D&D General No One Reads Conan Now -- So What Are They Reading?

I read a lot of dark fantasy and sf, and I’d say that there’s a strong theme of the vulnerability of every society to corruption and decay. But where Howard championed the renewing power of barbarism, modern authors champion the need to build better societies. Renewal is doing this thing again, but having learned the lessons of current and past failures so as not to repeat them. As someone who depends on a lot of infrastructure to not die horribly from my disabilities, I find this a more congenial approach.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


Huh. I'd suggest you head back to the texts, especially the ones dealing with Conan as king. Hour of the Dragon, for example, sets up Conan as a wise and just ruler, as opposed to the greedy and oppressive rule of Valerius and Xaltotun. For example, one passage:

"Again Conan shook his head. 'Let others dream imperial dreams. I but wish to hold what is mine. I have no desire to rule an empire welded together by blood and fire. It's one thing to seize a throne with the aid of its subjects and rule them with their consent. It's another to subjugate a foreign realm and rule it by fear. I don't wish to be another Valerius. No, Trocero, I'll rule all Aquilonia and no more, or I'll rule nothing.'"


Not gonna get into specifics, but again I don't think this interpretation is held up in the originals. One of the ways Howard shows the decadence of civilization is that it controls social relations, often putting women in positions to be exploited and controlled by power structures which only exist in civilized society. Conan is presented as a contrast to this. He is lustful, but there is simultaneously an equality of desires that isn't present in civilization.

The (unpublished, now available in critical editions) version of Phoenix on the Sword has the best brooding scene, and I suggest you check that out. But more generally, Howard's Conan is far from the stupid barbarian stereotype. He's thoughtful and intelligent as well as physically impressive.

Edit: ah, we deserve the text. Here's what I have in mind from Phoenix:

"His mirth fell away from him like a mask, and his face was suddenly old, his eyes worn. The unreasoning melancholy of the Cimmerian fell like a shroud about his soul, paralyzing him with a crushing sense of the futility of human endeavor and the meaninglessness of life. His kingship, his pleasures, his fears, his ambitions, and all earthly things were revealed to him suddenly as dust and broken toys. The borders of life shrivelled and the lines of existence closed in about him, numbing him. Dropping his lion head in his mighty hands, he groaned aloud.

Then lifting his head, as a man looks for escape, his eyes fell on a crystal jar of yellow wine. Quickly he rose and pouring a goblet full, quaffed it at a gulp. Again he filled and emptied the goblet, and again. When he set it down, a fine warmth stole through his veins. Things and happenings assumed new values. The dark Cimmerian hills faded far behind him. Life was good and real and vibrant after all – not the dream of an idiot god. "
That is some seriously purple prose.
 

Upon what do you base that these are the "big three"? Like, do you have sales numbers or something? Or is it just your personal assessment based on what you see in the discourse you happen to see?
I don't have hard sales numbers (I don't work in the TTRPG industry), but it is an assessment on what I see in discourse, in terms of new titles on DriveThru and Itch - and while the root games of those (like Blades in the Dark) are about 5 years old, there are newer games Powered by Borg (for example), than that (Pirate Borg is about a couple years old).
 

That is some seriously purple prose.
I would call it “heightened”. “Purple Prose” implies poor quality, but this is quite deliberate, in order to establish gravitas. Howard’s ability to write like this was actually a strength. It perhaps suffers a bit by lack of context.

Lovecraft used similar techniques - which would generally be considered over-writing by modern standards.
 

I don’t associate purple prose with an innate lack of quality. It’s prose that is usually bad, yes, but really intensely passionate expression and description can be wielded with careful control to good effect. There are Nobel Prize winners I’d put in the category, along with some genre fiction writers.

But I don’t think my take is objectively true or anything. It’s just that I like to praise some prose as purple yet disciplined.
 





Remove ads

Top