Okay, first, let's air out the racism thing. Dude was hella racist, even for his time. Some of his short stories are completely unsalvagable because of the racist bullshit, others you have to cringe for a couple pages to get past it. The Deep Ones (horrible fish monsters) are frequently cited as one of the best examples, but the story he ghost-wrote for Houdini is much more blatant. Sadly, Call of Cthulhu is also pretty much scrap heap material with all the "terrible cults" that are suspiciously full of brown people and intentionally resemble real world religions. This is going to come up more, but I wanted to make sure it got the front and center place it deserves. Now, the point:
Lovecraft wrote horror because he was a terrible little man and was scared of progress.
It's funny how nerds have latched onto the guy, when he literally represents the backwards attitudes most of them despise in the world around them. He was afraid of scientific progress, of racial diversity, and so utterly confused by women that barely any appear in his stories. The time he lived in (1890-1937) was full of massive cultural and scientific upheaval, and his response to this was to dig his heels in and screech about the horrors all around. A contemporary of Tesla and Einstein, all he could see from their amazing work was that MAN IS LOOKING INTO THINGS HE SHOULD NOT KNOW and he filled his stories with fevered dreams of what nightmares science might unleash. Only a few generations removed from slavery, he was terrified of the idea that western culture might get influenced by all these BROWN PEOPLE and wrote multiple stories on the horrors of mixing races. The world around him was forever in decay.
He contributed something to society, it's true. He and Mary Shelly paved the way for modern horror: terrifying stories based not on ancient superstition or religion but new and terrifying things outside the scope of human understanding. Scientific horror. The rich shared background of his short stories has given generations a jumping-off point for their own otherworldly horror, and many of these successors have salvaged the good and the interesting from the bad writing and backwards attitudes. But he deserves to be made fun of, because little man couldn't handle the idea that the world was changing all around him. Not everyone is cut out to live in interesting times.
He certainly had a problem with race, there's no doubting that.
And "his times" aren't really an excuse, because other writers that dealt with race that preceded him (Kipling, Twain) had a far more realistic attitude.
And of course they are vilified for using the colloquial terms of the day in stories that depict brown people, etc, as PEOPLE, and Lovecraft gets a pass even though the smudgy people are invariable evil and degenerate in ALL of his stories in which they were included.
This is very interesting; never having been into Lovecraft I didn't know any of this at all.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:09:50 PM
He certainly had a problem with race, there's no doubting that.
And "his times" aren't really an excuse, because other writers that dealt with race that preceded him (Kipling, Twain) had a far more realistic attitude.
And of course they are vilified for using the colloquial terms of the day in stories that depict brown people, etc, as PEOPLE, and Lovecraft gets a pass even though the smudgy people are invariable evil and degenerate in ALL of his stories in which they were included.
The one thing worth mentioning is that his stories are full of evil, degenerate characters, the brown folks do not have a monopoly on being the villains. They
are universally excluded from being the good guys, which is worse.
Usually when you see people complaining about Lovecraft, they stop at the race thing, which I think leaves out the very important anti-science aspect. He wasn't
just willfully racist, he was scared of all kinds of progress.
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 28, 2013, 05:16:43 PM
This is very interesting; never having been into Lovecraft I didn't know any of this at all.
Understandable. His writing style is sort of like Herman Melville on tranquilizers. And he cheats.
Quote from: Mrs. Nigelson on October 28, 2013, 05:16:43 PM
This is very interesting; never having been into Lovecraft I didn't know any of this at all.
If you ever have the time for some casual reading, Mountains of Madness is one of the best pieces. Scientific expedition to Antarctica uncovers an ancient abandoned city and pieces together some of the history. No voodoo cults, no horrors of race mixing, not even his usual LOL POOR PEOPLE.
Drinking game: every time he uses "Cyclopean," drink.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 05:24:13 PM
Drinking game: every time he uses "Cyclopean," drink.
Alcohol poisoning ITT.
Also, "indescribable", "unnameable", and "retreated into madness".
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:25:11 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 05:24:13 PM
Drinking game: every time he uses "Cyclopean," drink.
Alcohol poisoning ITT.
Also, "indescribable", "unnameable", and "retreated into madness".
If you stick to just Cyclopean, and you don't read it all in one night...
The worst part about him is he CHEATS. When the big reveal on the monster happens, it's "indescribeable".
HP Lovecraft should be dug up and fired out of a cannon full of shit. Into a landfill.
Also: Lovecraft is what happens when Providence gets you. :lulz:
This is all true. I don't remember which story it is, but in one he descibes an unconscious black man in New York City in completely gorrilla-eesque terms. Miiight be Horror at Red Hook?
But yeah, the man completely loathed his times... to the point of using archaic words and spelling. He was like one of those guys today who longs for the 20s, except he longed for colonial times.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 05:32:55 PM
Also: Lovecraft is what happens when Providence gets you. :lulz:
No.
Lovecraft IS Providence, he said it himself and it's on his headstone.
The city in itself is scared of change, and a great majority of older established families that still live here, including the Philips clan, are still very much against a lot of things. The entire Eastside and a certain Ivy League named for the color of shit was built with slave money thanks to John Brown. Of COURSE Lovecraft was racist and reclusive. He grew up around and was apart of Providence Old Money atop the sheltered College hill. He literally could look down on the world from Prospect Street near the bones of ol' Roger Williams.
The man actually just wrote what he saw. Both of his parents landed in Butler, which was the pioneer for shock therapy in the nation AND STILL USES IT, while up in your neck of the woods, Danvers invented the lobotomy. New England is full of fucking crazy, none of this is new. Providence just happens to have a darkness about it. I've watched several people completely go mad. I mean, go from being good A-students at Johnson and Wales or Providence College and then turn around a month later as emaciated heroin addicts, for no reason other than Providence. While working at the mall, I got to witness 2 suicides and someone try to drive out of the parking garage onto 95 via the roof, because it sounded like a good idea at the time. I also got pushed down the stairs at my old job from some unseen force.
I mean, we set our river on fire willingly every other weekend
BECAUSE WE CAN.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:30:57 PM
The worst part about him is he CHEATS. When the big reveal on the monster happens, it's "indescribeable".
HP Lovecraft should be dug up and fired out of a cannon full of shit. Into a landfill.
Good luck finding him.
No, really, he's not under his headstone. Some cultists found that out the hard way. We know he's somewhere in his family plot, but the Philips Family has moved him before and threatened to move him again. Even Swan Point Cemetery says they aren't 100% sure exactly where he is. I've only been there once. It's very hard to find, and someone from the Philips' are sometimes there and will chase you off. :|
Quote from: Suu on October 28, 2013, 06:37:58 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:30:57 PM
The worst part about him is he CHEATS. When the big reveal on the monster happens, it's "indescribeable".
HP Lovecraft should be dug up and fired out of a cannon full of shit. Into a landfill.
Good luck finding him.
No, really, he's not under his headstone. Some cultists found that out the hard way. We know he's somewhere in his family plot, but the Philips Family has moved him before and threatened to move him again. Even Swan Point Cemetery says they aren't 100% sure exactly where he is. I've only been there once. It's very hard to find, and someone from the Philips' are sometimes there and will chase you off. :|
Then I guess we'll have to turf up the entire clan.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 06:38:37 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 28, 2013, 06:37:58 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:30:57 PM
The worst part about him is he CHEATS. When the big reveal on the monster happens, it's "indescribeable".
HP Lovecraft should be dug up and fired out of a cannon full of shit. Into a landfill.
Good luck finding him.
No, really, he's not under his headstone. Some cultists found that out the hard way. We know he's somewhere in his family plot, but the Philips Family has moved him before and threatened to move him again. Even Swan Point Cemetery says they aren't 100% sure exactly where he is. I've only been there once. It's very hard to find, and someone from the Philips' are sometimes there and will chase you off. :|
Then I guess we'll have to turf up the entire clan.
I know where they live. We'll start with the living.
