Regional Gothic-Part One

In the spring of 1935, Ellen Glasgow (1873-1945), a Southern author, spoke and wrote of what she called "Southern Gothic." She may very well have been the originator of that term. It seems to me to be a loose one. Sometimes I think every Southern author of the twentieth century was considered to be in that category, certainly William Faulkner (1897-1962), Carson McCullers (1917-1967), and Flannery O'Connor (1925-1964). In his vast study, Love and Death in the American Novel (Dell/Delta, revised edition, 1966), Leslie Fiedler wrote:

[. . . ] the American novel is pre-eminently a novel of terror (p. 26)

and:

It is the Gothic form that has been most fruitful in the hands of our best writers [. . .]. (p. 28)

In other words, in essence, American literature, or the mainstream of American literature, is Gothic according to Dr. Fiedler.

It used to be that American literature was, at least in part, regional. There were of course Southern authors, but there were also New England authors (Sarah Orne Jewett), Midwestern authors, also called authors of the Middle Border (Hamlin Garland), Chicago authors (James T. Farrell), Northwestern authors (Nard Jones), and many others. I'm sure there were Western regional authors who were not the authors of Westerns, too. Ivan Doig and Wallace Stegner come to mind, even if they were from a later era. August Derleth (1909-1971), a teller of weird tales, was a regional author of the upper Midwest, specifically his home state of Wisconsin. Regionalism was also in American art of the early to mid twentieth century.

I don't know how true that is today, I mean about regionalism in American literature. In this age in which a uniform gray sludge has come to overlay the land, I'm not sure there is such a thing as any regional author or regional novel. One exception might be the Eastern author, who writes the Eastern writer's novel, which is a novel written by an Eastern writer, about an Eastern writer, for a readership of Eastern writers, published by an Eastern publishing house, and reviewed by Eastern writers sitting in Eastern coffeehouses, drinking Eastern coffee, and nibbling on Eastern muffins or scones. These are sometimes good, for example, many of John Irving's novels. Very often they are dreary, for a person can read only so much about summer camps, prep schools, suburbs, beach houses, university campuses, and the agonies of the upper middle class.

So if the Gothic novel (or romance) is the pre-eminent form in American literature, and American literature was once regional, then does that mean that there were other categories of Gothics? There was supposedly a Southern Gothic. Were there also an Eastern Gothic, a Midwestern Gothic, and a Western Gothic at the very least? (Richard Brautigan, a Western author, actually wrote a novel called The Hawkline Monster: A Gothic Western, published in 1974.) In weird fiction that was certainly true. H.P. Lovecraft (1890-1937) was an exemplar of Northeastern or New England Gothic. Maybe Robert E. Howard (1906-1936) was his counterpart in Texas or the West. If I knew more about Carl Jacobi (1908-1997) and his tales of the Rentharpian Hills, I could say that he wrote weird/Gothic tales of the Upper Midwest. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about him or them, even though I have read an account of his career, Lost in the Rentharpian Hills: Spanning the Decades with Carl Jacobi by R. Dixon Smith (1985). That book, like so many books by fans, is basically a list or a catalog of facts and lacks any analysis or critical examination of the author's work. I was disappointed when I read it. Maybe I'll have to write myself about the late Mr. Jacobi and his oeuvre.

I'm from Indiana. Now here I am trying to think of an Indiana Gothic. Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914?) lived and worked in Indiana before the Civil War, but he's not really closely associated with the Hoosier State, although some of his tales are set on the American frontier of his youth. Other well-known authors of Indiana--Booth Tarkington (1869-1946), Jessamyn West (1902-1984), Gene Stratton Porter (1863-1924), Ross Lockridge, Jr. (1914-1948)--wrote in the mainstream. Indiana, after all, is a conservative place and its people tend towards conservatism and the mainstream. Maybe because of that, Indiana authors are often forgotten and their books set aside, unless they are made into movies, for example The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), Friendly Persuasion (1956), The Girl of the Limberlost (1934, 1945), and Raintree County (1957). Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (1922-2007) was also from Indiana, but he began his writing career in a science fiction era, and so he doesn't appear to have been much of a Gothicist. Besides that, he turned into an Eastern writer and doesn't seem to have written much about his native state.

In Indiana, Gothics are more often, or exclusively, real-life phenomena, for example, the activities of the serial killer Belle Gunness (1880s-early 1900s), the murder of Howard Pitezel by H.H. Holmes (1894), the murder of Madge Oberholtzer by D.C. Stephenson (1925), the torture and murder of Sylvia Likens (1965), the Hollandsburg Massacre (1977), the Burger Chef Murders (1978), and the legend of the House of Blue Lights (1960s). The Pitezel and Oberholzter cases took place in Irvington where we grew up (there are still large, Gothic houses in that neighborhood), while the Sylvia Likens case happened a dozen or so blocks to the west. The Hollandsburg Massacre and the Burger Chef Murders happened when we were children. Along with the Speedway bombings and the Tony Kiritsis hostage-taking, they helped to make Indiana a scary place in the 1970s. And let's not forget that Charles Manson and Jim Jones also called Indiana home at one time or another.

