course. It gives men and boys a chance to imagine themselves as rescuers of women. Pulp magazines, however, emphasized the sexual aspect of women in peril. (Maybe that gave men and boys a bit of a thrill or even a chance to imagine themselves as the tormenters of women.) They also emphasized sexual deviancy and sexual violence, including bondage, sadism, torture, and sexual mutilation. That was the hallmark of the weird menace pulps of the 1930s. But as the covers below show, there was fiendishness and murderousness in pulps before that. I count seven such covers of Weird Tales from the 1920s. Four are obviously in this category. Three are less certain. Unfortunately, I haven't read any of these cover stories, so I can't say for sure.

Weird Tales, April 1926. Cover story: "Wolfshead" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by E.M. Stevenson. You have seen this cover before--pretty recently in fact. Here it is again. Robert E. Howard was all of twenty years old when this cover was new.

Weird Tales, May 1926. Cover story: "The Ghosts of Steamboat Coulee" by Arthur J. Burke. Cover art by Andrew Bensen. Here the tables are turned and the fiend or murderer has the knife.

Weird Tales, September 1926. Cover story: "The Bird of Space" by Everil Worrell. Cover art by E.M. Stevenson. I included this cover with vampires and bats, but I don't know that the fiend here is a vampire. Maybe he just looks like one.

Weird Tales, July 1927. Cover story: "The Return of the Master" by H. Warner Munn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. I think that's a man scaring the woman. I'm not sure. And he may or may not be a fiend. I have included this cover here just to be sure.

Weird Tales, January 1929. Cover story: "The Black Master" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. Here again, I'm not sure that the man is an actual threat to the woman. He may be rescuing her. Here it is, though, just to be on the safe side.

Weird Tales, July 1929. Cover story: "The Corpse-Master" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. Where is the fiend? Sneaking into the picture on the left. I'll have to add this cover to my list of dwarf covers. And he's green. Note that there are three "masters" in a row.

Weird Tales, December 1929. Cover story: "The Mystery of the Four Husbands" by Gaston Leroux. Cover art by Hugh Rankin. This is the third ambiguous cover. I'm not sure that the man is a bad guy. The woman may just think that he is. Of course his bringing a knife to her bed might have something to do with it. Anyway, I just want to say that Hugh Rankin could really draw women. In their stature and allure, they remind me of Roy Crane's women in Wash Tubbs and Captain Easy.

To be continued . . . 

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Fiends and Murderers of the 1930s

$
0
0
The fiendishness and murderous continued into the 1930s in Weird Tales. I count five covers with this theme from that decade. Fiends and murderers seem to prefer knives, but there is hypodermic needle in the first picture and a snake, seemingly from a bottle, in the fourth.

Weird Tales, May 1930. Cover story: "The Brain-Thief" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf.

Weird Tales, October 1932. Cover story: "The Heart of Siva" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, March 1932. Cover story: "The Black Gargoyle" by Hugh B. Cave. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, February 1936. Cover story: "Coils of the Silver Serpent" by Forbes Parkhill. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, May 1937. Cover story: "The Mark of the Monster" by Jack Williamson. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

To be concluded . . . 

Text copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Fiends and Murderers of the 1940s and '50s

$
0
0
There was less murder and fiendishness on the cover of Weird Tales in the 1940s and '50s. That might be because the editor was a woman. Maybe she didn't want any more of that menacing and threatening of women. As you can see, none of the following four covers fits easily into this category, at least at first glance. I have read The Damp Man series, though, and I can tell you that the title character is the very definition of a fiend.

Weird Tales, January 1942. Cover story: None. Cover art by Gretta. This cover, by Joseph C. Gretter, is kind of a throwback to the 1920s or '30s. This was a time of transition in Weird Tales. Gretter, an artist of those decades (though he later assisted on Riley's Believe It or Not!), seems to have been a fill-in artist, and this was his only cover for "The Unique Magazine."

Weird Tales, March 1944, Canadian edition. Cover story [?]: "The Valley of the Assassins" by Edmond Hamilton. Cover art by an unknown artist. I'm not so sure about putting this cover in the category of fiends and murderers. The man on the right kind of looks like one of the undead. Or maybe he's a sorcerer of some kind. Anyway, here it is. You'll see this cover again.

Weird Tales, May 1949. Cover story: "The Damp Man Again" by Allison V. Harding. Cover art by John Giunta. That's the Damp Man himself, a real creep and a fiend.

Weird Tales, March 1950. Cover story: "Home to Mother" by Manly Wade Wellman. Cover art by Lee Brown Coye. The figure on this cover looks like he could be a murderer or fiend, but he could be just another one of Coye's decrepit souls.

Now it's on to Human Sacrifice and Executions.

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Rogue One and "Escape"

$
0
0
I have been thinking about Rogue One: A Star Wars Story and a few of more things that bother me about the movie. I have a friend who is a big fan of Star Wars movies. I asked her what she thought of Rogue One. She said it bothered her that there are so few female characters. It's true, there are few, but I pointed out that the lead character is female. That didn't do much for her (my friend), though. But is the female lead, Jyn Erso, played by Felicity Jones, really female? Or is she just a male character cast as a female, as is so common in movies, television, comic books, and fiction these days? Worse yet, is she not even a character but just a plot device disguised as a character?

