Nuñez and Real 1

Carolina Nuñez

Felipe Real

Professor Ana María Burdach

Applied Discourse Analysis LET1716-1

26 November 2008

Evaluation in Horror Narrative: The Case of Lovecraft’s “Dagon”

Introduction

The following research intends to analyze Lovecraft’s short story “Dagon”—published in

1919 in that year’s current edition of the magazine Weird Tales—under the theoretical

framework of evaluation in narrative, in order to disclose how the horror narrative contained in it

is constructed from the evaluative perspective of its first person narrator. In this sense, this

research is trying to provide a linguistic analysis of a literary piece of art while, at the same time,

it pretends to give the literary critic a basically objective frame of reference so as to criticize the

construction and effectiveness of this short story. As a result, this project will rely heavily on

Thompson and Huston’s Evaluation in Text, as well as in other related material of Evaluation’s

field of expertise.

The relevance of this study is based upon the importance of analyzing more structured

and carefully constructed narratives—as opposed to the current trend in Evaluation in Narrative,

where more and more prominence is being given to natural and/or spontaneous narratives, or to

ethnical/culturally related narrations.

Nuñez and Real 2

General and Specific Objectives

The most general—and ambitious—objective of this research is to bridge the gap

between Linguistics and Literature, through a study that uses a literary corpus analyzed from a

linguistic perspective. Now, more specifically, this study intends to disclose the “magic” behind

a horror narrative; in other words, it pretends to disclose—linguistically—the secret of how fear

and horror are produced on the reader. At the same time, this project deconstructs the text and

reveals how “it is evaluation that enables monologic narrative to be interactive and to fulfill a

communicative function.” (Thompson and Hunston 13)

Research Question

It is our intention to deconstruct Lovecraft’s “Dagon” in order to find and be able to

explain, from a linguistic perspective, the mechanisms that create a relationship between an

imaginary narrator and the real, concrete reader. More importantly, we believe that this

relationship is fundamental in creating the horror effect on the reader—whereas by identification

with the narrator or by a sympathetically attitude towards him. In this sense, the evaluation that

the narrator provides is either used by the reader as his own or sympathetically rejected by him.

Either way, the reader establishes a relationship that is sued by the narrator in order to

manipulate and horrified the reader.

Methodology

Introduction: Recognizing Evaluation

The linguistic research on Evaluation includes many ways in which we can identify

evaluative statements in a given text. Following what Thompson and Hunston assert, recognizing

Nuñez and Real 3

evaluation consists mainly of “a question of identifying signals of comparison, subjectivity, and

social value.” (13) The importance of Evaluation, however, is not provided by the modes of

recognition of it. Instead, it is given by the functions it can perform, namely:

1) to express the speaker’s or writer’s opinion, and in doing so to reflect the value system of

that person and their community;

2) to construct and maintain relations between the speaker or writer and hearer or reader;

3) to organize the discourse. (Thompson and Hunston 6)

Methodology of this paper

As it can be seen, both functions 1) and 2) perfectly fit in the intuitive model presented in

the introduction. However, function 3) is mostly irrelevant in the analysis of the creation, mainly

because the interaction between narrator and reader is largely controlled by the former.

Moreover, as Thompson and Hunston state in "Evaluation: An Introduction," “In monologue,

especially in written monologue [such as in Lovecraft’s narrative], evaluation at the end of each

unit (for example, at the end of a paragraph) marks that a point has been made and that the

reader’s acceptance of that point is assumed.” [our comment] (11) Since we have already

mentioned that it is one of our main objectives to disclose and deconstruct the narrative

mechanisms of the horror story, we will not consider the organizational function of Evaluation in

our analysis. As for the other two functions, we will analyze them through a close reading of the

text itself, at the sentence level, and always considering the author’s intention of provoking

horror in his readers—which is, after all, the main “point” of this narrative.

Nuñez and Real 4

We will include also the appraisal theory, in order to enhance our comprehension and

analysis of the short story. For this matter, we will include Martin’s theory of Appraisal, included

in Thompson and Hunston’s text.

Corpus description

The corpus of this research is Howard Phillips Lovecraft horror short story “Dagon,”

written in 1919 for the Weird Tales magazine. The author is a respected and recognized

American novelist and short story writer, whose chaotic and horrifying cosmos/mythology was

so influential in his time—and even nowadays—as to inspire a large number of writers.

