Setting aside the text of H. P. Lovecraft's included tales (“The Rats in the Walls,” “The Colour Out of Space,” “The Dunwich Horror,” and “At the Mountains of Madness”), The Annotated Lovecraft quickly becomes an instance of gratuitous exploitation of Lovecraft's name.
The author of well over fifty horror stories (not to mention essays, noted letters, and weird poetry), a selection of three short stories and one short novel hardly encapsulates even a sampling of the author's work. The Annotated Lovecraft teases the reader with a smattering of quotations culled from Lovecraft's correspondence with fellow authors and editors, and provides some “viewpoints” written by Lovecraft with regards to his own craft as a denouement – but the included material does not warrant an entire volume dedicated to such sparse revelations.
Annotations included feel somewhat intrusive, for the most part. Despite several occasions when a footnote is helpful to a modern-day reader (a description of chemicals mentioned in “The Colour Out of Space,” for example, or the scientific nature of light waves and their impact upon the human eye, are completely unnecessary to the enjoyment of the story but provide further insight as to the author's intent), the notations are excessive. They serve as comparisons to other works not included in the book, including those of other authors. Other notes serve as stickling points to point out perceived errors in Lovecraft's scientific knowledge (despite the fact that such erroneous observations are made by the tale's third-party narrator, and not by Lovecraft himself). These serve as points of interest only to those already well-versed in Lovecraft's work, and then the notations are completely moot anyway.
By far, the most offensive notes are those which serve as definitive sources. A certain word – say, “ichor,” “detritus,” “pustules,” or even “cul de sac” - will be defined by use of a footnote, as if the reader would not be intelligent enough to know the word and would need further clarification in order for the story to proceed. And yet, throughout the introductions of each story, true five-dollar words are strewn throughout the text without such dictionary assistance – as if to express a superior intelligence of the writer over the reader.
Photographs are included throughout the book, but they come with captions centrally located at the beginning of the title as opposed to conveniently beneath the image, as is typical. For a book comprised of annotations, this is a downfalling not to be overlooked.
Finally, perhaps the most insulting quality of The Annotated Lovecraft is editor S. T. Joshi's frequent exhalation of frustration with erroneous, incomplete, or improperly edited Lovecraftian tales, whether by the original publishers, by subsequent editors of short story collections, or even by H. P. Lovecraft himself (from autograph manuscripts wherein Lovecraft attempted to include details omitted from his original work) – and yet, The Annotated Lovecraft is veritably riddled with typographical errors. These errors are primarily of mistyped words (one correctly-spelled word in place of a similarly-spelled word, which effectively renders the text incomprehensible in its newly erroneous form, or sometimes words which have been omitted completely due to error) which could have been avoided by a careful review of the reprinted text. “Convenient, if textually unsound,” states Joshi of one collection of Lovecraft's work. “Lengthy but insubstantial and occasionally unreliable,” he writes about another book, a memoir of one of Lovecraft's friends. “The editing is at times erratic” and “Previous Arkham House editions [...:] contain many errors” he goes on about other compilations.
He ought to have thrown his own The Annotated Lovecraft on top of that same pile of lightly-dismissed works.