Anon10/15/25, 17:32No.96759960
The issues with Lovecraftian Horror, are that;>A lot of people mistake "lovecraft's horror settings" for Lovecraftian Horror.
For every "Dead Space" or "Bloodborne" you get, where the monsters are quantifiably that kind of eldritch, alien horrors, massive in power and removed entirely from the experience of mere humanity so as to be akin to gods in the outer voids of space, you get something like DnD or Pathfinder, where they make a race of funny octopus people and creatures and go "hey look, we've got lovecraftian themes here too" because tentacles are Lovecraft, right?>Lovecraft didn't always write 'Lovecraftian' horror.
He was a great writer, but he and others in that sphere, writing in the similarly shared fantasy/alt-history setting of 'The Cthullhu mythos', were more akin to creepypasta writers than greek epicists. And while a lot of his works had subtle supernatural themes, a LOT were just scary stories with barely a hint of anything otherworldly.>Lovecraft was a bit of a patsy.
A phenomenal writer, yes. And a remarkably learned man for someone who never traveled. But the man was genuinely scared of air conditioners, bream, vaguely surrealist (and entirely unoffensive and understimulating) paintings, and non-euclidian geometry.
He was the kind of man to genuinely be unsettled at the sight of the Sydney Opera house. And this influenced his horror writing, and his ideas, so that so much of what made his works horror, was just not going to land as utterly terrifying to people who are comfortable with seeing strange things, or going outside their comfort zone.Actual Lovecraftian horror is pretty good. It makes you both horrified, and captivated, wanting to both see and understand the thing, and get away from it. It has scifi elements, depth, and a believability to it that 'angry obsessive stalker with a knife' or 'spooky dream demon with a smoker's cough' doesn't have.
