# Removed



## Raven Crowking (Jul 23, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jul 26, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jul 26, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Philosopher (Jul 28, 2010)

Excellent analysis. (I wanted to give you XP, but I apparently need to spread some around first. I guess this isn't the first time I've appreciated what you've posted.) It's been a while since I've read "The Phoenix on the Sword", and now I may be moved to revisit it.

It would be interesting to see a similar in-depth analysis given to LotR. I'm no expert on Tolkien, so I won't be able to give that analysis myself. What has always struck me (and this is something you've hinted at here, and I believe you may have explicitly stated in the thread this is forked from) is that Tolkien's work seems to have supported the status quo of a classed society. I've heard many people emphasize the close friendship between Sam and Frodo, but it never seemed to me to be a genuine friendship among equals. Sam was always Frodo's servant, and Sam's virtue was always loyalty. And while Aragorn becomes king, he is just as much trapped in this role as Sam is trapped in the role of servant. I find this much more of a bleak world than one in which a barbarian can become king of a _civilized_ nation.


----------



## Philosopher (Jul 28, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> Contrary to popular portrayal, Conan is an intelligent, thinking man *(if not a philosopher)*.




(Bolded for emphasis.) Oh well, no one's perfect. 

EDIT: Regarding the "popular portrayal", I've heard that this is largely due to Carter and de Camp's editing/revising. Is that so? I've read Howard's original tales, but I'm not terribly familiar with other writings.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jul 28, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Philosopher (Jul 28, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> You should really consider getting The Best of Robert E. Howard, Vols. 1 & 2, for a wider sampling of his work......And a lot of great stories!




What I meant is that I'm not terribly familiar with other writings about Conan by other authors. That's why I wasn't sure if de Camp and Carter's portrayal is as I described.

Having said that, it is also nonetheless true that I haven't read any of Howard's non-Conan stories. Instead of picking up the "best of" work, I'm the sort of person who'd rather go for the collected works on one of the characters. So far, I've just got all the Conan tales. If I asked you to recommend just one character to read about next, who would it be?


----------



## Raven Crowking (Jul 28, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 4, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Umbran (Aug 4, 2010)

Glancing over the quotes... the rest of it is clearly there, but I don't quite see "scholar and statesman".  

I see a guy who's bright enough, knows how to write, and has some knowledge - but no sign that this comes from extensive active study to make him "scholar".

I see a man who is king (by right of arms, rather than politicking, correct?), and he's good enough with people.  I'm not sure I see "statesman", to which I attach rather high connotation.  From the quotes, I get that his office is respected, and his might is respected.  Not so much that his wisdom in matters of national policy is respected.  He's not manipulating many other heads of state, or getting arguing folks to accept new national policy, or the like.  

Maybe that's elsewhere in the story, though, which I've not read.

I think him not being all things is an asset, though. Warrior, and scholar and statesman and all around good guy you'd want to go drinking with and who the women all adore - that starts sounding kinda "Mary Sue".  A good hero has some areas in which he lacks, that he has to overcome, no?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Aug 6, 2010)

Umbran said:


> A good hero has some areas in which he lacks, that he has to overcome, no?




Well, that story is towards the end of his life, so I guess he's done most of the overcoming by now, eh?


----------



## Umbran (Aug 6, 2010)

Plane Sailing said:


> Well, that story is towards the end of his life, so I guess he's done most of the overcoming by now, eh?




I suppose, though it being the first published story rather mitigates that.

Plus, how many "perfect" old men do you know?


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 6, 2010)

*The Scarlet Citadel Part I: Fable of Right divine*

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 6, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Plane Sailing (Aug 6, 2010)

I think you probably meant to quote Umbran there!


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 6, 2010)

*The Scarlet Citadel Part II:  The Lion strode through the Halls of Hell.*

Removed


----------



## john112364 (Aug 7, 2010)

You are making me want to pull out my old Conan books for a re-read! 


To me the biggest difference between REH and JRRT is the tone of the stories. Conan, for instance always seemed so much grittier than any part of LotR. Conan seems.... realisitic for lack of a better word. 

