Thomas Ligotti - Sect of the Idiot

This post is part of the RIP or Readers Imbibing Peril seasonal reading event.

Having recently read Thomas Ligotti’s The Conspiracy Against the Human Race: A Contrivance of Horror and finding his thinking to be interesting but flawed, I decided to delve into the author’s fiction. Ligotti is primarily a short story writer. Some of his stories can be classified as falling within the realm of horror, but some can be better described by what Ligotti himself terms to as “Weird Tales.” I have now read a fair sampling of his stories pulled from various collections found at my local library. I attempted to read the stories that his fans and critics have identified as his best works as well as those which have intriguing descriptions or titles.

Ligotti’s prose paints an extremely moody and menacing atmosphere. He is, as he admits, very influenced by the fiction of H. P. Lovecraft in tone, plot and themes.  I noticed that the tales written later in the author’s career deviate from the Lovecraft influence, at least in plot, as compared to the earlier works.  While some of the stories have a very cohesive and logical plot, others are dreamlike and involve events that do not really fit together.

The author’s view of the universe is grim indeed. Though not a proponent of his worldview, see my commentary here, this dark, pernicious outlook helps to generate terrific and dark yarns. While the endpoint of the author’s belief system is almost laughably pessimistic, he raises some thought provoking issues and themes in regard to the meaning of existence. Furthermore, if one does not take the over the top gloominess of the fiction too seriously, this gloominess can be ironically entertaining and even fun in a creepy sort of way. These tales, at times, can be disturbing.  Though Ligotti rarely describes actual terrible events, he often implies that terrible things have, or will, occur.

 Almost without exception, various facets of the author’s worldview as expressed in The Conspiracy Against the Human Race: A Contrivance of Horror are conveyed in his fiction. This philosophy, either symbolically through the philosophical musings of various characters, or through downright descriptions of the universe, is constantly on display. Again and again we are reminded of humanity’s insignificance, that our perception of ourselves is completely wrong and that we are much less than we think we are. Ligotti has expressed in his essays a deterministic view of human behavior. He believes that free will and the concept of “self” are illusions.   He sees people as being “puppets” of nature. Thus puppets, dolls, mannequins, etc. often reoccur in his tales.  Most importantly, his stories take place in a universe that is itself malevolent. Dark forces are always lurking underneath the visible world. He writes few stories that can be described as “good versus evil.” Instead, he pits hapless and helpless people against a pernicious cosmos.

"The Sect of the Idiot" is a striking and imaginative tale that illustrates much of Ligotti’s thinking.  The unnamed narrator is the inhabitant of an unnamed phantasmagoric city. The protagonist initially dreams of a group of strange, hideously inhuman, robed figures who hold power in the city. Eventually, evidence is discovered, revealing that the group is real and that it exerts godlike powers over the fate of all humanity.

The narrator expresses the trivial nature of himself, and by implication of humanity, in comparison to these beings,

“I was no more than an irrelevant parcel of living tissue caught in a place I should not be, threatened with being snared in some great dredging net of doom, an incidental shred of flesh pulled out of its element of light and into an icy blackness. In the dream nothing supported my existence, which I felt at any moment might be horribly altered or simply. . .ended. In the profoundest meaning of the expression, my life was of no matter.”

Later, our narrator comes to realize that there is a higher force than these grotesque beings.  It turns out that, just like humanity, these creatures are in denial as to the truth behind creation. The truth is that there is chaos and meaningless underlying it all, chaos and meaningless that Ligotti equates with idiocy,

“these hooded freaks who were themselves among the hypnotized. For there was a power superseding theirs, a power which they served and from which they merely emanated, something which was beyond the universal hypothesis by virtue of its very mindlessness, its awesome idiocy.”

Ultimately, the Universe is a dark and pointless place that is very bad for people. Personal insanity is almost a logical endpoint to it all. The narrator eventually concludes,

“Life is the nightmare that leaves its mark upon you in order to prove that it is, in fact, real. And to suffer a solitary madness seems the joy of paradise when compared to the extraordinary condition in which one’s own madness mealy echoes that of the world outside. I have been lured away by dreams, all is nonsense now.”

Gnostic influence can be found all over Ligotti’s works. He makes several direct mentions to Gnosticism in both his fiction and his non–fiction essays. The Gnostic belief that the creator of our Universe was some kind of imposter who did something very wrong is reflected here. These beings are cold and maleficent deities.  They exhibit the attributes of an imposter God, as portrayed by their subordinate position to the greater force.  Most Gnostic thought systems, however, acknowledge a positive spiritual power that takes precedence over reality. Here, the spiritual force is mindless and vile. This story takes place in a creation that is very, very wrong.