Lovecraft’s writings—and his successors’—have been compiled under the name of the Cthulhu

Mythos’ cycle, and present a more or less coherent portrayal of a universe where humankind is

just a recently arrived inhabitant. Indeed, our very Earth does not belong to humans but, instead,

to a monstrous race of fish-creatures who descend from Dagon, the Philippine Fish-God—

according to the “Dagon” story. This race—also called “Deep Ones”—was on Earth prior to

mankind’s appearance and has even the ability to reproduce with humans, producing hybrids as a

result.

Theoretical Background

Evaluation

In any type of utterance the writer’s or speaker’s opinion is a very important feature

which should be taken on account in order to have a complete description of its meaning. It is

important to remark that evaluation is not always a distinguishable matter. According to

Nuñez and Real 5

Thompson and Hunston evaluation “is the broad covered term for the expression of the speaker

or writer’s attitude or stance towards, viewpoint on or feelings about the entities or propositions

that he or she is talking about.” (5) In order to talk about this phenomenon, a widely range of

terminology is used. Though, some of the most fixed terms are; connotation, affect and attitude.

In which “the first focuses on the language items (it is the words that have connotation), while

the second and third take the perspective of the language user (it is the people who “have”

attitudes).” (Thompson and Hunston 2)

Due to the syntactic and morphological flexibility of this term, it can also be used to talk

about the values that are given to the individuals and propositions that are evaluated.

Furthermore, for Thompson and Hudson, evaluation becomes important regarding the three

functions that it performs:

a) To express the speaker’s or writer’s opinion

b) To construct and maintain relations between the speaker or writer and the hearer or reader

c) To organize discourse

In order to recognize evaluation it is needed to identify signals of comparison, subjectivity and

social value. According to Thompson and Hunston there are some groups of linguistic features

which will help to recognize these signals:

1. Comparison: “evaluation consists of anything which is compared to or contrasts with the

norm.” (Thompson and Hunston 13) Use of comparators which includes comparative

adverb, adverbs of degree, comparator adverbs (just, only, to name a few), expressions of

negativity (morphological, grammatical and lexical).

2. Subjectivity: “someone’s (subjective) reaction to an event is reported.” (Thompson and

Hunston 14) Use of markers of subjectivity such as modals, markers of (un)certainty, non

Nuñez and Real 6

identifying adjectives, adverbs, nouns, and verbs. Also, sentence adverbs and conjunctions;

report and attribution structures; markers clause structures, and patterns beginning with it

and there.

3. Social Value: “Hudson suggests ‘what is good’ and ‘what is bad’ can be defined in terms of

goal achievements. Something that is good prevents to achieve a goal, while something that

is bad prevents or hinders the achievement of a goal.” (Thompson and Hunston 14) Use of

markers of value. There are two groups; lexical items used in an evaluative environment

and the indications of the existence of goals and their (non-)achievement. (21)

Therefore, it, also, can be recognized in terms of lexis (adjectives, adverbs, nouns and verbs

which can be clearly evaluative), grammar (intensifiers, comparators, correlatives and

explicative), and text (Situation-evaluation pair, or evaluation is identified because of its position

in the text)

Expressing opinion

This function is use in order to express to the reader (or hearer) the writer’s opinion about

something. Also, each act of evaluation express the value-system of a community, in addition,

every act of evaluation builds up that value-system. Furthermore, the value-system is part of the

ideology which goes under every text. Consequently, evaluation reveals the ideology of the

society which has produced the text -- or to a sub-group of it.

Maintaining Relations

This function is use to built a specific relation with the reader or hearer “by assuming

shared attitudes, values, and relations which can be difficult for the reader, as the subordinate in

Nuñez and Real 7

this relationship, to dispute.” (Thompson and Hunston 8) Maintaining Relations has been related

to three main ideas: manipulation, hedging, and politeness. The first one refers to manipulate and

persuade the reader (hearer), so, he or she will see the things in the specific view-point that the

writer (speaker) wants. For instance, as there are at least two participants, a problem can be seen

in two different ways, therefore, the writer (speaker) guides the reader (hearer), so he could have

the same perception. In some text, the reader’s (speaker’s) approval of the evaluation is assumed.

The second one refers to the moments when the evaluation is use to adjust a true-value or give a

level of certainty to the statement. As the hedging is used to “mark a knowledge claim as

acknowledge by the community, not certain,” (Thompson and Hudson 10) it is seen as a

politeness device.