And now I wonder whether Gothic horrors are simply the flipside of a staid, conservative, and traditional lifestyle and culture. What lies under the surface of the supposedly stable and respectable man, woman, or household?

To be continued . . .

Original text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Agon Again, or, The Bonnevilles of Literature

If you remember high school English class, you might remember the concept of conflict in fiction, and you might remember that there are four basic types of conflict:

Man against man

Man against nature

Man against society

Man against himself

It used to be that there were just three, I think. Man against himself was added sometime later, maybe in the 1950s when there was a new kind of fiction beginning to develop. Maybe that new kind of fiction was based in part on Freudian psychology. Anyway, we have our words protagonist and antagonist. We recognize that the protagonist is on the positive side of the conflict or struggle and that the antagonist is on the negative side. The protagonist is the hero. He or she is the character with whom you identify. You're on his side and you root for him. The antagonist is against the protagonist. Your hope is that he will be defeated. In most stories, it's easy to tell which is which, who wears the white hat and who the black. I'll add that the idea of conflict in a story is predicated on the idea that there is a protagonist, in other words, a positive character or figure.

At the heart of these two words is agon. I think we're more familiar with protagonist and antagonist than we are with agon. Agon seems to have a narrower and more specialized meaning. It doesn't mean just "conflict." It has an older meaning based in Classical Greek drama. That's my understanding anyway. For today at least, I'll think of agon as being the central conflict of a story.

In weird fiction, the conflict is usually between man and nature. At its extreme, it is against super-nature, i.e., supernatural, preternatural, fantastic, or super-scientific forces, even if the "science" is an impossible kind of science. For example, Cthulhu is not a supernatural monster. He is instead a super-scientific one. He's an alien from another planet, and he came here by super-scientific means. Our conflict with Cthulhu is one of man against nature, for he exists as a physical being in a physical universe. He's like a super-sized, interstellar Moby-Dick. He reminds me of Leviathan.

In "The Thing of a Thousand Shapes," his first story in Weird Tales (Mar.-Apr. 1923), Otis Adelbert Kline expressed an insight that there isn't actually anything supernatural because there isn't anything that is above God. God reigns at the pinnacle of nature. All things are below him. With that being the case, the conflicts of man against nature, man against the supernatural, man against fate, man against God, and maybe even man against himself are all rolled into one. We are, after all, part of nature and of God's creation. When we fight against ourselves, we fight against our own nature, i.e., nature. As for the supposed conflict of man against technology, I think that might be lumped in with man against man or man against society, for technology is of our own invention and is made for own purposes. It is a tool that we use. If someone is trying to kill you with a shovel (a work of technology), your conflict is not with the shovel. It's with the man. In other words, man against technology is a science-fictional conflict. These are not perfect categories.

In science fiction, the conflict is more varied than it is in weird fiction, but then science fiction is a much broader genre than is weird fiction. Again, the science-fictional conflict is usually man against man or man against society. If one of the purposes of science fiction is to serve as a satire of society, for example, in stories of dystopia, then maybe a very large portion of science fiction involves a conflict of man against society.

In "Four Car Stories-Part Two," I wrote:

It used to be that hero was synonymous with protagonist, but as we have seen, a story does not need a hero in order to function. In a story of a different type, Dwight Bonneville would be not the protagonist but the antagonist. We would recognize him as a villain. But if there isn't any hero, how can there be a villain in opposition to him? And if the hero is absent and the villain becomes the protagonist, what is the agon? There isn't any conflict within Bonneville. He is a man of conviction. He has his obsession. His conflict isn't with the men he hunts. Being weak and without conviction themselves, they go easily to the slaughter. Theoretically, his struggle (or one of his struggles) is against a society that wants to stop him from spreading death and destruction. But where is that society? Nowhere to be found. He goes on with his mission with nothing to stand in his way. He is active, competent, and efficient. And what are we to do as readers? Identify with him? Root for him? What reader would?

In writing that, I hadn't considered the possibility that there is another type of conflict, what you might call a meta-conflict:

Man against the reader

In this conflict, the man--a character who acts as the protagonist--resides within the story, but there is no one there to oppose him. There isn't any conflict, and he lacks an antagonist. His essential conflict is with the reader, if the reader is willing to take up the struggle. If man against the reader is a type of conflict, then that conflict extends outside of the work. A character like Dwight Bonneville, within his milieu of the story, is an affront to us as readers. His actions are criminal and transgressive, his beliefs morally offensive and intolerable. He isn't out to negate just the fictional rocket scientists of the world. He's out to negate all of us. But if there isn't anyone within the story to stand against him, then only the reader can fill that role.

