Worst horror book?

[Lobolover]

yes,ive got the book.

Will is mentioned as being Teuthold in Georg Christoph Hamberger's and Johann Georg Meusel's "Das Gelehrte Teutschland oder:Lexikon der jetzt lebendedn teutschen schriftsteller" ("Learned Germany:Lexicon of the curently living german writers")-under this entry:

"Will (Peter):Prediger einer teutschen Gemeinde zu London,geb. Darmstadt.Under dem Namen Teuthold gab er heraus:The Necromancer of the Black Forest,founded on facts"
(Will (Peter)-Priest of a german congregation at Londo,born in Darmstadt. Gave out a book named "The Necromancer (etc.)",under the name of Teuthold")

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Lobolover

yes,ive got the book.

Will is mentioned as being Teuthold in Georg Christoph Hamberger's and Johann Georg Meusel's "Das Gelehrte Teutschland oder:Lexikon der jetzt lebendedn teutschen schriftsteller" ("Learned Germany:Lexicon of the curently living german writers")-under this entry:

"Will (Peter):Prediger einer teutschen Gemeinde zu London,geb. Darmstadt.Under dem Namen Teuthold gab er heraus:The Necromancer of the Black Forest,founded on facts"
(Will (Peter)-Priest of a german congregation at Londo,born in Darmstadt. Gave out a book named "The Necromancer (etc.)",under the name of Teuthold")

That's very interesting. All I can say is, if the two are the same, then in the interval between the two tranlsations, his command of English improved tremendously... not to mention his English prose style. The other alternative (and one not at all unlikely given the period) is that there was another hand involved in the English editions of the book, a "ghost writer" (or "ghost translator" in this case), who hammered an awkward book into better form. This was quite common with translations from continental literature at the time, and unfortunately the majority (if not all) of the names of these "third hands" have been lost.

Frankly, I'm inclined to this latter view; the stylistic differences are simply staggeringly different, for one thing; and the entire use of words seem to be coming from two vastly different people. However, it is possible that Will/Teuthold may have made such a change -- though I find it unlikely.

At any rate, in neither case does it alter the contention that Will was the original author of the Horrid Mysteries, which is where this discussion began, as I recall.

One thing, though: the source you provide a translation for mentions he "[g]ave out a book named [etc.] under the name of Teuthold".... This sounds almost as if he wrote it, yet all other sources I've seen indicate he was the translator, not the original author. In fact, Wikipedia notes (and other sources seem to agree) that it was Karl Friedrich Kahlert (under the pseudonym of Lawrence Flammenberg) who was the original author. As I mentioned, it's been quite some time since I read the Folio Society's editions of the seven "Horrid Novels" mentioned in Northanger Abbey, with their notes by Devendra P. Varma... but I vaguely recall him mentioning much the same thing....

Do you know of any other sources that would clarify this question?

[Lobolover]

Well,the statement seems awkward,but it IS meant to say that Will translated it.As for a source-youd have to either find the lexicon in question or ask Valancourt itself.

[j. d. worthington]

I may have to track down a copy of the Valancourt edition and read the new introduction. I'd be interested in finding out more about this.

Incidentally, even here there is a distinction made between the two:

Norton, Gothic Readings - Anthologies - Bibliographies - Romantic Circles

http://home.gwu.edu/~klarsen/goth041.html

There's also an interesting bit about both Grosse and Kahlert here:

Gothic Fiction - Biographies

[Lobolover]

well,sorry,forgot that the intro does mention Gross being the author of Horrid Mysteries as well (though were they ever creative with translating book titles: "Der Genius" into "Horrid Mysteries"-though I wanted to ask you something-you to thought this name promising and misused on something rather unfiting?)

Ps:Ive made a post in the weird thread you may have not seen.

[j. d. worthington]

On Horrid Mysteries... well, to be honest, the plot is very much in the Gothic style, and this particular title would fit, on the whole; had it been written (or translated) more skillfully, it could have been an entertaining and suspenseful tale... but it was the clumsiness of the whole thing, along with the endless repetition of certain motifs (and, it seemed at the time, entire passages, almost!) that made this such a pain. I think I'd rather have my teeth drilled (sans anaesthesia) than read this one again....