Forest Whitaker plays a character (or plot device) called Saw Gerrera in Rogue One. (His name is an obvious pun on the theme of war.) In the movie, he is referred to as an extremist and is looked down on by the Rebellion. I thought that was odd. Is that the intrusion of contemporary politics into a movie about a time long ago and a galaxy far, far away? There seem to be parallels in the movie between Gerrera's group and Muslims on earth and between the attack on the convoy and a terrorist attack in the Middle East of today. Just what are the moviemakers getting at? Wouldn't it be better just to leave out things like that?

Speaking of the attack, why didn't the Empire just fly their shipment out of the city? Why did they have to transport their kyber crystals in overland vehicles? In too many science fiction movies, science and technology are used in the same way magic is used in fantasy: what the wielder of magic (or technology) can do with his abilities is essentially arbitrary. Gandalf can do all kinds of things, but he can't levitate himself out of the pit when he falls in with the Balrog? The Empire can fly a moon-sized space station between galaxies, but it can't lift off from the surface of a planet with a shipment of kyber crystals?

The way the Rebellion makes important decisions is downright laughable. Everybody gets together in a big room, they all get to put in their two cents worth, and there isn't any order or organization to their meeting. It's just a bunch of people shouting at each other. It's like a bunch of students sitting around in a lounge or a dorm room and talking about a problem. I suppose these scenes (there's one in The Force Awakens, too) are supposed to let us know that the Rebellion is democratic and inclusive, unlike that nasty, oppressive Empire. I'm skeptical, though. I doubt that a democratic structure, which tends to become no structure at all and very quickly a mob, has ever led to victory in war. I'm pretty sure only a hierarchical structure is capable of that.

The Rebellion seems to be pretty timid and tentative before being forced into the final battle. Keep in mind that Rogue One takes place very shortly before Star Wars. However, the rebels in Star Wars are not the same rebels as in Rogue One, and they didn't get that way because of the events in Rogue One. They were hard, tough, determined, and courageous long before the opening scene of Star Wars.

Finally, it's pretty obvious that women and minorities are the good guys in Rogue One and that white men are the bad guys. Well, whatever. It's their movie, and I can't say that really bothered me. What bothered me more is that Darth Vader seems smaller. Yeah, David Prowse no longer plays the character, but they could have at least found someone with shoulders to (literally) fill the role.

* * *

There is a good commercial playing on television right now. It's for PlaySation Vue, and it's called "Escape." You can watch it by clicking here. I don't know how aware the makers of the commercial are of science fiction and dystopian literature. I wonder if these images and ideas are actually a part of the collective unconscious or of the zeitgeist in today's world. But the commercial begins like The Matrix and ends like THX 1138 or Logan's Run. "Escape" depicts a corporate dystopia, the great fear of at least one-half of the political spectrum in this country. I'm skeptical of the prospects for a corporate dystopia. I even have misgivings about the plausibility of the conventional political dystopia. But this is a good commercial, and if there is anything like a corporate dystopia in America today, it surely has to do with cable television. (Just ask my sister, who has had to deal with the likes of Spoor and Dowser lately in her dealings with the cable company.)

Copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Human Sacrifice and Execution in the 1920s

$
0
0
There is more fiendishness and murderousness in this series on human sacrifice and execution in Weird Tales. In the previous series, the fiend or murderer attacked a woman who might somehow resist. Here, she is helpless. You can interpret this situation sexually, just as in the previous series. There is even a name for the desire to have sex with a sleeping or helpless person. It's called somnophilia. Bill Cosby, whom we loved so much when we were kids, has been accused of raping women after having drugged them. Some people think that he is a somnophiliac. Not long ago, I watched Mother, Jugs & Speed from 1976. There are scenes of drug use and of somnophilia in that movie, and you just can't watch it in the same way now as you might have then. I suppose this desire to put women into situations where they are helpless has to do with the viewer's (or participant's) feelings of inferiority or a lack of confidence, sexual ability, or sexual experience, or his attempts to avoid rejection or humiliation. Anyway, here they are, the covers of the 1920s showing human sacrifice and execution. In this first installment, all of the victims are women.

Weird Tales, September 1925. Cover story: "The Gargoyle" by Greye La Spina. Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch.

Weird Tales, November 1926. Cover story: "The Peacock's Shadow" by E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by E. M. Stevenson.

Weird Tales, February 1927. Cover story: "The Man Who Cast No Shadow" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C. Barker Petrie, Jr. I assume this is an image of sacrifice: the woman is helpless and tied down, while the man holds a knife. That makes three knives in a row.

Weird Tales, Ocober 1929. Cover story: The Woman with the Velvet Collar" by Gaston Leroux. Cover art by Hugh Rankin. Here the weapon of choice is not a knife but a guillotine blade. I remember in the movie The Da Vinci Code that the blade is supposed to be a masculine symbol and the cup a feminine symbol. So far in this series (and in the previous one), that seems to be true, at least for the male symbol.

To be concluded . . . 

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

Human Sacrifice and Execution in the 1930s and Beyond

$
0
0
There was more human sacrifice and execution in the 1930s in Weird Tales. The pattern was pretty well the same as before: a helpless woman, usually bound and recumbent, is about to be knifed, usually by a man. The pattern is a little different in two pictures here. One shows a man as the victim. The other shows a woman as the perpetrator. Once again, there is only one scene of execution, this one with a rope. In the last picture, there is no weapon at all, but I assume this is an image of human sacrifice.