Again, the Bonneville-type character is an antagonist in a story that lacks a protagonist, and so his role as antagonist dissipates, as does the whole concept of conflict. He's not a hero, unless he is his own hero with his own cause, but he is also not really a protagonist because he isn't a positive character and there isn't any conflict within the story. The only conflict is between us as readers and the Dwight Bonnevilles of literature--again, as long as we are willing to take up that struggle. If we are indifferent to the Bonnevilles of literature, or if we agree with them and support them in their cause, then there also isn't any conflict, except with other readers who possess some moral sense. And if that happens, then the conflict moves completely outside of the work and into the real world where it becomes a conflict between those who share in Dwight Bonneville's goal and those who stand at some higher level of morality. In this example of reader versus reader, the author serves as a neutral party: he sets up an experiment by which his readers are tested against each other, or against some moral absolute. Some will pass the test, while others will fail, but there is no keeping score, except in the reader's own heart. I feel certain that there are readers who are content to remain as moral monsters even after they read about Dwight Bonneville, at least three other of the "protagonists" in the Cosmic Horror Issue of Weird Tales, or characters like them. One of the reasons I feel this way is that there are authors who seem to be moral monsters. Either that or they are stupid, ignorant, or unserious, or they are simply chasing after money, status, and approval by following their readers instead of taking on the obligations incumbent upon the artist as a leader in matters of taste.

So in the example of "The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson, there will be readers who are cool with atheism, nihilism, murder, despair, destruction, and so on. There will be others who are not. The first group is affirmed in its beliefs by Bonneville's words and actions. He destroys because the world and humanity deserve to be destroyed. That's how they like it. They would like to read more of his adventures. If there were a Dwight Bonneville t-shirt, they would wear it. Readers on the opposite side of things may be outraged by what he and his fans and followers do and think and believe, but hopefully they are moved in their reading of a story like this one. Hopefully they are not discouraged. Hopefully they keep the faith and don't fall into despair like Bonneville's rocket-scientist victims. They should tell themselves what the dying Captain Lawrence said to Oliver Hazard Perry: "Don't give up the ship." In this case, maybe the ship is our whole civilization, which was built, after all (to mix metaphors) upon the rock of faith and holds that place by a continuance of faith. Once that goes, the ship of civilization will be wrecked upon the rocks like how Felix De Groot wrecks his car against a concrete abutment along the highway. To switch metaphors from the ship to the automobile of civilization, we could very well be modockin down the freeway of self-destruction. We should not want that. We should want to live.

Text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Four Car Stories-Part Four

In "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror" by Alex Gaby (The Saturday Evening Post, Jan. 14, 1956, reprinted ten years later in 52 Miles to Terror and Other Stories of the Road), a man named Biff, driving on a lonely road in the American West, is tormented by the unseen driver of a red hotrod. The driver of the hotrod is anonymous. The threat seems embodied in the vehicle itself. In Gaby's story, the man is not alone. He has his wife and his daughter in the car with him. The driver of the hotrod is also not alone. His passenger is as unspeaking and anonymous as he is. Both drive unnamed cars. We can assume the first is a conservative, family-type car, although it does okay in a drag race. Maybe the second is a souped-up Ford. Anyway, all of that reminds me of the story "Duel" by teller of weird tales Richard Matheson, which was published in Playboy in April 1971 and adapted to film later that year by Steven Spielberg from Matheson's script. We watched Duel on television when we were kids. Only much later did I read the story.

In the film version of Duel, the driver of the truck is anonymous, unspeaking, faceless, and almost unseen. The truck seems to be disembodied and to act on its own. It seems itself to be the menace and the threat, or maybe the driver is simply an extension of the truck. When we watched Duel, I had a sense that the truck and driver were together a supernatural force. I don't think there's anything in the movie to dispel that sense. But then in any encounter with an inexplicable evil, we are perhaps also in an encounter with the supernatural.

In Duel the movie, the protagonist, named, significantly, Mann, drives a red, late-model Plymouth Valiant. (The model name sounds like the epithet of a knight, a hero. Look for a Plymouth Valiant in the story behind "Vehicle" by the Ides of March, from 1970.) The truck is a 1957 Peterbilt 281. The vehicles, especially the truck, become almost like characters. In "Duel" the story, neither vehicle is identified. It might have been a better story if they had been. It might have helped us visualize the duel or joust that takes place. In film, cars and trucks can't be generic. They have to be identifiable products. In prose, you can write "car" and "truck" and that can work, at least as a bare minimum.

"Duel" the story seems to me overwrought, somewhat repetitive, probably padded for length. The atmosphere of menace and suspense seems partly artificial to me. The writing style is pulpish. As I remember it, Duel the movie is more streamlined and economical. There are of course no thoughts and not much dialogue. (There are long periods of silence in No Country for Old Men [2007], too.) Prose can be inward, whereas film is mostly outward. Beyond that, Duel was made by a 23-year-old director who grew up on movies rather than reading prose. And it is very suspenseful.

