[ Note: Aickman wrote in The River Runs Uphill: "I was told by a porter at Diggle station an anecdote upon which (as there now seems no harm in acknowledging) I based my story, "The Trains." ]
James Michael Rogers (March 31, 1998)
[Baptism]I, too, have been pleasantly surprised by this group which I heard about on the GASLIGHT mailing list the other day. I am thrilled speechless to encounter other Aickman fanatics, since I have long felt like I was the only one.
Aickman is one of the writers who I think would benefit from a bit more in the way of critical commentary....I would be curious as to what people make of certain stories, notably "Mark Ingestre: The Customer's Tale" and "The Trains".....both of which seem pretty puzzling even by Aickman's usual standards.James
oOo
Steve Wise (April 3, 1998)
I read "The Trains" recently and felt it was basically a joke, since the woman would not really expect that waving to the engineer would bring assistance, given the history of which she was apprised earlier in the story.I read the other story recently too, but you would have to remind me which one it is.
--overdosed on Aickman
oOo
Robert Suggs (April 1, 1998)
[Aickman]Welcome! There's always room for more Robert Aickman fans. I believe I can say, after a good bit of consideration, that he's my all-around favorite author of weird tales. I've never been truly disappointed by any story of his--though the one which won an award, "Pages From a Young Girl's Diary," I think, was for him a weaker effort; though more conventional. He wasn't meant for vampire stories.
"Mark Ingestre" is also a later work, based on Sweeney Todd if I remember correctly, and was pretty bizarre if not his best work. But still pretty gripping. "The Trains"--now we're talking about some of his best work. Yes, that's one I'd like to discuss. It's said not to be a supernatural story; what do you think?
Again, welcome. What can you tell us about the GASLIGHT mailing list? I was thrilled when I found that site and the number of stories they have online.
Rob
oOo
deathbird44 (April 2, 1998))
Yeah, The Trains is something of an oddity; I've got one of those paperbacks of that ghost stories series edited by Aickman, the volume containing the Trains, and in the introduction he's talking about the nature of the ghost represented in a few of the stories, and of The Trains he says something along the lines of: "and sometimes you can't tell whether or not it IS a ghost". I know, that doesn't really clear anything up, but seeing as it came from the horse's mouth there must be a clue within I'm sure. From what I can recall at some stage there seems to be a vision of a dead (suicided) lady hanging from rafters, but it's not clear whether it's a ghost or what. You get the impression that she's been locked up and gone mad or something, and quite possibly this is the fate awaiting the two young (and initially quite sane) protagonists. Your thoughts folks?
JohnoOo
rbadac (April 2, 1998)
[Ayer/Arno, De La Mare, Aickman, the weather, my grandkids, my arthritis, what's for dinner, etc.]Hi, guys! Gals, too, if you're out there, but for some reason, I'll bet you're mostly guys. That's a whole separate subject for discussion, however...
[snip, snip]
Now, regarding all you wimps who didn't understand OUT OF THE DEEP- okay, so we got a kid who's selling off the family heirlooms and living in the old homestead off the ill-gotten gains, he hated the old butler who mistreated him when he was young, but who is now dead, he gets a bright idea to yank the butler bell-pull one night for fun, and is ANSWERED, not only by some kid who looks like the butler's son, but also a little girl, and THEN also by a 'pet' of sorts, all in direct response to specific wishes of our hero, and he ends up dead in bed with the bell-pull looped out of his reach. What's not to understand?
Just kidding, of course. De La Mare, gotta love him! Gotta read the Cliff's Notes on him, too, shame there aren't any.
Hey, I wanna talk about THE TRAINS, too! Why don't we all re-read it soon and meet back here?
rbadac
oOo
Robert Suggs (April 3, 1998)
[snip]rbadac wrote:
>and he ends up dead in bed with the bell-pull looped out of his
>reach. What's not to understand?Well, as I remember, I wondered whether he was hanged on the bell-pull. I guess I need the children's adaptation. Thing about De la Mare is the little sentence he throws in here and there, just when you think you're up to speed. Robert Aickman took that a step further, so that it's whole characters, settings, and well, COLLECTIONS OF STORIES that are noggin-scratchers.
