Dickens of a Blog

[Contact Me] [FAQ] [Some "Dougisms" Defined] [About Dickens of a Blog]

[Twitter] [Goodreads] [Google+]

BLOT: (14 May 2015 - 08:52:59 AM)

Doug Talks Weird Bonus Episode: Re-Reading Aickman. Additional notes and commentary, with some response to Jason Wilcox's "The Shadow Woman: A Re-reading of Robert Aickman's 'The Trains'".

I've posted a bonus episode for Doug Talks Weird, this one about re-reading Robert Aickman's stories and the way it enhances enjoyment (and is a companion video to my Doug Talks Weird episode on Aickman's "The Trains" and irrealism). The original title was going to be "The importance of re-reading Aickman", and was going to say that Aickman has to be read two or three times for someone to "get it", but that's kind of dangerous talk. I still hold that Aickman is best upon a second or so reading, but the immediacy of the original reading is also very powerful.

In the above episode, I quote Vladimir Nabokov's "Good Readers and Good Writers", talking about reading. I'll share it again, here:

Curiously enough, one cannot read a book: one can only reread it. A good reader, a major reader, an active and creative reader is a rereader. And I shall tell you why. When we read a book for the first time the very process of laboriously moving our eyes from left to right, line after line, page after page, this complicated physical work upon the book, the very process of learning in terms of space and time what the book is about, this stands between us and artistic appreciation. When we look at a painting we do not have to move our eyes in a special way even if, as in a book, the picture contains elements of depth and development. The element of time does not really enter in a first contact with a painting. In reading a book, we must have time to acquaint ourselves with it. We have no physical organ (as we have the eye in regard to a painting) that takes in the whole picture and then can enjoy its details. But at a second, or third, or fourth reading we do, in a sense, behave towards a book as we do towards a painting.

That quote is the first reason I give in the video, that we have to work upon a text like listening to a piece of music or watching a movie, we never catch everything right off and it takes time to fully embrace every nuance (and unlike books, movies and songs are generally something it is socially acceptable to re-enjoy). By Nabokov's reasoning, you do not fully understand a book until you have gotten past the act of "moving the eyes". In this way, only after you have read a book more than once have you been able to fully appreciate the text of the book and how the whole thing works together. I am not 100% behind this, in that I think some books are not meant to be read more than once (which is another dangerous statement and I'll leave it alone), or at least were written for the excitement of the first reading moreso than any subsequent ones. As a bonus, from roughly the same place in the same Nabokov lecture, another line: "The mind, the brain, the top of the tingling spine, is, or should be, the only instrument used upon a book."

The second reason I give is that as we read, we bring in ourselves at a given time to the reading. Our emotions, our life circumstances, our sense-of-importance we attach to text-as-read, all of these are also-read when we sit down with a book. By re-reading at a different time in our life, a different set of circumstances, you are better able to assail the boundaries you place on a book and see it as more timeless.

I became aware of the re-readability of Aickman, perhaps ironically, with an audiobook. The Reece Shearsmith audiobook of Wine-Dark Sea was picked up by me as something to listen to while out walking at night (etc). The slower, human reading of the tale forced me to listen to the gentle, slower, human elements of the story. While I had previously thought of stories like "Into the Wood" as inexplicably strange and kind of creepy, I realized that was mostly set-dressing for a story about a woman dissatisfied with suburbia but yet too out of touch with the strangeness of reality to fully face it [at least at first]. I've enjoyed Aickman since the first time I read Roald Dahl's Book of Ghost Stories (which has "Ringing the Changes"), but I truly fell in love with his writing on the second (and later) readings.

You can watch my video, below:

Funnily enough, in a recent article which I had the pleasure to read yesterday, Jason Wilcox talks not only about re-reading Aickman, but about specifically re-reading "The Trains":

["The Trains"] is a story that demands re-reading, as on a first read it engages us on the level of surface narrative, while most readers will, I think, be aware that much of its significance and detail is lost if the attention is paid only to this level. A second reading should reveal its hidden paths, or the level of the 'unconscious text' (a term which seems to have been first used by the French critic Jean Bellemin-Noel, a follower of Lacan). Which is not to say that Aickman as author is unconscious of this deeper level: on the contrary, I would say that he is writing most, if not all, his best stories with this level very much in mind.

