Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9608786" data-attributes="member: 7026594">I could see an argument that in some ways they were "woke" for their time and context. Even the most racist Howard stories I've read, in his Solomon Kane tales, still have him allying with and respecting the shaman N'Longa, and Howard writes about them sharing a bond of human dignity and mutual respect.  Maybe this is just an example of the "you're one of the good ones" racist trope, but when I encountered it, it read to me like Howard's mind contradicting his prejudices and that getting onto the page.I think that the lives they were living on Arrakis were more in keeping with Howard's values a la the Conan stories.As for Paul's vision of humanity's extinction, I think that raises a bigger philosophical quandary about just how much evil can be justified in the name of survival.  If one has godlike power, the temptation is always there to commit atrocities for "the greater good".  And I don't think Herbert's intent was for us to comfortably conclude that Paul was right.  I don't really see that dark mirror at all.  Max actively rejects rulership and authority and dominance over others, which are all Joe wants.  If given Joe's ability to control the water supply, to torment his people by withholding it and enforce their groveling submission in releasing it, Max would reject the authority to control it entirely.  I don't think he'd even accept the power and try to wield it responsibly.Great post. I agree that as humanity has shifted to the vast majority of us living in urban centers, the barbarian outsider becomes less relatable, though I can see how it has romantic appeal for some.  Heck, Khal Drogo on the GoT TV show is this to some extent, is he not?  He's a fantasy barbarian who mocks civilization, can be brutal still maintains some honor and gentleness with people he cares about.I'm not sure interconnectedness was exactly what Howard was unhappy with.  To my recollection it had more to do with alcohol and crime and physical abuse which he saw sweep into Texas towns during oil booms. Civilization, to him, also represented rapacious business interests and the human casualties thereof.Indeed.  Conan doesn't embody Might Makes Right either.  A lot of his problems are solved by being braver, or more decisive than the people around him.  And there are dangers he runs from and protects others from when he can.  He happens to be bigger and stronger than most people around him (the comparison to Reacher which Voranzovin made earlier is apropos here), but the stories don't argue that he has the right to do whatever he wants or to hurt innocents.  They do glorify the ability to assert your will on the environment, but Conan doesn't, as a rule, exercise his power cruelly or harm innocents.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f44d.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs up    (y)"  data-smilie="22"data-shortname="(y)" />Yes, it's in the Phoenix on the Sword.  One of his reforms as a ruler which is referenced is relieving oppressive tax burdens.  Which we could read through a modern lens if we want, but I read more like a Robin Hood reference.</blockquote>

Verification