Talk:R'lyeh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

distance between derleth r'lyeh and lovecraft r'lyeh[edit]

i used this script to find the distance. should i enter it in the article? http://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong.html it is 329.7 km —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.238.225 (talk) 01:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I would personally say no. I don't think it is a significant enough note; maybe if some writer had made an issue or whatnot of it, but this is treading the waters of original research perhaps. Still, nifty. --Human.v2.0 (talk) 19:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

References to R'lyeh[edit]

The doom metal band Catacombs and it's reference to it.

http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=99037


Using those given coordinates on Mapquest puts R'lyeh in the middle of China - is it Mapquest that's wrong or the coordinates? Or is it simply me who's completely unable to use coordinates? --Niffux 17:13, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

googlemaps This sofar is the only thing I have been able to find --The_redstar_swl 20:12, 12 July 2005 (PST)

But thats Easter Island... Mr. Quertee 17:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Mapquest[edit]

Either Mapquest is incorrect in plotting the coordinates or you incorrectly inputted them. I've never used Mapquest to plot Long/Lat's before, but many programs may require you to place a minus (-) before the coordinates in order to identify them as being S/W instead of N/E. I recommend using 3D World Map.

The coordinates given by Lovecraft in the "Call of Cthulu" places it in a vast expansion in the Pacific Ocean. According to my program, it's roughly 1700 miles North of the Antarctic Shelf and approximately 2300 miles west of the closest point on South America.


Google Maps agrees with the location west of the southern portion of South America. Here's a fun quote, doesn't belong on the main page but amusing nonetheless:

Most people aren't aware of the fact that UNIX actually dates back to the Cthulhuvian epoch, and was widely used in R'lyeh. The R'lyehish word fhtagn is actually a technical term, and literally means "sleeps on an event". Thus, "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" literally means "in his house at R'lyeh dead Cthulhu waits blocked on I/O". -- Andrew C. Bulhak


References to Cthulhu, not R'lyeh[edit]

The following from the References section are references to Cthulhu, not R'lyeh:

* Metallica's "The Call Of Ktulu" off of Ride The Lightning is a tribute to Lovecraft's story. See [1]

* The Vision Bleak song "Kutulu!" * Carpathia - A Dramatic Poem is also a tribute to Lovecraft's story. See [2]

Miraculouschaos 00:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, they should be moved to the Chtulhu article. This reference too:

*In the book, the story says that mentioning the name Cthulhu (Verbally or written) will bring him closer. That's why Metallica used the name "Ktulu" and not "Cthulhu" - for fear of the beast.~ www.songfacts.com

189.15.220.112 (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

Can we have some reference to how to pronounce this name? I've heard it pronounced all sorts of ways,. 20.142.32.68 22:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The most common one I've heard is [r@"laI.Eh] (ruh-LYE-eh) or [r@"laI.Ex] (ruh-LYE-ekh) but I've also heard ["Er.ljEh] (ER-lyeh). Lovecraft was no Tolkien, though, and it's not clear that his spellings reflected any kind of consistent phonology. --FOo 08:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


Bloop[edit]

"Interestingly, in 1997 US Navy operators recorded an ultra low frequency "bloop" near the same coordinates described by Lovecraft.[2]" The "bloop" is said on that link to be on coordinates 100ºW 50ºS. There is a 26 degree longitudinal gap. This is in no way "near", it's several hundred miles away. Mordac

O R'lyeh? (Sorry) Seriously though, good work noticing that.--142.165.186.154 20:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I came here to say this. I found it interesting as well. Vicpro (talk) 04:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-Euclidean Architecture[edit]

Would it be possible to expand on this subject? It seems to be somewhat glossed over... — SheeEttin {T/C} 04:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

No, not really. - Dotdotdotdash (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Lovecraft had a gift for using adjectives when he didn't actually have anything to say. His vague description is the best we've got, I fear.--otherlleft 21:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I think Robert Weinberg is an idiot and his reference should be removed. We can't actually build in another dimension? Next he's gonna write a book about how old Gods and magic don't actually exist. Gee thanks. Ever heard of the suspension of disbelief? It's bloody science fiction. What a waste. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.114.177 (talk) 17:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
The mention is there to offer a valid counterpoint, and helps build an encyclopedia standard article. But then, I'm talking to myself, aren't I? Another random drive-by comment offered by someone who couldn't even be bothered signing in. Oh well.

PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Read CoC last night. It did not occur to me that Lovecraft was suggesting the architecture was actually "non-Euclidean" ... just that it appeared disorienting because it did not follow basic norms or contemporary architecture, or may have explored optical illusions, which are very real, and very subtle, and actually fairly common in monolithic architecture old and new. --72.173.160.58 (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
PS: I decided to just remove that bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=R%27lyeh&action=historysubmit&diff=453813232&oldid=451442784) ... I will probably remove the non-Euclidean reference next for consistency. --12.213.80.55 (talk) 01:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
My assumption was simply that there was an ungodly amount of curves and spherical shapes involved, with the buildings being much more sphere-based, rather than the oblong buildings we're all used to seeing. GRAPPLE X 01:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Why the part on the bloop?[edit]

Sorry, but what does that have to do with this article? Shouldn't that be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.168.152.68 (talk) 19:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Changes[edit]

This is fairly straightforward - corrected colloquial language, removed unsourced statements and threaded ideas together (with references to the short story) in a logical and cohesive flow. References to the same text accurately cited and original research claim (someone listening to a CD) removed. A quick glance at the infobox alone should have indicated that there were changes needed. Other material can be added, but it must be sourced and gel with the rest of the text, which was previously a clunky collection of facts and trivia. PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 02:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC)