Talk:Lovecraft fandom

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Popular culture (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture articles

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Page numbers disclaimer

The copy of Poole's book I have is digital and it has unclear page numbers, so I apologize if the page numbers provided are a bit off. Hopefully one day someone with paper copy can correct any errors. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additional sources

There are few more sources I found that could be used to expand this, if they are deemed reliable and/or we can get full text:

Driven to Madness with Fright: Further Notes on Horror Fiction book by S. T. Joshi seems to have an entire chapter on "The World of Lovecraft Fandom". Unfortunately, it is a WP:SPS: publisher is CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, so it is likely not reliable, although SPS also says: " Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.", and S. T. Joshi is considered an authority. In either case, I don't have access to this book, but it might be a useful source for expanding it. Wonder why Joshi didn't publish i properly (could indicate it is poorly researched, sigh).

@Piotrus: I think I voted merge in the AfD, but am not familiar with S. T. Joshi, but from what I can see he's well-known. Given the lack of refs, this could be included (as it's probably marginally reliable), but I don't think it counts to GNG. Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 00:19, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The book was published by S. T. Joshi's Sarnath Press micro-imprint. He uses it to publish works that he does "not wish to burden other presses with" and projects that are "impractical to publish by ordinary means" due to their sheer size. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 20:46, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems "upcoming", as in, announced by the author but not available online yet: Loos, Martijn J. "Affirmative Lovecraft Fandom: Beyond Disavowal and Apologism as Approaches to Lovecraft's Racism." Journal of Fantasy and Fan Culture 2 (2022).
Available now, right here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.151.213 (talk) 04:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is also an older Master Thesis that is weekly reliable (being a MA). I also can't seem to locate a digital copy: Lowe, Christopher (2006). The Cult of Cthulhu: The Cthulhu Mythos Fandom and the Norms of Copyright. National University of Ireland, Maynooth.
There also some discussion in this fanzine (?), New Frontiers, from 1964 (NEW FRONTIERS, May 1964, Volume 2, Number 1). [1]. The article is JOSEPH FANN AND HIS BROTHERS. Fans of the Caves. by Harry Warner, Jr. Whether the source is reliable, it's anoher question (Fanzine...). The author is probably Harry Warner Jr., who has been active in science fiction fandom (per his article). -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This has some useable content. There are relevant sources in Lovecraft studies. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 18:24, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the journal article "Letting Sleeping Abnormalities Lie" and they use this blog article as a source, which is about the fandom in specific. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:30, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That paper is cited in H. P. Lovecraft's own article. The sources there are also relevant. Many of them do not discuss the fandom, but a number of them do. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 18:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This PhD dissertation ("Into the Seething Vortex: Occult Horror and the Subversion of the Realistic" by David Ryan Kumler) could be useful. Fandom isn't the primary aim, but it looks like it is discussed. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:51, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another dissertation, this time a graduate study but it could lead to more info: An examination of contributive narrative: A look at the Lovecraft Circle and the expansion of the Cthulhu Mythos. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:19, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found a newspaper article, "Loving treatment for Lovecraft; Hollywood never got it right, so fans of the unfilmable author made their own film - silent and black-and-white". (Salas, Randy A., 2006, Star Tribune) It's more about a fan film, but it is a step in the right direction. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The book "‘The Visual History of Science Fiction Fandom" may be helpful, but I don't have a way to review it to see if/where he's mentioned. Given that these are considered to be thorough, I'd be surprised if he wasn't. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:30, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found two articles that contain discussions of the H. P. Lovecraft Film Festival. Articles in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Providence Monthly and The Bay have some useable information. Relevant images for Wikimedia Commons can be found here. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 18:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I guess better sources have now been listed by now, but the Omni review article from the Midnight Shambler article briefly talks about several Lovecraft magazines; that article also seems to be appear completely in The Year's Best Fantasy and Horror: Tenth Annual Collection, pages LVI-LXII. Daranios (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We can go deeper. The H. P. Lovecraft Archive has bibliographical information for the Crypt of Cthulhu, Lovecraft Studies and the Lovecraft Annual These journals contain relevant information. There are scans of old Crypt of Cthulhu and Lovecraft Studies issues in the Internet Archive. The entirety of the the Lovecraft Annual is accessible through JSTOR. There is also a reasonable collection of articles that might be useful. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 19:52, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An entire issue of Studies in Gothic Fiction was devoted to Lovecraftian adaptations. Some of the articles within are relevant. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 19:20, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Fanac Fan History Project has a full copy of Meade and Penny Frierson's HPL and the supplements. While it is a one-shot fanzine, HPL contains a sizeable amount of content that was written by early Lovecraft scholars and was republished elsewhere. George T. Wetzel, Richard L. Tierney and R. Alain Everts were among the contributors. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 20:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note on Merge

Accidentally typed incorrect edit summary only "external link" when it should be "external link and Merged content from Lovecraft fandom to here. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midnight Shambler. Sorry for this error, in a new minor edit posted the correct summary per copyright. Apologies. VickKiang (talk) 00:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]