The Mark Samuels tribute anthology

[Justin Isis]

Quote Originally Posted by Tom A.

Browsing through this thread made me think of this Kissinger quote: "Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small."

The writing stakes are far smaller, fortunately - you're not likely to catch student loans, fake (as opposed to real) liberal politics, or any other communicable diseases. Although there's always the mutant viral crossover in the form of academic Writing Workshops - but the less said about them, the better. Thread now descending into real horror territory!!!

[Nemonymous]

I think I met Mark around 1986 and I am very proud to have been asked to submit a story to a forthcoming tribute to his work. I don’t think such an inclusion of a story by any author should be seen as condoning (or referencing at all) the behaviour of the author of the work thus being honoured. The work and its author should always be separated as far as possible. As many know, I have always espoused that ambition from Nemonymous to the Real-Time Reviews.

This thread has been criticised elsewhere for ignoring or side-stepping Allyson’s post about a particular story by Mark. So be it. This includes myself and other TLO members (including at least one current TLO member involved in making this criticism) who also failed to refer to her post. My view, as I remember it, was that Ally had made her point strongly and needed no counter-comment, supportive or not.

I, of course, can see how this story hurt her deeply. My review of the story is here before I knew of the claim of its connections with Ally.

Regarding the story itself, Mark has commented here. Only he knows whether that is true as referenced by his faith within that blogpost

My review in April 2010 of Ally's BULL-RUNNING FOR GIRLS is here, a review that predated her winning the award with this book.

Mark's comments here first ignited the whole issue whence all else stems, following which I have since supported Ally against Mark regarding that issue.

PS: I use the word 'predated' not to imply cause and effect, but to make the important chronology clear.

.

	TLO THOMAS LIGOTTI ONLINE

Quote Originally Posted by Nemonymous

I think I met Mark around 1986 and I am very proud to have been asked to submit a story to a forthcoming tribute to his work. I don’t think such an inclusion of a story by any author should be seen as condoning (or referencing at all) the behaviour of the author of the work thus being honoured. The work and its author should always be separated as far as possible. As many know, I have always espoused that ambition from Nemonymous to the Real-Time Reviews. This thread has been criticised elsewhere for ignoring or side-stepping Allyson’s post about a particular story by Mark. So be it. This includes myself and other TLO members (including at least one current TLO member involved in making this criticism) who also failed to refer to her post. My view, as I remember it, was that Ally had made her point strongly and needed no counter-comment, supportive or not. I, of course, can see how this story hurt her deeply. My review of the story is here before I knew of the claim of its connections with Ally. Regarding the story itself, Mark has commented here. Only he knows whether that is true as referenced by his faith within that blogpost My review in April 2010 of Ally's BULL-RUNNING FOR GIRLS is here, a review that predated her winning the award with this book. Mark's comments here first ignited the whole issue whence all else stems, following which I have since supported Ally against Mark regarding that issue. PS: I use the word 'predated' not to imply cause and effect, but to make the important chronology clear. .

I remember these ugly comments. Mark's response concerning his story "Keeping Your Mouth Shut" is so disingenuous as to be laughable. It is not difficult to discern who is the common denominator of so many "controversies" both on TLO and other boards. It is good for newer members to know of these exchanges. I agree that one should not mistake an author's work with the author, but being part of a "tribute" anthology is something else again. As merely a reader of weird fiction, I will simply say 'I'll pass.'

	TLO THOMAS LIGOTTI ONLINE

[Nemonymous]

Quote Originally Posted by Forgotten Prisoner

Quote Originally Posted by Nemonymous I think I met Mark around 1986 and I am very proud to have been asked to submit a story to a forthcoming tribute to his work. I don’t think such an inclusion of a story by any author should be seen as condoning (or referencing at all) the behaviour of the author of the work thus being honoured. The work and its author should always be separated as far as possible. As many know, I have always espoused that ambition from Nemonymous to the Real-Time Reviews. This thread has been criticised elsewhere for ignoring or side-stepping Allyson’s post about a particular story by Mark. So be it. This includes myself and other TLO members (including at least one current TLO member involved in making this criticism) who also failed to refer to her post. My view, as I remember it, was that Ally had made her point strongly and needed no counter-comment, supportive or not. I, of course, can see how this story hurt her deeply. My review of the story is here before I knew of the claim of its connections with Ally. Regarding the story itself, Mark has commented here. Only he knows whether that is true as referenced by his faith within that blogpost My review in April 2010 of Ally's BULL-RUNNING FOR GIRLS is here, a review that predated her winning the award with this book. Mark's comments here first ignited the whole issue whence all else stems, following which I have since supported Ally against Mark regarding that issue. PS: I use the word 'predated' not to imply cause and effect, but to make the important chronology clear. . I remember these ugly comments. Mark's response concerning his story "Keeping Your Mouth Shut" is so disingenuous as to be laughable. It is not difficult to discern who is the common denominator of so many "controversies" both on TLO and other boards. It is good for newer members to know of these exchanges. I agree that one should not mistake an author's work with the author, but being part of a "tribute" anthology is something else again. As merely a reader of weird fiction, I will simply say 'I'll pass.'