Weird Tales, February 1930. Cover story: "Thirsty Blades" by Otis Adelbert Kline and E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by Hugh Rankin.

Weird Tales, October 1930. Cover story: "The Druid's Shadow" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Hugh Rankin. A nicely done cover by Hugh Rankin in complementary blue and orange.

Weird Tales, March 1932. Cover story: "The Vengeance of Ixmal" by Kirk Mashburn. Cover art by C. C. Senf.

Weird Tales, July 1933. Cover story: "The Hand of Glory" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, July 1936. Cover story: "Red Nails" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, September 1938. Cover story: "As 'Twas Told to Me" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, Summer 1974. Cover story: None. Cover art by Jack L. Thurston, a reworked version of an earlier paperback cover by the artist.

Next: Scientific Experimentation.

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Scientific Experimention on the Cover of Weird Tales

$
0
0
If science is the religion of the twentieth (and twenty-first) century, and if the god of science is an indifferent god, and if human beings are merely material objects without souls, then human sacrifice in the cause of science can be considered acceptable, even desirable. Witness Nazi experimentation on their victims. That's just some theorizing on my part. But on the cover of Weird Tales and other pulp magazines, the imagery of scientific experimentation isn't very much different from that of the fiend and murderer, or of human sacrifice and execution. Note the first three images shown below, especially the second, in which the woman is bound to what looks like a stainless steel table, her tormentor wields a scalpel instead of a knife, and he also wears a white lab coat instead of a red robe. He is evidently a scientist, but he acts like a cultist or a fiend. In my mind, that's a strange and significant association.

Weird Tales, January 1926. Cover story: "Stealer of Souls." Cover art by Andrew Brosnatch.

Weird Tales, November 1929. Cover story: "The Gray Killer" by Everil Worrell. Cover art by C.C. Senf.

Weird Tales, May 1930. Cover story: "The Brain-Thief" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C. C. Senf.

Weird Tales, April 1935. Cover story: "The Man Who Was Two Men" by Arthur William Bernal. Cover by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, February 1938. Cover story: "Frozen Beauty" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Virgil Finlay.

Weird Tales, November 1944, Canadian edition. Cover story [?]: "Death's Bookkeeper" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by an unknown artist. The cover artist or artists for the Canadian edition of Weird Tales seem to have worked pretty readily from a picture file: that's obviously a depiction of Boris Karloff and an even more realistic image of a snake.

Next: Whips, Chains, Bondage and Torture.

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Whips, Chains, Bondage, and Torture-1924-1931

$
0
0
Very often, Weird Tales was a magazine of terror, violence, torment, and cruelty. Cover after cover--about twenty in all in the magazine's original run--show scenes of whipping, bondage, torture, and other kinds of sadism. Much of the violence and cruelty is sexual. The cat-o'-nine-tails, with its connotations of sexual and homosexual flagellation, is especially common, especially in covers from the 1930s. Why all the cruelty? Part of it, I think, can be explained by the origins of the weird tale in the work of Edgar Allan Poe, who wrote several of what are now called contes cruel, or stories of cruelty, "gruesome physical horrors" (a quote from H.P. Lovecraft), and savage and ironic twists of fate. Some of these covers are in poor taste. Others are carried out pretty well, I think, like Hugh Rankin's moody illustration for "The Inn of Terror" by Gaston Leroux (Aug. 1929). At least one, the last shown here, is a nightmare of theme and composition. Like I said, there are about twenty of these covers. I'll show them in three parts beginning with the period 1924 to 1931.

Weird Tales, March 1924. Cover story: "The Spirit Fakers of Hermannstadt" by Harry Houdini. Cover art by R.M. Mally. This is one of few images of a naked man on the cover of Weird Tales. It's also one of the few in this three-part series that does not depict some kind of torture or cruelty.

Weird Tales, October 1928. Cover story: "The Werewolf's Daughter" by H. Warner Munn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. This cover almost makes it into the category of human sacrifice and execution, but there doesn't seem to be any executing going on, despite the presence of the headsman. There's also an odd detail: a dead cat on the lower left.

Weird Tales, November 1928. Cover story: "The Mystery of Acatlan" by Rachael Marshall and Maverick Terrell. Cover art by C. C. Senf. The whipping begins.

Weird Tales, August 1929. Cover story: "The Inn of Terror" by Gaston Leroux. Cover art by Hugh Rankin.

Weird Tales, January 1930. Cover story: "The Curse of the House of Phipps" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. There were lots of redheads on the cover of Weird Tales. Curtis Senf seems to have had a special liking for them.

Weird Tales, February 1930. Cover story: "Thirsty Blades" by Otis Adelbert Kline and E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by Hugh Rankin.

Weird Tales, January 1931. Cover story: "The Lost Lady" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf. This one has a reaching hand, a pistol, a green ghoul, a young, bound, and scantily clad woman, and a bald sadist with a cat-o'-nine-tails. The only thing missing is the kitchen sink.

To be continued . . .