That is from Jason Wilcox's "The Shadow Woman: A Re-reading of Robert Aickman's 'The Trains'", published in Wormwood 24 (i.e. The Spring 2015 issue). The gist of the article starts with, "it could be said that to attempt to 'understand' Aickman's stories is to fall into a trap...", but he holds that certain stories can be understood, and the article is him attempting to analyze "The Trains" by an "unconscious" understanding [that is, that elements of the story can be taken as a indicative of the story's unstated, though present, intent].

Warning, I'm going to spoil some elements of the story to discuss Wilcox's article. Leave now if you still need to read the story and care about specific plot points.

I believe Wilcox to be spot-on to point out the juxtaposition between Margaret and Beech (and between the largely unused Guest House with the Roper House). Margaret is a confused character. She is unsure of herself, but on the surface is merely plain. Beech's self-doubt is manifested in cross-dressing (and enhanced by a largely unexplored strange black ring, which could possibly be a sign of cult-like activity, or of secret marriage). In both, the real character is underneath, and in both the companion-of-choice—Mimi and Wendley, respectively—is a person that seems to be more socially acceptable though hides other layers. Much in the way the pattern of four-stones-to-a-map-of-a-house motif shows a reflection of the sad Guest House and the Miss Roper-less "Miss Roper's House", the character of Margaret can be understood by Beech and vice versa.

However, Wilcox links this to an attraction of Margaret for Mimi. This I am unsure about. While sexual confusion is there, and while Margaret is more positive in her assessment of Mimi's looks than of any man the story has to offer, I see it instead as Margaret being more jealous of Mimi's ability to wear herself in public, while Margaret cannot. As for lines such as the taboo of Beech barging in and of some of the discussions of sex and gender matters—not mention the quote about "you know what love is", which is perhaps Beech over-assuming—, this story still feels to me to be a comment on the gendered Victorian ghost story. What should not have mattered in a modern world, a female family servant to a male family member, becomes corrupt and confused because the house itself is a ghost of an earlier time.

Wilcox's interpretation bests mine, mind you, in that it asks the pertinent question of why bother with such a set-up, and does a nice job of comparing Margaret's killing of Beech with her own sexual confusion. I simply think assuming Margaret wanting more from Mimi besides to feel accepted is possibly, to quote Wilcox's own line, "a trap".

Is definitely worth a read, though, and is a good example of how Aickman comes across in layers, and how those layers show up not on first glances, but on subsequent ones.

Nabokov, Vladimir. "Good Readers and Good Writers". As collected in Lectures on Literature. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980.

Wilcox, Jason. "The Shadow Woman: A Re-reading of Robert Aickman's 'The Trains'". Wormwood 24, Spring 2015.

Robert Aickman


BLOT: (04 May 2015 - 10:47:10 AM)

Tartarus Press to release book chronicling early development of Robert Aickman's style, includes documentary, Robert Aickman: Author of Strange Tales

Apparently it was a good week to post my video about Aickman's "The Trains" and my definition of Aickmanesque (followed up a post expanding on some ideas), in that Tartarus Press announced today that they are going to be publishing The Strangers and Other Writings, which will collect some previously uncollected/unpublished works on a range of topics. The first bit that excites me is that it will chronologically present the unpubished stories/fragments so that you can see the development of Aickman's early style. The second bit that excites me is that it will include the 50+ minute documentary, Robert Aickman: Author of Strange Tales.

Book trailer embedded below.

Robert Aickman


BLOT: (02 May 2015 - 10:47:11 AM)

Some additional notes/commentary about Doug Talks Weird 2: Robert Aickman's The Trains, Aickmanesque, and Irrealism

Couple of nights ago, posted the second video in my Doug Talks Weird series. This video looks at Robert Aickman's "The Trains", as well as the concept of what makes a story "Aickmanesque" and/or gives it a flavor of irrealism. You can watch the video by clicking the "thumbnail" below, the first link, above, or see it embedded at the bottom.

Wanted to take a moment and fill in some more blanks and give some additional commentary. I dug around a little online to find out how other people identified "Aickmanesque". Anecdotally, it seems to be considered a phrase tied to the inexplicable, though Brian J. Showers points that out there's more to it than "an oblique and impentrable ending" (that's about al he says about Aickman in the inteview, but it's a good interview). The Curious Tale's blogpost about Poor Soul's Light, gives these keywords: "mysterious, elliptical, uncanny, unsettling." Throughout that post, you see a few other elements: loneliness, gentle prose, and dreamlike. On Thomas Ligotti Online, a comparison of Ligotti to Aickman, by "Nemonymous", concludes that Aickmanesque is..."various metaphors becoming humanity", which I like the sound of though probably do not agree with. To end it with one more, let's look at Mario Guslandi's definition [as applied to "The Swords"], given in his review of Cold Hand in Mine: "inscrutable and disquieting, blending eroticism, weirdness and the disturbing feeling that something terrible lurks behind our trivial daily existence." "Oblique" and "puzzling" shows up, as well.