Organizing the Discourse

There is a relationship between the reader (hearer) and the writer (hearer) which can be

interpreted in terms of the text itself. The producer of the text, also, tells the reader which is the

beginning and the end of the text, and how the argument fits together. In addition, the writer

(speaker) and the reader (hearer) have two relationships. Firstly, the one is given for the roles

they have in life. For example, when a mother writes a letter to her daughter, the first relation

would be of the mother and the daughter. Secondly, there is the relation between the discourse-

producer and the discourse-recipient. Consequently, the evaluation not only organizes the

paragraph but also it does it in an interactively manner. In addition the evaluation “which both

organizes the discourse and indicates its significance, might be said to tell the reader the ‘point’

of the discourse.” (Thompson and Hudson 12)

Nuñez and Real 8

For Labov, apart from the basic narrative clause, evaluation could be seen as the most

important feature of narration, because it answers the ‘So what?’ question. Thanks to the

evaluation the reader (hearer) can interpret the events of the story as boring, terrifying, exiting,

and so on.

Evaluation in Narratives

Cortazzi and Jin distinguish three types of evaluating evaluation in narratives:

a) Evaluation of Narratives in which it is “an examination of the way the narrative is

received and how the point of the narrative is understood ... [there] socio-cultural factors

play an extremely important role.” (Thompson and Hunston 102)

b) Evaluation through Narratives where the “narratives are used as a basis for the evaluation

of the teller.” (Thompson and Hunston 102)

c) Evaluation in Narratives

According to Labov and his co-workers “fulfill formed narrative has a six part structure.”

(Cortazzi and Jin 104) In which there is found the abstract -- “[which] summarizes the point in

advance or states a general position that the narrative will exemplify ... The orientation [that]

gives the setting, with details of time, place, and so on ... The complication makes up the main

narrative events ... a problem ... which gives the story interest ... The resolution describes the

outcome ... A coda [which] brings listeners back to the narrative.” (Cortazzi and Jin 104) The last

feature is evaluation that remarks the point of the narrative.

For Labov narratives have two social functions: a referential function (information given to

the audience through the teller’s acquaintances) and the evaluative function (gives the meaning

Nuñez and Real 9

of the story by the use of personal involvement). Moreover, according to Cortazzi and Jin, “The

evaluation makes the narrative reportable, repeatable, and relevant.” (105)

As the evaluation is ambiguous, there is more than one level of it. First, evaluation is seen as

the element which goes between the complication and the resolution which holds the reader

(hearer) in suspense. Also, in a form of external evaluation, it interrupts the story to express the

point of the story. Second, “it is a functional element that is spread throughout various points of

the narrative and overlaps with other elements.” (Cortazzi and Jin 107)

Appraisal System

J.R Martin use appraisal to talk about “the semantic resources used to negotiate emotions,

judgments, and valuations, alongside resources for amplifying and engaging with these

evaluations.” (Martin 145) The meanings can reflect the strength of the evaluation. Martin

focuses on three systems (AFFECT, JUDGEMENT, and VALUE). These systems “encode

feeling,” (Martin 147) and form, altogether, evaluation through a widely range of linguistic

resources.

1) AFFECT: “it is the resource developed for construing emotional responses (‘happiness,

sadness, fear, loathing’, etc.).” (Martin 145) According to Martin and Rose they can be

positive or negative, in addition they can be utter directly (a mental state of the writer

(speaker) is expressed literarily; by the use of words and physical acts to communicate

emotions) or implied (sings of emotions should be read in context and use of metaphors)

Features which indicate AFFECT by White

Nuñez and Real 10

a) Verbs of emotion (Mental Processes) such as to love/to hate, to frighten/to reassure,

to interest/to bore, to enrage/to placate - (Your offer pleases me, I hate chocolate.)

b) Adverbs (typically Circumstances of Manner) such as happily/sadly (Sadly the

government has decided to abandon its commitment to the comprehensive school

system.)

c) adjectives of emotion happy/sad, worried/confident, angry/pleased, keen/uninterested

- (I'm sad you’ve decided to do that, I'm happy she’s joining the group, She's proud

of her achievements, he's frightened of spiders, etc)

d) Nominalization (the turning of verbs and adjectives into nouns) joy/despair,

confidence/insecurity (His fear was obvious to all, I was overcome with joy) (Affect 4

as quoted by Gonzalez).

2) JUDGEMENT: “is developed for construing moral evaluations of behavior (‘ethical,

deceptive, brave’, etc.).” (Martin 145) According to Martin and Rose it can be personal

(admiration or criticism) or moral (praise or condemnation). Thus, they also can be

positive or negative.

