Do you feel the need to explore genres in a roughly chronological order?

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

For better or worse (probably worse), horror/weird refers to and borrows heavily of it's past. I generally feel the the need to read the most important authors first before I move on to the newer ones. If I read newer authors, I try to pick ones who I'm guessing are less in debt to the classics of the genre.

I worry about not knowing that someone else did something first, that I'll be too impressed by someone who has borrowed too much. That I'll have to go back and revise my review that claimed their work was so unique and original.

But I can't ever remember this being a real issue in music or visual art. Maybe it doesn't matter much. Somehow it doesn't bother me as much when I think of reading other genres. Somehow it doesn't seem as bad if an author is borrowing heavily from less obvious source.

[ToALonelyPeace]

I don't feel the need to read in order (whether from old to new or the opposite) because it is not the Weird Fiction genre itself that interests me. I treat and appreciate each book on its own, and unless the borrowed crafts are seriously misused, I don't bother thinking back and forth on who influence the author.

[nihilsum]

Somewhat, yes. I at least feel a need to read some of the most "classic" works in order to have an understanding of a genre or style and the works that they influenced.

Especially with weird fiction/horror when so much of it is so strongly influenced Lovecraft, Chambers, sometimes Machen and Blackwood.

Likewise, before I read much fantasy I felt the need to read The Lord of the Rings and Conan before much else.

[Michael]

The way I started and progressed is similar to most people I know who are acolytes. Discovered one or two authors, then spider webbed out to a few more. At some point, I made a decision to go back and go chronological starting at Gilgamesh. I know people who reached that juncture and said "Eh, not for me" and just kept spider webbing. I don't think the spider web method or the chronological method are mutually exclusive or one is better than the other. I still do both. So right now, Charles Brockden Brown but also reading Amos Tutuola. I, personally, ended up with a meet in the middle method. Start at the beginning but then start at the "end" and go backwards, that way I get access to the contemporary gems but can also put them in the richness of the "tradition."

[Michael]

I don't know if this question is relevant but also would be interested in people's thoughts on the necessity or lack thereof of reading the "canon". Basically, could I pick up Caitlin Kiernan, with no reading of Poe or Lovecraft and achieve the same aesthetic effect.

[Ibrahim]

Quote Originally Posted by Michael

I don't know if this question is relevant but also would be interested in people's thoughts on the necessity or lack thereof of reading the "canon". Basically, could I pick up Caitlin Kiernan, with no reading of Poe or Lovecraft and achieve the same aesthetic effect.

One thing i've noticed is that in contrast to contemporary "high-brow" culture- whose artists & performers & authors often, in interviews, can be heard to say things like "oh i don't really follow much of current music/lit/art", artists on the 'pulp'or popular or less accepted end of the spectrum are extremely knowledgeable about their artistic lineage.
And it's a good thing to have that awareness, i think, both as reader and writer. A lot of what's interesting about Kiernan's work is the way she subverts some of the genre tropes, so it's good to be knowledgeable about that, no?

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

I'm not sure.

I think a lot of older creators gradually lose interest in what most others are doing. Perhaps higher standards, more refined tastes or just too busy. I've heard some say that's what kills a lot of older artists: not enough new influences because they're still stuck on the same fuel they were using decades ago.

Tanith Lee said she didn't keep up with the genre(s), she just read whatever speculative fiction was written by her friends or brought to her attention.

Knowing your genre is one of the biggest pieces of advice writers and editors tend to give to new writers in case they unknowingly repeat what's been done a million times but Jeffrey Ford rejected that advice because he thought you might unknowingly do an old plot in your own unique way and he just didn't like reading Asimov and Heinlein.

More than ever there are science fiction fans/writers who dislike most 20s-50s pulp science fiction and don't want to do that homework, not just because it's old fashioned but that many people consider it badly written and not on the same level as other classic pulp authors.
Science Fiction is so huge now that it would take you forever to read all the classics before you delve into the hundreds of authors today.

Then there's stuff outside your language barrier. France seems to have explored vampires before British writers did, but British writers are usually credited with setting the precedents.

I've been looking at reviews of William Morris, wondering why more people haven't read his fantasies despite his fame. Seems like there's a lot of Tolkien fans reading Morris out of a feeling of obligation.

[ToALonelyPeace]

I forgot to mention the most important reason why I don't read chronologically, though I used to have a reading list to do so. Due to my impossible indecisiveness, reading a book is similar to luring a donkey across a river on a bamboo bridge for me. If I go in with intention of thoroughly exploring every nook and cranny for originality or a signpost of influence, the donkey just flees the overwhelming task. I have to blindfold the donkey and plug its ears to go through one book and it still dithers half of the time.

[Ibrahim]

Quote Originally Posted by Robert Adam Gilmour

I'm not sure. I think a lot of older creators gradually lose interest in what most others are doing. Perhaps higher standards, more refined tastes or just too busy. I've heard some say that's what kills a lot of older artists: not enough new influences because they're still stuck on the same fuel they were using decades ago. Tanith Lee said she didn't keep up with the genre(s), she just read whatever speculative fiction was written by her friends or brought to her attention.

Oh, sure. I admit that was a bit of a sweeping generalisation of mine, but still, as generalisation, quite true, i think, & not to be disproved by its few exceptions.
I must admit being guilty of the same thing myself though- i have no money & no time to visit museums (except when on holiday, when i have made time anyway & the entrance fees- anywhere in Europe- to museums are not as ridiculously high as in the Netherlands), so i mostly see my colleagues'art in a studio environment pre- or post-exhibition.
& i make more of an effort to keep up with comics than i do with contemporary art.

The thing about stuff that's inspired you is - why would you want to hide or obfuscate that? I say spread the word. 'There's some of that in this thing i did- check out the real thing.' One must pay one's respects.

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

I think I need to focus on finishing the weird/horror classics because I keep gravitating towards newer shorter books and then classics start to feel like a burden. Perhaps the weight of expectations creates more fear of disappointment?