Almost humorously, to me, though I discuss the puzzling nature and the trouble of applying a single definition to an Aickman story, when I was searching for my own definition of Aickmanesque, I seem to have focused more on the practical. It is not that I disagree with much of the above (though I think a lot of it, like a lot of the critique of Ligotti, misses out on the humanity of the situation), it is simply that most of those definitions could be equally applied to the later stories of M.R. James (stuff like "Story of a Disappearance and a Reapparance," I mean) or to the stories of Edward Lucas White. Reggie Oliver (and Ramsey Campbell, and Laird Barron, and so on) has many of those qualities in his stories, but I would not say that their stories are fully Aickmanesque, merely that they tap into the same vibes, presumably on purpose. Some of my more specific elements include:

I did not go too much into a formal definition of "narrative lacuna", because I have not had much luck finding one. People seem to use the term in relation to their own definition.

I did, however, go into a more formal definition of Irrealism, which can be dangerous. As a literary critique, it seems almost a little too new to have full staying power, but I find several of the articles about it, such as those in The Irreal Reader, to be fascinating. Some takes on it are pretty much just surrealism/Bizarro, but the more formal bits, including the articles I quoted in the video, demonstrate the style as a method to embrace the chaos of pure experience but then to apply, perhaps apophenically, the rules of consciousness to it.

Another book I quoted from, Gary William Crawford's Robert Aickman: An Introduction, is actually one that I was so-so on (you can see my review on Goodreads, in which I gave it the 2-star, "It was ok," rating). I really liked his biographical sections early on, and I liked the concentrated collection of critique and his bibliography, but I disagreed with several of his summations and commentaries on the individual stories (not all, of course, not even most, just some). "The Trains" was one where I disagreed with a lot of Crawford's critique/summation, but some snippets that might be useful for a contrast reading to my own follow:

The story is so subtle and "elliptical" to use Ramsey Campbell's term, that it is difficult to say precisely what happens in it. Yet Aickman creates an intensely frightening tale...[snipped section includes a summation of the story and gets a few details off by my reckoning, but I'll leave that up to the those who have read the story to decide]...But these events are filtered mainly through Margaret's perceptions, so it is very difficult to say which is dream or which reality...As in dreams and poems, the truth is presented metaphorically: Roper's home and "The Quiet Valley" are analogues of hell. For no reason, Margaret finds herself caught up in it, and this punishment, as in "The Inner Room," appears quite unjust.
[Crawford, Gary Williams. ROBERT AICKMAN: AN INTRODUCTION (Kindle Locations 835-852). Ash-Tree Press. Kindle Edition.]

If you want some other critique on "The Trains", there is quite a bit. A longer one that goes into a number of issues and ideas is Brendan Moody's " Blood and Iron: Robert Aickman's 'The Trains'. In the 24th issue of Wormwood (that is pretty new in that it came out a couple of days ago), Jason Wilcox has an article called "The Shadow Woman: A Re-reading of Robert Aickman's 'The Trains'" that I am curious about (I have it on order, but I have not read it). Based on its title, I have a suspicion about its focus and what sort of re-casting it takes about the end.

By the way, I meant it about Berberian Sound Studio. I think it hits pretty much all the right Aickman vibes. The only peson who has compared the two, though, appears to me. Ah well. I'm also the only person I've seen use irrealism to describe Aickman. If anyone wants to get a good journal article that proves me right, I'd appreciate it!

Alright, onto the video. The next full episode will be on Thomas Ligotti's "The Frolic" and will deal with the question, "What's a Lovecraftian?"

Weird Fiction, Robert Aickman


BLOT: (29 Apr 2015 - 09:18:22 AM)

Day in the Life 13848: Panoply, Batman, It Follows, Knee Injury, and Talking Weird

It is a little bit of a tradition that I go with Sarah on the opening/Friday night of Huntsville's spring-time festival, Panoply. This year we were joined by Alicia. It was ok. Over the years, the ticket price has ticked up, now $10 a day, and the free-festival stuff had decreased (music/dance acts notwithstanding, I mean more in the lines of the free arts and crafts booths that have become a bit cheaper, more-for-kids only feeling) so you are kind of paying more to do less unless you want to listen to the music and pay high-ish prices for frozen treats and funnel cakes. If we had money to buy art, as we usually do, it might be different, but many of the artists I like I already know and could technically cut out the middle-man or see them at Lowe Mill. I'm not done with the festival, per se, but I would like to see it swing a little back to its older roots.