JUDGEMENT is expressed by:

a) normality (eccentric, maverick, conventional, traditional etc)

b) competence (skilled, genius, knowledgeable, stupid, dunce, brilliant, incompetent,

powerful, feeble)

c) psychological disposition (brave, cowardly, determined, obstinate, zealous, stubborn,

committed, lazy etc) (White, Judgment 1)

Nuñez and Real 11

3) APPRECIATION: “construes the ‘aesthetic’ quality of semiotic text/processes and natural

phenomena (‘remarkable, desirable, harmonious, elegant, innovative’, etc.).” (Martin 145-

46) It is directed toward concrete and abstract things. Consequently, they do not evaluate

human behavior.

Sub-types of aesthetic APPRECIATION given by White:

a) Composition, structure or form, with the question of how well the parts of the entity

under evaluation fit together.

b) Presentation, with whether the entity under considering is pleasing or displeasing ‘to

the senses’, so to speak – for example, beautiful, lovely, splendid, breathtaking

(positive); plain, ugly, drab (negative).

c) Values which make reference to, or are derived from, values of affect (emotion). A

depressing building (quoted by Gonzalez 2)

Results and Analysis

Specific data analysis procedures

The short story used here was analyzed at a syntactic sentence level, considering the

relationship between the sentence and the context—in this case, the text in itself and the intention

of its narrator.

In this sense, we proceed to follow the tabulation example provided by Thompson and

Hunston in their text (3), such as the following example:

Nuñez and Real 12

Expressing Opinion

Thing/Event Narrator’s opinion

a full account (story) for the information or the contemptuous amusement of my fellow-men

As it can be seen, the first column shows what is being evaluated and the second, how it

is evaluated. In this research we use two main categories, corresponding to the aforementioned

functions 1) and 2) (and explained in detail in our theoretical background). Also, we divide our

most relevant category—corresponding to the Expression of Opinion—into two sub-categories:

Thing / Event and Entity / Proposition, in relation to what is being evaluated.

Quantification and Comments

First of all, if we consider the results of our analysis of Lovecraft’s short story, the two

functions are represented in the following proportions:

Functions of Evaluation in "Dagon"

98%

2%

Expressing OpinionMaintaining Relations

The chart shows us the unbalanced relation that exists between the relative appearance of

function 1): Expressing Opinion and function 2): Maintaining Relations. In numerical values, we

Nuñez and Real 13

encountered 194 occurrences of function 1) against only 4 of function 2). This can be interpreted

as a clear sign of the importance of the expressions of the narrator’s opinion, as opposed to the

relatively low importance given to establish a direct relationship between narrator and reader; i.e.

the narrator does not often address the reader, at least not from the evaluative perspective.

Nevertheless, it is important to remember that it was not—and still is not—usual at all for

a writer to directly address his reader. Moreover, the way in which the narrator addresses the

reader in “Dagon” demonstrates a great amount of self-awareness for the part of the narrator,

who is clearly conscious of his narrative effort and of the future readers, which will come after

he is no more. As a result, the narrator can effectively manipulate the reader, in order to win him

fro “his” side; i.e. the narrator creates a bond with the reader that makes the reader be part of the

narrative through this empathetic link.

Now, inside function 1), we find two sub-categories (as already mentioned). These sub-

categories represent two very different forms of expressing opinion in narrative. The first, related

to things and events, is a form of “external” evaluation; in other words, it expresses the narrator’s

perception of the reality that surrounds him. On the other hand, the second develops a form of

“auto-evaluation.” In this case, the narrator evaluates his own actions and decisions, as well the

validity or truth of propositions given and/or elaborated by himself. The results of our

quantitative analysis are summed up in the following chart:

Nuñez and Real 14

Expression of Opinion in "Dagon"

73%

27%

Thing / EventEntity / Proposition

The numerical results in this case are 141 occurrences for the Thing / Event category and

53 for the Entity / Proposition category. From these results, it is clear the importance given by

the narrator to the perception of his surroundings over the evaluation of his own self.

In spite of that, it is a remarkable aspect of the Entity / Proposition category that all the

occurrences are of the following form:

Expressing Opinion

Entity/Proposition Narrator’s opinion

I shall be no more

This “I + predication” repeats throughout 52 of the 53 examples of this type of

evaluation. This could be interpreted as usual in the case of a first person narrator, but it seems to

us that this type of evaluative form implies much more than just the simple presence of that kind

if narrator. In fact, it seems to only reinforce the manipulation that function 2) intended to create.