I'll re-read "The Trains," though it hasn't been too long. It's a page turner.
Rob
oOo
rbadac (April 3, 1998)
I laughed when I saw Steve’s comment about being 'overdosed on Aickman’. That's not hard to do.So, here's some MORE.
Text read was from THE FONTANA BOOK OF GREAT GHOST STORIES (Beagle, NY 1971), though the arrangement was copyrighted in 1966 by Aickman, who edited this excellent series (for Fontana in England, I presume). The story is originally from WE ARE FOR THE DARK (Jonathan Cape, London, 1951), the collection Aickman shares with Elizabeth Jane Howard.
Aickman picked one of his own stories for nearly each of the eight volumes in this series, which is perfectly all right with me, an instance where egotism is not the issue, but simple aptness (or as Walter Brennan once said on an old TV series, 'No brag, just fact.') The interesting thing is that 'The Trains' is in a GHOST STORY anthology, and yet can be argued (and has been) as not being one. A ghost story, that is.
I didn't think it was, anyway (SPOILERS AHEAD); I saw it largely as a story rampant with people and things trying to be what they are not. The 'Quiet Valley' which is obviously full of train noise, Mimi and Margaret, and their ambiguously lesbian relationship, Beech the butler (I won't include the spoiler on THAT!), Wendley Roper writing under the name of 'Howard Bullhead', and unable to carry on in the shoes of his railroad magnate grandfather (who got knocked OUT of HIS, by the way!), crazy aunt Roper, who either IS or ISN'T the ghost in this story, if it has one (and I have a thought about that, too, which I'll throw out later), a clock that is 5 1/2 hours slow in a context of trains supposedly running 'on time', etc. etc.
The whole 'waving at trains' business I found to be hilarious, as well- besides its incongruity at the end, it is used as a female response to a male device (trains going into tunnels, nudge nudge); having Mimi escape from a fate worse than death at the hands of Wendley with her pockets stuffed full of railway tickets was another good one (nowhere left to go, indeed); funny, I had Mimi pegged as the quasi-lesbian at first, mostly from remarks she made and her general demeanor, but Margaret's jealousy of her finds its voice when Wendley prefers her to Margaret, and we discover that Mimi is, besides being the commoner to Margaret's blue-bloodedness (and moody to her constancy), is also the attractive one, and actually responds to Wendley's advances. Of course, that proves nothing either way, even in real life, and certainly not in an Aickman story.
Anyway, I have a theory that Wendley was the ghost. And I don't think Beech was doing the waving.
One other thing: on p. 176 of the Beagle ( p. 127 in NIGHT VOICES), Aickman writes:
"Just as they were over the tunnel entrance another train sped downwards. They looked from above at the blind black roofs of the coaches, like the caterpillar at the fair with the cover down."What the hell does THAT mean?! (Interrobang courtesy of Bill B.)
rbadac
oOo
Robert Suggs (April 4, 1998)
Dadgummit, Rbadac, have you ALREADY re-read the 40 pages of "The Trains?" Do you ever work, or sleep? I got through the first page before my 4-year-old came running in and leaped on me, and as always I had to wrestle him with one arm while I protected my books with the other. Four-year-olds and libraries are a bad match.I will say now that the story is indeed a mock gothic, I think, or perhaps Aickman dragging the gothic kicking and screaming into the 20th century. Most of the time, we aren't immediately cognizant of Aickman ‘having us on,’ as they say, except perhaps in "Growing Boys." I also remember that the story is all the more weird in that he initially sets up a traditional ghost story with a desolate house in the valley with figure in window, two weary travelers, pub scene out of "American Werewolf in London" with wary villagers eyeing the outsiders and making dark comments about what might lurk on the moors. If the intent of the story is a bit comic as some of you suggest, the best hint might be here. This is an early story (1951), but Aickman doesn't traffic much in hallowed fictional conventions. And that's about all I can say about this one until I actually revisit the thing.
