Buddy read: "Carnacki, the Ghost Finder"

[Ken B]

Anyone interested in tackling the six short stories of Carnacki, The Ghost Finder by William Hope Hodgson?

We can do one short story a week. I can map that out and maintain the thread.

The book is free all over the internet. I downloaded it at:

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10832

The version below has the other three stories "The Haunted 'Jarvee'", "The Find" and "The Hog" and it also appears to have a different version of "The Thing Invisible" (published in 1949 vs the original publication in 1910):

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hodgs...

[Marc-Antoine]

I'm in, Ken.

[Ken B]

Lets do these dates. If you finish and post any discussion, use spoiler tags.

Anyone can join in at any time!!!!!

"The Gateway of the Monster" & "The House Among the Laurels" - week starting 9/16
"The Whistling Room" & "The Horse of the Invisible" - week starting 9/23
"The Searcher of the End House" & "The Thing Invisible"- week starting 9/30
"The Haunted 'Jarvee'" & "The Find" - week starting 10/7
"The Hog" - week starting 10/14

[Marc-Antoine]

Cool, look forward to both the read, and the discussion.

[Stan]

One of my favorite authors. My Master's thesis in film writing at UCLA was a script adaptation of "The Whistling Room."

I thought "Carnacki" would be a great TV series. Apparently, the BBC thought so as well, producing a series called "The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes," of which Hodgson's story "The Horse of the Invisible" was a part, filmed in 1971. Donald Pleasence starred as Carnacki (I thought—though I love him as an actor—he was poorly cast.)

[Jon Recluse]

There are 9 Carnacki stories....

And I'm moving this thread over to the Buddy Reads folder.

[Ken B]

Yeah, there are 9. But, only six in this collection. If we make it through these 6, we can do the others.

[Ken B]

Stan, might be nice to have your input when we get to "The Whistling Room". Would be cool to hear about what you found difficult about writing the screenplay (you say "script adaptation"...is this a screenplay?). What did you have to change to make it work.

Save your ideas for the week of 9/30.

[Stan]

Ken, yes, it was a screenplay. And there were definitely things that needed to change to help the work "play" on screen. We'll cover that on 9/30.

[Marc-Antoine]

Could not help myself and read the first story. Not sure how I will be able to hold back on the other stories.... What a delightful read! I am always intrigued by how much a free read can be so much better than most of the crap I pay upward of $ 20 to read as of late!

[Marc-Antoine]

I am curious, are the three other stories preceding this collection? As the story refers to other Carnacki adventures?

[Ken B]

From what I can tell, the original 6 were published in 1913 and those original six are the ones we are looking at. It looks like a different publisher put out those six plus an additional 3 at a later date.

Those three are:

"The Haunted 'Jarvee'"
"The Find"
"The Hog"

I will start on "The Gateway of the Monster" tonight.

I can only assume that the references to other cases is similar to the Sherlock Holmes stories, where you find mention of other cases that were never written. I'm not sure if Doyle intended to eventually publish additional stories or if he just did this to add depth to the Holmes' investigations.

[Ken B]

And, you're right. Free books read better than paid-for books just as free beer somehow tastes better than beer you bought.

[Ken B]

If you get impatient and are too tempted to jump ahead, go check out this one:

Carnacki by William Meikle.

I am almost done reading these pastiches. I have it on good authority that they stay true to Hodgson's Carnacki and from what I am seeing so far, that appears to be the case.

[Ken B]

************"The Gateway of the Monster" - week starting 9/16************

[Ken B]

Great story!

As you stated, Carnacki references two cases, The Black Veil and The Moving Fur, that were never written by Hodgson. The Black Veil sounded particularly violent as a Carnacki colleague, Aster (no other info on this guy), was killed.

(view spoiler)[The Gateway Monster was a bit more violent than I expected as well with the killing of the cat and then the entity coming back and revisiting the body a couple times out of frustration. (hide spoiler)]

The short stories in this book were all published in 1913. I wonder how the use of the pentagram was perceived by the Edwardian readers. These were the waning years of Spiritualism. So, maybe, the 300 years that had passed since the Pendle Witch trials and 100 years of Spiritualist hokum had desensitized the populous. Otherwise, I am sure Hodgson would have been burned at the stake.

