Conan the Confessor

[Swoop109]

Today, Jan.22, would have been REH's 98th birthday. Do you feel that his stories are as good as any current fantasy writers?

 

[ledded]

Today, Jan.22, would have been REH's 98th birthday. Do you feel that his stories are as good as any current fantasy writers?

As good as *any*? Oh, certainly. He's got a lot of the genre-spewers and gaming-induced regurtitators beat hands down, no contest, and can hold his own against many of the more well respected writers. Is he as good as Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin, Terry Brooks etc? Maybe not some of those, but that all depends on your perspective and the context you take it in; some folks hate Jordan while others revere him, the same could be said about most major writers (though anyone who has read George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire books and didnt like them needs to have their head examined ). But most of those guys are more 'epic' fantasy, and REH is a different style. I still re-read one of the old REH's every now and then, and will enjoy the re-reading more than some of the stuff that I've sufferred through in the last few years.

 

[afreed]

REH Today

Today, Jan.22, would have been REH's 98th birthday. Do you feel that his stories are as good as any current fantasy writers?

I'm sure people will vehemently disagree, but I'd have to say 'no' in general. There are some pulp writers whose work holds up very well, but I don't think Howard is one of them.
It's worth noting here that I've just started reading Conan, so these comments are made on the basis of the first few stories.
The prose has flashes of brilliance, but also a lot of flaws: overuse of certain metaphors (blazing eyes), too many cliches, and a tendency to be overwrought. With the exception of Conan and a few select others, the characters are stereotypes. The plots are fairly predictable--partly because Howard defined the S&S plot tropes, but it's nonetheless a flaw when compared to modern fantasy.
None of which is to say that the Conan stories aren't exciting entertainment, and vitally important to the genre's history. And if Howard had been born 20 years ago, he might well be writing cutting-edge stuff. But '30s Conan probably wouldn't be published today.

 

[Wraith Form]

too many cliches

WHAAA--???

Dude, he created many of those cliches before your so-called "modern" writers were even born, let alone included them in their writing.

That's like saying that '20's - '50's blues are too cliche compared to Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck and their contemporaries. Hunh? We're talking roots here.

Howard pre-dated Tolkien, Jordan, Martin, Lieber, Salvatore and all your fantasy author-idols. I strongly argue that your "modern" writers use many of Howard's tropes and themes as a springboard for what they're currently doing, and without his influence (whether overt or subtle) much of what we read today wouldn't have the same depth, beauty and downright coolness.

Was Howard's writing perfect? Certainly not. Considering the type of audience he was writing for, however, his re-use of certain phrases (i.e. Conan's panther/catlike speed, etc. which--even as a fan--gets old quick) was understandable. How many times did Arthur Conan Doyle use the same phrases in his Holmesian tales? That's just the way writing was done in short, serialized tales. This way new audiences got on board faster, and fans immediately recognized and associated with their familiar hero/villain/etc.

Regarding whether Howard would "make it" in today's fantasy market....well, it's irrelevant. Would H P Lovecraft make it today? I hardly think so. Would Conan Doyle? Who cares? They're our current fantasy's roots and source. Howard did fairly well in the context of his time period, just as Jordan and Martin are doing in the context of ours.

Feh. Kids these days. Oy, I tell ya.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I love the LotR, and reading it again after seeing the films is excellent. I still think it is one of the all-time greats.

AND, I love Conan. The Conan books (howard and deCamp) were tremendous fun and they had the biggest influence by far on my early D&D campaigns. They captured the kind of world that I wanted to run adventures in (I've never tried to have a campaign world designed like middle earth OTOH).

I'm intrigued as to what might be different about Conan d20 as against just using D&D rules for it... I'll check out the other threads.

 

[Plane Sailing]

How are Andrew Offut's Conan novels?