RoboOo
Dr. Nick (April 5, 1998)
Well it's been awhile since I read that one. I don't recall any ambiguous suggestions of lesbianism, just that the fat one seemed jealous of her companion though I have all but forgotten any fine details in their relationship. That ‘American Werewolf in London’ touch in the inn lent a nice unsettling air, but what was the jist of that whole thing? Some kind of vague warning about the area they were in? Rbadac I hope you'll provide more details as this is a story I'm a little foggy on, and expound on any theories you may have. Was the ’ghost’ a train; The train that killed the old fellow as he was checking the tracks? I think I'm hopelessly lost on this one and must defer the discussion to more recent readers, but please keep this going as I would like to know more.
JohnoOo
Bill Barnett (April 5, 1998)
rbadac wrote:
> The interesting thing is that 'The Trains' is in a GHOST STORY anthology,
> and yet can be argued (and has been) as not being one. A ghost story, that is.> I didn't think it was, anyway (SPOILERS AHEAD); I saw it largely as a
> story rampant with people and things trying to be what they are not.Indeed, even the coffee at the inn is not really coffee, but ‘made from essence.’ (Is that the same as instant coffee?)
Upon reading it this time I find it to be a send-up of a gothic story type, and I think there's an example of it in the OXFORD BOOK OF ENGLISH GHOST STORIES (I just can't figure out which story): traveller on the moors must find lodging for the night and happens upon a forbidding old mansion. Occupying the mansion is the lord of the house and a single servant. The lord has long been retired from society, and has spent the last several years in reclusive ‘research.’ Here is where "The Trains" diverges from the formula: Aickman has taken the story template and substituted ‘railways’ for ‘the black arts’. Normally, when the guest is admitted to the inner sanctum, it is a combination laboratory and library. We should see alembics, retorts, mortars and pestles, ancient leather-bound volumes with strange and evil diagrams; instead, the den is the only modern, comfortable room in the house. When the host presents a book he has written pseudonymously, we expect to see a grimoire, say, GLIMPSES OF ABSOLUTE POWER by John Strong or something; instead we see EARLY FISHPLATES. And what does Roper hope to discover? It must be the terrible secret that his grandfather took to the grave, and that his aunt could never be compelled to reveal; a secret so terrible, in fact, that the Old Man ran out in front of a train rather than live with such awful knowledge. Then there is his servant, who, Igor-like, goes up to the garret room to secure the final ingredient for his master's great experiment... Did I mention that It Was a Dark and Stormy Night? I haven't figured out how the ‘damsel imprisoned in the tower waving to passing knights for rescue’ image fits in, though, other than it's Aickman once again having fun with a stock scene.
> "Just as they were over the tunnel entrance another train sped downwards.
> They looked from above at the blind black roofs of the coaches, like the
> caterpillar at the fair with the cover down."> What the hell does THAT mean?!
Ditto!
In his autobiography, Aickman explains his placement of a suit of Japanese armor in the hotel in "Ringing the Changes": as a child he had seen such a suit and was inexplicably terrified by it; he put it in the story simply because it was scary to *him*. I'd wager that the ‘hospital train’ anecdote in "The Trains" has a similar origin. As for the caterpillar at the fair, who knows? In a case like this you can usually say it's an allusion to Lewis Carroll without being challenged.
Finally, I have previously maintained that Aickman includes signals in his stories that we are now leaving the real world and entering the dream world, and in "The Trains" this sign is pretty explicit, with the passing of the ’different’ train and Margaret's realization that she is dreaming. Does she ever wake up? Is Miss Roper's ’ghost’ just a vision in a dream? Is it possible to ‘explain’ *any* Aickman story? I'd like to see someone give "The Same Dog" a shot.