Nuñez and Real 15

Negative vs. Positive

Thompson and Hunston comment, while explaining the properties of Evaluation’s

function 1): Expressing Opinion, that “opinions can be seen essentially in terms of positive and

negative.” (3) In this sense, if we analyze the two sub-categories we can find the following:

Negative vs Positive in Expressing Opinion about Thing / Event

73%

27%

NegativePositive

In the first sub-category, Thing / Event, the majority of the opinions expressed about

things and events have a negative connotation. These results further enhanced our point of view

that the “Dagon” narrator is highly critical of his environment, and that that setting is oppressive

and uncomfortable for him. Interestingly enough, when the narrator describes “the creatures”

(Dagon’s offspring) he cannot decide whether to feel admiration or horror for them. Actually, the

evaluation of the creatures occurs 6 times in the text, and in 3 times has both a negative and a

positive connotation.

It is also interesting that the narrator judges the moon that he is so afraid of at the end of

the story in a positive way, as “fantastically” gibbous when he first sees it. Likewise, it called our

attention how the narrator describes the morphine drug at the beginning of the story, as

something that “alone makes life endurable.”

Nuñez and Real 16

Now, in the case of function 2), the situation is very similar to function 1). The negative

aspect of this evaluation is even more dominant, rising up to a 77% of the occurrences. Here, we

can clearly see how the narrator makes a hard judgment of his own self in the face of fear and

horror. His pessimistic attitude reveals how affected he is by the things that have happened to

him, and how determined he is in killing himself in order to escape his grim reality. Again, we as

readers are compelled to share the narrator’s feelings and attitude, in order to provoke a similar,

horrifying reaction in us. All this assessments are supported by the chart that follows.

77%

23%

Negative vs Positive in Expressing Opinion about Entity / Proposition

Negative

Positive

Appraisal System

Martin uses three systems to the discussion of appraisal. This three-part system is

composed by 1) AFFECT; 2) JUDGMENT and 3) APPRECIATION. Taking into consideration

this appraisal system we found:

Nuñez and Real 17

In the appraisal systems we found that a large number of the evaluation follows the

appreciation pattern – in this case, were found 81. Then, we found 22 resources to express

judgment. Finally, only 7 features to express Affect were found. We were, previously, expecting

this result, due to the large number of Thing/Event category in comparison to Entity/proposition

one. Because, as Appreciations are directed to things, but Judgment and Affect are in relation to

the entity. Consequently, this chart demonstrates the relevance of the objects – also, the

evaluated object – that the horror novel has in order to create the intended mood.

Affect

White argues that the effectual position can be determined by the use of four linguistic

features a) verbs of emotion (Mental Processes); b) adverbs (typically of Circumstance or

Manner); c) adjectives of emotion; and d) nominalization (the turning of verbs and adjectives

into nouns). Therefore, if we analyze affects in our text we should find the following:

Nuñez and Real 18

As the previous chart showed, we did not find many features that indicated the Affect

system. We think that this is because the narrator is more concerned to monitory his actions and

feelings rather than simply give an account of the emotion. In addition, in this case there were

use more verbs to express affect than adjectives, and assessments of b) adverbs and d)

nominalizations were not found. Furthermore, the small amount of findings does not allow us to

take any more conclusions regarding this issue.

Judgment

White states that judgment can be identified taking on consideration the assessment of a)

normality; b) competence c) psychological disposition. As judgment concerns the human

behavior, we are going to analyze Entity / Proposition category from the function 1). By doing

this analysis we found:

Nuñez and Real 19

In the Entity / Proposition category, we found a large number of c) psychological

disposition, only one judgment made of b) competence and no judgment through assessment of

a) normality. Most of the lexical items found of the c) category have a negative connotation

(such as concerned, unwise, and deterred). Probably, this is because the narrator is sharing his

experiences, which were highly psychological damaging. Furthermore, we think that the negative

psychological disposition findings help to create the environment of fear and horror in which the

character is settled. Also, it gives a psychological connotation in which the character appears as

someone who is mentally disturbed. Thus, at the end of the novel Lovecraft make us doubt about

if this story really happened or if it was a product of an unstable mind.

Appreciations

White found three sub-types of aesthetic appreciation. a) composition, structure or form;

b) presentation, whether the entity under consideration is pleasing or displeasing ‘to the senses’;

and c) values which make reference to, or are derived from, values of affect (emotion)

Judgement

0% 5%

95%

normalitycompetencepsycological disposition

Nuñez and Real 20

As we have already stated, the appreciation system was the one with a higher nomber of

elements. An within them the sub-type a) composition, structure or form was the most recurrent

one (with 45 utterances). Then, the sub-type b) presentation, whether the entity under

consideration is pleasing or displeasing ‘to the senses’, was the next in terms of number (25).

