The Review Show does a drive-by on Howard

After all that heavy emotional lifting Germaine does, it's time to send you into the weekend on a slightly lighter note. Here's comedian Stewart Lee with a selection of his favourite books, most of which appear to be out of print - should that tell us something?
 - Kirsty Wark's condescending lead-in to Stewart Lee's discussion of Robert E. Howard, Arthur Machen and Nina Hamnett on The Review Show, and yes, it should tell us that The Review Show needs to learn how to use %&$@ing Google

The more I think things are getting better, that people are finally starting to let go of the old myths, the more angry I get when something like this comes up.  Mike Chivers of Necronomania sent me this, and I simply have to discuss it.

Warning: I am seriously ticked off by this.

Vindication is hollow indeed

So it turns out that not only is Real Steel getting more than a few great reviews, but Richard Matheson himself liked it.

IGN Movies: What have you seen of Real Steel so far? Have they shown you the entire picture?

Richard Matheson: Yeah, they brought over a copy of the film here. It's a wonderful piece of work. [Director] Shawn Levy did a really outstanding job.

GN: Would you say that you're satisfied with it as an overall adaptation of your story?

Matheson: Yeah. As is the case of I Am Legend, they never followed my stories precisely, but they do a decent job of adaptation. I don't mind that. In this case, they did such a wonderful job. Shawn Levy did such an amazing job. I was very pleased.

IGN: How did you feel about some of the changes made, such as the introduction of the relationship between the father and son? That's not in the other versions.

Matheson: No, that's not in my story at all. My son and I, we've just adapted a novel of mine that came out some years ago called Journal of the Gun Years, and because it was too long, it would make a six-hour film. We had to truncate it, which we did, and it doesn't bother us to do it as long as we hold onto the flavor of the original.

IGN: And you feel that Real Steel captures that essence?

Matheson: Oh, yeah. Yeah.

IGN: I ask because I was curious if you felt concerned that by introducing a father/son relationship it might detract from Hugh Jackman's character's relationship with the robot.

Matheson: No, I believe it was well done. I can't really cavil with it.

Matheson also talks about past adaptations of his work, particularly his long-documented dislike of What Dreams May Come and The Omega Man, as well as discussing the genesis of "Steel."

This is the point where I think "there, now can we PLEASE stop calling this Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots: The Movie, people," but then the horrible truth dawns on me: they will never stop calling this Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots: The Movie.  They won't.

Science Fiction vs Fantasy, or, Optimism vs Nostalgia

It's a common argument that I see: science fiction is intellectual, productive, inspirational, innovative, optimistic, and emphasises everything good and worthwhile about humanity.  Fantasy, however, is superstitious, nostalgic, stagnant, and emphasises the glorification of the past over hope for the future.  It's one I utterly disagree with - what of dystopian science fiction, for example, and those fantasy stories which open up realms of insight and supposition normally the domain of science fiction - but the dichotomy usually favours science fiction as being "good" and fantasy being "bad."  It's a dangerous stereotype, and one you'd think the supposedly higher-minded SF fans would recognize and avoid.

Well, I think I've found the ultimate example of that argument. Enter Science Fiction vs Fantasy by Ryan Somma.

Preparing the S.H.I.E.L.D.W.A.L.L. for the onslaught to come

Man, that damned movie...

Anyway, I'm trying my best not to be negative, but in all the reviews for the upcoming film I've seen so far, few, if any, seem to know the slightest thing about Robert E. Howard. This isn't one of them - it's a review of the 1982 film - but it highlights exactly the sort of problems I'm having.  The largest of which being that some people think they can comment on Robert E. Howard purely by watching the 1982 film.  This review is the most profound example of that sort of thing for reasons which will become obvious.

Conan. Oh, Conan. A pulp hero whose whole deal was that he was big and strong and didn’t mind cutting a guy from crotch to throat, ripping out his tongue and throwing it to the starving dogs in the corner. But he also has a bruiser’s intelligence, that kind of thick-necked thoughtfulness an MLB slugger brings to the plate.