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

A New Page and an Updated Page

$
0
0
I have added a new page for links to various websites related to weird fiction, fantasy, and weird fiction. See the list of pages on the right. If anyone has suggestions for additions to that page, please send them in. I will consider adding links to websites that are scholarly or encyclopedic in nature. I'm not interested in commercial websites, in sites that hype or advertise anything, or sites that contain objectionable content or just plain bad writing, art, or design.

I have also updated my page on my new story magazine. Just click on the link on the right.

Thanks for reading.

Whips, Chains, Bondage, and Torture-1932-1935

$
0
0
More bondage, more whipping, more cruelty. The only cover here that doesn't exactly fit in this category is the last, showing Conan in prison, about to be helped by a spunky young woman straight out of a Hollywood movie. He is in chains, though. The 1930s were the decade of the weird menace fad. Weird Tales seems to have participated in that fad, especially in the covers following these, in the last of the three parts of this series. Note that two of the four covers here that show a woman whipping another woman are of stories by Robert E. Howard. He may have been giving his readers some thrills when he wrote scenes of lesbian sadism and bondage. Then again, maybe he was giving himself some thrills.

Weird Tales, February 1932. Cover story: "The Devil's Bride" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by C.C. Senf.

Weird Tales, September 1933. Cover story: "The Slithering Shadow" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, January 1934. Cover story: "The Red Knife of Hassan" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, April 1934. Cover story: "Satan's Garden" by E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, December 1934. Cover story: "A Witch Shall Be Born" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, February 1935. Cover story: "The Web of Living Death" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, December 1935. Cover story: "The Hour of the Dragon" by Robert E. Howard. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

To be concluded . . . 

Text and captions copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

Whips, Chains, Bondage, and Torture-1936-1943

$
0
0
The following covers are not very much different from those before them. There are two more showing people wielding a cat-o'-nine-tails. In the first, the red-robed cultist is showing his victim the whip or caressing her with it in what seems to me a sexual way. A knife or sword can be used to represent a phallus. Maybe a whip can be, too. Anyway, there are two covers here showing women wielding whips in self-defense, a change in theme over previous covers. Then, finally, there is a man bound to a wheel, like in Margaret Brundage's cover in June 1938.

Weird Tales, March 1936. Cover story: "The Albino Deaths" by Ronal Kayser. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. Three years into the weird menace fad, Weird Tales gave its readers this cover promising "weird tortures in a ghastly abode of horrors." I assume those tortures were carried out by the albinos of the title, who might have been thrown with dwarves and hunchbacks into the pot of weird menace villains.

Weird Tales, January 1937. Cover story: "Children of the Bat" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, May 1937. Cover story: "The Mark of the Monster" by Jack Williamson. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. The weird menace fad continues in this cover illustrating "a powerful tale of weird horror."

Weird Tales, October 1937. Cover story: "Tiger Cat" by David H. Keller. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, November 1937. Cover story: "Living Buddhess" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, May 1938. Cover story: "Goetterdaemmerung" by Seabury Quinn, called "A Strange Tale of the Future" on the cover. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. Finally, the cat-o'-nine-tails have worn out and we're back to bondage.

Weird Tales, June 1938. Cover story: "Suicide Chapel" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage. The last weird menace type cover in Weird Tales.

Weird Tales, September 1942, Canadian edition. Cover story [?]: "Masquerade" by Henry Kuttner. Cover art by an unknown artist.

Weird Tales, November 1943. Cover story: "The Valley of the Assassins" by Edmond Hamilton. Cover art by A.R. Tilburne. In this last cover in the category of whips, chains, bondage, and torture, the bondage is not the focus of the illustration but only a detail. In other words, the kind of cruelty and depravity so common in the covers of the 1920s and '30s effectively came to an end in June 1938. Weird Tales was sold to Short Stories, Inc., later that year. I wonder if those two events were just coincidental. More likely, the weird menace fad was coming to an end. Evidence of that: probably around the time Weird Tales had its last weird menace cover, Dime Mystery Magazine announced that it would change its format beginning with its September 1938 issue. The emphasis would be less on weird menace and more on mystery and detective stories. Not long after that, Mayor Fiorello La Guardia of New York City launched a crusade against obscenity in magazines. Weird menace was in the spotlight in a way you don't want to be. The fad finally came to an end in the 1940s, although it likely jut migrated to paperback books and larger format magazines, especially confessional magazines of the kind that were still on the newsstand in the 1970s and '80s.

Text and captions copyright 2016 Terence E. Hanley

Peacocks on the Cover of Weird Tales

$
0
0
I closed the last series with a cover showing a peacock. That made me think of a further entry on the peacock covers of Weird Tales. I wish I could say that this is a happier topic than the previous several series, but there's more human sacrifice and bondage here. 

There are four peacock covers in Weird Tales, a fair number for a subject you wouldn't ordinarily associate with weird fiction, although Flannery O'Conner, who wrote what might in a broad sense be called weird fiction or at the very least gothic fiction, was known for raising peacocks. I suppose the association between peacocks and weird fiction has to do with the association between peacocks and the Orient: very often, weird stories are set in that part of the world, or its villains originate there.

Weird Tales, November 1926. Cover story: "The Peacock's Shadow" by E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by E.M. Stevenson.

Weird Tales, August 1932. Cover story: "Bride of the Peacock" by E. Hoffman Price. Cover art by T. Wyatt Nelson.