Therefore, in “Dagon” the narrator is using appritiation in order to give an account of the

landscape by telling the reader how he perceive the things that were sorrounding him. Finally, it

is important to mention that we had to create a forth category for the evaluations that expressed

both the composition and the presentation of the objects.

Conclusions

It is our perception here, at the end of our research, that the specific objectives we set for

this work have been almost completely accomplished. This perception is supported by the data

analysis, which has enhanced and improved our intuitive ideas regarding the horror effect and

Nuñez and Real 21

the empathetic link between reader and narrator. Moreover, Lovecraft’s narrative has become

alive thanks to the newly found linguistic characteristics that enable us to say that the experience

of reading it is far from being one-sided or predetermined but, instead, is pervaded by a strong

sense of communication between the writer and his reader. In this sense, the narrative can be said

to be no longer a personal experience, but rather a cooperative interaction between writer and

reader where both are equally important in order to have a successful experience.

Now, regarding our most general—and still very ambitious—objective, the bridge is no

longer a desire that we can accomplish on our own. We have learned, throughout this project, the

importance of the cooperation in order to achieve a desired result, Therefore, we can only

conclude that the bridge will exist as long as you, our readers, consider the intertwined

connections that weave together the worlds of Linguistics and Literature.

Propositions for further research on the subject

It would be very interesting to read more projects on the subject of Evaluation in

Narrative that deal with corpus that is literary. In this sense, we hope to read more about

Evaluation in Narratives that are socially relevant, such as classic novels, short stories and even

playwrights. It is our conviction that the field of Evaluation in Narrative has a promissory future,

and it is in all of us to give the field a more prominent—and definitely deserved—place inside

the field of Discourse Analysis.

Likewise, it would be interesting to develop a further research on Lovecraft’s narrative.

In that case, it could be useful to use a different—yet still related—theoretical background such

as the Six-Part structure model for narrative. This model was scarcely mentioned in our work,

Nuñez and Real 22

but it is our idea that it could be a good frame of reference in order to expand the knowledge

about Lovecraft’s unique horror narrative.

Nuñez and Real 23

Appendix 1: The Story

Dagon (1919)

I am writing this under an appreciable mental strain, since by tonight I shall be no more.

Penniless, and at the end of my supply of the drug which alone makes life endurable, I can bear

the torture no longer; and shall cast myself from this garret window into the squalid street below.

Do not think from my slavery to morphine that I am a weakling or a degenerate. When you have

read these hastily scrawled pages you may guess, though never fully realise, why it is that I must

have forgetfulness or death.

It was in one of the most open and least frequented parts of the broad Pacific that the

packet of which I was supercargo fell a victim to the German sea-raider. The great war was then

at its very beginning, and the ocean forces of the Hun had not completely sunk to their later

degradation; so that our vessel was made legitimate prize, whilst we of her crew were treated

with all the fairness and consideration due us as naval prisoners. So liberal, indeed, was the

discipline of our captors, that five days after we were taken I managed to escape alone in a small

boat with water and provisions for a good length of time.

When I finally found myself adrift and free, I had but little idea of my surroundings.

Never a competent navigator, I could only guess vaguely by the sun and stars that I was

somewhat south of the equator. Of the longitude I knew nothing, and no island or coast-line was

in sight. The weather kept fair, and for uncounted days I drifted aimlessly beneath the scorching

sun; waiting either for some passing ship, or to be cast on the shores of some habitable land. But

neither ship nor land appeared, and I began to despair in my solitude upon the heaving vastnesses

of unbroken blue.

Nuñez and Real 24

The change happened whilst I slept. Its details I shall never know; for my slumber,

though troubled and dream-infested, was continuous. When at last I awaked, it was to discover

myself half sucked into a slimy expanse of hellish black mire which extended about me in

monotonous undulations as far as I could see, and in which my boat lay grounded some distance

away.

Though one might well imagine that my first sensation would be of wonder at so

prodigious and unexpected a transformation of scenery, I was in reality more horrified than

astonished; for there was in the air and in the rotting soil a sinister quality which chilled me to

the very core. The region was putrid with the carcasses of decaying fish, and of other less

describable things which I saw protruding from the nasty mud of the unending plain. Perhaps I

should not hope to convey in mere words the unutterable hideousness that can dwell in absolute

silence and barren immensity. There was nothing within hearing, and nothing in sight save a vast

reach of black slime; yet the very completeness of the stillness and homogeneity of the landscape

oppressed me with a nauseating fear.