In "Duel," there is a wreck at the end, but the driver Mann seems somewhat passive. The wreck is partly by accident. In Duel, there is also a wreck at the end, but Mann, played by Dennis Weaver, brings that about. He is the agent of his own salvation. In that way, he's like Biff in "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror." Both men are triumphant in the end, for they have vanquished their tormenters. Both are the heroes and the protagonists of their own stories. The drivers of the other vehicles--or the vehicles themselves--are the obvious antagonists. In Duel the movie, though, the situation is more extreme, the threat and menace more dire, the antagonist actually evil as far as we can tell, partly because his motivation remains unknown and unexplained. Duel might count as a weird tale. It might also be a conte cruel except that it ends in relief and release.

* * *

Richard Matheson based his story on an experience he had while driving with his friend Jerry Sohl on a California road. The date was November 22, 1963. John F. Kennedy was  assassinated on that day in Dallas. He was our only president killed while riding in an automobile, a Lincoln Continental, named for our first president to die by violence. C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley also died that day. Their deaths were of course overshadowed by the assassination of the American president.

* * *

The last of the four car stories in this series is The Hitcher, released in 1986. In that movie, C. Thomas Howell's character, named Jim Halsey, is driving a red Cadillac Seville across West Texas when he runs into the title character, a man named John Ryder, played by Rutger Hauer. An hour or more of suspense and terrible menace, evil, violence, and gore follows. The writer of the original story, Eric Red, was inspired by the song "Riders on the Storm" by the Doors and its lyric "there's a killer on the road." The character name "John Ryder" lets us know that that's what he does--he rides. By the way, Eric Red also wrecked his car. A strange story.

As in the three previous stories I have written about in this series, The Hitcher takes place on the road, in the American West, when one driver encounters another.* In "The Last Bonneville," the first driver is not the protagonist. He in fact falls victim to the second. In the other three, the first driver is the protagonist, and he has a clear antagonist. I don't know that Richard Matheson ever read "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror." He didn't have to. He had personal experience from which to draw in writing his story. Film critic Gene Siskel may have detected a subsequent influence when he wrote that The Hitcher is "a thinly veiled but more gruesome ripoff of Steven Spielberg's 'Duel.'" I can't say one way or another. But there are similarities among these three stories, written before the twentieth century came to an end. "The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson is significantly different. It's a story of the twenty-first in which there aren't any heroes and evil drives through the world, seemingly unimpeded, with the top down and the driver whooping it up as he puts the miles and leaves the bodies in a trail behind him.

-----

*I have written that "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror" takes place in the West. It's actually on the approach to Waco, which is in central Texas. We just don't know in which direction the driver is going. In any case, if you drive across Texas from east to west, you will begin in places that are almost indistinguishable from the East and make your way into places that are very clearly in the West. Just where is the transition? Somewhere in central Texas, I guess, where it turns from green to brown.

Original text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Four Car Stories-Part Three

"The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson is a car and driving story that reaches its climax as a man crashes his car into an abutment along a desert highway. That man, named Felix De Groot, is not the hero or protagonist of this story. He is in fact the tormented. His tormenter lives on, unscathed, part of his mission accomplished. He drives away, next stop Nevada, to continue in his mission of spreading despair, death, and destruction.

I finished reading the Cosmic Horror Issue of Weird Tales in January 2024. Later that year I found a Scholastic book called 52 Miles to Terror and Other Stories of the Road, edited by Ruth Christopher Carlsen and G. Robert Carlsen, and published in 1966. The cover story is "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror" by Alex Gaby. It was originally in The Saturday Evening Post, in the issue of January 14, 1956. "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror" was adapted to film as Hot Rods to Hell, released in 1967, but by then the original concept might have become obsolete, for in the 1960s, teenagers were no longer villains, no longer the punks or duck-tailed greasers or juvenile delinquents of the 1950s. Instead, by 1967, young people were the main subjects and probably the main consumers of American popular culture. In reading "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror," I was reminded of "The Last Bonneville." These two stories, published nearly seventy years apart, have their parallels and their divergences. In a small way, they show how things have changed in our society and culture since the 1950s.

Like F. Paul Wilson's story, "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror" is about a driving and being on the road in the American West. Biff and Paula are on their way to see Aunt Mildred and her husband and family in Waco, Texas. In the back seat is their ten-year-old daughter Ruth. We don't know what kind of car they're driving. They call it "Steady Nellie," as if it were a horse, as if this were 1900 instead of midcentury. This is the 1950s, and they're a family. Their story is in The Saturday Evening Post, a popular, conservative, general-interest, slick magazine. On the other side of things are two teenagers in a bright red hotrod. They represent youth and new things, which might be cause for apprehension and fear.

