Talk:Eldritch Abomination/Oral Tradition

As I mentioned, I was gonna do my usual example pass, but while focusing on the Norse ones in particular... a lot of these examples ain't written too great, and seem to have confused "a being unknowable and incomprehensible on some level to mankind" with "giant super-scary monster". It's an understandable enough mistake to make - I was just discussing this with @HeneryVII, in fact - and this is an inherited page from the TVTropes of old, so I think this might be a case of the content showing its age, and should be looked at with the aim to bring it up to snuff. Do you guys concur?

Pinging some other actives: @Agiletek @Bauerbach @GentlemensDame883 @Goo Monster @Jlaw‎ @Lequinni‎ @RivetVermin @Umbire the Phantom @Utini501 @Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Could be something to look into, yeah.

I took the liberty of removing the Buddha example for exactly the rationale you gave, pending someone more knowledgeable of Buddhism coming by to fix it.

That could be a notable aversion honestly, but I'm going off limited and half-remembered knowledge for that, so grain of salt.

It's an easy trap to fall into with any sub class of Eldritch Abomination. I was going to add King Kong to the page, but thought about it and figured he wouldn't fit.

Good decision.

The key thing to remember about Eldritch Abominations is that they are, or are perceived by lesser beings, as unnatural and defying the laws of the universe. They are, or at least seem to be, fundamentally wrong, things that shouldn't possibly exist but do. Trying to reconcile this with a limited understanding of the universe is one of the things that contributes to their madness-inducing nature. King Kong is not fundamentally "wrong" -- in fact, he is eminently understandable: "Oh, a giant ape. No big."

Speaking with my Mod hat on, we like it when people go back and clean up old "examples" that don't appear to fit the trope - either by showing how they do fit the trope, or by deleting them. @Umbire the Phantom, you don't need permission to do this.

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

I can do my best with this one. Generally anything big, monstrous and incomprehensible feels eldritch to me but will give it a whirl.

Right. Also for @HeneryVII and @Jlaw in particular, since I've been mulling this over: Not all big monstery creatures are eldritch, but for a lot of eldritch critters that are big and monstery, the sheer scale of their being can contribute to difficulty in comprehending them.

@Looney Toons is on to something as well, so I'll use that as a springboard: Sure, you can imagine a giant snake that circles the earth and lurks in its seas, wolves that eat the sun and moon, or maybe an eagle-shaped being whose wings provide the entire planet's wind - but it's definitely going to be far more at odds with your understanding of reality compared to, say, "big squirrel that fucks with the inhabitants of a giant tree": both groups sound straight out of a cartoon, which isn't a value judgment in either direction (though certainly makes for amusing images), but I personally would have an easier time believing the former to be eldritch than the latter. It also depends on the sources you're using - a quick scan of Wikipedia didn't offer much to support some of the examples I was looking over for Animalistic Abomination, but that doesn't mean I can't re-consider them if there's other info out there I haven't seen.

Also @Robkelk, I wasn't seeking permission for the quality pass edit per se (else I wouldn't have been doing it up to this point), so much as possible assistance from interested editors, including some discussion about the direction to take this in. I like having people chime in, especially when they provide perspectives I might not have considered. :3

Honestly, doubling back on the Buddha example, much of the deities from Hindu folklore could possibly apply provided it's scrutinized enough...

Depends on the deity, really. Tulsidas, the man who wrote the Ramayana in Hindi, said that gods take form that we understand so that humans can love them. Most of the gods take comfortable forms to not scare their devotees.

Even the Abrahamic faiths are not immune to this. Angels, while having human forms to communicate with humanity for our comfort in regards to communication, they too have been described as this trope otherwise.

Basically, if they have a form that is absolutely alien and disturbing to most perceptions, they they qualify, but it it's just merely monstrous looking but comprehensible to the average person without making them doubt their sanity, then those examples should be purged.

Angels, while having human forms to communicate with humanity for our comfort in regards to communication, they too have been described as this trope otherwise.

As someone else once said, there's a reason most Angelic communications start with "Fear not".

Is there any figure in Norse mythology that truly qualifies? Fenris seems comprehensible-- giant wolf that bites off hands, and Jormagundr is basically big snake. Would the old woman Time count, given she beat Thor?

Another thing to remember is being Eldritch isn't just incomprehensibility - it might be possible to gain some understanding, but that almost always comes at a significant price. For example, I personally feel that The Book of Ezekiel is probably among the few Old Testament chapters that come close to something out of a Cosmic Horror Story with the details given in the visions, and I seem to recall it driving our titular prophet around the bend a bit. Don't take my word for it, though - I haven't read a Bible proper in years. :B

On the note of madness, I'm reminded of an anecdote about an ant coming across a circuit board that may help you here.