['The Trains' - Addendum]
Oops, I forgot these other items re: railways-for-black-arts substitution: "A railway is like an iceberg, you know: very little of its working is visible to the casual observer," and "Only a small fraction of all the train movements are in that [the passengers' timetable]. Even the man behind the counter knows virtually nothing of the rest" equal "There are more things in Heaven and Earth..."
Bill B.
oOo
Robert Suggs (April 5, 1998)
As many before have observed, most of Robert Aickman's stories are literal and metaphorical journeys in which unforeseen twists and turns of the road confront the main characters with the truth about themselves. Peter Straub has said these characters are controlled by "a power over us of what we do not quite grasp about ourselves and our lives.""The Trains" is a perfect example. It's a story about the unmarked boundaries of sexual identity. Margaret and Mimi, whose names evoke their classes) are from different worlds, socially and psychologically. Margaret is from an upper crust family, if a bankrupt one (a social level of interpretation is peeking out here). Mimi is a hair-dresser's daughter. Margaret is more refined and confined in clothing, habits and every other way. Mimi is more in tune with the forces of nature; when the rains come, she's the one prepared. As such, Mimi has a gender ambiguity which is a key to this story.
Aickman often poses her in masculine postures, but eventually takes her in the opposite direction. When the women enter the home of Wendley, he says, "Tomorrow will put a new face on things." It certainly will--not only on Beech, the ’butler’, but others. Aickman draws a link between the lewdly staring man in the coffee house and Wendley, who echoes his words, then seeks to fulfill what was obviously on the former's mind.
The trains themselves, of course, are the central symbol. Male engineers wave from them, oblivious to the women they're waving to. If women wave first, Mimi says, they won't be noticed. What we find is that a wave may mean different things. It could be a distress signal. But it will be unheeded, if this story is any indication. Those trains keep pounding into those tunnels and disappearing. Throughout the evening, we notice she has heard the trains with a frequency which precisely parallels her brushes with sexuality in the house. Finally, she hears a ’new train’, one which is the most disturbing of all, casts its own eerie light, and is linked in her memory with a hospital train--a cargo of sickness. Then she's confronted with something sick sexually. It is then that Margaret, who began as the most tentative and confused of the pair, must confront her own situation. She will take action--if violently--and ’wave confidently’ to the trains, with blood on her hands. Mimi has an offstage confrontation the details of which we are spared, but it's awful enough to paralyze her into inaction. Much is unclear, but it seems apparent in the final scene that one strong hope for the women is in each other.
This is an early Aickman story, and it's perhaps a bit more transparent in its symbolism than usual, if no less effective. Aickman is also subtly playing with gothic conventions, with two travellers (damsels in distress) forced by a storm into the dark house (literally dark, with railway soot). The thwarted love affair in the family's past is a convention, as is the princess imprisoned in the tower. The story is all the more shocking for the departure it makes. One other note. As perhaps Aickman's central tale in the dual collection We Are For the Dark, this story's counterpart would be Elizabeth Jane Howard's "Three Miles Up." In a way that story inverts the formula of this one. Two men with an ambiguous relationship are travelling, this time by water. This time a woman, of course, comes between them--one named Sharon. She pilots the boat, taking the two men to their fate in uncharted waters (they, too, struggle with the limitations of their map). It has been pointed out (and I think reasonably; no reason Howard wouldn't be as interested in ancient myth as Aickman) that Sharon could be Charon, who ferries the ancient boat across the river Styx to the underworld. If so, we have an inverted sexual role again, in yet another story of sexual identity. That parallel will break down at some point, of course, but it's clear the stories have very similar themes.