But seriously, even talking about this is giving me the jim jams all of a sudden. It's hard to explain. Honestly, I'd rather just leave the bastard be. We all live on the Westside for a reason.
I've gotta say, having been reading some really racist literature of the same period (Prester John was written in 1910), Lovecraft had issues with race, but he was by no means the worst around.
I'm a huge fan of Lovecraft, so I'm no doubt biased, but whilst you can read him as being anti-progress, I think he was more critical of insular communities and backwards thinking than you give him credit for. Many of his stories are about inbred communities who hide dark secrets, and how slavish devotion to tradition or the elder generation leads to horrible ends.
Also, whilst Abdul Alhazred may not be a 'hero' in the typical sense, within the Lovecraft canon he is also one of the only figures who gets to stick two fingers up to the nameless horrors and make sense of it. And he is, famously, the 'Mad Arab'. One of the most renowned and recurring figures.
My personal favorite is The Rats in the Walls. There's a lot of Lovecraft stories which haven't stood the test of time, but that one still managed to give me a shiver when I read it, and I still love his writing. Yes, there's a lot of fear of the unknown in them... but a lot of it is because he is examining the implications of there being no God, if the universe really cares nothing for the existence of humans, and he tries to make that nihilistic nothingness the real core of his horror. It was new and exciting, and its a pity that so many geeks just take all their Lovecraft from the Call of Cthulhu RPG and act as though he thought tentacles were the last word in terror. He didn't.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 28, 2013, 07:31:30 PM
Also, whilst Abdul Alhazred may not be a 'hero' in the typical sense, within the Lovecraft canon he is also one of the only figures who gets to stick two fingers up to the nameless horrors and make sense of it. And he is, famously, the 'Mad Arab'. One of the most renowned and recurring figures.
Okay, I'll give you that.
QuoteIt was new and exciting, and its a pity that so many geeks just take all their Lovecraft from the Call of Cthulhu RPG and act as though he thought tentacles were the last word in terror. He didn't.
And that's almost a shame, because you can get some serious mileage out of tentacles.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 07:45:01 PM
And that's almost a shame, because you can get some serious mileage out of tentacles.
Hah, true.
Also, many of Lovecraft's protagonists were men of learning or scientists, very few of his stories glorified violence in the way typical of the era. Much of the violence is brutal, bloody, and as likely to kill off a lead as anything - there's some examples of PTSD in there, too, which wasn't something really touched on in the time.
I'm not saying he was the most progressive guy around, but I do think there's a reason a lot of his stories resonate today where others have fallen by the wayside.
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 28, 2013, 07:49:06 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 07:45:01 PM
And that's almost a shame, because you can get some serious mileage out of tentacles.
Hah, true.
Also, many of Lovecraft's protagonists were men of learning or scientists, very few of his stories glorified violence in the way typical of the era. Much of the violence is brutal, bloody, and as likely to kill off a lead as anything - there's some examples of PTSD in there, too, which wasn't something really touched on in the time.
I'm not saying he was the most progressive guy around, but I do think there's a reason a lot of his stories resonate today where others have fallen by the wayside.
And that's kind of the bit that pisses me off. Most of the problems in the Lovecraft stories could be solved with a couple of companies of light infantry.
And in at least 3 cases, they were.
I don't see the criticism against insular communities as contrary to his other views. Lovecraft didn't want any change, and part of that is the slow decay of (Superior White) families into degenerate backwoods sorcerers. It's worth pointing out that Lovecraft came from some money and was a significant factor in that family's fall from grace. He ended his life barely scraping by on what was left of his inheritance, never making any kind of profit off his work and generally being terrible at holding a job.
Color Out of Space is a good one for people who are stuck on tentacle monster Lovecraft.
ALSO (damn you new replies) his men of science are not very progressive, themselves. He likes the kind of scientist that prays to Newton every night.
Providence also gave us these guys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGNOfRzDysw
There's one more thing I think he got right.