Weird Tales, November 1937. Cover story "Living Buddhess" by Seabury Quinn. Cover art by Margaret Brundage.

Weird Tales, November 1943. Cover story: "The Valley of the Assassins" by Edmond Hamilton. Cover art by A.R. Tilburne. The artist Tilburne specialized in depicting animals. It's no surprise that his peacock would be the most prominent on the cover of Weird Tales.

I still have a few categories to go in completing this series on the cover themes and subjects in Weird Tales, but I would like to take a break from it and get back to the biographies of the writers and artists who contributed to "The Unique Magazine." That's how I will start off the month of February 2017 after a series on the origins of zombies in America.

Text copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

The Secret Origin of Zombies-Part One

$
0
0
Zombies Are Here!

Zombies as we know them today are revenants, a French word that translates more or less as those who come back. I have written about zombies before. Earlier this month I wrote about them again. Now here they are again today. Being revenants, zombies have come back to my blog. I will continue to write about them over the next few weeks. My purpose will be a little different this time around, but I will return to some of the same themes and interpretations as before.

The article with which I began this month of January is called "A Retreat of the Totalitarian Monster." You can read it by clicking here. I'm still not completely happy with what I wrote, but I'll let it stand for now. I can tell you, though, that if you're thinking about writing on zombies, you'd better be ready for a tussle.

At first glance, the zombie story is an entertainment. Millions of people watch zombie movies and television shows; read zombie novels, short stories, and comic books; and participate in zombie walks and other zombie events. They do these things for fun or escape or to pass the time. There may be something more going on, though, something deeper and with greater significance. I wrote about zombies before and I have written about them again because I have sensed deeper meaning in the zombie storyAny meaning or significance is open to interpretation of course. Some people see it this way. Some that. But the fact that discussions of zombies get so contentious indicates that there is indeed some deeper meaning in their story. It's obvious that people on both sides of the argument have something very serious at stake. Usually the argument is or becomes political--and pretty quickly. There are controversies when it comes to other monsters in our culture, but none seems to match the controversy over zombies. I would hazard a guess that no one has ever said that werewolves represent a consumerist, conformist, statist, or socialist society, nor has anyone ever said that people who want to destroy werewolves are capitalists, fascists, or racists. To say those things about zombies and their human opposition, though . . . well, them's fightin' words.

Two questions came up in my article on zombies. The first is a larger question that ought to be answered. The second is much smaller and will be answered when we have an answer to the first.

The first question is this: When did zombies first enter popular culture in America?

The second is this: Was there some kind of connection between: a) the entry of zombies into American popular culture; and b) American capitalism and colonialism or imperialism around the turn of the twentieth century?

An answer to the first question is important because zombies are so popular and pervasive in our culture. We ought to know their history. An answer to the second question is important because of suggestions that human society in the zombie story, specifically in the television series The Walking Dead, represents fascism and/or an extreme of American capitalism and colonialism or imperialism. That case is made by writer Sean T. Collins in an article called "The Shameful Fascism of The Walking Dead," dated December 17, 2016, and posted on the website The Week, here.

My second question was not really prompted by what Mr. Collins wrote. He has his interpretation of the zombie story and I can easily live with that. I have a problem with his expert, though. That expert is Dr. Stephen Olbrys Gencarella of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Dr. Gencarella is an associate professor of folklore, humor, and related subjects. His doctoral degree is from Indiana University, so I'll say hi to a fellow Hoosier. The description of his interests on his university's website is a lot of overly intellectualized academic gobbledygook. But lurking in his list of publications is this: "Thunder without Rain: Fascist Masculinity in AMC's The Walking Dead," published in Horror Studies, 7 (1), 125-146, 2016. I have not read that paper, nor have I seen The Walking Dead. Maybe I'm not the right person for this discussion. But I can tell you what I have found so far in my research.

In his article, Sean T. Collins quotes Dr. Gencarella:
The zombie trope in the United States emerged with the zombie-as-slave phenomenon around the turn of the 20th century, when American capitalism and colonialism led to ethical conflicts about labor and human rights.
The implication seems clear to me: by associating the emergence of "[t]he zombie trope" with an age of "capitalism and colonialism" in America, Dr. Gencarella seems to be saying that zombies represent an underclass of industrial workers and/or colonial laborers. By extension, then, the human beings in the zombie story must represent their overlords. A further implication, it seems, is that capitalism and colonialism have reached an extreme in the present day, and that that extreme is fascist. That's Mr. Collins' argument, anyway. Judging from the title of Dr. Gencarella's paper, I would say that he agrees. Or maybe the idea was his originally, as the title and publication date of his paper suggest.

It seems to me that much of the argument that The Walking Dead--and by extension the country that voted for our current president--is fascist hinges on the supposed emergence of "[t]he zombie trope" coincident with a capitalist-colonialist age, i.e., around 1900. So here's where the first question comes in: When did zombies come into American popular culture? If it was around 1900, then Dr. Gencarella's interpretation might have some weight. But if not, then what? How strong is an argument that hinges on an association that turns out not to be any association at all?