I have one, and it is absolutely abysmal. I couldn't recognise the Conan he used as even related to the Conan of the older books. It was on the basis of this failed attempt to do Conan that I didn't bother looking at *any* modern author attempting to do him. I think that Offut just didn' *get* Conan.

Cheers

 

[afreed]

WHAAA--???

Dude, he created many of those cliches before your so-called "modern" writers were even born, let alone included them in their writing.

Let's try to stay civil, here, huh?
When I said cliches, I meant just that. Overused phrases and images that have lost their meaning. 'Blur of blinding speed.' 'Mop of unruly hair.' 'Swayed like a sapling in the wind.' Howard didn't create these. They are, to my mind, a flaw in his prose.

Howard pre-dated Tolkien, Jordan, Martin, Lieber, Salvatore and all your fantasy author-idols. I strongly argue that your "modern" writers use many of Howard's tropes and themes as a springboard for what they're currently doing, and without his influence (whether overt or subtle) much of what we read today wouldn't have the same depth, beauty and downright coolness.

And I freely acknowledge his influence. (I also wouldn't call any of those authors my 'idols,' thanks.) But when the question is whether or not his work holds up today, I don't think it's unreasonable to point out his problems.

Was Howard's writing perfect? Certainly not. Considering the type of audience he was writing for, however, his re-use of certain phrases (i.e. Conan's panther/catlike speed, etc. which--even as a fan--gets old quick) was understandable.

In some cases, yes. But there are places where he repeats the same image not just in one story, but in one paragraph.

Regarding whether Howard would "make it" in today's fantasy market....well, it's irrelevant. Howard did fairly well in the context of his time period, just as Jordan and Martin are doing in the context of ours.

It's only as irrelevant as any other attempt at judging literary merit. Saying that Howard's work doesn't hold up against contemporary fantasy doesn't take away from everything he did to define the genre. He's done far more than Jordan and Martin to influence fantasy. (Well, Jordan deserves credit / blame for helping to spur the market for huge fantasy series, but that's a minor point.)

I'm not canonizing or demonizing anyone. Howard had some great characters (Conan himself), some wonderful bits of prose (the 'ghostly tryst' image from the start of 'Frost Giant's Daughter' comes to mind), and some clever plots. He also had a lot of stereotypes, awkward writing, and predictable plots. If you find that his merits outweigh his flaws, that's wonderful. But the flaws are there, and worth noting in a discussion of his work.

 

[ledded]

<snip>He also had a lot of stereotypes, awkward writing, and predictable plots. If you find that his merits outweigh his flaws, that's wonderful. But the flaws are there, and worth noting in a discussion of his work.

Ok, I see merits and flaws in most of your arguments, but this is what I mainly want to ask:

Have you *read* any modern fantasy lately? And I don't mean epic Martin/Brooks/Jordan/etc, but the more 'pulp' writers that truly compare to the type of books that Howard wrote. It is so hard for me to find a fantasy book by a new or unknown author that I can *stomach* long enough to slog through. Come on, skinny elves, burly and surly dwarves, and dice rattling in my head every time these guys write an action scene... it's quite sad. Not to say it's all bad, but there are a lot of writers in the genre that are either gamers or pulp fantasy readers that do not write with even a tenth of the quality or originality of the stuff they were inspired by (and that stuff wasnt *that* original to begin with most of the time).

So we can discuss the different literary facets to Howard's actual work, but I can base one thing just off of my personal observation and experience: I know that I still occasionally re-read one of his books today and smile (or occasionally grimace) and still enjoy it on some level; 3 out of 5 fantasy authors I pick blindly off the shelf to try I can almost assure you I can't stomach through a few chapters. I'm just too busy nowadays to put down a book and then think "Wow. There's a few hours of my life that I'll never get back". Sure, he's got bad cliche's, and style issues, and repetitive imagery, but at least they are *fun* faults... nobody said the stuff was Hemingway

But then again, many folks dont enjoy pulp writing, which is OK, but my main point is that Howard still kicks the Hyborean Crap out of 90% of the pulp fantasy writers of today, and can *occasionally* hold his own with a few of the better ones, despite his faults.