Biff isn't exactly a hero--you'll have that if your name is Biff--but he is the protagonist in this story. The two unnamed teenagers in their unnamed red hotrod are the antagonists, the tormenters of Biff and his family. Biff is foolish in provoking them: he gets in a drag race with them in a small Texas town along the way. They win. He catches up and upbraids them at a last-chance gas station. After that, there are sixty miles of straight, empty road ahead of Biff and his passengers. Or it's empty until the red hotrod catches up. And then the torment and menace begin. Racing, dangerous road games, and games of chicken ensue. Finally, Biff tricks his tormenters with a complicated scheme that results in their wrecking their car against the concrete balustrade of a small bridge over a drainage ditch. When I read that, my mind went back to the story I had read ten months before.

Again, Biff isn't a hero exactly. He's too foolish and immature for that. And his tormenters aren't exactly villains. There's a "Hey, you kids, get off my lawn" quality to this story. Biff's tormenters are really just two teenaged boys, too immature to understand the seriousness of what they're doing. (Their mistake is in thinking that they're up against another teenaged driver and that he shares in their values and interests, that he wants to play their game. It doesn't help that Biff, tapping into his own immaturity, instigates the whole thing by taking them up on the invitation to drag race on a city street.) But Biff saves his family from a situation (that he helped create) and so maybe he is heroic after all. He is also cunning and competent. His scheme works. And in the end, out of charity, he offers to deliver the two anonymous teenagers--they go unnamed, in fact they don't even speak--to the nearest town.

In "The Last Bonneville," there isn't any Biff, for there isn't any hero and no one is saved from any menace. In "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror," there isn't really any villain in the end, just two teenaged boys trying to have what they call fun. At the climax of both stories, a car is wrecked against a concrete structure along the road. In "The Last Bonneville," it is the tormenter, not the tormented, who comes away unscathed. In "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror," it is the tormenters who are stopped. In Alex Gaby's story, there is a scheme. It works, and the menace is ended. Biff and his family drive on, and we can be sure of a happy ending. What a story they will have for Aunt Mildred and the gang in Waco. In F. Paul Wilson's story, there is also a scheme. It works, too, and the menace continues. Like Biff, Dwight Bonneville is cunning and competent. It's on to Nevada for him. Who will die there?*

In "Fifty-Two Miles to Terror," Biff's family car is something of a character. They call it--her--"Old Nellie." Even so, we know who Old Nellie's passengers are. They're the real characters in the story. The passengers of the red hotrod, however, are almost unseen. They are unspeaking and anonymous. The threat and the menace are almost disembodied from human characters and are instead embodied in the car itself. (Cars have bodies, too. And is the hotrod red because it is somehow diabolical?) In Gaby's story, the red hotrod becomes the character, the antagonist, the threat. What do the hot-rodders call their car? We don't know, but it seems almost certain to have a name. Finally, after the crash and after the torment is gone, Biff the hero, such as he is, has mastery over the hotrod and the two teenagers. The whole situation reminds me of a third car story . . .

Next: Duel

-----

*The movie No Country for Old Men (2007), another story of the road and the American West, ends with a car crash, too. The killer doesn't come away unscathed. Nonetheless, he comes away, and we can be sure that the killing will go on.

52 Miles to Terror (1966), with cover art by Mort Künstler (1927-2025), one of the most aptly named artists ever. I can't tell what kind of car that is. Is it a Chevy? Could it be a Corvair? Anyway, there is only one story in this collection that might be considered a weird story, and no science fiction stories at all, even if the souped-up jeep in Bill Mauldin's story is a work of near super-technology. The almost weird-fictional story is "Hearse of the Speedway" by Peter Granger, originally in Esquire in September 1936.

Text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Four Car Stories-Part Two

In "The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson (Weird Tales #367, 2023), the title character so torments his interlocutor that he drives his car--a Maserati--into an abutment along a desert highway and dies in a fiery crash. The hapless victim is named Felix De Groot, and he is a rocket scientist. Dwight Bonneville wants him erased because his mission--Bonneville's mission--is to make sure that human beings remain earthbound for the benefit of what he calls "Our Owner" (an obvious Fortean reference). He does this by killing off scientists, more accurately, by driving them (no pun intended) to kill themselves.* So he goes on the road, driving across the American West, tracking them down in his Bonneville with a recording of gibberish, fresh from the Void, in hand. He has them listen to it, and they thereby lose the will to live. It's like an audiobook version of The King in Yellow or the Necronomicon. In the end, Felix De Groot, despite his name, is neither happy nor great.

De Groot is not the protagonist of "The Last Bonneville." Although he's a human character, he's basically just a bump in the road. Bonneville is the one who acts, and this is his story. He might not be the hero of it, but he is--I think, I guess--the protagonist, a role he would probably refuse if it were offered him. In "The Last Bonneville" and most of the Cosmic Horror Issue, nobody plays the hero. There are mostly just protagonists, and even at that, most are weak. But then we live in an age of weakness and failure.