Let's try posting the couple of good pictures I have of the event. The first, from around 9pm, is the folks from Sloss Furnace pouring out the excess molten iron as fireworks go off behind them. The second is a piece of cast iron art that we—Sarah, Alicia, and myself—made. It is three parts, a fish, a spiral, and a tree; one for each of us. It looks kind of neat.

The other memorable moment from our night was getting to watch some of Unknown Lyric's show. Positive acoustic music, I'd guess you'd call it. Bought a CD, since Sarah needs violinspiration (dang). I've seen them play at Bridgestreet before (note: video not mine, but it is indicative), but hadn't really known who they were.

After Panoply, we went over to the Regal 18 and watched It Follows. I dug it. I want to write my review of it sometime, but kind of think I need to see it again to fully write one. First impression is that it's an effective story driven by a simple premise—once you sexually contract "It", It will follow you...no matter where you are, it is out there, somewhere, walking straight towards you. When it gets you, you die, and then it goes after the person you contracted the disease from. It suffers, as many movies do, from dragging its heels around the 2/3s mark, and there are probably a good 20-minutes of faffing back-and-forth that could have been avoided without any loss of story. Still, it's a good horror movie to see and it has the sort of ending that I wish more had, though I suspect it will piss a few people off.

In other media news, have been a little bit on a Batman kick lately, partially driven by the fact that I had grown somewhat tired of Batman as a character—thanks-in-the-most-part due to Nolan's overblown movies—but after reading The Dark Knight Returns, I wanted to go back and experience the key moments in the character's history. I've been mixing reading several of the key comics—stuff like The Killing Joke and Arkham Asylum—with the New 52 stuff and watching the amazingly amazing 90s cartoon. I'm sure I'm driving Sarah a little bit...wait for it...batty.

That's about it. I hurt my right knee a couple of days ago, which has made walking to work a strange exercise in slow motion, but it is not too bad up until night-time when it tends to hit the peak-pain for the day. I'm taking it fairly easy on it, but am seriously considering getting a brace because my knee seems to be lacking the ability to not hyper-extend the second I stop thinking about where I'm placing my leg.

Also, have finally gathered up enough materials from my crashed hard-drive to build a complete Doug Talks Weird episode, which I am going to try and do tonight. Though I've said that before.

Ok, need to get to work. Have a better one.


BLOT: (11 Apr 2015 - 09:45:44 PM)

Five reasons to listen to Jon Padgett's "20 Simple Steps to Ventriloquism"

If you have to listen to one audio short story about puppets and ventriloquism today, you should listen to Jon Padgett's "20 Simple Steps to Ventriloquism" via Pseudopod. Why? Let's give you five reasons (note: number might be arbitrary, the fact that you should do it is still a fact).

Reason #5: It's Free. Perhaps the weakest of reasons, still a valid one. You can download and listen (and share!) the mp3 for free (through a CC3.0-BY-ND-NC license).

Reason #4: It Is Read by the Author. Author-read audiobooks can highlight different patterns and underlying frequencies than those you get from reading the text on the page, and this is a good case of that. Padgett sped through some lines I read slow, and slowed down some lines I read fast. For author intent, this would be the definitive way to experience the tale.

Reason #3: It Makes a Good Introduction to Grimscribe's Puppets. This was one of my favorites from The Grimscribe's Puppets (LGT: My review of the collection). "20 Simple Steps" is a good example of what is good about the collection, a tribute that is also a bit different than something that Ligotti would ever write.

Reason #2: It Reverses the Uncanny Aspects Associated with Puppets. Cleverly, the story is not about how puppets are just like us, but about how we are just like them. It is about being afraid not of the glass-eyed stare nor the wooden teeth but of the fleshy hand in the back, pulling the levers as though it was the most normal thing in the world.

Reason #1: Because the Voice in Your Head Is Telling You To... Sure, it sounds just like static, but let us stop pretending that we do not know what it means. Give in, give up, enjoy.

Photo Credit: Paul Winchell Jerry Mahoney 1951, by James Kriegsmann, listed as public domain at link. Manipulation by me.


BLOT: (04 Apr 2015 - 09:40:05 AM)

Lovecraft's 1912 poem, his first published, "Providence in 2000 A.D."