To be frank, that describes an awful lot of pulp heroes: Conan had a lot more to offer than that.  Conan was an outsider, someone born outside the comforts of civilization, and yet also curious about its history, wonders and treasures.  Sure, he's brutal, but also capable of great generosity and selflessness later in his career, to the point where he's a noble and just king.  He's a surprisingly complex, intellectual and thoughtful character who grows and evolves over the course of the stories without losing his sense of self. 

I will say, that description of "bruiser's intelligence" fits Steve Costigan to a tee, though.

Most importantly, however, Conan has the physique of, well, a bodybuilder. 

It would be fairer to say Conan has the physique of someone who lives his life on the edge of death.  He grew up climbing sheer cliffs, hunting animals with spears, constantly battling enemy tribes.  The bodybuilding physique only came from the illustrations and comics, and was further cemented by Arnold.


So far, so predictable.  But this... this is impressive.

They retained Howard’s almost Jungian terminology: Wheel of Pain, Riddle of Steel, Eye of the Serpent, Mountain of Power.

... None of those terms appear in any Robert E. Howard story.  At all.  They're all Stone/Milius creations.  The story of the 1982 film has nothing to do with Robert E. Howard, save that it features a character called Conan, from a place called Cimmeria, and he happens to be a muscular swordsman.

Now riddle me this: how can a film retain "Howard's almost Jungian terminology" when that almost Jungian terminology is completely and utterly absent in the stories?

This is just the beginning.  We've already had dunderheids making statements like this:

It’s certainly obvious that a lot of work went into the film, both as a faithful re-imagining of the original, and as a fitting adaptation of Robert E. Howard’s writing, with much of its imagery being pleasingly evocative of his books’ pulp covers... though it wisely never takes itself too seriously, it never gets too ridiculous. It’s certainly far more enjoyable than it might have been, and whilst inevitably the question must be asked whether a remake was necessary, the film is a solid piece of violent fantasy, that should be enjoyed by fans and newcomers alike.

And eejits spouting this:

Though in most films such a skeletal narrative would spell disaster, it actually works perfectly for Conan The Barbarian. This is a no-frills action experience so fast paced that it leaves no room for high falutin' clap trap like introspection and ambiguity, and Nispel sensibly makes no effort to modernise the brutish, boorish Conan, whose caveman-like demeanour is actually part of his muscular appeal. "I live, I love, I slay...I am content," he says in a rare moment of thumbnail self-analysis. The handsome, charismatic Jason Momoa (Stargate: Atlantis) admirably commits to the role of Conan 100%, and makes for a likeable, impressively physical hard-man hero, while simultaneously injecting finely judged jolts of humour into his essentially one-note character...
As originally designed by Robert E. Howard, the world of Conan The Barbarian was an ugly and violent one, and Marcus Nispel captures much of that greasy, mud-crunched viscera here. Though he fails to work up any truly unforgettable set pieces to rival director John Milius' inspired visions on his big-and-bold 1981 cult hit, Conan The Barbarian (which starred Arnold Schwarzenegger in the title role), Nispel certainly succeeds in making a gutsy, ballsy, bloody action-adventure flick worthy of its central character's towering, archetypal mythos.

And puddinheids trumpeting this:

Momoa actually filmed Conan before (now wildly successful) Game Of Thrones. And he exudes more charisma in his big screen leading role than most of the muscle bound heroes in previous decades, carrying the film with ease, even if Conan himself is restricted by his own motto “I live, I love, I slay and am content.”
Still, the lack of political correctness in Conan’s outlook on life and love is, depending on your point of view, part of its appeal, and for the most part is played in a comedic fashion, free from the malice which permeates so much modern horror, having most of the audience I saw it with laughing along.

And tubes mumbling this:

There is no point to analyze or criticize this bare bones plot because there is nothing to add. Going into Conan with zero expectations and a need to escape certainly helped the nearly two hours running time, and for its many flaws, unoriginal plot, wooden acting and atrocious pacing, Conan succeeds on some level because it fulfills the quota of a manly man beating stuff to a pulp... There is certainly nothing to be inspired by, it is all by-the-book and probably true to the source material in terms of how pulpy it all is... he kills stuff really well, demeans women and eats stuff really fast, there is not much more you can look for in a barbarian.