A perusal of online opinions indicates that many folks find Ligotti to be depressing. As I alluded to earlier, I do not concur. Paradoxically, the imaginary nasty universe that the author creates, for me, is at times an amusing and intellectually stimulating counterpoint to reality. In addition, even if one does not buy completely into the negativity, these tales are thought provoking.   I find if one likes dark and odd stories, set in dark and odd universe, these stories are highly recommended.

Just a note about one story, “The Frolic,” where Ligotti goes way beyond his usual level of “bad stuff going on.”  This one is in no way fun and it is very disturbing. As it is the first story in some collections, I warn the faint at heart to consider staying away and others from judging the author on this tale alone. Though it still implies rather then describes what actually happens, in terms in intensity and ugliness, it is really not like most of the author’s other works.

Portnoy's Complaint by Philip Roth

Portnoy's Complaint by was written in 1969 and was the book that put Philip Roth on the map. The tale is told from the point of view of Alexander Portnoy in a stream of consciousness style of monologue directed at an unheard psychoanalyst. Portnoy is intelligent, self aware and highly literate. He is also neurotic, insecure, a narcissist, a sex-crazed womanizer and is very vulgar, especially in regards to bodily functions and masturbation. The novel alternates in time between the Portnoy’s childhood and adult adventures.

This is a brilliant character study. It hilariously plumbs the psychology and social interactions of Portnoy, who is alternately likable and unlikeable to the point of being reprehensible. The constant commentary is very often extremely crude and unfiltered. Portnoy views and describes sexuality as well as other biological functions in extremely uncouth terms.  In my opinion the sexuality is ribald and usually not erotic. Many readers will be offended while others may be simply disgusted.  Though I loved this book and found it often hilarious, and consider myself relatively thick skinned, the over the top diatribe was even a bit much for me at times. In addition, Portnoy can be a very unpleasant character. In real life, his self-absorption would be tediously annoying, and he treats women as sex objects, to name just a couple of his character flaws. On the other hand, I find his portrayal to be realistic. I have known people who speak and seem to think a lot like Portnoy.

Some have taken Roth to task about this work, as the characters often express sexist, racist and otherwise anti–social views. I find this angle of criticism unfounded. It seems relatively obvious that this work is not advocating these views. Though Portnoy has his virtues and at times is extremely insightful, when he behaves badly, the reader clearly does not laugh with him, but rather laughs at him.

There is a lot here. This novel is a fantastic and complex character study. There are so many avenues one can ponder. One of many things that this novel succeeds in being is an exploration, and perhaps a parody, of Freudianism. Roth often approaches this from a humorous angle.

The ideas of Sigmund Freud are brimming all over the narrative. Portnoy’s actions and thoughts are a torrent of Freudian concepts relating to guilt, the Id, ego and super-ego, castration anxiety, neurotic guilt, infantile sexual abuse, symbolism in dreams, etc. At certain points in the narrative, the protagonist even reads and obsesses over Freud. On one level, this work can be viewed as the fictional representation of how these influences play out in the real life of a person. 

For instance, Portnoy recalls a strong erotic attraction to his mother that is pure Freud.

“While I crayon a picture for her, she showers— and now in the sunshine of her bedroom, she is dressing to take me downtown. She sits on the edge of the bed in her padded bra and her girdle, rolling on her stockings and chattering away. Who is Mommy’s good little boy? Who is the best little boy a mommy ever had? Who does Mommy love more than anything in the whole wide world? I am absolutely punchy with delight, and meanwhile follow in their tight, slow, agonizingly delicious journey up her legs the transparent stockings that give her flesh a hue of stirring dimensions. I sidle close enough to smell the bath powder on her throat— also to appreciate better the elastic intricacies of the dangling straps to which the stockings will presently be hooked.”

In similar Freudian fashion, he describes his murderous rage at his father. 

“I would have only to leap across the dinner dishes, my fingers aimed at his windpipe, for him instantaneously to sink  down beneath the table with his tongue hanging out.”

Lest we be too quick to label this novel as the uncritical acceptance of these ideas, there seems to be something else going on here. The references to the theories of Freud can be found on almost every page. They involve all kinds of over the top and ludicrous thoughts and situations. Less of a serious depiction of these concepts, at times this book is closer to parody.