Over on /r/Lovecraft, someone asked to see the full-text of "Providence 2000 A.D.", a poem the redditor described as "HPL's early xenophobic writing", which, spoiler, is a damned apt way to describe it. You can read it, in print, in the 2001 The Ancient Track, put out by Nightshade Books and edited by Joshi. It is the first poem under section IV - Satire - and shows up on page 191. Or, you know, you can read it, below. I said to the redditor I would type it up when I had time, and I had some time this morning.

Some precursor notes, the text below is taken from the 2001 edition in all cases but the superscripts and the footnotes. The paranthetical introduction is, I assume, part of the original. I typed this in by hand and have done a couple of pass-throughs. I might have a typo here or there, but I think I've caught most of them.

"Providence in 2000 A.D.", by Howard Phillips Lovecraft1

(It is announced in the Providence Journal that the Italians desire to alter the name of Atwell's Avenue to "Columbus Avenue".)

For years I'd sav'd my few and hard-earn'd pence To cross the seas and visit Providence. For tho' by birth an Englishman am I, My forbears dwelt in undersiz'd R.I. Until, prest hard by foreign immigrations, Oblig'd they were to leave the old Plantations, And seek a life of quiet and repose On British soil, whence our fam'ly rose. When on my trip I ventur'd to embark, I stepp'd aboard a swift and pond'rous ark Which swimm'd the waves, and in a single day2 Attain'd its port in Narragansett Bay. I left the ship, and with astonish'd eyes Survey'd a city fill'd with foreign cries. No word of discourse could I understand, For English was unknown throughought the land. I went ashore at Sao Miguel's Cape, Where cluster'd men of ev'ry hue and shape. They say, this place as "Fox Point" once was known, But negro Bravas have that name o'erthrown. Upon a shaky street-car, north I flew,3 Swift borne along O'Murphy's Avenue. Long, long ago, this street was call'd "South Main", But such plain titles Erin's sons disdain. At Goldstein's Court I quit the lumb'ring car, And trod the pave that once was "Market Square". At the east end, close by a tow'ring hill, There stands the ruin of a brick-built pile: The ancient "Board of Trade", the people say, Left from the times before the Hebrew's sway. Across a bridge, where fragrant waters run, I shap'd my journey toward the setting sun. A curving junction first engag'd my gaze; My guide-book calls it "Finklestein's Cross-ways",4 But in a note historical 'tis said, That the old English nam'd the spot "Turk's Head". A few yards south, I saw a building old; A stone Post Office, waiting to be sold. My course now lay along a narrow street, Up which I tramp'd with sore and weary feet. Its name is Svenson's Lane, for by the Swede "Westminster Street" was alter'd thus to read. I next climb'd on a car northwestward bound, And soon 'mid swarthy men myself I found On La Collina Federale's brow, Near Il Passagio di Colombo. I then return'd and rode direclty north; On rusty rails the car humm'd o'er the earth. Loud near my seat a man in scorn decry'd And easy plan for reaching the East Side.5 Thro' New Jerusalem we swiftly pass'd; Beheld the wealth that Israel amass'd, And quick arriv'd within New Dublin Town, A city large from small "Pawtucket" grown. From there I wander'd toward Nouvelle Paris, Which in the past, "Woonsocket" us'd to be Before the Gaul from Canada pour'd in To swell the fact'ries, and increase their din. Soon I return'd to Providence, and then Went west to beard the Polack in his den. At what was once call'd "Olneyville" I saw A street sign painted: Wsjzxypq$?&%$ ladislaw.6 With terror struck, I sought the warf once more, But as my steamboat's whistle 'gan to roar, A shrivell'd form, half crouching 'twixt the freight, Seiz'd on my arm, and halted short my gait. "Who art though, Sirrah?" I in wonder cry'd; "A monstrous prodigy," the fellow sigh'd: "Last of my kind, a lone unhappy man, My name is Smith! I'm an American!"7


[1] According to Joshi's notes in The Ancient Track, this poem was Lovecraft's first published poem, and was in Providence's Evening Journal on 4 March 1912 [Section 2, page 6].

[2] In the year 2000, giant ships will travel across the Atlantic ocean in a single day! This is one of the rare cases of "future tech" showing up in Lovecraft's writings.

[3] This is the first of a handful of descriptions that this "Non-English" Providence is starting to crumble.

[4] For those keeping score, the poem comes across as slightly more racist against Jews than others, linking them with the destruction of the "Board of Trade" and having them amass wealth in New Jerusalem. By the way, unlike the other places, New Jerusalem is not linked with renaming something else, but based on the travel descriptions, seems to either be part of Providence itself or a renaming of North Providence.

