To embrace the work as
a whole... I respect Strantzas for
wanting to avoid the obvious tribute collection, as he concedes from
the outset, so adding to the countless roster of second-rate
fan-fiction titles; but his alternative reasoning for the title feels
tenuous in the extreme.
For those anticipating a tribute collection, written-in-the-style,
you may be disappointed. The narrative voices are mainly the
authors'; which is just as well since the majority, expressed in the
modern American-English vernacular, would only further distance us
from Aickman's own English RP style.
While
Strantzas warns against this very assumption in his intro, his
alternative reasoning for the title seems equally vague – that,
while RA's work was
idiosyncratic, the way
he worked is shared by our generation, influenced by him. i.e. by
“mining their own personal psychology” and “tapping into their
own subconsciousness, much as Aickman had.” Aickman, yes, and also
every other writer on the planet, which fails to justify or explain
precisely what set him apart.
On
reading, I remain puzzled as to how these tales – taken in
unity – even begin to justify the book's title, if the way
Aickman worked is a raison d'etre shared by this generation.
Strantzas claims this is through being“open to exploring new
avenues of the subtly bizarre.” Then could you not say that about
any idiosyncratic
author in recent history? Which
then was Aickman's avenue? This isn't defined. The approach of
each contributor is so much a contrast to its predecessor as to have
been lifted from disparate sources. This is less a complaint, though,
than a mild word of warning to an Aickman completist going by the title alone. I'd suggest its
appeal would lie more with the convert to the uncanny, at large,
rather than the seasoned specialist on the author.
Strantzas also claims that attempting to write like Aickman is
“impossible.” Difficult, certainly,
but not insurmountable.
The
best of the work here defies this claim, showing the necessary cool
impassivity and psychological insight. Praise then to Richard
Gavin, John Howard, D.P. Watt, Michael Cisco, Lynda Rucker, Michael
Wehunt, Helen Marshall and Malcolm Devlin. Their entries at least
feel influenced by
Aickman, without, in any way, aping him, as Strantzas wanted to
avoid. Were
that the whole collection was so pitched.
But it is fortunate, for us all today, that we live in an era where
the short tale has blossomed in popularity, regularity and quality, in the
face of nay-saying publisher agents; one of whom – as recently as
2008 – confidently predicted its demise. Undertow's growing list remains
welcome confirmation of that untruth.
No comments:
Post a Comment