Rob
oOo
Robert Suggs (April 6, 1998)
['The Trains']Just a bit more on "The Trains." First, I don't think we should make too much of the fact that he put it in a book of ghost stories. It's been pointed out he made lots of odd selections for his ‘ghost’ anthologies, such as ‘Levitation’ by Joseph Payne Brennan, which has nothing anywhere close to a ghost. Aickman was no ghostly- fundamentalist, to coin a phrase. He was interested in the atmosphere of mystery, and he was certainly not interested in resolving all the plot elements. If you can untangle all the mysteries in his story, you've taken a wrong turn. He's interested in the mysteries we're all left with in life, the creepy things we're confronted with we can never quite decide about. I think everyone has one Aickman story that just DRIVES THEM CRAZY! For me, it was "The Hospice." I DEMAND answers at the end of that one! For others, I think it's "The Trains," though I can personally handle the questions I'm left with at the end of that one. But I don't think the author's intent is for us to decode the story into a logical, linear progression of events.
RoboOo
deathbird44 (April 7, 1998)
Robert Suggs wrote:
> Just a bit more on "The Trains." First, I don't think we should
> make too much of the fact that he put it in a book of ghost stories.But in the introduction to the Fontana book in which the Trains appears, Aickman talks about the ‘ghosts’ (for which he may have a broad definition) represented in each of the stories, and of the Trains he says something to the effect of , well, sometimes you can't tell if it really is a ghost; it presumably being whatever it is that one might confuse for a ghost. The thing is, nobody knows what exactly we should be considering the ghost of this story; I can't buy the idea that it's the Wendal bloke, too ordinary an oddball, and Miss Roper seems to have been eliminated as a suspect. So maybe it is a train? Or possibly a cake which mysteriously materializes in Mr. Roper's study.
> He's interested in the mysteries we're all left with in life, the creepy things
> we're confronted with we can never quite decide about. I think everyone
> has one Aickman story that just DRIVES THEM CRAZY! For me, it was
> "The Hospice." I DEMAND answers at the end of that one! For others,
> I think it's "The Trains," though I can personally handle the questions I'm left
> with at the end of that one. But I don't think the author's intent is for us to
> decode the story into a logical, linear progression of events.I agree the lingering mystery is the point, it's just damn annoying when it seems so cleverly crafted. Hell, maddening Aickman stories; to paraphrase a potato chip selling point: how can you pick just one?
Cheers,
JohnoOo
rbadac (April 6, 1998)
['The Trains' and De La Mare, too...]Yeah! THAT'S what I tune in to this site for!!!
I spent all weekend thinking about it, and suddenly it came to me in a flash (a sputter, actually) that the 'caterpillar' is AN AMUSEMENT PARK RIDE. Pardon me for not feeling dumb, though- it's not as if Aickman makes ANYTHING easy...
Gotta go read "The Entrance" and "The Same Dog". Does EVERYONE on this board have THE OXFORD BOOK OF ENGLISH GHOST STORIES? Seems like it's become the standard reference work lately, not that there's anything WRONG with that...
Re-read De La Mare's 'The House' this weekend. Wonderful. It can be found in his collection THE WIND BLOWS OVER (now good luck finding THAT), possibly elsewhere. It also contains another favorite of mine, 'Strangers And Pilgrims'.
Also found myself looking at a reprint of his THE THREE ROYAL MONKEYS (THE THREE MULLA-MULGARS), a very charming children's fantasy; in the introduction by Richard Adams (of WATERSHIP DOWN fame, not to mention THE GIRL IN A SWING for all you ghost fans- did any of you catch the film of this?), he states that De La Mare wrote this at the same time as he wrote THE RETURN, in fact, on alternate days. Boy, that must have been weird.