Last time I wrote about the lack of heroes in contemporary fiction. Is that a real thing, or is that just my perception? There are certainly few, if any, heroes in the Cosmic Horror Issue of Weird Tales, but then this is weird fiction--or at least it's what passes as weird fiction. We think of heroes as ascendant, even if they come to their ends, for example, as Robert Jordan does in For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway (1940). The weird-fictional protagonist more often descends, or falls, or even plunges into plutonian depths. Again, if you're looking for heroes and heroic action, you should probably read something other than weird fiction. Even so, you might not find them or it in what's out there today.

I see the artist as a leader in matters of taste. An artist is not and should not be a follower. He or she should not follow the zeitgeist. The artist should lead. The purpose of art is not to tear down or destroy. It is to create. The spirit of our time, though, is that every person and every thing, including the world, is terrible. They and it deserve to be torn down. By this interpretation, art is dishonest if it is positive, affirmative, inspirational, edifying, uplifting. In our age of hatred, cynicism, destruction, nihilism, and extreme ironic stances, there are and can be no heroes. Heroism is stupid. It's fake. It's sentimental. It's cringe. It's from the past. It might even be fascist. Heroes from previous eras are demoted in our popular culture, while horrible people and horrifying characters are elevated. People tear down statues of Abraham Lincoln while wearing Che Guevara t-shirts. Superman, the former Man of Steel, becomes a weak and whiny character, a stalker, a loser, full of self-doubt. People flock to see a very dark movie about the Joker, seemingly out of identification with a dark, mentally ill, and nihilistic character. They also go to see the story of Odysseus except that he's not the Odysseus of myth and literature. He has been made into a modern man, wracked with doubts, guilt, and anxiety. Readers, viewers, and audiences seek out works of supposed art that affirm their view of the world. And the artist stands by, weakly gives in to their demands, even chases after them, giving them exactly what they want, or what he or she thinks they want. The artist emerges from their midst, or if not, becomes one of them, all in their service. He or she is only slightly more articulate, creative, and imaginative than they are. There isn't any higher calling in any of this. We must debase everything, including ourselves. In the words of British author Duncan Williams, drawing from C.S. Lewis, we must make of ourselves trousered apes. We must create a sick literature.

None of that is to say that F. Paul Wilson is at work trying to tear things down. It is his character--his protagonist--who is doing that within his story. I think Dr. Wilson was actually trying to make a point in "The Last Bonneville"; it should probably be read in conjunction with his essay "Cosmic vs. Abrahamic Horror" in that same issue of Weird Tales. It used to be that hero was synonymous with protagonist, but as we have seen, a story does not need a hero in order to function. In a story of a different type, Dwight Bonneville would be not the protagonist but the antagonist. We would recognize him as a villain. But if there isn't any hero, how can there be a villain in opposition to him? And if the hero is absent and the villain becomes the protagonist, what is the agon? There isn't any conflict within Bonneville. He is a man of conviction. He has his obsession. His conflict isn't with the men he hunts. Being weak and without conviction themselves, they go easily to the slaughter. Theoretically, his struggle (or one of his struggles) is against a society that wants to stop him from spreading death and destruction. But where is that society? Nowhere to be found. He goes on with his mission with nothing to stand in his way. He is active, competent, and efficient. And what are we to do as readers? Identify with him? Root for him? What reader would? I guess we're left with this: we must see this story as an entertainment, while nonetheless picking up on the point being made. In that, the author was entirely correct in his approach, for "The Last Bonneville" is ironic and light in tone, even humorous, albeit in a pretty grim way. After all, who hasn't run into or been waylaid by somebody like Dwight Bonneville? If humor is about recognition, who doesn't recognize in him the patented American crackpot?

-----

*There has been an ongoing conspiracy theory about missing and deceased scientists, mostly in the American West. Could Dwight Bonneville be at work in the real world?

Next: Fifty-Two Miles to Terror

Text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Four Car Stories-Part One

The second car and driving story in the Cosmic Horror Issue of Weird Tales (2023) is "The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson. You can tell it's a car story from the get-go because it has the name of a car in its title. That name is also the surname of a character in the story, Dwight Bonneville. You could call the use of that name and product--the Pontiac (not Oldsmobile) Bonneville--a kind of product placement or a commercial message dropped into a story. I prefer not to see it that way. (There is other product placement and namedropping in his story, though.) I have tried to make the case that using the brandnames of cars, guns, alcoholic beverages, and tobacco products is or may be acceptable in fiction. That use has to mean something, though. It has to tell us something about a character or a situation. It has to bear on the story or its events.