[5] I feel like the "passage to the East Side" is a reference to something, but I do not know it.

[6] Yes, those characters are in the original. Tee hee.

[7] A later poem, "On an Accomplished Young Linguist", has a sort of similar vibe, as a young polyglot who can speak many languages, including classical ones, is chided for not knowing proper English.



BLOT: (04 Apr 2015 - 12:31:22 AM)

Holy crap, a blog post?! My talks this week, visits home, concerts, and other various sundries

I think one reason it has been a month since my last blog post (give or take, you know, a week), is me trying to avoid the "long time no post" cycle of "I should post more" followed by a blog being deleted a month later. You know what I'm talking about. Yes, you [I'm writing this since about half of my regular readers have done this]. Really, though, the big reason is that I have been super busy for about three weeks, with most of my creative juices aimed at some work stuff and some home stuff and whatnot. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of current events and online arguments recently have been so far down the rabbit-hole that any commentary upon them seems redundant. There is only so many times you can write, "This stance is dumb because it is clearly dumb," before you reach the heights of post-modernism; the "This page is intentionally left blank" of social commentary.

In no particular (except, you know, maybe chronologically, but probably not even that) order, some things!

Ok. That'll do. Time to embed the Prezi an get some sleep. Later later...


BLOT: (11 Mar 2015 - 08:41:32 AM)

Working on identifying the sound cues from the old Infocom IF game, The Lurking Horror

It has been some years (I think about seven), since I've written my somewhat user-friendly walk-through of The Lurking Horror, which ended up being not only one of the more popular pages on my site but also one of the more popular walk-throughs of the game. Rarely do I get much correspondence from it, nowadays, but I have fond memories of writing it and talking about the game to folk.

Recently I *did* get an email from a Stephen asking me to help him identify the sound cues in the game. If you do not know, The Lurking Horror had a series of sounds that would play at key events, to add some flavor to the text-based adventure. It also had a manual that was a combination of a short "how to play" and story-text and was even required to play: mixed in with the fun notes on the setting there was a password that you needed to progress in the game. These two elements helped to give it a "beyond-the-console" feel to it and has made it a favorite of mine.

Back to Stephen's question, he was curious about where specifically the sounds show up. It has been too long since I've played for me to know this off the top of my head, but I decided to start digging. I found someone had packaged a blorb file of the sounds as AIFF. I extracted that and listened to them. I wrote up my impression of what the sounds sounded like [divorced from events in the game]. Stephen had sent me a list of the sound effects that he identified, and with the sound files and my descriptions, matched up the lists. See the following table (note, mildish spoilers) (bonus note: Stephen's descriptions were sent first, but I tried to keep them out of mind when writing my description, so I've put them second here):

Sound #Doug's DescriptionStephen's Placement
3 Sort of a squishy/gurgle sounds Maintenance man removing the axe from his chest
4 Screaming, as a group Rats
6 Musical Hook Opening the hatch in the tomb
7 Sort of a rumbling sound, with what sounds like an elevator ding and a crash Brick wall ripping in concrete box
8 Very short rustly sound Getting the stone (to end the game)
9 Squeaky wheels followed by a scream? [Probably the forklift]*
10 Drums Nightmare chant
11 Electricity Putting the line in the connector
12 Long screech Creature screeching after the stone is thrown at it from the roof
13 Chant Alchemy lab chant
15 Robot voice sound Encountering the wire urchins in the Large Chamber
16 Not sure...sort of a "aaaaah" sound [Cutting the wires in the Large Chamber]*
17 Sort of a cross between mechanic clicks and insect screeching Entering the Inner Lair
18 Sort of a gurgling laugh sound Gurgling from under the plate at the altar

Two notes. First, there are no sounds with the numbers 1, 2, 5, or 14, which makes 14 total sounds even though the last one is #18. Second, sounds #9 and #16 were guesses by Stephen (they are in brackets and marked with *). He says these did not play in Winfrotz.

If you want to try and help, you can download The Lurking Horror sounds as AIFF in a zip file.

If you do want to play along, I'm looking for the following information:

Happy hunting!

The Lurking Horror


Written by Doug Bolden

[Valid RSS]

For those wishing to get in touch, you can contact me in a number of ways

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

The longer, fuller version of this text can be found on my FAQ: "Can I Use Something I Found on the Site?".

"The hidden is greater than the seen."