Conan focused on the individual adventures whereas LotR focused on the storyline that the characters happened to be involved with. In LotR the story was always building towards on epic conclusion and you felt the weight of it throughout the story. With Conan it was rarely obvious that he had a destiny other than survival and kicking butt.

Both are great reads, but for different reasons. This thread has actually given me new respect and apreciation for REH.

Thanks RC


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 9, 2010)

*The Scarlet Citadel Part III:  "The sword that slays the king cuts the cords of the e*

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 9, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Philosopher (Aug 15, 2010)

RC - Given your views on Howard's Conan, how would you define the sword and sorcery genre as a whole?


----------



## Orius (Aug 16, 2010)

Ah, good thread.  The Scarlet Citadel is one of my favorite Conan stories.  It may not be one of the best written -- Howard's later stories are considered the best of his craft -- but it's still a fun read.  There's something about Conan fighting against oppressive rulers who came to power through birth and being a more benevolent ruler than they that resonates with me.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 30, 2010)

*The Tower of the Elephant (Part 1)*

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Aug 30, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Orius (Aug 31, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> So, here we have our youthful Conan, embarrassed, naïve, and bewildered.  We also have a beautiful (and, IMHO, true) bit of REH philosophy:  Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.
> 
> (A fitting statement about the InterWeb as well:  Folks on the InterWeb are more discourteous than in real life, because they know they can be impolite without haveing to deal with face-to-face implications, as a general thing.)




Or as Penny Arcade refers to it, the GIFT (and boy does it keep on giving...)  That's probably why I've seen this line from the story quoted in a number of sigs.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Sep 7, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Sep 7, 2010)

Removed


----------



## JohnBiles (Sep 23, 2010)

Philosopher said:


> society. I've heard many people emphasize the close friendship between Sam and Frodo, but it never seemed to me to be a genuine friendship among equals. Sam was always Frodo's servant, and Sam's virtue was always loyalty. And while Aragorn becomes king, he is just as much trapped in this role as Sam is trapped in the role of servant. I find this much more of a bleak world than one in which a barbarian can become king of a _civilized_ nation.




Keep in mind that Sam eventually gets Frodo's home, becomes the elected Mayor of the Shire repeatedly, and a member of the royal council of the North-Kingdom and his descendents become the leaders of the new Shire colony of Westmarch.  (This is all in the appendices which trace out post LOTR events)

And in-universe, we know the whole story because of Sam's line.

Indeed, Tolkien's own explicitly stated goal in his story was to show that you didn't have to be a major noble or king, etc, in order to be important to events.  (This is from his letters).  Frodo is a man of some wealth in the shire, but he's just Joe Schmoe in the larger world, along with his hobbit friends.

There is a strong element of class structures being accepted rather than challenged, but Tolkien is basically following a lot of his source material in that respect.


----------



## JohnBiles (Sep 23, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> REH has unjustly been criticized for creating a world where men are cynical, and where betrayal is more common than actual friendship.  But, instead, REH created a world in which friendship comes fast among those who deserve it, and who treat each other with mutual respect.  And, opposed to Tolkien’s world, those who deserve it come from all walks of life.




Actually, one of the defining characteristics of a fair number of Tolkien's heros is their ability to form friendship with people not of their station.  Bilbo, in the Hobbit, is basically nowhere near the stature of Thorin (an exiled king) and his pledged warriors, but emerges as the hero of the tale, forms friendships with kings and Elrond (of vastly higher status than Bilbo), etc, etc.

The same for the Hobbits in LOTR, who might be people of some status in the shire but this is basically being the big fish in the small barrel.  Again, they form friendships with ancient beings of power (Treebeard), wizards who are basically demi-gods (Gandalf), ancient high status elves, the future King of Gondor and Arnor (Aragorn), the heir to the current line of rulers of Gondor (Boromir gives his life to save two hobbits), etc.