I can't say why exactly the name Bonneville might bear on the story "The Last Bonneville." One possibility is that a Bonneville is a certain type of car with a certain cachet involving power, speed, handling, and styling. That cachet goes back to the name of the car, which was taken from the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah, a place where land speed records are made using turbojet- and rocket-powered cars, also from the Bonneville Salt Flats Race Track. This place is, again, in the Desert West where postwar science and technology were developed and tested. The author misidentified the Bonneville as an Oldsmobile rather than a Pontiac. I wonder if that misidentification was intentional and meant to be an allusion to the Oldsmobile Rocket 88, for there are rockets in "The Last Bonneville," specifically the Saturn 5 rocket that carried the Apollo 8 astronauts into space at Christmastime in 1968. (Vehicles named for pagan gods ascended into the heavens in a Christian season.) Remember the slogan: "Rocket Ahead with Oldsmobile." You don't really need that allusion, though, if you can rocket ahead with a Bonneville, or in a rocket-powered vehicle on the salt flats at Bonneville. I should point out that Pontiac automobiles are no longer being made. One day there truly will be a last Bonneville.

One of the problems with the Cosmic Horror Issue and possibly with contemporary fiction in general is that there aren't any heroes. There are only protagonists, whatever their agon might be. This is weird fiction, or what passes for weird fiction these days. The lack of a hero might be baked in, for the protagonist in weird fiction is usually flawed, often weak (or the opposite, filled with hubris and ambition), possibly mentally unbalanced or even insane, and very often defeated or humiliated, if not killed, in the end. There are heroes to be sure in weird fiction, but if you're looking for heroic men and heroic action, you will more likely find it in science fiction and adventure stories. It need not be that way. Weird, or Wyrd, is prominent in Beowulf, one of the oldest works in our literature, and yet it is a story in which there are heroics. Beowulf and his men are heroes, even if they eventually fail or fall, as we all must.

For examples of the lack of heroes in the Cosmic Horror Issue:

• In "The City and the Sea," the character Hellboy does very little. He is mostly just an observer. He also lacks any moral or intellectual dimension. He is literally two-dimensional, being originally a comic-book character.

• In "A Ghost Story for Christmas," the protagonist is a TV watcher and a man completely wrapped up in himself. He is depressed (wrapped up in himself), has poor relationships with everybody around him (wrapped up in himself), and is presumably an atheist (wrapped up in himself). If you were to meet someone like him in real life, you would probably just walk away.

• In "Night Fishing," the protagonist is unpleasant, self-absorbed, mentally ill, presumably also an atheist, and, as it turns out, a murderer, or at least an agent of murder and destruction. We are led to believe that he is a witness to the Void, but, as it turns out, the Void is within him. To his credit, he knows this.

• In "The Traveler," the protagonist is basically an idiot, a typical twenty-first century American numbskull. As I wrote before, here is almost his whole description of the marvel of an alien interstellar spacecraft: "a f--king spaceship." Such detail. Such eloquence.

• In "Mozaika" and "Call of the Void -- L'appel du Vide," the protagonists are fog-brained artists who have problems with their mothers and live in the small world inside of their own heads. What exactly is the agon? Is it in any way interesting or compelling? You decide.

• In "Laid to Rest," the protagonist is a man with a truncated personality and seemingly incapable of fully loving another person or of changing within himself in order to become a better person. He is also stubbornly an atheist. If anyone should have gone to a terrible place of suffering, it should have been he rather than his lover. She doesn't deserve her fate. He doesn't deserve her.

• In "The Last Bonneville," the protagonist is a crazy person, a crackpot--except that he's not in at least one way--and an atheist. He is a genuine American psycho. His mission in life is to spread despair, madness, and death. He succeeds.

The only story in which there is a likable or sympathetic protagonist is "Concerto in Five Movements" by Ramsey Campbell. All of the other authors chose to write about unlikable or unsympathetic--or at the very least, not very interesting--protagonists. For most, their struggles are also not very interesting. Maybe only F. Paul Wilson among the creators of these unlikable, unsympathetic, or uninteresting protagonists chose his because of his own ironic viewpoint and his larger purpose in telling his story. Only he seems to have gotten outside of his own character and refrained from writing at least in part an autobiographical story. ("Concerto in Five Movements" is still the exception.) In other words, I don't get the sense that Dr. Wilson is like his character in any way or that he sympathizes with Dwight Bonneville's nihilistic beliefs or terrible mission. It's worth pointing out that F. Paul Wilson's tone is also different than in all of the other stories. Only he chose an ironic and slightly humorous approach. (There is some ironic distance in "Night Fishing," too.) The others are serious, even if they are not very compelling. And I should point out again that I think "The Last Bonneville," "Night Fishing," and "Concerto in Five Movements" are the best, most complex, most well written, or most interesting stories in the Cosmic Horror Issue. "The Last Bonneville" is probably my favorite. Part of that is because it moves. Part of the reason it moves is that it's about cars and driving. I also have to admit a bias in favor of the American-style story.

To be continued . . .