Well, I can see what you are saying. But I was asked to contribute to an anthology in tribute to the work of someone I have known for 30 years. I would have been an hypocrite based on my espoused philosophy since the 1960s about not mixing up an author with his or her work if I had refused submitting.
And I also wanted and needed to write something inspired by the work of MS, having been asked to do so, and 18 other authors evidently did, too. I wrote a special story that I hope everyone will enjoy one day.

	TLO THOMAS LIGOTTI ONLINE

[Nemonymous]

Sorry, I just noticed a typo-type error in my first post today above. For 'April 2010', please read 'June 2009'. The confusion arose from the original blog server going out of business and I had to copy and paste it to a new blog server where it is now with the June 2009 dates clearly shown. All my reviews are crystallised in contemporaneous book form, too, in the years they were originally put on-line.

All else I said in my post is unchanged.

[Evans]

Thanks for the reasonable post and helpful references Des

If this thread 'has been criticized for ignoring Ally's comment' there is a simple reason for that, namely, there is nothing more we can add. Ally has restated her position on the matter more less eloquently. Since none of us know Ally but at least one of us has spoken to Mark in-depth about the matter we are naturally inclined to grant him the benefit of the doubt. Of course there is the chance he might be lying, she might be lying, one or the other of them might be in error et cetera et cetera: however, short of telepathy or or memory scans there isn't really a way to ascertain this.

To be blunt this anthology has nothing to do with her. Of course had we implied she was featured as a character, even in a jokey way, in one of the stories therein, she would have a right to at least raise concern over this. This not to belittle the way she feels about the controversy, or stop her trying to resolve it or clarify what happened in other ways, but merely to state that this volume does not pertain to it. In other words it is not our business to settle their controversy even if it could be settled thus wise.

If I recall correctly it was Mr Constant who first mentioned the controversy in a somewhat impulsive post in defense of this friend Laird Barron. As I hope we've made clear the antho is not a hatchet job or get-back at Laird and the references to himself and 'More Dark' are in this thread are in a jokey vein (note: if readers seriously expect a Barron slash Stoker story in the antho they may be disappointed).

[brendanconnell]

Funny that so many people are ready to forgive a jerk like Lovecraft for his racism, read countless anthologies dedicated to him, and countless authors "inspired" by him, and are unable to forgive a living person, Mark Samuels, who actually has living sensations and feelings. And over matters that, as far as I can tell, involve only individuals, and are not entire philosophies that damn entire races. I have met Mark and we had an enjoyable conversation over a few pints. He struck me as an intelligent, considerate person. I believe he is a fine writer --- using fine as Hemingway would, to mean very good. I certainly am not going to form my opinions on him or his writing based on some ten year old controversy. Does a person really need to take sides on every matter in the universe? And if you are not interested in this anthology, fine - but must you really make that public? Aside from Mark, as Des has pointed out, 18 authors worked on material for this. Justin put a ton of effort into it. If you don't want to joint the celebration, fine, but don't piss in the champagne.

[Frater_Tsalal]

To be honest, I don't really care either what Mark did (or didn't do) back in 2009 or whatever. I read those same comments and I think people are making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill... if I were Mark I'd be more embarrassed that I had posted 420 times on a website that's somewhat tackily called "Vault of Evil." Christ's sake, it's not like he's talking about fisting kittens or anything, which is where I'd draw the line. Let's be honest, no writers are saints, and the ones that are saints are usually boring to read (trust me, I've read some of the books written by actual saints, and most of them are as dull as dishwater, though I suspect Mark would disagree with me on that point). Every literary scene needs some controversial figures, otherwise things will just get very boring very fast!

[qcrisp]

Well, I'm proud to be associated with this anthology. I'm only sorry my contribution isn't longer.

I don't see that anyone's obliged to care about village gossip.

[Evans]

Controversy will resume after Sisters of Mercy:

The Sisters Of Mercy - when you dont see me (with lyrics) - YouTube

(Since Mark likes Bishop Berkeley)