So when did zombies enter popular culture in America? The story on the Internet seems to be that zombies arrived with the publication of William B. Seabrook's book The Magic Island in 1929 and the subsequent release of the movie White Zombie in 1932. From what I have found so far, that seems to be true. People had encountered the word zombi(e) before in print, but nothing before seems to have matched the popularity or the staying power of The Magic Island or White Zombie. There were Vikings in America before Columbus (and probably other Europeans, too) but Columbus gets the credit for discovering America because once he had discovered it, it stayed discovered. Likewise, once William Seabrook wrote about zombies and people saw them on screen in White Zombie, zombies stuck. They haven't been forgotten in the almost ninety years since. But there were zombi(e)s in America before The Magic Island. Long before.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary (more accurately, according to accounts on the Internet of what the Oxford English Dictionary says), the first use in print in English of the word zombi(e) was in Robert Southey's History of Brazil, published in three volumes from 1810-1819. I haven't found the exact passage yet, but I think the word was spelled zombi rather than zombie. (The spelling has some importance, as we'll see.) Just nineteen years later, the word zombi entered popular culture with the publication of a story called "The Unknown Painter" in Chambers' Edinburgh Journal for June 30, 1838. Within weeks, that story was reprinted in American newspapers. (The earliest occurrence I have found is in The People's Press and Wilmington Advertiser of Wilmington, North Carolina, for August 24, 1838.) That began an extraordinary run, for "The Unknown Painter" was reprinted again and again in American newspapers, popular magazines, and books for more than half a century after its first appearance. In short, Americans had encountered the term zombi long before 1900 and long before the age of capitalism and colonialism in America.

Now to be fair, the zombi in "The Unknown Painter" is not one of the undead. He appears to be more of a nocturnal mischief-maker or trickster, like the African folkloric character Anansi, or like the elves in the story of the elves and the shoemaker. There were other zombis in American popular culture after the unknown painter's zombi, though. There were also related creatures and beings, including duppies, loogaroos, and jumbies (also spelled jumbis or jumbees). All were supernatural creatures or beings. Most were spirits. Even as the story of the unknown painter faded, Americans continued to write about these creatures and beings, often after having been in direct contact with Caribbean culture. Chief among them was Lafcadio Hearn (1850-1904), who went to the Caribbean in 1887-1889 and returned dispatches for publication in Harper's New Monthly Magazine. He collected his stories in book form in Two Years in the French West Indies, published by Harper and Brothers in 1890. Again, in the stories and accounts of Lafcadio Hearn, zombis are not really the undead, certainly not the bodily undead. (1) They are more nearly evil spirits, and they remained evil spirits in the popular fiction of his time and later, such as in The Isle of the Winds: An Adventurous Romance by Samuel R. Crockett (1900) and The Marathon Mystery: A Story of Manhattan by Burton E. Stevenson (1904). (See below.)

So we have arrived at the turn of the century, and zombis are still one of three types: 1) The mischief-maker or trickster, an interpretation that seems to have disappeared after "The Unknown Painter" fell out of print; 2) An evil spirit of varying kinds and manifestations; and 3) One I haven't mentioned yet, Li (or Le) Grand Zombi, the Serpent God of Voodoo culture, apparently equivalent to the Damballa or Damballah of African mythology. (George Washington Cable mentioned Zombi in his book Creole Slave Songs [1886].) What is missing in all of this is William B. Seabrook's version of the zombie, i.e., one of the undead, a bodily creature who has been enslaved through magic. That zombie--spelled with an -e, apparently for the first time in The Magic Island--is the version that has come down to us today as the shambling, mindless slave, only today, he is a slave to his appetite for human flesh rather than to a human master.

So there were zombis in American popular culture as far back as 1838, there were zombis throughout the 1800s, and there were zombis into the early 1900s. My research isn't bulletproof by any means, but I have not found, in any source before the 1920s, an example of or a reference to zombi(e)s as bodily revenants, the undead, the walking dead, or mindless or soulless slaves made that way by slave masters of whatever color. No zombies suffering under the capitalist, colonialist, or imperialist America of the turn of the century. No zombies yoked to the machine of American oppression. No zombie underclass, no zombie proletariat, no zombie peasants or zombie farm workers exploited for their labor, no mass of industrial zombie workers or zombie wage slaves. Nothing but evil spirits, tricksters, duppies, and serpent gods.

I hope Dr. Gencarella has found something more.

Note
(1) Hearn in fact asks a young woman, Adou, straight out:
"What is a zombi? [. . . .] Is it the spectre of a dead person, Adou? Is it one who comes back?"
She answers:
"Non, Missié,--non; çé pas ça."
("No, Monsieur,--no; that's not it.") Italics are in the original. The trouble Americans (or maybe just white people) have in getting an answer to the question What is a zombi(e)? is a recurring theme in the early literature of zombi(e)s, i.e., from 1838 to 1929. I believe there is some significance in the question and answer, even if the point is only that the rationalist modern mind may try but is not up to the task of understanding something from the pre-rational past.

To be continued . . . 

The Isle of the Winds: An Adventurous Romance by Samuel R. Crockett (1900) is a historical adventure involving, among other things, a search for the treasure of Sir Harry [sic] Morgan. On board a jolly boat, young Philip Stansfield and his companions are beset by a school of devil fish . . .
"But this is rank witchcraft," I cried. "This is the blackest of black magic."
Eborra shrugged his shoulders.
"It is my mother," he said, as if the explanation were sufficient; "my mother and Obeah--Obeah always great magic."
(Obeah is a type of magic of the West Indies and is related to Voodoo.)

