Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8310091" data-attributes="member: 18">I mean, that's kind of been done to death, mostly in the late '90s and early '00s, when there was a lot of &quot;what if we just flip it around?&quot; attempts to reclaim stuff which was kind of messed-up (and I feel like there elements of it going back into the 1960s even). It's not really as effective any more and tends to read a bit farcical.Don't say citation needed if you're not going to even going to try and Google it, mate, that's really rude and disrespectful. Obviously a huge amount of work was put into this post. Calling that &quot;defamation&quot; is honestly so disrespectful and lazy that I think you should be ashamed of what you've said.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Howard#Character_sketch[/URL]In short, you can absolutely legitimately support what [USER=6796468]@Steampunkette[/USER] is saying, and I'd say, based on the best information we have, that's a pretty accurate description of Howard in &quot;the early days&quot;, and of a significant amount of his work. Your impression probably derives from two things. First off, next to HP Lovecraft, who was a racist to the point he was portraying Scotsmen as subhuman near-monsters for their failure to be WASPs, he wasn't nearly as extreme, and he even advised Lovecraft to maybe turn it down a notch at least once (though it wasn't in very strong terms). Second off, later on in life, after he'd written most of the work we're familiar with, he began to chill out and stop being that way, as the Wikipedia article (which is a hell of an article) notes.I think trying to dispute that he was racist/sexist at all is kind of laughable and a distraction from an interesting thread. That he was only averagely racist and less sexist for a white American male of his era might be fair, but that's a low bar. Later on he was probably more progressive than much of his age cohort, but that is later on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8310091, member: 18"] I mean, that's kind of been done to death, mostly in the late '90s and early '00s, when there was a lot of "what if we just flip it around?" attempts to reclaim stuff which was kind of messed-up (and I feel like there elements of it going back into the 1960s even). It's not really as effective any more and tends to read a bit farcical. Don't say citation needed if you're not going to even going to try and Google it, mate, that's really rude and disrespectful. Obviously a huge amount of work was put into this post. Calling that "defamation" is honestly so disrespectful and lazy that I think you should be ashamed of what you've said. [URL unfurl="true"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Howard#Character_sketch[/URL] In short, you can absolutely legitimately support what [USER=6796468]@Steampunkette[/USER] is saying, and I'd say, based on the best information we have, that's a pretty accurate description of Howard in "the early days", and of a significant amount of his work. Your impression probably derives from two things. First off, next to HP Lovecraft, who was a racist to the point he was portraying [I]Scotsmen[/I] as subhuman near-monsters for their failure to be WASPs, he wasn't nearly as extreme, and he even advised Lovecraft to maybe turn it down a notch at least once (though it wasn't in very strong terms). Second off, later on in life, after he'd written most of the work we're familiar with, he began to chill out and stop being that way, as the Wikipedia article (which is a hell of an article) notes. I think trying to dispute that he was racist/sexist at all is kind of laughable and a distraction from an interesting thread. That he was only averagely racist and less sexist for a white American male of his era might be fair, but that's a low bar. Later on he was probably more progressive than much of his age cohort, but that is later on. [/QUOTE]

Verification