Lovecraft was no fan of copyright and intellectual property the way it gets used now. Part of the reason his work is remembered is because he actively encouraged people to riff off his ideas and use his settings and props. He also riffed heavily off other contemporary authors. His sloppy handling of his posthumous copyright also means that the majority of it reverted to public domain quickly. It probably wasn't much comfort to him in his life, but it's an attitude I appreciate.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 10:04:52 PM
There's one more thing I think he got right.
Lovecraft was no fan of copyright and intellectual property the way it gets used now. Part of the reason his work is remembered is because he actively encouraged people to riff off his ideas and use his settings and props. He also riffed heavily off other contemporary authors. His sloppy handling of his posthumous copyright also means that the majority of it reverted to public domain quickly. It probably wasn't much comfort to him in his life, but it's an attitude I appreciate.
Well, he died broke, which is a pretty good method of supporting "free information".
:lulz:
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 10:49:23 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 10:04:52 PM
There's one more thing I think he got right.
Lovecraft was no fan of copyright and intellectual property the way it gets used now. Part of the reason his work is remembered is because he actively encouraged people to riff off his ideas and use his settings and props. He also riffed heavily off other contemporary authors. His sloppy handling of his posthumous copyright also means that the majority of it reverted to public domain quickly. It probably wasn't much comfort to him in his life, but it's an attitude I appreciate.
Well, he died broke, which is a pretty good method of supporting "free information".
:lulz:
Often the fate of folks on this side, it's true. I like to think there's something between Disney Style Copyright and IP and total anarchy :P
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 11:06:05 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 10:49:23 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 10:04:52 PM
There's one more thing I think he got right.
Lovecraft was no fan of copyright and intellectual property the way it gets used now. Part of the reason his work is remembered is because he actively encouraged people to riff off his ideas and use his settings and props. He also riffed heavily off other contemporary authors. His sloppy handling of his posthumous copyright also means that the majority of it reverted to public domain quickly. It probably wasn't much comfort to him in his life, but it's an attitude I appreciate.
Well, he died broke, which is a pretty good method of supporting "free information".
:lulz:
Often the fate of folks on this side, it's true. I like to think there's something between Disney Style Copyright and IP and total anarchy :P
I think someone should build a house.
I think they should use their own effort and materials.
I think I should get to move in, and make them live in the garage.
Oh yeah, oh yeah
I think I should get it for free.
I think my price of admission to the internet should cover all subsequent expenses. Like when you go to a comicon and the entrance ticket means you get to take a copy of everything at the con.
You know? Yeah. Oh yeah.
Yeah.
I think I should make a creative work that NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING WITH FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER I'M DEAD. That's totally fair to the culture that raised me and filled me with enough interesting ideas that I was able to synthesize my own.
Or we could not play hyperbole?
Guys, we just finished with a drug thread, as well as a tribalistic bias thread.
Do we really need to start a copyright thread so soon?
That much said, it's all you "information wants to be free" types that have prevented me from being a professional musician.
Well, that, and DOUR™.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 29, 2013, 03:52:53 PM
Guys, we just finished with a drug thread, as well as a tribalistic bias thread.
Do we really need to start a copyright thread so soon?
That much said, it's all you "information wants to be free" types that have prevented me from being a professional musician.
Well, that, and DOUR™.
But LMNO, I have a Uniform I need to keep clean!
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 29, 2013, 03:52:53 PM
Do we really need to start a copyright thread so soon?
It's the will of the Gods.
QuoteThat much said, it's all you "information wants to be free" types that have prevented me from being a professional musician.
Starve for your art, or it's not authentic.
QuoteWell, that, and DOUR™.
And Nigel's dick up your ass.
:hammer:
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 29, 2013, 03:40:44 PM
I think I should make a creative work that NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING WITH FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER I'M DEAD. That's totally fair to the culture that raised me and filled me with enough interesting ideas that I was able to synthesize my own.
Or we could not play hyperbole?
I don't view that as hyperbole. I view it as JUST.
Your culture didn't make it. YOU did.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 29, 2013, 03:40:44 PM
I think I should make a creative work that NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING WITH FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER I'M DEAD. That's totally fair to the culture that raised me and filled me with enough interesting ideas that I was able to synthesize my own.