At one point, the protagonist himself wonders if all these connections, explanations and childhood associations are worth so much time and angst and even if they are real or not,

“Whew! Have I got grievances! Do I harbor hatreds I didn’t even know were there! Is it the process, Doctor, or is it what we call “the material”? All I do is complain, the repugnance seems bottomless, and I’m beginning to wonder if maybe enough isn’t enough. I hear myself indulging in the kind of ritualized bellyaching that is just what gives psychoanalytic patients such a bad name with the general public. Could I really have detested this childhood and resented these poor parents of mine to the same degree then as I seem to now, looking backward upon what I was from the vantage point of what I am— and am not? Is this truth I’m delivering up…..”

So is this story a satiric exploration of Freudian ideology from the point of view of a neurotic character? Or, instead, is it a savage critique of the theories and the impact that these ideas have had upon society? I think that it may be a little bit of both. The ideas of Freud have had an enormous impact upon our culture and are important to understand. When applied to a character as Roth does here, they create a fascinating case study.  At the same time they have been employed in all kinds of, what seems to me, ridiculous interpretations of human behavior. Thus, I believe one can analyze these ideas while, in some ways, also mock them. It seems that this is exactly what Roth is doing in this work.

This is a very funny and lively character study. There is a lot more here then the musings about the Freudian thought system. Many of Roth’s favorite themes appear here including his ubiquitous examinations of human identity. As usual, I have only scratched the surface. This book is not, however, for the faint of heart. As mentioned above, it is exceedingly raunchy. In addition, those looking for a completely likeable main character will not be happy with the narcissistic, womanizing Alexander Portnoy. However, those who can deal with these raw elements may find this is a thoughtful, engaging and hilarious novel.

For those with further interest in Roth:

My commentary on I Married a Communist is here.

My Commentary on The Human Stain is here.

My Commentary on Exit Ghost is here.

Shakespeare Sonnet Number 2

This post is part of my ongoing ruminations about particular Shakespeare Sonnets. Though I will likely not indefinitely continue to run through the poems in numerical order, I may continue to cover the early entries in sequence since they are so closely related.

Thus, after sharing some thoughts on Sonnet Number One here, I am proceeding on to Sonnet Number Two.

 When forty winters shall beseige thy brow,

And dig deep trenches in thy beauty's field,

Thy youth's proud livery, so gazed on now,

Will be a tatter'd weed, of small worth held:

Then being ask'd where all thy beauty lies,

Where all the treasure of thy lusty days,

To say, within thine own deep-sunken eyes,

Were an all-eating shame and thriftless praise.

How much more praise deserved thy beauty's use,

If thou couldst answer 'This fair child of mine

Shall sum my count and make my old excuse,'

Proving his beauty by succession thine! 


This were to be new made when thou art old,

And see thy blood warm when thou feel'st it cold.


Another early entry in the “Fair Youth” sequence, this one also falls into the “Procreation “ subgroup. In other words, the message here continues to be that the worthy object of the sonnet should have children.

The argument in the first sonnet was that the young man owed it to the world to reproduce. Shakespeare moves on to a more selfish reason here; that is, the young man’s desire to leave something for posterity. The sonnet contends that having progeny will be a replacement for the lost glory of youth. In this case, the now older person will be living vicariously through his child or children. Such pleasures will warm the blood.

Once again, I am a bit puzzled as to the possible ironic connotations here. It could be that Shakespeare is playing with what can be construed as a silly notion, that one’s lost youth can be compensated by the youth and beauty of one’s offspring. Any reading of Shakespeare’s plays makes it clear that The Bard was well aware of the fact that children do not always turn out as expected.

Or it could be that the sonnet should be taken at face value; that is, there are some individuals that are so beautiful that their offspring would be as well, and the beauty of their children will compensate for the ravages of time. One might dismiss the possibility of a Goneril and Regan as the products of less than virtuous parents.

Googling this sonnet indicates that there is a fair amount of opinion out there that does take the sonnet as is, and some folks even accuse Shakespeare of being a eugenicist!

Shakespeare had a knack for expressing the dark side of life. Here, he describes the “proud livery” of youth yielding to “tatter'd weed, of small worth” and being observed through “deep-sunken eyes”. These are despairing images indeed. (A forty year old is described here! I suppose that folks were a bit less healthy back in 1609).  If we are to take the advice of the sonnet seriously, we must conclude that here the poet is offering a solution to such despair.

