Posted for later reference and commentary
Jan. 25th, 2011 10:01 amThe Shortest Distance Between Two Towers, by Steve Tompkins.
I'm only half-through this, and want to read it when there's a more favorable gray-matter-to-phlegm ratio in my cranium.
The author takes issue with the idea that Tolkien is not Sword and Sorcery, and in fact has far more in common with Robert E. Howard than most genre observers would grant.
Since I've loudly advocated the "plaid and paisley" position myself, this interests me.
I've also become keenly aware that Howard's work is another critical gap in my reading history. When I first dove into Sword & Sorcery after getting initiated into D&D in 1978, I read Moorcock and Lieber ... but not Howard. My exposure to Conan, to that point, was through the Marvel comics I mostly ignored. Milius's 1982 film and its star did nothing to temper my inaccurate impression of Howard's best-known creation as "Big Dumb Guy With Sword".
I know that's not the case, after reading about Howard's work for decades—and yet, I've never cracked the covers of a Howard tome.
That needs to change—particularly since my own magnum opus is assertively on the Sword & Sorcery side of the fantasy divide.
If there really is such a divide.
Addendum: Also adding a "read when brain works" link to Spacesuit, Blaster and Science(!): Confronting the Uneasy Relationship between Science Fiction and Heroic Fantasy, by Michal Wojcik, which addresses another set of genre-trope prejudices I hold even though I know they don't bear sustained scrutiny.
I'm only half-through this, and want to read it when there's a more favorable gray-matter-to-phlegm ratio in my cranium.
The author takes issue with the idea that Tolkien is not Sword and Sorcery, and in fact has far more in common with Robert E. Howard than most genre observers would grant.
Since I've loudly advocated the "plaid and paisley" position myself, this interests me.
I've also become keenly aware that Howard's work is another critical gap in my reading history. When I first dove into Sword & Sorcery after getting initiated into D&D in 1978, I read Moorcock and Lieber ... but not Howard. My exposure to Conan, to that point, was through the Marvel comics I mostly ignored. Milius's 1982 film and its star did nothing to temper my inaccurate impression of Howard's best-known creation as "Big Dumb Guy With Sword".
I know that's not the case, after reading about Howard's work for decades—and yet, I've never cracked the covers of a Howard tome.
That needs to change—particularly since my own magnum opus is assertively on the Sword & Sorcery side of the fantasy divide.
If there really is such a divide.
Addendum: Also adding a "read when brain works" link to Spacesuit, Blaster and Science(!): Confronting the Uneasy Relationship between Science Fiction and Heroic Fantasy, by Michal Wojcik, which addresses another set of genre-trope prejudices I hold even though I know they don't bear sustained scrutiny.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 06:41 pm (UTC)The black cover Del Rey oversized paperbacks of the Conan stories are good. They're reprints of the hardback Wandering Star Press editions, with lots of added stuff like partial drafts and letters. And the artwork by Gary Gianni is very nice. Del Rey also released the Kull, Solomon Kane, and Bran Mak Morn collections, which are good to compare to the Conan work.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 06:44 pm (UTC)... I don't have the space or the ready funds to BUY books right now.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 12:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 07:25 pm (UTC)Fortunately, "Howard purist" editions of his work are fairly easy to get ahold of these days. :)
Some of Howard's other stuff can get into downright ugly bigotry; you can catch whiffs of it in Conan from time to time, but no more than many other pulp authors and considerably less than some. But when you get into Howard's attempts at Lovecraftian horror (for instance) or some of his "yellow menace" stories, it starts to get nasty.
He's a complex case -- amazing at his best, appalling at his worst.
-TG
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 08:13 pm (UTC)My familiarity with Lovecraft also leaves me wary of the "writer's circle" effect. I doubt that DeCamp, Carter, and Roy Thomas were guilty of more egregious dilution Howard than August Derleth was of Lovecraft.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 08:24 pm (UTC)Nominee for year's most vivid dysphemism.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 02:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 10:08 pm (UTC)Reply, Eight Months Later!
Date: 2011-08-28 03:37 pm (UTC)They miss some important facts:
1) The Lovecraft characters who end up that way are all Effete Sensitive Intellectuals;
2) Not all of Lovecraft's characters -- even his protagonists -- fall into that category; and
3) If you're going to include Derleth in the Mythos, there's no reason not to include Howard.
∴ Conan is an appropriate model for a CoC protagonist.
Re: Reply, Eight Months Later!
Date: 2011-08-30 03:21 am (UTC)Re: Reply, Eight Months Later!
Date: 2011-08-30 03:48 am (UTC)THAT'S the way you do it.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 10:27 pm (UTC)Cimmerians were a real people. They lived in south Russia/Ukraine, presumably got absorbed my the Scythians, and survive in the Georgian term gymyri, giant. Howard jacked the name for his black-haired northern guys - he has two other northern groups, Aesir (who are blond) and Vanir (who are redhaired) to give some perspective. To give you an idea of how the cultural stew continues playing out in the whole thing, the Picts - who are where the historical Picts wound up, and are presumably their descendants in the Bran Mak Morn stuff - are basically sort of stereotype Native Americans in a lot of ways.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 10:52 am (UTC)