The sun was blazing down from a sky which seemed to me almost black in its cloudless

cruelty; as though reflecting the inky marsh beneath my feet. As I crawled into the stranded boat

I realised that only one theory could explain my position. Through some unprecedented volcanic

upheaval, a portion of the ocean floor must have been thrown to the surface, exposing regions

which for innumerable millions of years had lain hidden under unfathomable watery depths. So

great was the extent of the new land which had risen beneath me, that I could not detect the

faintest noise of the surging ocean, strain my ears as I might. Nor were there any sea-fowl to prey

upon the dead things.

Nuñez and Real 25

For several hours I sat thinking or brooding in the boat, which lay upon its side and

afforded a slight shade as the sun moved across the heavens. As the day progressed, the ground

lost some of its stickiness, and seemed likely to dry sufficiently for travelling purposes in a short

time. That night I slept but little, and the next day I made for myself a pack containing food and

water, preparatory to an overland journey in search of the vanished sea and possible rescue.

On the third morning I found the soil dry enough to walk upon with ease. The odour of

the fish was maddening; but I was too much concerned with graver things to mind so slight an

evil, and set out boldly for an unknown goal. All day I forged steadily westward, guided by a far-

away hummock which rose higher than any other elevation on the rolling desert. That night I

encamped, and on the following day still travelled toward the hummock, though that object

seemed scarcely nearer than when I had first espied it. By the fourth evening I attained the base

of the mound which turned out to be much higher than it had appeared from a distance, an

intervening valley setting it out in sharper relief from the general surface. Too weary to ascend, I

slept in the shadow of the hill.

I know not why my dreams were so wild that night; but ere the waning and fantastically

gibbous moon had risen far above the eastern plain, I was awake in a cold perspiration,

determined to sleep no more. Such visions as I had experienced were too much for me to endure

again. And in the glow of the moon I saw how unwise I had been to travel by day. Without the

glare of the parching sun, my journey would have cost me less energy; indeed, I now felt quite

able to perform the ascent which had deterred me at sunset. Picking up my pack , I started for the

crest of the eminence.

I have said that the unbroken monotony of the rolling plain was a source of vague horror

to me; but I think my horror was greater when I gained the summit of the mound and looked

Nuñez and Real 26

down the other side into an immeasurable pit or canyon, whose black recesses the moon had not

yet soard high enough to illuminate. I felt myself on the edge of the world; peering over the rim

into a fathomless chaos of eternal night. Through my terror ran curious reminiscences of

Paradise Lost, and of Satan's hideous climb through the unfashioned realms of darkness.

As the moon climbed higher in the sky, I began to see that the slopes of the valley were

not quite so perpendicular as I had imagined. Ledges and outcroppings of rock afforded fairly

easy foot-holds for a descent, whilst after a drop of a few hundred feet, the declivity became very

gradual. Urged on by an impulse which I cannot definitely analyse, I scrambled with difficulty

down the rocks and stood on the gentler slope beneath, gazing into the Stygian deeps where no

light had yet penetrated.

All at once my attention was captured by a vast and singular object on the opposite slope,

which rose steeply about an hundred yards ahead of me; an object that gleamed whitely in the

newly bestowed rays of the ascending moon. That it was merely a gigantic piece of stone, I soon

assured myself; but I was conscious of a distinct impression that its contour and position were

not altogether the work of Nature. A closer scrutiny filled me with sensations I cannot express;

for despite its enormous magnitude, and its position in an abyss which had yawned at the bottom

of the sea since the world was young, I perceived beyond a doubt that the strange object was a

well-shaped monolith whose massive bulk had known the workmanship and perhaps the worship

of living and thinking creatures.

Dazed and frightened, yet not without a certain thrill of the scientist’s or archaeologist’s

delight, I examined my surroundings more closely. The moon, now near the zenith, shone

weirdly and vividly above the towering steeps that hemmed in the chasm, and revealed the fact

that a far-flung body of water flowed at the bottom, winding out of sight in both directions, and

Nuñez and Real 27

almost lapping my feet as I stood on the slope. Across the chasm, the wavelets washed the base

of the Cyclopean monolith; on whose surface I could now trace both inscriptions and crude

sculptures. The writing was in a system of hieroglyphics unknown to me, and unlike anything I

had ever seen in books; consisting for the most part of conventionalised aquatic symbols such as

fishes, eels, octopi, crustaceans, molluscs, whales, and the like. Several characters obviously

represented marine things which are unknown to the modern world, but whose decomposing

forms I had observed on the ocean-risen plain.