Either way, Shakespeare has left us with some great poetry. He has also provided us with something to think about. The issues explored here endure, as does our appreciation of the sublime nature in which they are expressed.

Commentary on other Shakespeare Sonnets:

Sonnet 1

Sonnet 66

The Conspiracy Against the Human Race by Thomas Ligotti

Thomas Ligotti is best known as a horror writer. Though I have not read his fiction, a perusal of book descriptions and reviews make me suspect that his short stories and novels are both literary and offbeat. In The Conspiracy Against the Human Race: A Contrivance of Horror, Ligotti tries his hand at philosophy. I find his thinking and writing to be bold, at times brilliant, though also deeply flawed. The worldview advocated by Ligotti is simply the most pessimistic that I have ever encountered. The “Conspiracy” of the title refers to what the author contends to be a universal fiction, that “Being alive is all right.”  Ligotti believes that human consciousness is a terrible accident, a tragedy and the ultimate horror of horrors, and that life is MALIGNANTLY USELESS (Ligotti’s capitalization). He goes on for pages and pages explaining why he uses both of those words.

Though the book is not organized as such, Ligotti seems to focus upon three reasons for his conclusions. The first is that death, in a universe with no God or afterlife, is unendurable to the human psyche. 

Ligotti writes,

“Undeniably, one of the great disadvantages of consciousness— that is, consciousness considered as the parent of all horrors— is that it exacerbates necessary sufferings and creates unnecessary ones, such as the fear of death.“

Second, the considerable amount of suffering built into the lives of conscious beings can never be compensated by pleasure. He describes the pleasure that one experiences in life as, 

“a few crumbs left by chaos at feast”

Third, humans are not really independent selves, as we like to think. Instead, we are an amalgamation of chemical and physical processes; we are literally survival and reproduction puppets. Everything that we believe to be meaningful, such as love, loyalty, honor, patriotism, the wonder of nature, etc., are just the result of neurons firing in the brain and are ultimately vacuous.

Ligotti further contends that consciousness, which he labels an accident of evolution, should bring us face to face with the above horrors and we should thus all be insane. However, everyone who is supposedly sane is instead in a perpetual state of denial based upon illusions aided by certain mental repression mechanisms. He goes further and ascribes many types of mental illness to the failure of these safeguards. Thus, many neuroses and psychoses are simply the results of people perceiving the universe and themselves as they really are, without the normal set of protective delusions. 

He writes,

“Once the facts that repressional mechanisms hide are accessed, they must be excised from our memory— or new repressional mechanisms must replace the old— so that we may continue to be protected by our cocoon of lies. If this is not done, we will be whimpering misereres morning, noon, and night”

In order to end what he views as the abomination of consciousness, Ligotti advocates for the voluntary extinction of the human race through attrition. That is, by people deciding to stop having children. 

Finally, Ligotti conducts a literary and psychological analysis of supernatural and horror literature. He contends that much of it, particularly the works of Ann Radcliffe, Edgar Allen Poe and, most of all, H. P. Lovecraft are attempts to illustrate the underlying malevolence of existence.

Ligotti mines copious amounts of Western and Eastern culture while drawing his conclusions. He devotes numerous pages to ruminating about the writings of various authors and philosophers. He is particularly enamored with the viewpoints of Arthur Schopenhauer, Ernest Becker and Peter Zapffe. He makes references to both Western and Eastern religion and scripture, including Gnostic thought. The Gnostic idea that something is very wrong with the universe resounds throughout this work.  He delves into scientific discoveries and research, particularly in the area of human consciousness. At times, the book - really a series of connected essays - seems disorganized, repetitive and is peppered with unsupported contentions. At other times, the writing seems thoughtful, extremely insightful and goes to great lengths to support the author’s views.

For the most part, I reject Ligotti’s ultimate conclusions. Yet, his reasoning is of particular fascination for me. First, in regard to the bedrock understanding of the facts and construction of the universe, Ligotti’s beliefs are very much in line with mine. That is, we live in a universe without a creator or God, and that all that we experience and observe, including human consciousness, can be broken down into physical laws and explainable processes. Finally, at least to a degree, humans go through life with all kinds of illusions in their heads about themselves as well as about humankind in general. Thus, a thinker who shares such an underlying view of the facts of existence with myself is going to garner my attention.