[Marc-Antoine]

It really was a great story! I enjoyed when Carnacki stated that he was a 20th century man...

[Marc-Antoine]

I love how Carnacki (view spoiler)[ kicks everyone out (hide spoiler)] at the end of the story.

[Ken B]

Marc-Antoine wrote: "It really was a great story! I enjoyed when Carnacki stated that he was a 20th century man..."

I laughed at that too!

[Ken B]

Marc-Antoine wrote: "I love how Carnacki [spoilers removed] at the end of the story."

The meeting setups look pretty formulaic. The group arrives at Carnacki's flat by invitation and dinner is served. Afterwards, they sit down in front of a fire with a smoke and a Scotch while Carnacki tells his tale. Arkwright will make an ass of himself at least once. When the story is done, Carnacki clears the living room.

Sounds like a good time to me!

[Ken B]

And they have to stop at least once during each story to refill their pipes and drinks.

[Marc-Antoine]

I need to find a similar group to join! I would love to start up a scotch and book club in my region! I'm just too damn lazy to organize it!

[Marc-Antoine]

I just noticed that I kind of went crazy with those exclamation marks... I'll stop yelling now.

[Marc-Antoine]

Since it only seems to be the two of us, you feel like going ahead and reading the second story?

[Ken B]

Marc-Antoine wrote: "Since it only seems to be the two of us, you feel like going ahead and reading the second story?"

Sure, I'll read it tonight.

[Ken B]

Marc-Antoine wrote: "I need to find a similar group to join! I would love to start up a scotch and book club in my region! I'm just too damn lazy to organize it!"

I would join that club.

[Canavan]

I've read this first Carnacki story, "The Gateway of the Monster", at least once before, but I'm not sure how long ago that was -- at least 3 or 4 years. I confess to being a little disappointed upon re-reading it over lunch today.

(view spoiler)[Part of the problem is my own feelings concerning stories about psychic investigators. Like many such stories from that era this one is told retrospectively in a genial setting, leaving the reader in absolutely no doubt about the outcome -- Carnacki is not going to get done in by whatever spectral bad guy he is investigating. Given that the outcome is known in advance, the author who is trying to generate any anxiety in the reader has an uphill battle. A further problem -- one of my biases is for things that go bump in the night to remain largely unexplained; in contrast, Hodgson goes into excruciating detail in outlining the pseudoscience (construction of pentacles, etc.) that underlies Carnacki's duel with the entity. That's perhaps not too surprising; the story was originally published in 1910, before the Spiritualist Movement in England had really started to fade away. A final gripe -- This will come off as a bit contradictory, but in my estimation Hodgson manages the trick of both over-explaining and under-explaining the adventure. I've already mentioned his penchant for over-explaining the pseudoscientific underpinning of Carnacki's investigation; on the other hand, Hodgson is remarkably stingy about providing details concerning the history behind the haunting. A giant, demonic hand appears -- why? What event or events led to it taking possession of the room? In the middle of the story Carnacki finds a ring and we are briefly and dismissively told that, oh by the way, this is the famous Luck Ring acquired under "peculiar circumstances".

I don't mean to imply that there is nothing of value in the story. Hodgson was not a terrible writer. In spite of the fact that, as I mentioned, the reader knows Carnacki is going to prevail in his contest, it's impressive that Hodgson's prose can still on occasion elicit quite a bit tension. I also appreciated the passage where Carnacki admits to "funking it" during the initial portion of his confrontation; in a lot of the psychic investigator tales from this time period, the heroes are presented (rather unrealistically) as utterly fearless. (hide spoiler)]

2.5 (of 5) stars

[Ken B]

Canavan wrote: "I've read this first Carnacki story, "The Gateway of the Monster", at least once before, but I'm not sure how long ago that was -- at least 3 or 4 years. I confess to being a little disappointed up..."

(view spoiler)[I think the "pseudoscience" is what makes it fun. There is certainly a degree of fantasy involved in these stories. And, as such, there is going to be a lack of scientific explanation as to how the remedies work.