Or we could not play hyperbole?
Artists don't create for other people. Just as a live artist has the right to create the most earth shattering piece with profound cultural significance and never show it to anyone, so too have they the right to distribute it and pass that right onto whomever they wish to should they die.
Artists may absorb culture, but artists don't owe culture anything.
Quote from: Faust on October 29, 2013, 04:34:29 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 29, 2013, 03:40:44 PM
I think I should make a creative work that NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING WITH FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS AFTER I'M DEAD. That's totally fair to the culture that raised me and filled me with enough interesting ideas that I was able to synthesize my own.
Or we could not play hyperbole?
Artists don't create for other people. Just as a live artist has the right to create the most earth shattering piece with profound cultural significance and never show it to anyone, so to have they the right to distribute it and pass that right onto whomever they wish to should they die.
Artists may absorb culture, but artists don't owe culture anything.
This, right there.
Intellectual property is property, period. If I build a factory, I have the right to allow my children or the benefactors of my estate to inherit it. The same goes for a book I write.
Leonardo Davinci didn't owe Florence a Goddamn thing. Horrible times make great art, but you don't reward the horror with partial ownership.
[flip-flop]
But when corporations get hold if it, work-for-hire stuff, so they "own" it, should the same rules apply?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 29, 2013, 04:40:34 PM
[flip-flop]
But when corporations get hold if it, work-for-hire stuff, so they "own" it, should the same rules apply?
If I own it, I can sell it. If I commissioned it, I own it.
And whomever I sell it to takes title. Just like anything else.
The fundamental disconnect is based on the ease of copying intellectual property electronically. To say that this validates just taking it is the same as saying you have a moral right to steal a car if it's left unlocked.
The fact that a theft is easy doesn't justify the theft.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 29, 2013, 04:40:34 PM
[flip-flop]
But when corporations get hold if it, work-for-hire stuff, so they "own" it, should the same rules apply?
When the creator agrees to it sadly yes. Example: Alan Moore got fucked on the watchmen because the clause was the ownership would revert to him when the book went out of print for a year.
It has never gone out of print.
DC are an evil manipulative company not honouring the mutual understanding of the previous agreement by looking for a loophole in said agreement, but from Moore's end he should never have entered it.
Quote from: Faust on October 29, 2013, 04:45:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 29, 2013, 04:40:34 PM
[flip-flop]
But when corporations get hold if it, work-for-hire stuff, so they "own" it, should the same rules apply?
When the creator agrees to it sadly yes. Example: Alan Moore got fucked on the watchmen because the clause was the ownership would revert to him when the book went out of print for a year.
It has never gone out of print.
DC are an evil manipulative company not honouring the mutual understanding of the previous agreement by looking for a loophole in said agreement, but from Moore's end he should never have entered it.
If I hire a carpenter to build a house, who owns the house?
The thing here, I think, is to treat an artist as any other fundamentally essential craftsman. Society can't function without plumbers, and on another level, it can't function without artists.
Even the worst societies have art. Horribly sterile art (usually of Dear Leader, etc), but art all the same.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:09:50 PM
He certainly had a problem with race, there's no doubting that.
And "his times" aren't really an excuse, because other writers that dealt with race that preceded him (Kipling, Twain) had a far more realistic attitude.
And of course they are vilified for using the colloquial terms of the day in stories that depict brown people, etc, as PEOPLE, and Lovecraft gets a pass even though the smudgy people are invariable evil and degenerate in ALL of his stories in which they were included.
Out of the three, I've probably read Twain the most, which still isn't saying much, but I have an
idea of all their writing styles. Would it be reasonable to assume that the Vilified v. Pass, is on account of Kipling/Twain, in a sense rubbing the racism of the day in people's faces by depicting colored people as regular people, who are treated as sub-human by many around them (this is where the slurs, etc. come in)? (If I'm way off, I apologize. I've read bits here and there about criticisms of these authors' works as being racist, but I'm not entirely clear on what their personal opinions may have been). Whereas Lovecraft reinforced people's attitudes towards colored people by depicting his villains as colored, etc. but it was "clean" because he didn't specifically use slurs or blatantly state "meanwhile, those shift arabs, horrible as they all tend to be, blah blah blah"? I.e., "it's ok, because he didn't say nigger, regardless of what he implied."