Text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley

Television and the Road

"Movie Night at Phil's" by Don Webb (2012) is a story about watching TV. "A Ghost Story for Christmas" by Paul Cornell, from the Cosmic Horror Issue of Weird Tales (2023), is also about watching TV. Watching TV is not an activity. It's actually the opposite of an activity. A person can descend into himself, as he would like, by watching TV. Watching TV can also lead him to a descent into himself without his seeking it. As with loneliness, nothing happens while a person is watching TV. Nothing can happen. Driving on the other hand is an activity. I suppose it's possible, but I'm not sure that anyone has ever descended into himself by driving, by actually going somewhere in the world. He might descend into himself at the end of his journey, in some small, dark, and enclosed space, but while he's there, on the road, the road goes on.* The road is a straight line into the future and not a descent into a figurative parking garage, into the hollow, cave-like, concrete gyre of the self. The road is a ribbon stretched out before you, in the sun, in the sun. Walker Percy wrote a novel called The Moviegoer (1961).** His novel is about a lot of things, including watching movies in the dark, on a big screen. If you're Walker Percy, you can write about watching movies on a screen. If you're not Walker Percy, you should probably write about something else. Joseph Conrad wrote about a journey into the heart of darkness. If you watch TV and think of that as an activity of interest to anybody but yourself, you may be on your own journey into a heart of darkness. But that heart is only in your own bottomless, cramped, empty, cave-like interior. In short, nobody wants to hear about your TV-watching "experience."

There are two stories about cars and driving in the Cosmic Horror Issue. First is "The Traveler" by Francesco Tignini. Although "The Traveler" is partly about driving, we don't know the make or model of the car. All we know is that it has both an airbag and a cigarette lighter. In other words, it's a car of the imagination, dreamed up so as to meet the requirements of the author and his plot. He can't alter his plot to fit the real world. Oh no. The world has to be altered instead, thereby making his story inauthentic. Mr. Tignini works in television and movies, and it shows. He, like many of the writers in the Cosmic Horror Issue, has what essayist Lincoln Michel calls "TV brain." He and they are not principally writers of prose. In this issue they're only slumming. TV is where the bread is.

Mr. Tignini lets us know that his narrator is listening to the radio as he drives. A Chuck Berry song plays, and he lets us know that, I think because he wants us to know that he's cool and knowing and with it. Chuck Berry sang one of the most famous of car songs, "Maybellene," released in 1955. Here are the words of the first verse:

As I was motorvatin' over the hill
I saw Maybellene in a Coupe DeVille
A Cadillac a-rollin' on the open road
Nothin' will outrun my V8 Ford
The Cadillac doin' 'bout ninety-five
We was bumper to bumper, rollin' side to side

There is more excitement and color in the brief lyrics of "Maybellene" than in the whole of "The Traveler," which isn't very much longer. But then there's a difference between good writing and the other kind.

I think modockin must be the Indiana version of motorvatin'.

"The Traveler" is a warmed-over version of the alien contact/alien abduction story told so many times in the history and culture of flying saucers. There is almost nothing original in its very meager contents. And it is written under the influence of TV brain. "Radar Love" by Golden Earring (1973) is a not entirely authentic driving song. Even so, I'll take it over a story written by a TV-influenced keyboard operator. In fairness to him, though, I will lay the blame for his story at the feet of his editor, who should have sought out a better story or nursed his friend along in the development of his own. Anyway, the singer in "Radar Love" is also listening to the radio as he drives. His driving song is Brenda Lee's "Coming On Strong." He lets us know that not because he's trying to be cool. It's simply to add a concrete detail to his story and to give a backdrop to his quest. Mention of Brenda Lee and her song is not product placement nor a case of namedropping, two literary offenses that are becoming all too common these days. I guess in the minds of contemporary authors, every story has to have its commercial breaks, for they have been conditioned to be that way by a lifetime of TV-watching. It's probably automatic and unavoidable for them because they lack imagination. A mind free of commercials and brandnames is probably inconceivable to them, maybe even frightening, for it would leave them naked and alone, without things--physical objects--around them. They have to have and display their stuff, and they have to let you know about their expertise when it comes to their stuff. My advice to every aspiring or practicing author: turn off your TV and pick up a book. And it's probably best to make it a book published before the year 2000.

The second car-and-driving story in the Cosmic Horror Issue is "The Last Bonneville" by F. Paul Wilson. I'll write about that next.

-----

*There were genre authors who ended up that way, including L. Ron Hubbard (1911-1986), whose end is a study in extreme decadence. I remember also the female character who kills herself (does she double back on herself?) in the dark and suffocating bedroom in the rear of an apartment in David Lynch's Mulholland Drive (2001). By the way, there is a character in that movie named Camilla. That fact will become pertinent in a matter of seconds . . .

**The mother of the narrator in The Moviegoer has as her maiden name Castagne. I would not be surprised if David Lynch had read The King in Yellow by Robert W. Chambers (1895), but was Walker Percy also a reader? The spelling is different, but maybe that doesn't matter very much. On the other hand, maybe it's just a coinkydink.

Original text copyright 2026 Terence E. Hanley