Religious horror writers?

[cannibal cop]

Quote Originally Posted by James

I think spiritual doubt (either the materialist fear of the hidden spiritual or the spiritualist's fear of a purely materialistic cosmos) is more vital to the gothic genre than firm religious conviction, which is less frightening.

Make that just plain doubt. Being a spiritualist doesn't mean one necessarily has a better grasp of whatever lies beyond the veil. Similarly, being a materialist doesn't make one better prepared for the reality of the void.

A major feature of horror is the dismantling of certainties, such as the sense of security people draw from their beliefs, whether spiritual or secular in nature.

[qcrisp]

Quote Originally Posted by James

Christianity is so weird in how it has reused premises and archetypes from older mythologies that it's hard to see a single universal deeper truth to even deny as the construction is by its nature rather arbitrary and self-contradictory. I find Blake and Machen's more mystical and artistic interpretation of Christianity more interesting than the reality of most Christians, old or new. I have no interest in most orthodox religion, which is as stifling or more stifling than the worst of materialism in how it clogs the brain with the surface details at the expense of meaning. Mainline Anglicanism or Catholicism are the dogma of modernity in many ways. The words of a capitalist elite system of monarchy or church have little to say to me. Just more fog to justify the social positions of the powerful. I'll take Machen and Blackwood instead.

I agree with this to an extent (specifically the bolded section). When one looks at how suggestions of pantheism in mysticism have been stubbornly resisted by guardians of church orthodoxy one (plainly, I) gets the feeling that this was to maintain the toll-gate on God.

However, I do think the world generally (atheist and theist) would benefit from a greater understanding of, for instance, Scholasticism and the ways in which Plato and Aristotle have provided the philosophy undergirding Christian theology.

Anyway, for lack of time and fear of going OT, I shall cease here.

[Whispers of Sorrow]

Machen was outwardly Christian, but the dominant strain in his work is of course the Gnostic pagan one... there are even some direct attacks on Christianity in his work, like the treatment of conservative Christian school in The Secret Glory as contrasted with the protagonists free minded paganism... his professed Christianity is to be seen as a façade crafted in order to protect his respectability in what was at the time still a highly conservative Christian society... no one familiar with his fiction would hold his professed religion as relevant to it

[Whispers of Sorrow]

Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp

I think the best response I can make at present is to quote Solzhenitsyn: Quote If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?

you are quoting a right wing propagandist... I fail to see how his response to "anything" can be relevant, in "any" context
http://www.idcommunism.com/2018/01/g...-exposing.html

[qcrisp]

Quote Originally Posted by Whispers of Sorrow

Quote Originally Posted by qcrisp I think the best response I can make at present is to quote Solzhenitsyn: Quote If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? you are quoting a right wing propagandist... I fail to see how his response to "anything" can be relevant, in "any" context http://www.idcommunism.com/2018/01/g...-exposing.html

Don't be so ridiculous. Read the quote. Either it's relevant or it's not. It doesn't matter who said it. (I would point out that you're linking to a communist propagandist website, but I don't have time for these shenanigans.)

[Whispers of Sorrow]

@James
Blake was an individualistic esoterist who saw himself as an "luciferian rebel", so I would say that he was closer to our side than he was to the Christian one

[cannibal cop]

Good night and God bless, O happy discussion thread. Yea, we hardly knew ye.

[Robert Adam Gilmour]

In Defense of Communism: The Death of Stalin: Vulgar anticommunism under the veil of "comedy"

This site looks pretty silly.

[qcrisp]

Quote Originally Posted by cannibal cop

Good night and God bless, O happy discussion thread. Yea, we hardly knew ye.

It might pull through. Let's see.

[qcrisp]

Quote Originally Posted by James

Many of the great gothic horror writers from older eras either haven't been particularly religious for their time period (Poe) or have labelled themselves religious despite being plagued with religious doubt (Le Fanu), so I think it's a mistake to consider it a Christian genre. Even Machen's 'Christianity' was really more mystical and about the truths behind religion more than it was religion. Of the current writers, Mark Samuels is a Christian, but his more orthodox Catholic religious views are hard to compare to Machen's more mystical mindset. Reggie Oliver has labelled himself a 'liberal Christian'. Clive Barker has repudiated the label of Christian, but has prominently used Christian themes in his art. I think spiritual doubt (either the materialist fear of the hidden spiritual or the spiritualist's fear of a purely materialistic cosmos) is more vital to the gothic genre than firm religious conviction, which is less frightening. I don't really understand how anybody who is convinced good will ultimately forever triumph could be that anxious about the universe or their place in it.

I am going to attempt to come back to this. I was serious in my reply before, but perhaps it was too brief. I am still short of time, however, so... general throat-clearing and attempting to get to the point:

Of course, if one just supposes, "Ah, everything will be okay in the end," and (somehow) thinks no further on the matter - if we suppose there are people who do this, and there probably are - then it is hard to see how they would become writers of horror fiction, or anything in that vein. However, we only have to take one or two examples of people of very decided faith to see that for the thinking person the situation is not that simple.

(Not that we should base the credibility of anything on whether it wins in the Horror Olympics - just that I think it's a mistake to suppose horror and faith incompatible.)

So, take as one example, Kierkegaard, the author of Fear and Trembling (the clue's in the title, etc.), who wrote at the end of his life:

Quote

A human being must live in such a state of anguish that if he were a pagan he would not hesitate to commit suicide. In that state, then, he must -- live! Only in that state can he love God.

It might be objected that Kierkegaard is not representative of Christians generally, but this really leads us to the question as to what extent any writer or philosopher (etc.) represents the demographic they are known to belong to. Does Lemmy represent metal fans? In some ways, yes; in other ways he's clearly exceptional. And so on in different ways for every other cultural figure.

So, anyway, Kierkegaard:

YouTube

YouTube

Or take the example of Petrarch, who, in his Secretum dwells on his horror at the peril his soul is in on the brink of the mouth of hell.

There is a horror in believing that whatever you do might have eternal consequences.

Against this, of course, we have St. Paul telling us that we see through a glass darkly. But seeing in such a way is not, of course, incompatible with horror. We also have, for instance, Julian of Norwich telling us all will be well.

But Julian is an ambiguous figure, not formally beatified. As far as I can gather, the situation seems to be: "We've examined this and it's not heretical, but we might not want to give it the full imprimatur. Let's just say: 'Not necessarily the views of the management.'"

In short, there seems (unless I find out otherwise) always to be a leap over a bottomless abyss. The situation is not simple.

Anyway, I'll finish here. Sorry this is disjointed. Lack of time, etc.