I think you exaggerate your point.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Sep 23, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Dausuul (Sep 24, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> It is this story that begins
> 
> "Know, oh prince, that between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars – Nemedia, Ophir, Brythunia, Hyperborea, Zamora with its dark-haired women and towers of spider-haunted mystery, Zingara with its chivalry, Koth that bordered on the pastoral lands of Shem, Stygia with its shadow-guarded tombs, Hyrkania whose riders wore steel and silk and gold. But the proudest kingdom of the world was Aquilonia, reigning supreme in the dreaming west. Hither came Conan, the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet."
> – The Nemedian Chronicles.​




This paragraph is one of my favorite bits of fantasy writing ever.


----------



## The_Gneech (Nov 18, 2010)

I always enjoy a good analysis of REH and/or JRRT (and HPL for that matter), but I do have a couple of objections to raise...



Raven Crowking said:


> REH has unjustly been criticized for creating a world where men are cynical, and where betrayal is more common than actual friendship.  But, instead, REH created a world in which friendship comes fast among those who deserve it, and who treat each other with mutual respect.  And, opposed to Tolkien’s world, those who deserve it come from all walks of life.




I don't know where you get this last line. Who in the world could possibly be more trustworthy than Sam Gamgee? And who, by the end of the story, is more respected and deserving of that respect?



Raven Crowking said:


> It is as easy to find a worthy thief in a REH story as it is to find a worthy noble.  REH doesn’t look down on people for their walk in life.




See above. Who is it that you seem to think JRRT is looking down on? The orcs? It's not lack of lineage that makes orcs objectionable -- particularly if you go with the "once elves" origin -- it's the fact that they're cruel, petty, greedy, tyrranical, and hate beautiful things.



Raven Crowking said:


> Now, some might consider this as part of the “cynical world” REH draws.  But, if so, we must remember as well that Taurus and Conan met perhaps 15 minutes ago.  And Conan trusts Taurus enough to do as he is told.
> 
> Compare this, in LotR, to the hobbits’ first meeting with Aragorn, where the “ranger Strider” has a far more difficult time convincing him to accept him as a companion, and tells them that they are still not being cautious enough.




I'm not sure what you're getting at here -- Aragorn has a very specific reason to be paranoid, namely that Frodo is carrying the Ultimate MacGuffin of Doom that will either save or destroy the world, and using it to show off dancing on the tables of the Prancing Pony where anybody and their brother might see it.



Raven Crowking said:


> Please note that this story was published in 1933; _*The Hobbit*_ in 1937.
> 
> ...
> 
> One might wish to re-read “Spiders and Flies” in _*The Hobbit*_ with that passage in mind, and note the similarities.   Did Tolkien read Howard?  If so, he certainly took images and details from this story.




I saw a quote somewhere, now lost to the mists of memory, where someone asked Tolkien if he'd read any of Howard's work, and Tolkien replied that he had and enjoyed it. Whether he specifically drew from this, I have no idea. But he was a big believer in both borrowing, and being borrowed from.



Raven Crowking said:


> Note the relationship to a HPL story, “A civilized man in his position would have sought doubtful refuge in the conclusion that he was insane”.  REH and HPL were long-term correspondents, and the use of HPL-like material in REH’s writing is not an accident.
> 
> But REH is not writing a story about how the universe is inimical to human life; he is writing a story about compassion:
> 
> ...




HPL's creatures as a rule are not strictly inimical to human life either; it's more that on a cosmic scale, human life just doesn't matter. Individual creatures on a similar scale, such as the Mi-Go in "Whisperer in Darkness," can and do get along with humans just fine, and the Old Ones in "Mountains of Madness" are described as being "men," for all their being 12' green barrels with starfishes for heads.



Raven Crowking said:


> REH ends the story in the only way possible:
> 
> Into the waving green gardens came the Cimmerian, and as the dawn wind blew upon him with the cool fragrance of luxuriant growths, he started like a man waking from a dream. He turned back uncertainly, to stare at the cryptic tower he had just left. Was he bewitched and enchanted? Had he dreamed all that had seemed to have passed? As he looked he saw the gleaming tower sway against the crimson dawn, its jewel-crusted rim sparkling in the growing light, and crash into shining shards.​
> _The Tower of the Elephant_ is, altogether, among the best fantasy stories ever written.  It certainly rewards a careful reading.