If you were taken aback by the pseudoscience of "The Gateway Monster", wait until you get into "The House Among the Laurels". He pours it on thick in that one.

I agree though with lack of provenance on the cursed relic. You are told that it was recovered in the crusades and that the family knew enough to know not to wear the thing. So, there must have been some known history. It would have been nice to read that.

I believe that Hodgson answers the question "What event or events led to it taking possession of the room?". The trigger was the wearing of the ring. But again, why?

I found myself mentally jumping ahead once the ring was recovered, trying to figure out how the hero was going to neutralize the object. I was thinking sealing it in a box inside a pentacle and bury it away would be a solution but would leave an open end in terms of finality. I thought our boy took a big risk melting the thing down. He could have released the entity from the bounds of the ring, allowing it a more permanent run of the world. (hide spoiler)]

[Ken B]

************""The House Among the Laurels"**************

This story follows the same formulaic setup and closure discussed earlier. Invitation, dinner, drinks & smokes, story and abrupt dismissal. Arkwright did not make an ass of himself though.

Carnacki does again mention other cases that he worked on that went unpublished, namely "The Steeple Monster Case" and "The Saiitii Manifestation" and less specifically, he states, "I have solved hundreds of cases of so-called hauntings".

I was a little disappointed with this story though.

(view spoiler)[I was okay with the story having a non-supernatural resolution. But, the actual explanation of the physical was lacking. When he uncovered the gang using the house as a hideout he stated that he did not care whether they were "coiners, thieves, inventors, or what." It was, in fact, none of his concern. He had "laid the ghost", which was all he had set out to do.

When explaining the tricks used by gang to simulate a haunting. Wires and colored water were used to explain the open and closing of the doors and the "blood drip". But when explaining the extinguishing of the candles and the fire, he did not know. He did suggest the use of carbonic acid. But, when explaining how it was employed he simply stated, "I have no idea".

I think more fleshing out of these points would have greatly improved the story. (hide spoiler)]

[Canavan]

Discussion of "The Gateway of the Monster".

(view spoiler)[Ken wrote (in part):

I found myself mentally jumping ahead once the ring was recovered, trying to figure out how the hero was going to neutralize the object.

Along those same lines, I thought Carnacki's decision to take the ring into the protective pentacle was an odd one. That is, I was surprised that it didn't immediately occur to him that this was precisely the wrong course of action. (hide spoiler)]

[Canavan]

Discussion of "The House Among the Laurels".

(view spoiler)[As noted by Ken, in many respects the trajectory of this story is similar to the first -- background of the case is laid out, followed by an initial confrontation replete with Carnacki's anti-spook paraphernalia, and finally by the denouement in which the solution is revealed to the reader. The big difference between this tale and the preceding one is the "Scooby-Doo" type ending. I'm not a huge fan of stories where a seemingly supernatural manifestation is ultimately rationalized in this way, but I'm not totally opposed to the idea. But, again as pointed out by Ken, the manner in which the machinations of the bad guys are outlined is a bit sparse on detail and, in addition, I wasn't too keen on the fact that they escaped unpunished.

One other stray thought: In this story, as in the previous one, the protagonist uses animals as indicators of the presence of bodily danger (i.e., sort of like canaries in a coal mine). Maybe it's just me, but I found this strategy a bit callous. (hide spoiler)]

1.5 (of 5) stars

[Canavan]

Ken wrote (in part):

If you get impatient and are too tempted to jump ahead, go check out this one:

Carnacki by William Meikle.

You might also consider looking at No. 472 Cheyne Walk: Carnacki, the Untold Stories by A. F. (Chico) Kidd and Rick Kennett. Many of their stories take as a starting point the off-hand references to past cases made by Carnacki in the original Hodgson tales.

The hardcover edition of the book was published in 2002 by Ash-Tree Press, but e-versions (including one for the Kindle) have since been released.

[Ken B]

Canavan wrote: "Ken wrote (in part):

If you get impatient and are too tempted to jump ahead, go check out this one:

Carnacki by William Meikle.