rbadac
oOo
Dr. Nick (April 6, 1998)
['The Trains' - lingering questions]I'm sure much could be made of the style and symbolism presented in "The Trains", but that does little to resolve the mystery of the story, such as it is. Having just done a quick overview of this story I'm left remembering how odd it must have seemed on a first reading. The question still stands as to whether or not there is clearly a supernatural element to the story, a ghost or whatever; if not, then why is it in a book of ghost stories? What is the deal with ‘The Quiet Valley’, and why is it called that when apparently there is hardly a moment's peace unbroken by the passing of trains? Is that eerie final ’train’, marked only by an unpleasing rattling noise, merely a textual device or is it indicative of a supernatural presence; remember, it is closely linked with Margaret's dream (?) vision of the dead Miss Roper. And what of the piles of seemingly innocuous tickets Mimi is clasping at the end, accompanied by a sudden inexplicable change of her outlook to one of grim resignation. For me it is hard to dismiss such oddities as minor details, mere elements of the stories pastiche of Gothic fiction; they seem like containing information central to the plot, though of course Aickman typically understates them to the point where one might question their significance. Anyhoo, your thoughts are appreciated.
JohnoOo
rbadac (April 6, 1998)
Dr. Nick wrote:
> The question still stands as to whether or not there is clearly a supernatural
> element to the story, a ghost or whatever; if not, then why is it in a book of
> ghost stories?My question also- and if it IS a ghost story, which is the ghost? Aunt Roper? Wendley? The Trains themselves (or at least one of them, anyway)?
> What is the deal with ‘The Quiet Valley’, and why is it called that when
> apparently there is hardly a moment's peace unbroken by the passing of trains?That's probably from everybody always yelling, 'QUIET!'
> Is that eerie final ‘train’, marked only by an unpleasing rattling noise, merely
> a textual device or is it indicative of a supernatural presence; remember, it
> is closely linked with Margaret's dream (?) vision of the dead Miss Roper.That's gotta be it. Rob mentioned earlier that each train matched a sexual encounter in the house, which was something I hadn't noticed until he pointed it out. What a character, that Aickman.
> And what of the piles of seemingly innocuous tickets Mimi is clasping at the
> end, accompanied by a sudden inexplicable change of her outlook to one of
> grim resignation.Rape! Now she's been around the block, seen a few things, had her fare punched, no place left to go, she's got a ticket to ride and she don't care, etc.
> For me it is hard to dismiss such oddities as minor details, mere elements of
> the stories pastiche of Gothic fiction; they seem like containing informatiion
> central to the plot, though of course Aickman typically understates them to
> the point where one might question their significance. Anyhoo, your thoughts
> are appreciated.Man, we are READING these damn stories, aren't we? I'm with you, Dr. Nick! When the going gets weird, the weird turn journalist.
rbadac
oOo
StoOdin101 (April 13, 1998)
rbadac wrote:
>> They looked from above at the blind black roofs of the coaches, like the
>> caterpillar at the fair with the cover down."
>>
>> What the hell does THAT mean?! (Interrobang courtesy of Bill B.)A "Caterpillar" is a train-like ride in a carnival: 8 or 9 cars, tied together, going around in a wobbly, dipping circle. A tarpaulin cover comes up over the riders at intervals, putting them in darkness. I never thought it was much of a ride, myself.
NECRONOMICON, all-instrumental electronic music inspired by H.P.Lovecraft, now available on c-60 cassette. E-mail ... for details.
oOo
rbadac (April 13, 1998)
[caterpillars]StoOdin101 wrote:
> A "Caterpillar" is a train-like ride in a carnival: 8 or 9 cars, tied together,I figured as much later, but I had to think about it, and that makes my head hurt. It's a wonder I read any Aickman at all...
I want one of those cassettes, too. Is it electronic music as in Gyorgi Ligeti, or as in Tomita? Or Morton Subotnick? Or Tangerine Dream?
rbadac
oOo
William Allison (April 20, 2003)
[Run Over by 'The Trains"]I recently had reason to re-read Aickman's first Fontana and I noticed something I hadn't spotted on earlier readings of 'The Trains'. I brought it up in email to almahu and she thought it interesting and suggesting I post it here for comment. Those who haven't read the story, and don't want it possibly spoiled a bit, should bail out *now*.