A little later:

"It is nigh to the hour of the zombis!" said Eborra behind me, speaking in a whisper with his lips close to my ear.
"And what are the zombis?" I asked him without moving [. . . .]
"They are the spirits of the dead," he answered solemnly. "They come when my mother calls them. It is they who have entered into the devil fish. Soon they will depart."
And so they do, in a scene worthy of Weird Tales.  

The Marathon Mystery: A Story of Manhattan by Burton E. Stevenson (1904) is a contemporary mystery/adventure set in New York City. In it, the narrator questions a young woman named Cecily, late of Martinique, about a man named Tremaine, whom she refers to as doudoux (an endearment referring to one's lover or boyfriend):
"You were happy there [at Fond-Corre]?"
"Yes--except for the times when doudoux was in his black spells."
"His black spells?"
"Yes--oh, then every one ran from him--even I. He was terrible--raving and cursing M'seur Johnson."
"Johnson?" I repeated with a sudden leap of the heart. "Who was he, Cecily?"
"He was doudoux's zombi," she answered with conviction, and crossed herself.
"Then he didn't live at Fond-Corre?"
"At Fond-Corre? Oh, no! He was a zombi--in the air, in the earth, everywhere. Doudoux would fight with him an hour at a time. Oh, it was terrible!"

Here, then, are two examples of the zombi of the turn of the century. In the first--set in the historical past--zombis are indeed revenants, but they are spirits, not bodies. In the second, the zombi is obviously a spirit in fleshly form, but like the spirits that possess the devil fish in The Isle of the Winds, the zombi Mr. Johnson is a tormentor, seemingly in a position superior to that of the tormented person and nothing like the zombies of today.

Original text copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley

The Secret Origin of Zombies-Part Two

$
0
0
Magical Thinking and The Magic Island

Like the title says, I'm looking into the origins of zombies in American popular culture, and I'm doing it for two reasons. First, so we know just when and how it happened. Second, so that we can figure out whether it has anything to do with capitalism, colonialism, imperialism, fascism, or any other -ism you care to imagine.

For the first part of this series, I looked for occurrences of the word zombi(e) in the popular press around 1900 and before. Why 1900? Because that's when Dr. Stephen Olbrys Gencarella of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst says it all happened, to wit:
The zombie trope in the United States emerged with the zombie-as-slave phenomenon around the turn of the 20th century, when American capitalism and colonialism led to ethical conflicts about labor and human rights.
The quote is from an article called "The Shameful Fascism of The Walking Dead," by writer Sean T. Collins, dated December 17, 2016, and posted on the website The Week, here. It seems to me that there's a lot riding on Dr. Gencarella's assertion, for if "[t]he zombie trope"didn't come into American popular culture sometime around 1900, then there could be something wrong with his argument. It might take some of the starch out of Mr. Collins' argument as well.

So I did a search for the word zombie in popular sources from before 1910, and I came up empty. That's because no one I have found called them zombies before William B. Seabrook in his newspaper articles of 1928 and in The Magic Island of 1929. (The word zombi, describing a different kind of being or creature, was in print in American newspapers as early as 1838.) I will admit that I didn't exhaust sources in the American popular press from before 1910, but I did what I think were some good, thorough searches, and I came up empty. I wonder if Dr. Gencarella has access to further sources to back up his assertion that zombies arrived on our shores and in our imaginations around 1900.

So if it didn't happen around 1900, when did it happen? When did zombies as we know them today make their entry into American popular culture? The evidence still points to the period 1929-1932 when The Magic Island was published and White Zombie, the first known and extant zombie movie, was released. That's a big gap--1900 to 1929. (1) There was something to fill that gap, but I'm going to hold off on that part of the story for now.

I have a newspaper item from 1932 that reads:
Do zombies really exist? Rumors have been seeping in for years from the island of Haiti about dead bodies being exhumed and, through a process of sorcery, put to work in the fields and mills, but is there any truth in the rumors? (2)
The item doesn't give any source for the "rumors" of zombies. (I guess rumors don't really have sources.) So what does that mean, "for years"? Since 1928, when William B. Seabrook had his first articles on the subject published in American newspapers? Or was it before that? We'll never know as far as this newspaper item is concerned. But the conventional wisdom is that zombies are part of the folklore of Haiti, a nation situated on Seabrook's "magic island" of Santo Domingo or Hispaniola. And just what was going on in Haiti in the 1920s and early 1930s? Well, American occupation was going on, so cheer up, all of you who think zombies have something to do with capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism.

All right, that's enough cheer, for there are already problems with the idea that the zombies of Mr. Collins' and Dr. Gencarella's theorizing are somehow related to capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism at the turn of the century, and the American occupation of Haiti. First, American troops did not go into Haiti until 1914, and the actual occupation didn't begin until the following year. So unless you're really math-challenged, 1914-1915 still isn't "around the turn of the 20th century." On the other hand, it's only 14 to 15 percent of a century. That's the same percentage that the New York Times gave as Donald Trump's chances of winning the presidency, so maybe it's accurate after all. As we all know, the New York Times is never wrong.