You might also consider looking at No. 472 Cheyne Walk: Carnacki,..."

Thanks for the recommendation. I picked it up.

[Ken B]

We are moving on ahead and did "The House Among the Laurels" too. We thought it was going to just be the two of us. But, we had some very welcome lurkers.

I think I may move the schedule to two stories a week. Any objections?

[Ken B]

I revised the schedule to two stories per week and added the three additional stories. I will dig up links to free copies well before we get to them.

I am enjoying this discussion guys. I halfheartedly started and stopped these stories so many times for various reasons, never for a lack of interest, that I thought a little encouragement would keep me in them. Working so far!

[Marc-Antoine]

8 spooked out guys with loaded guns in a tight space.... Sounds like a great idea.

[Marc-Antoine]

I take it Hodgson is not a pet lover.

[Marc-Antoine]

Again, I enjoyed. I like the tongue and cheek humor, and the formula. Kind of expected the turn out of this one since I had read your post before completing, Jeff, but my bad. Found the story amusin none the less. Can't wait till next week!

[Ken B]

Jeff wrote: "8 spooked out guys with guns! Too funny. Really. I needed a laugh. Thanks."

Yeah, I laughed at that too. At least he was smart enough to withhold alcohol from the second group.

[Ken B]

Jeff wrote: "How does [spoiler removed] work? That is, should I be using this?"

Just above the comment box there is "(some html is ok)". Click on that and the spoiler info is near the bottom.

[Marc-Antoine]

Is anybody able to enlighten me as to what is the Sigsand MS?

[Ken B]

Marc-Antoine wrote: "Is anybody able to enlighten me as to what is the Sigsand MS?"

The Sigsand Manuscript is a fictional book made-up by Hodgson. It appears to be Carnacki's prime reference material when dealing with spooks.

[Ken B]

********************"The Whistling Room"********************

This one followed the Hodgson formula almost step by step.

(view spoiler)[In fact, a first it almost seemed as if I was re-reading "The Gateway Monster".

From the discussion of the haunting in a rarely used room of the old house, to the investigation of the crime with hairs and seals across doors, windows and the fireplace opening, the story read identical to "The Gateway Monster".

Hodgson dropped a false clue into this one, the broken hair on one of the seals. When asked "What broke the seventh hair?". Carnacki responds that he did not know, that it was probably strung too tightly. A false clue that had me thinking in completely different directions.

But, the rest of the resolution to the haunting seemed reminiscent of "The House Among the Laurels". A lost artifact in the fireplace and the incineration of that artifact inside a pentacle.

I think if Hodgson had spent some time fleshing out the tale of the jester, the story would have been much better.

Carnacki again mentions his fictional creations, the "Aeiirii" and "Saiitii" manifestations and spends a full paragraph mumbo-jumboing on "Harzan's Monograph" and his "Addenda to it, on Astral and Astral Co-ordination and Interference". Words, words, words!

Carnacki briefly discusses a couple of previous cases, "Grunting Man Case" and the "Nodding Door Business" which went unpublished. Their mention struck me differently this time, or maybe it was something that I just picked up on. It seems they were mentioned not to add some sense of depth to the detective but rather to add some sense of experience to the detective. As if saying, remember when this procedure was used and there were positive results, letting the reader know that Carnacki knows what he is doing and not just merely shooting from the hip. (hide spoiler)]

I would have to say, in general that I was unimpressed with this case.

[Marc-Antoine]

Ken, I have to agree with your statements, for me it felt like a mix of the previous two stories. I was actually thinking that the formula is now getting old, like he already ran out of ideas. Kind of like season two of Prison Break... I hope the fourth story goes in a different direction.

[Ken B]

So far, the William Meikle pastiches are better than the originals.

[Canavan]

Discussion of "The Whistling Room".

(view spoiler)[My recollection of this story, having last read it quite some time ago, was that it was one of the stronger ones in the collection. (It's probably the one that's been most anthologized.) And while others didn't much care for it, after re-reading it over lunch today, I think it still fares pretty well. The set-up is, I think, a bit cleaner than in the previous two stories; there is less reliance on the rather silly pentacle-related devices; and the author does a better job wrapping up the story by way of providing the reader with enough (but not too much) explanatory material about the underpinnings of the haunting. And I thought the information about Tassoc's wife, provided in the final paragraphs, was a nice touch.