It was the pictorial carving, however, that did most to hold me spellbound. Plainly visible

across the intervening water on account of their enormous size, were an array of bas-reliefs

whose subjects would have excited the envy of Doré. I think that these things were supposed to

depict men—at least, a certain sort of men; though the creatures were shewn disporting like

fishes in waters of some marine grotto, or paying homage at some monolithic shrine which

appeared to be under the waves as well. Of their faces and forms I dare not speak in detail; for

the mere remembrance makes me grow faint. Grotesque beyond the imagination of a Poe or a

Bulwer, they were damnably human in general outline despite webbed hands and feet,

shockingly wide and flabby lips, glassy, bulging eyes, and other features less pleasant to recall.

Curiously enough, they seemed to have been chiselled badly out of proportion with their scenic

background; for one of the creatures was shewn in the act of killing a whale represented as but

little larger than himself. I remarked, as I say, their grotesqueness and strange size, but in a

moment decided that they were merely the imaginary gods of some primitive fishing or seafaring

tribe; some tribe whose last descendant had perished eras before the first ancestor of the

Piltdown or Neanderthal Man was born. Awestruck at this unexpected glimpse into a past

Nuñez and Real 28

beyond the conception of the most daring anthropologist, I stood musing whilst the moon cast

queer reflections on the silent channel before me.

Then suddenly I saw it. With only a slight churning to mark its rise to the surface, the

thing slid into view above the dark waters. Vast, Polyphemus-like, and loathsome, it darted like a

stupendous monster of nightmares to the monolith, about which it flung its gigantic scaly arms,

the while it bowed its hideous head and gave vent to certain measured sounds. I think I went mad

then.

Of my frantic ascent of the slope and cliff, and of my delirious journey back to the

stranded boat, I remember little. I believe I sang a great deal, and laughed oddly when I was

unable to sing. I have indistinct recollections of a great storm some time after I reached the boat;

at any rate, I know that I heard peals of thunder and other tones which Nature utters only in her

wildest moods.

When I came out of the shadows I was in a San Francisco hospital; brought thither by the

captain of the American ship which had picked up my boat in mid-ocean. In my delirium I had

said much, but found that my words had been given scant attention. Of any land upheaval in the

Pacific, my rescuers knew nothing; nor did I deem it necessary to insist upon a thing which I

knew they could not believe. Once I sought out a celebrated enthnologist, and amused him with

peculiar questions regarding the ancient Philistine legend of Dagon, the Fish-God; but soon

perceiving that he was hopelessly conventional, I did not press my inquiries.

It is at night, especially when the moon is gibbous and waning, that I see the thing. I tried

morphine; but the drug has given only transient surcease, and has drawn me into its clutches as a

hopeless slave. So now I am to end it all, having written a full account for the information or the

contemptuous amusement of my fellow-men. Often I ask myself if it could not all have been a

Nuñez and Real 29

pure phantasm—a mere freak of fever as I lay sun-stricken and raving in the open boat after my

escape from the German man-of-war. This I ask myself, but ever does there come before me a

hideously vivid vision in reply. I cannot think of the deep sea without shuddering at the nameless

things that may at this very moment be crawling and floundering on its slimy bed, worshipping

their ancient stone idols and carving their own detestable likenesses on the submarine obelisks of

water-soaked granite. I dream of a day when they may rise above the billows to drag down in

their reeking talons the remnants of puny, war-exhausted mankind—of a day when the land shall

sink, and the dark ocean floor shall ascend amidst universal pandemonium.

The end is near. I hear a noise at the door, as of some immense slippery body lumbering

against it. It shall find me. God, that hand! The window! The window!

Appendix 2: The Tabulated Analysis

(Presented in the following pages)

Nuñez and Real 30

Works Cited

Cortazzi, Martin, and Lixian Jin. “Evaluation Evaluation in Narrative.” Evaluation in Text

Oxford: OUP, 1999. 102-120.

Lovecraft, Howard Phillips. "Dagon". H. P. Lovecraft: The Fiction. Comp. by S. T. Joshi. New

York: Barnes And Noble, 2008. 23-27.

Martin, J.R. “Beyond Exchange: Appraisal Systems in English.” Evaluation in Text Oxford:

OUP, 1999. 142-175.

Thompson, Geoff, and Susan Hunston. "Evaluation: An Introduction." Evaluation in Text

Oxford: OUP, 1999. 1-27.