Of course, I could be way off base here.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:09:50 PM
He certainly had a problem with race, there's no doubting that.
And "his times" aren't really an excuse, because other writers that dealt with race that preceded him (Kipling, Twain) had a far more realistic attitude.
And of course they are vilified for using the colloquial terms of the day in stories that depict brown people, etc, as PEOPLE, and Lovecraft gets a pass even though the smudgy people are invariable evil and degenerate in ALL of his stories in which they were included.
MOST old stuff has racism in it, and it's really easy to blame it on the times, but yeah.
Here's a movie that I thought would be totally cringe-worthy, that turned out not to be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW-LC4CroIM
Nobody got tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail for making that.
Quote from: trippinprincezz13 on October 29, 2013, 04:50:35 PM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 28, 2013, 05:09:50 PM
He certainly had a problem with race, there's no doubting that.
And "his times" aren't really an excuse, because other writers that dealt with race that preceded him (Kipling, Twain) had a far more realistic attitude.
And of course they are vilified for using the colloquial terms of the day in stories that depict brown people, etc, as PEOPLE, and Lovecraft gets a pass even though the smudgy people are invariable evil and degenerate in ALL of his stories in which they were included.
Out of the three, I've probably read Twain the most, which still isn't saying much, but I have an idea of all their writing styles. Would it be reasonable to assume that the Vilified v. Pass, is on account of Kipling/Twain, in a sense rubbing the racism of the day in people's faces by depicting colored people as regular people, who are treated as sub-human by many around them (this is where the slurs, etc. come in)? (If I'm way off, I apologize. I've read bits here and there about criticisms of these authors' works as being racist, but I'm not entirely clear on what their personal opinions may have been). Whereas Lovecraft reinforced people's attitudes towards colored people by depicting his villains as colored, etc. but it was "clean" because he didn't specifically use slurs or blatantly state "meanwhile, those shift arabs, horrible as they all tend to be, blah blah blah"? I.e., "it's ok, because he didn't say nigger, regardless of what he implied."
Of course, I could be way off base here.
This is absolutely correct. Spot on.
The thing about Lovecraft's racism was that he was so bad at it. Regardless of his intent, by the end of the story it's always the foreign heathen cult whose beliefs are justified and the white christian protagonist who was laboring under an ignorant and superstitious belief system.
EDIT:
Of course that partly comes down to hate as well. It helps that he hated Christianity as much as he hated foreigners.
EDIT:
Which brings up the few times in the mythos when the christian character's beliefs might bot be unjustofied, to wit, when the monster is possibly a metaphor for Jesus, (cf. Dunwich Horror, compare the horror's death to Jesus' death scene in the gospels, the similarity of "Yog-Sothoth" to "Yah-Sabaoth" and the similarity of parts of the necronomicon passages to parts of John 10:7-9)
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on October 28, 2013, 05:07:00 PMIt's funny how nerds have latched onto the guy, when he literally represents the backwards attitudes most of them despise in the world around them. He was afraid of scientific progress, of racial diversity, and so utterly confused by women that barely any appear in his stories. The time he lived in (1890-1937) was full of massive cultural and scientific upheaval, and his response to this was to dig his heels in and screech about the horrors all around. A contemporary of Tesla and Einstein, all he could see from their amazing work was that MAN IS LOOKING INTO THINGS HE SHOULD NOT KNOW and he filled his stories with fevered dreams of what nightmares science might unleash.
...
He contributed something to society, it's true. He and Mary Shelly paved the way for modern horror: terrifying stories based not on ancient superstition or religion but new and terrifying things outside the scope of human understanding. Scientific horror.
I think a lot of the nerds empathize more with the villains and mad scientists than with the heroes of such works.
(His rejection of superstition also endears him to nerds)