I can't give the story a full-throated endorsement -- there were still a number of things that bugged me. This story, perhaps more than its predecessors (?), does a lot of name dropping regarding Carnacki's previous cases. At some point (for me at least) what was a clever device begins to get a little tiresome. And there is still the problem (inherent in this subgenre) of knowing in advance that Carnacki is not going to die in any of his encounters. Finally, while I have to give Hodgson props for coming up the rather original idea of a room that has lips, the visual image this conjures up just seems a little silly. I think I first read this story in an anthology edited by Henry Mazzeo, Hauntings: Tales of the Supernatural (1968), that was illustrated by the late, great Edward Gorey. Much as I have always loved Gorey's work, his illustration of this particular tale -- showing the puckered lips of the whistling room -- looked faintly ridiculous.

Finally, a question for anyone who might know -- the story frequently uses the word "hoon" (either as a verb or an adjective) to describe the jester's whistling. What the heck does this mean? (hide spoiler)]

3.5 of 5 stars

[Canavan]

Ken wrote:

So far, the William Meikle pastiches are better than the originals.

I have read (and enjoyed) some of Meikle's fiction, but have not yet looked at his Carnacki pastiches. I'll have to put those on my to-be-read list.

[Ken B]

Canavan wrote: "Discussion of "The Whistling Room".

My recollection of this story, having last read it quite some time ago, was that it was one of the stronger ones in the collection. (It's probably the one that'..."

(view spoiler)[I agree with the imagery of the puckering lips. I thought it outright silly. (hide spoiler)]

I too was wondering about the word "hoon" or "hooning". I did find one definition that seems to work in the context in which the word is used in this story:

mockery, sneering
scorn, derision

It is a Dutch definition.

[Canavan]

Ken wrote:

I too was wondering about the word "hoon" or "hooning". I did find one definition that seems to work in the context in which the word is used in this story:

mockery, sneering
scorn, derision

It is a Dutch definition.

Thanks, Ken. Yes, that sounds right. It nevertheless strikes me as odd that Hodgson would so frequently use (overuse?) such an obscure word. (I looked at the results of Google's Ngram Viewer to see if that particular word was more commonly used in the early part of the last century, but that seems not to be the case.)

Reading these stories in a relatively concentrated burst has perhaps made me more attuned to Hodgson's stylistic quirks. I noticed, for example, that Carnacki is always asking listeners questions such as "Am I clear?", "Can you understand?", and "Do you see?". He also seems very fond of the word "funk".

[Canavan]

Discussion of "The Horse of the Invisible".

I've now had the chance to go through the second of this week's stories and here are my somewhat disjointed first impressions. First thought: What a horribly clunky title for a story.

(view spoiler)[This story is an odd and (for me) dissatisfying amalgam in which the phenomenon under consideration (the spectral horse) is both rationalized and not rationalized. By story's end we are more or less left to conclude that in the main the haunting was the product of Parsket's skulduggery, but that the penultimate appearance of the horse may have had some sort of occult explanation. On the other hand, Hodgson is so mealy-mouthed about explaining what has transpired, that I found myself incredibly frustrated. At one point he states that "there is an extraordinary uncertainty in my conclusions". (No kidding!) Artful ambiguity is one thing, but Carnacki seems to constantly hedge in the closing pages of this story. Put another way, I can accept a certain amount of opacity in my horror fiction, but here (as in some of the previous stories) Hodgson's reluctance to explain events (either "real" or supernatural ones) strikes me as mere laziness or lack of imagination. For example, we hear Carnacki state that "it is impossible to make it clearer in a few words" and "it is was the wisest thing to do considering the things I cannot explain". The set-up to the story (the history of the invisible horse) and some of the horse's preliminary appearances are fairly effective, but that early promise is squandered in a messy ending. (hide spoiler)]

1.5 of 5 stars