The second reason that I am drawn to Ligotti’s reasoning is that I believe he expresses something that is an important piece to the puzzle of life. There is darkness inherent to existence. However, what I believe are vital pieces, Ligotti argues is the entire puzzle.

I have many arguments against Ligotti’s all encompassing final conclusions. Two in particular seem to me most important. First, I believe that there is a gaping hole in Ligotti’s logic. One of the author’s main points is that when everything that people value as the basis of human lives, such as love, family, honor, morals, etc., is deconstructed into physical processes, it becomes apparent that theses things are essentially neurons firing and chemical reactions that arise out of survival and reproduction strategies (he seems not to mention, and therefore disregards, the concept of Memes, or any idea of independent, self-perpetuating human ideas). I believe that there is some truth behind Ligotti’s contention (though I think that there is something independent going on relating to human culture and ideas). 

However, Ligotti goes much further. He argues that the nuts and bolts scientifically explainable origins of these values and concepts render these values and concepts utterly meaningless. Such meaninglessness renders life a horrible abomination. 

The problem here is that by this same logic, the concepts of meaninglessness, horror, undesirability of life, etc. are themselves the result of “neurons firing” and have no real meaning either. In a universe where these concepts are unreal, the horror that Ligotti obsesses over is also unreal. The dreadfulness that the author imagines is also an illusion.

Ligotti sees this differently and seems to give “horror” a special place.

“And one thing we know is real: horror. It is so real, in fact, that we cannot be sure it could not exist without us. Yes, it needs our imaginations and our consciousness, but it does not ask or require our consent to use them. Indeed, horror operates with complete autonomy. Generating ontological havoc, it is mephitic foam upon which our lives merely float. And, ultimately, we must face up to it: Horror is more real than we are.“  

The argument that “horror” occupies such a privileged position is, to me, unsupported and unconvincing. One could substitute many words for “horror” in the above passage and it would have the same meaning.

Another problem that I have with Ligotti’s views is that he equates deep understanding of the human mind and consciousness with the belief that human values and principles are meaningless. Once again, this nihilistic way of viewing things can be interesting and perhaps even at times useful in gaining understanding, but it is not the entire story. 

Perhaps all those Carl Sagan books have deluded me. I strongly believe that the incredibly complex mechanisms that go into the human mind, thought, consciousness and ultimately into human values, in no way diminish people or these value systems. In fact I would argue that the natural processes that gave rise to such wonders as life, the human mind, human principles, etc., enhance and give weight to humans and to these values. It is apparent that Ligotti has no sense of wonder or awe at the natural processes, human ideas and culture that that have arisen in our Cosmos.

In fact he writes,

“One cringes to hear scientists cooing over the universe or any part thereof like schoolgirls over-heated by their first crush. From the studies of Krafft-Ebbing onward, we know that it is possible to become excited about anything— from shins to shoehorns. But it would be nice if just one of these gushing eggheads would step back and, as a concession to objectivity, speak the truth: THERE IS NOTHING INNATELY IMPRESSIVE ABOUT THE UNIVERSE OR ANYTHING IN IT.”  (Ligotti’s Capitalization).

The above is very different from how I view the world. Though I am not a scientist, I am very much with the “Gushing Eggheads.” Scientists like Carl Sagan are expressing opinions when they ponder the wonder of the natural world, there is no requirement that everything that they write in this context be scientifically objective, just as there is no requirement that Ligotti be scientifically objective when expressing his opinions.

The above is also an example of Ligotti’s unfortunate tendency to name call and exhibit intolerance that borders on hysteria towards beliefs that he does not agree with.

I have many other qualms with Ligotti’s conclusions. Yet, I believe this to be a valuable work. At times, Ligotti’s reasoning is elegant, and he ties intriguing cultural, literary, philosophical and scientific threads together. Furthermore, I think that Ligotti is on to something. There are terribly dark, horrifying aspects to life and existence. Ligotti brilliantly zeros in upon and explores these aspects of reality. 

This darkness is all that Ligotti sees, however. For the most part, it is not in the facts that I disagree with in terms of his worldview. Thus, to some degree, it can be argued that this viewpoint is just one way of looking at life, no more or less valid than another viewpoint based upon the same facts (I understand that not everyone agrees that these are the facts and that there is plenty of room for honest disagreement on this).  I contend, however, that there are other equally important ways of looking at the Universe.

Those interested in modern, extremely pessimistic worldviews may also want to read Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence by David Benatar. My commentary on that book is here. Ligotti makes several references to Benatar’s work in this book.