Neal Monks has a new and long review of Robert H. Waugh’s collection A Monster Of Voices: Speaking for H.P. Lovecraft.

Initially, he argues, there’s something to be said for Lovecraft as a surrealist, but Waugh observes that his writing style is closer to that of Tolkien. In particular, where [C.S.] Lewis [Narnia books] was very precise in his language, favouring short, clear sentences and convincing arguments, Lovecraft, like Tolkien, always has more to say.

Yes, there is a similarity. Tolkien uses a lapidary method that I call “Tolkien’s tantalizing teasing” where he carefully inlays a sub-story across a half-dozen tantalising slivers (e.g. the story/journey of Boromir from Osgiliath to Rivendell) often made up of asides, offhand remarks, small fragments of fact. The same is done to gradually build up character back-story without actually giving an info-dump (e.g. Sam and his family). The reader must, if he is a good attentive reader, join the slivers together in memory and then add his own imagination. It’s a potent method, for the right kind of reader. Lovecraft has a similarly tantalising approach to revealing back-story, which also assumes a closely attentive reader who is not skimming the text or barely able to comprehend what is going on (e.g.: the baffled letter-writers to Weird Tales or Astounding). While attentive close readers could once be counted on to exist in reasonable numbers, they have today become a relatively rare sub-species when compared to the vast size of the thundering herd.