 

[Iron_Chef]

I have one, and it is absolutely abysmal. I couldn't recognise the Conan he used as even related to the Conan of the older books. It was on the basis of this failed attempt to do Conan that I didn't bother looking at *any* modern author attempting to do him. I think that Offut just didn' *get* Conan.

Cheers

I just finished reading Andrew Offut's first two Conan novels, CONAN AND THE SORCERER and THE SWORD OF SKELOS, and I thought they were absolutely thrilling, fantastic adventures worthy of Howard himself. I am now starting on his third (and last?), CONAN THE MERCENARY. I have no idea why anyone would *not* like Andrew Offut's Conan novels, nor consider them so "bad" as to put them off reading any non-Howard Conan books.

What I liked most about Offut's Conan tales are his characters, especially Conan's deadly love/hate relationship with the Zamboulan thief, Isparana (think Marvel's Red Sonja or Jordan's Karela The Red Hawk), the Shanki tribesmen, and the treacherous but charismatic Iranistani agents Ahjindar and Khassek, who are as eager to befriend Conan as to put a knife in his ribs. His villains (Hissar Zul, Tosya Zul (the Sand Lich), Zafra, Akter Khan, Chia The Tigress) are all pretty good if slightly underdeveloped. Hissar Zul is the best of the bunch, as he steals Conan's soul, but uses a variety of more mundane methods of capturing and knocking out the wily barbarian (traps, black lotus powder) to get him the position where his specialized brand of necromancy can be most effective. Offut helps flesh out the geography between Zamora and the Turanian satrapy of Zamboula, complete with much detail on the Shanki desert tribesmen and their culture, though little is revealed of their enemy, the Yoggites.

I think it is just fashionable to bash the non-Howard tales as some form of elitist nonsense... except in the case of L. Sprague deCamp, Lin Carter (and possibly Bjorn Nyberg, whose contributions I've read many years back but can't remember). The deCamp/Carter revisions and pastiches are, first and foremost, boring, crudely attempting to ape Howard to no good effect. However, I'm not sure that without deCamp and Carter's efforts and contributions, Conan would have become the brand name/household word he is today.

Andrew Offut and Robert Jordan's Conan books are easily the BEST non-Howard ones ever written, at least that I've read so far. The 1980s and later Conan authors who really suck that I've read are Poul Anderson (CONAN THE REBEL) and Leonard Carpenter (from what I've read and heard, though he has many books out and some are supposed to be pretty good). I haven't read Steve Perry or Roland Green. John C. Hocking's CONAN AND THE EMERALD LOTUS is supposed to be excellent; I just ordered it from Amazon. John Maddox Roberts is pretty good so far, but I've only read his CONAN THE CHAMPION (fantastic start and finish except for the 100 pages of "filler" in the middle where Conan is caught in the Spirit World and threatened by man-eating plants, hell-scorpions, demons, S&M "alien elves" and a clockwork centaur from hell). THE CHAMPION also fleshes out the geography and petty barbarian kingdoms of the unmapped Border Kingdoms north of the Vilayet, which I've always wondered about. His villain, King Totila, is easily one of Conan's most fearsome non-magical adversaries, and the final battle between these two barbarian giants is very well done.

One problem I've noticed in several Conan books is Conan doesn't get laid---not even once briefly for coin with some saucy harlot, despite generous female nudity on hand. Howard would never have stood for that!

 

[Plane Sailing]

I am now starting on his third (and last?), CONAN THE MERCENARY

I'll be interested to hear how you get on with that - its the one that I read that put me off him (I'd never heard of Offut in any other writing BTW - what else does/did he do?)

It was at least 10 years ago that I read it, I guess, but once you've finished the story I'll tell you what I didn't like.

Cheers