The "Was it all a dream?" flavor of this ending, along with others like "Frost Giant's Daughter," is inherited from the earlier "trip of faerieland" literary tradition, which is a well that JRRT draws from often as well. The two of them also employed deliberately archaic language in order to "heighten" their tale, although Tolkien (being a linguist first and a writer second) had a slight edge on Howard in that department, as well as drawing on historical and world mythical sources (where Howard may have had more of the edge, due to his voracious historical reading as a youth). In a lot of ways, the two writers are a lot more similar to each other than people often think.

-The Gneech


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## The_Gneech (Nov 19, 2010)

At the end of his life, REH was starting to move away from fantasy and horror and towards westerns and contemporary adventure tales; I've heard from REH scholars that those later pieces were some of his best work, but as they're nowhere near as famous as Conan, Solomon Kane, etc., they don't get a lot of popular notice.

I must admit to having a couple volumes of his non-fantasy stuff sitting on my shelves un-read ... but dangit, every time I go to pick one up, I spot a Conan title and end up reading it instead!

-The Gneech


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## The_Gneech (Nov 19, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> However, I challenge you to show me the slave, homeless person, or person brought up from the gutter in JRRT who Aragorn et al find worthy to join their company.




I don't know that you'll find a slave, homeless person, or person brought up from the gutter in JRRT at all ... the concepts don't really work in the context of M-E, especially in _The Hobbit_ and _Lord of the Rings_. Eriador was devastated by a plague, leaving the land largely depopulated ... there isn't enough of an urban base, even in Gondor, for such complex social structures to really work. M-E is not a land of glittering cities and untold wealth, the way Hyboria is. M-E is haggard populations clinging to moldering ruins and trying to rebuild.

One could argue that some of the Easterling men in Sauron's armies count as slaves, in which case there's a surprising amount of compassion for them too, considering they're "the bad guys." (Sam has a famous speech about a slain Easterling, wondering what led him to Gondor and if he wouldn't have much rather stayed at home with his family ... this was given to Boromir in the movies if I recall correctly.)

Again, the closest we have to someone of supremely low stature is Sam Gamgee, who is arguably the hero of the whole dang story. He's not a slave, but he is a servant, and more importantly, _of the serving class_ (remember, this is based on English culture and a very feudal tradition), which means that no matter what heights he may rise to, he'll always be one of the proletariat and nothing can change that. The reason he calls Frodo "Master Frodo" is because Frodo is a member of the gentry, and Sam is not.

Who is lower than Sam and still a "free-willed" creature (which orcs and the like are not)? The only one I can think of is Gollum, who was of very similar social stature to Sam before the whole "murdered his best friend and stole the One Ring" incident -- and Gollum's "unworthiness" is a flaw in his own character, not a matter of social stature. Frodo, member of the gentry that he is, is much more respectful of Gollum as a person than anybody.

I've never understood where the idea that Tolkien somehow sneered at lower classes came from -- not only is it not supported in the text, it's flat out refuted. They often don't have (or don't believe themselves to have) the agency to become big movers and shakers, it's true -- but that's also realistic. For every Conan who conquers the world through will to power, there are millions of Willy Lomans who are born, live, and die without ever achieving anything. _LotR_ can, among other things, be read as a study on how and why someone who normally would never amount to anything actually _does_ become a mover and shaker, and the effects that has on them.

-The Gneech


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## The_Gneech (Nov 19, 2010)

Random thought: probably the closest JRRT "sociopolitical" analogue to Conan (being an outsider barbarian) would be either a Dunlending or one of the Woses. So I could see a mental exercise where Ghan-Buri-Ghan lops off Denethor's head and names himself King of Gondor -- and how would the M-E setting react to that as compared to Hyboria.

Certainly, I can see the nobility of Gondor reacting to that in a very similar way to the nobility of Aquilonia react to Conan. But on the other hand, Denethor is not an indolent, tax-fattened parasite of a noble, either. (A bit deranged, yes, but not a parasite.) I doubt many (if any) of the people of Gondor would see Ghan-Buri-Ghan as a liberator the way the Aquilonian commoners see Conan.