What I noticed was how Aickman early on takes care to bring up the anchoring of the map with the four stones (twice) and how when Marge and Mimi moved on there was left a little square of stones around/holding nothing.
So, when we see Marge, Mimi, the lodger, and the proprietress together at the "unlicensed Guest House", and later when we see Wendley, Beech, Marge, and Mimi together at the Roper house I am reminded about the stones - almost like here are four people together, but there is nothing between them, just emptiness...
Maybe it's nothing, but it caught my attention. Oh, and let's not forget that when Mimi drops the tickets to the floor they form four piles...
Thoughts?
Bill A.
--
alt.books.ghost-fiction FAQ
http://home.epix.net/~wallison/abgf_faq.htmloOo
Jim Rockhill (April 20, 2003)
That is an excellent point, Bill! It adds a whole new layer of interpretation to the tale. This is what I love about Aickman: the metaphors tell us at least as much as the plot. Find a new one and the significance of everything changes. It is like watching a reptile rustling between the old skin and the new.Jim
oOo
Paul Montelone (April 21, 2003)
Fascinating observation! But I wonder if it's possible -- or even necessary -- to elicit a *meaning* from this pattern apart from a purely formal one. That is -- the repetition of the four-motif might be functioning in a purely aesthetic way just as motifs do, say, in a work of music. Much of the beauty of Aickman's tales rests in their profoundly satisfying *unity* -- despite Aickman's determined refusal not to resolve his stories conventionally in terms of plot."The Trains" is an outstanding tale! Of all of Aickman's work, this is the one that seems to have etched itself most deeply in my memory -- though perhaps it is not his best.
Paul M.
oOo
William Allison (April 23, 2003)
Good point Paul, and I can't help but think that Aickman would find it hilarious that I'm fretting over it. Your idea of repeating motifs does make me think of what a marvellous stylist Aickman was, up there in my book with James Branch Cabell, L.P. Hartley, Jack Vance, and J.G. Ballard - writers whose "voices" I treasure.Bill A.
oOo
Robert Kunath (May 16, 2003)
Hi, Bill! Nice to see you and Bill B. back at the old digs, and, though I have ungraded finals, and though I leave for Berlin on Tuesday, I couldn't resist tipping the hat to your keen eye. And I think Aickman would be thrilled that you were noticing those details. I am convinced that there is NOTHING in an Aickman story that is not there for a reason, but part of the "reason" is the peculiar genius Aickman had for crafting narratives that (at their best) seem to have a quite clear story line yet persistently, frustratingly, magically refuse to "add up." So, like an accountant going over books, or a programmer going over the lines of code, we go back over the stories, certain that we can make the elements of the narrative fit together if we just think hard enough. And, indeed, sometimes we can make things fit, but it's a rare Aickman jigsaw puzzle that doesn't have both a few critical pieces missing as well as a few pieces that seem to be a part of *another* puzzle, though they look like they *ought* to fit somewhere.Gad, the man was a genius. I can't imagine why more isn't being written on him, and why so much of his ouevre is out of print. But reprinting him is a specialty press dream, and I doubt that *The Late Breakfasters* and *The River Runs Uphill* and *The Model* are going to languish forever.
With best wishes for a good summer to the regulars at abg-f,
Robert
oOo
Adam Walter (May 17, 2003)
One wonders also about this unpublished novel, GO BACK AT ONCE, referred to briefly by Gary Crawford in his book.Adam
oOo
Huw Lines (May 17, 2003)
The Model is quite easy to find, but it's about time somebody reprinted the others! Does anyone know what became of the Old Earth 'collected' Aickman volume that was announced years ago?
And has anyone else here (apart from Ramsey Campbell, of course) seen his handwriting? Not quite in the same league as M.R. James perhaps, but not the most legible I've come across either.Huw
ooOoo
_____
Robert Aickman: An Appreciation website
Huw Lines provided the scans of the Aickman letter referenced above.