Second, the American occupation of Haiti was ordered by President Woodrow Wilson, a man who was a lot of the things that academics, journalists, and other people on their side of the political spectrum really love: college professor and college president; Progressive, Democrat, and internationalist; member of the academic, political, and intellectual élite; a hero for presiding over the implementation of the progressive income tax and the direct election of senators. As a bonus, he also presided over a controlled economy during World War I, suppressed dissent in America (just like universities do today), and advocated for the centralization of political power in a supranational organization, the League of Nations. And he really liked golf, just like our most recent ex-president, whom you might call a Wilson revenant.

Third--and this is a bigger part of the story--the United States has been since its inception an opponent and even a destroyer of empires. Since 1775, we have fought wars against the British Empire, the Spanish Empire, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Japanese Empire. We have also fought wars against states that were de facto empires, Russia under the Bolsheviks, Italy under the Fascists, and Germany under the Nazis, for example. And we have opposed other empires with which we did not go to war, such as the Mexican and French empires. You could make a good case that the United States established an internal empire on the North American continent, but as far as an overseas empire goes, there was never very much of one (the Philippines, Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico, etc.), and we willingly gave up most of it, or we have allowed our possessions their autonomy and have provided for their prosperity in ways that aren't very imperialistic-y. For example, no one thinks of Puerto Ricans as being a bunch of poor, oppressed people, laboring under the yoke of American imperialism and yearning for their freedom and independence. In fact, when they have been offered their independence, they have said no thanks. 

Anyway, like in most other places, American forces eventually pulled out of Haiti--not a very imperialistic-y thing to do, either. So now we're on the horns of dilemma: How can we possibly lay American capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism as the cause for zombies at the feet of a Progressive and Democrat like Woodrow Wilson? Well, don't worry, I'm about to let you off the hook: Wilson came from a family of slaveholders and is supposed to have been a racist. He was also a supporter of eugenics (as most good Progressives were in those days). And he committed a sin against liberalism (and against the Constitution, I might add) by clapping socialist (and Bernie Sanders equivalent) Eugene V. Debs in prison for sedition. (I'm surprised that a photograph of a young Bernie with an old Debs hasn't surfaced yet.) So maybe Wilson and his capitalist, imperialist lackeys caused zombies after all.

Wait, there's more: American troops remained in Haiti throughout the 1920s under Republican presidents Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover. Bad, bad Republicans. The troops finally came out under Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1934. Yay, FDR! There's still more in which leftists can take heart in their attempts to link zombies with capitalism: William B. Seabrook's book The Magic Island was published in 1929, the year of the stock market crash. White Zombie was released in 1932 in the worst year of the Great Depression. All of those events took place during the presidency of Herbert Hoover, one of our favorite bugaboo presidents. Oh, but wait a minute, Hoover is sometimes seen as a technocrat, i.e., as an expert, as one of a governing élite. We like élites. He was also something of a Progressive. We really like Progressives. And he worked for Woodrow Wilson during Word War I. We really, really like . . . wait, was Wilson a good guy or a bad guy? I can't remember now. Anyway, Hoover caused people to live in shantytowns in the Great Depression like a bad capitalist oppressor. Boo! On the other hand, he was, like Bill Nye the Science Guy, an engineer. Hooray! We love Bill Nye. He knows everything about global warming, even if he is only a mechanical engineer. Now I'm confused. Was Hoover good or bad? Was he a capitalist and an imperialist, or was he a Progressive and a technocrat who saved Europeans (who we know are superior to us) from the scourges of the bad, bad German Empire during World War I? (3) Didn't he oppose war? Didn't he have an American-Indian as his vice-president? And didn't he arrange for the American withdrawal from Haiti before leaving the presidency to his smiling successor? Too bad it all didn't happen under Calvin Coolidge, the worstest and most heartless capitalist we had as president until Ronald Reagan came along. If Coolidge had caused zombies, then we could all really put our minds at ease.

Anyway, there were zombis in the popular American press from as early as 1838 to the early decades of the twentieth century. There have been zombies in popular culture since 1929. In recent years, they're everywhere and have taken over everything. Today they actually live rent-free in the minds of academics and journalists. (I guess you could say that zombies have consumed their brains.) But what about the period of, say, 1900 to 1929? Where were zombis or zombies then? Well, where else but in pulp magazines?

To be continued . . .

Notes
(1) Please don't make the argument that 1929 was "around the turn of the 20th century." That's like saying World War II ended around the time of the Battle of the Somme.
(2) From "At the Elwood," evidently a canned press release for the movie White Zombie, printed in the Call-Leader of Elwood, Indiana, Dec. 23, 1932, p. 6. For those who haven't been there, Elwood is one long, straight, well-lighted street.
(3) And what about the German Empire? Yeah, they did horrible things to black people in Africa, but they stood against American imperialism in the Caribbean, plus they implemented a program they called State Socialism. As long as your program is socialist, it's okay to do horrible things to black people in Africa. Just ask Robert Mugabe and his apologists in the West. One more great thing the German Empire did: In 1917, they put Lenin in a train car from Switzerland to Sweden so that he could re-enter Russia. Revolution forced Russia out of the war, and after that, Lenin and his comrades created a workers' paradise in the new Soviet Union. Or was it that he and they sent millions of Russian workers to Paradise? I can't remember.



Text copyright 2017 Terence E. Hanley
Viewing all 1176 articles
Browse latest View live