Ghan-Buri-Ghan rising up and taking out Sauron, on the other hand, might get a warmer reception. Maybe. But of course, one of the key themes of _LotR_ is that power is inherently corrupting -- conquer Sauron, and you _become_ Sauron. (This in turn leads to questions about Aragorn's reign that I've always thought could stand more scrutiny, but which aren't really that germane to the JRRT/REH discussion.)

Does Conan become Sauron? Depends who you ask; the poet Rinaldo certainly thinks so, but that's because he's one of them college boys who hate anything that's popular. Conan obviously doesn't think so, and the implication is that neither does REH ... but you can also bet that a generation or two later, assuming Conan actually establishes a dynasty, one of Conan's descendants does. That's just the nature of the beast, in REH's work.

-The Gneech


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## The_Gneech (Nov 19, 2010)

This probably points to one of the central philosophical differences between the two, I suspect. In REH, you're worthy to be king because you're awesome; in JRRT, you're worthy to be king because it's the last thing in the world you want to be.

Can you imagine Sam as king of Gondor? It'd be hell on Earth for him!

-The Gneech


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 19, 2010)

Removed


----------



## Philosopher (Nov 26, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> But it isn't power that corrupts in Middle Earth; it's not knowing your place.




Correct. If power corrupts, then Iluvatar, Middle Earth's supreme being, would be more corrupt than Morgoth and Sauron put together.


----------



## jonesy (Nov 26, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> In JRRT, Aragorn was worthy to be king _*by birth*_.  His entire life is spent waiting for the time when he will actually become king.



I never saw it as him seeing it that way. I think Aragorn worked hard to become worthy of the title in spite of others thinking he already was. I think he he thought he had to earn it for real, and not just mope around.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 26, 2010)

Removed


----------



## jonesy (Nov 26, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> (And, no, he doesn't sit on his hands while waiting, but he is waiting nonetheless....all that he wishes for himself is dependent upon that day, including the right to wed Arwen.)



< I cut that part because my point was that I didn't really see it as him waiting to become king. Arwen, certainly.

To me it was like, you're this guy, and you have the right to this throne. But instead of waiting for that you decide to do something else more currently valuable. So you set aside the whole king-thing, and head out into the world to do good deeds. And if the king-thing happens, then it happens. But you're this ranger, and you're already the man.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 26, 2010)

Removed


----------



## MarkB (Nov 27, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> Aragorn cannot become king until the time is right.  He does much that demonstrates that he is worthy, yes, but he was worthy from birth.




Except that Aragorn's own line shows that it takes more than birth to be worthy. His greatest fear is that he carries the legacy of Isildur's weakness in his veins, and that in the end he will falter as Isildur did. It is true that, as presented, there are things that _only_ Aragorn can do - but he still must have the strength of character to prove that he can, indeed, do them.

There's a difference between being _eligible_ from birth and being _worthy_ from birth, and - at least as I read the stories - the latter was by far the greater factor than the former.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 29, 2010)

Removed


----------



## jonesy (Nov 29, 2010)

Is that actually said somewhere by him? He was a royalist, after all. You might be reading a bit too much into the knowing ones place idea.



Raven Crowking said:


> Sam, alone of all creatures in Middle Earth, hands the One Ring freely to another, because Sam well and truly knows his place.



Don't forget Frodo. He tried giving it away, but the people he offered it to declined. Also, Bilbo.


----------



## Raven Crowking (Nov 29, 2010)

Removed


----------



## jonesy (Nov 29, 2010)

Raven Crowking said:


> Frodo offered......but, as Bilbo discovered, offering and doing are not the same thing.



That's a good point.

Small thing about evil and JRRT. He tried and tried to come up with a solution to how the orcs came to be, but never came up with a solution that satisfied him. And in Silmarillion there is the implication that some of the orcs fought against Sauron's forces.

It might be that the War was affecting his ideas. Didn't he say something like "everyone was an orc back then"?


----------