You asked earlier about the Malleus Maleficarum, and I failed to answer. Sorry about that. Here goes:

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Malleus Maleficarum

Malleus Maleficarum

I'd say it's a must for anyone interested in understanding the mindset concerning this, but (save for the sections dealing with the various beliefs, which was really quite fascinating) it can be a migraine-inducer, nonetheless....

[Lobolover]

Hmm-well,repetitivnes does scorch alot of stuff,like the Night Land.

However,how exactly would YOU sumarise Horrid Mysteries and its contents?

[j. d. worthington]

Briefly: The account, by a none-too-savoury character, of his vacillating commitment to and exposure of (and consequent persecution by) a secret brotherhood (inspired in part by the more lurid accounts of the Rosicrucians and the like).

In other words: very typical Gothic stuff... just not nearly as well done as others....

[Lobolover]

Hmm-well,thats not exactly looring

by the way-the site you linked-has this on "The necromancer":

"he bewildering plot coagulates beyond comprehension, consisting of a jumble of violent episodes yoked together by shocking supernatural effects. The Teutonic Black Forest setting, into which Hermann and Helfried venture, is over-run by deserted castles, bleeding shadows and other ghoulish phenomena. The necromancer is the sinister magician, Volkert, who has been executed."

not only is this gross exageration-Melmoth does exactly the same,only it has diferent names for the stories-but its descriptions like theese led me to buy it,only to find that the description is 15 times beter then the actual book.

[j. d. worthington]

Well... to be honest, there was a lot of similarity between many of the Gothics. Entire episodes were often copied from one writer to another (Maturin, for instance, does this in The Fatal Revenge, more than once, taking something almost directly from Lewis here, another bit from Radcliffe from there, and even a bit, iirc from The Necromancer, and so on). It was fairly common in literature of the period, especially popular literature... hence the chapbooks that were in such demand, and then the penny dreadfuls and shilling shockers, which unabashedly plagiarized as heavily as they could possibly get by with....

Again, though, The Necromancer fits very well with Lovecraft's statement:

We may say, as a general thing, that a weird story whose intent is to teach or produce a social effect, or one in which the horrors are finally explained away by natural means, is not a genuine tale of cosmic fear; but it remains a fact that such narratives often possess, in isolated sections, atmospheric touches which fulfill every condition of true supernatural horror-literature. Therefore we must judge a weird tale not by the author's intent, or by the mere mechanics of the plot; but by the emotional level which it attains at its least mundane point. If the proper sensations are excited, such a "high spot" must be admitted on its own merits as weird literature, no matter how prosaically it is later dragged down.

I recall finding quite a few such moments in The Necromancer, where the atmosphere was genuinely of the weird, hinting (at least) of the supernatural; that it explained these things away at last is beside the point -- or, rather, it is only to be expected, as we were still seeing the final years of the "Age of Reason" and its influence on literature, which simply wouldn't allow the invasion of the supernatural save in very limited form, and under rather restricted conditions, on penalty of ridicule and critical disdain. In either case, the emotion of fear was certainly evoked by various passages in the novel, and I think it deserves consideration on its own merits....

[Lobolover]

well,yes,the "I understand the language of wisdom" and
the tale about the horrid count,but how soon into the FIRST book does necromancy become "cheat-cheats-cheaters-fake-fakes"?And......

I mean,the "oh,he dressed himself up as a ghost" "explanation" of the aparations-doesnt it strike you as insulting the inteligence/memory of the reader?

To "The Fatal Revenge,"-its explained rationaly too?

[j. d. worthington]

Oh, most definitely. In both cases. However, it was more or less demanded by the time, and I'm not entirely sure Lewis's The Monk, for all its genuine supernatural events,made things any easier on writers where that was concerned....

[Lobolover]

"Oh, most definitely."?That a reply to the "insulting th inteligence" or ?

[j. d. worthington]

Yes. In both cases, the answer was yes. The Fatal Revenge is given a naturalistic explanation for the few "supernatural" events that appear; and the shoddy dressing up as a ghost seriously marred an otherwise potentially effective scene....

[Lobolover]

I stil dont understand how they dressed up a man as a decaying woman,woth proper voice?