And glaikits simpering this:

Fully aware and firmly grasping how one-dimensional a character Conan is, Momoa gamely picks up the proverbial sword and hacks away at his enemies with strength and style. The plot is threadbare, as you should already expect, so, really, there is no need to break down what is simply almost two hours of testosterone-filled blood, sweat, fight and gore. Oh, and revenge... This is a lowest common denominator violent actioner, paced so fast you won't - and shouldn't - have time to breathe or think. Concentration, in-depth plot lines and analysis? There is simply no room or no time. Not when what you've come for is to witness a new brute flex his muscles and sell that rough-and-ready caveman-like demeanour. Call it man appeal in a bottle.

And most infuriatingly, numpties snorting this:

An ultra-violent action-adventure, which centers on the same character that Schwarzenegger played but is not a remake, the movie delivers the basic goods (but not more) expected of a primitive mythic epos whose story is driven by obsession and vengeance, guts and blood... The filmmakers are certainly aware of the simple (and simplistic) mythic qualities of the literary material, which explains its long-enduring appeal especially among teenage boys.

This entirely unnecessary potshot got my hackles up:

Screenwriters Thomas Dean Donnelly, Joshua Oppenheimer and Sean Hood mercifully spare us most of the arcane mythology with which Howard larded his original tales, putting what little setup auds need into the mouth of narrator Morgan Freeman, whose presence offers the first clue that the project aspires to some sort of respectability. 

Mercifully? You say that as if Howard's work wasn't worthy of being collected in the Library of America or Penguin Classics, or cited as one of the foundation stones of the modern fantasy genre alongside Tolkien, or that the Hyborian Age wasn't a well-crafted and fascinating milieu worthy of consideration alongside Middle-earth.

And then this sirrah makes this magnificent generalization:

If you believe you’re going to see an intricately crafted piece of cinema, you are sadly delusional (and most likely insane). What we do get is something that, if contextualised in its genre, satisfies on an adequate level.The title alone generates associations and it’s exactly what we are presented with; testosterone, violence, objectification, blood, gore, and sheer brutishness in abundance, as we follow a protagonist that would make 300′s Leonidas look like a crying school girl. Sure, Momoa plays the title role effectively and let’s face it, it’s never going to be the most challenging, as intellect and subtlety are substituted for brawn and killing power (a prime example of the dynamic of the character is when he bellows, “Woman! Here! Now!”).

It doesn’t sink to its predicted lows, but you weren’t expecting the depth of Inception now, were you? It doesn’t try to be anything other than what it is; a non taxing, fantasy-action, that entertains when it comes to its set pieces and choreographed fights, yet ultimately proves that this, indeed, is no more than a shameless cash in, rather than a thought provoking creation, a la Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Momoa delivers a Neanderthal-like performance suited to the character, which culminates in a film that can ultimately offer no depth in terms of story or character development...

Expecting a Conan film to be an intricately crafted piece of cinema would make one "sadly delusional," and "most likely insane"?  Surely not, just "maladjusted to the point of psychosis" would suffice.

No, no, I'm not going to be negative.  I have to stay positive.  The Critique is... well, I'll be frank, it's going to rip the film apart.  The more I've been thinking about the film, the angrier I've been getting, especially when I come across "whadaya expect, Citizen Kane?" type responses.

The Great Divide

What Conan Fans and People Who Know How To Use The Internet Know

1932       December       "The Phoenix on the Sword" (Weird Tales)

1933       January           "The Scarlet Citadel" (Weird Tales)

                March            "The Tower of the Elephant" (Weird Tales)

                June               "Black Colossus" (Weird Tales)

                September      "Xuthal of the Dusk" (Weird Tales)

                October          "The Pool of the Black One" (Weird Tales)

1934       January            "Rogues in the House" (Weird Tales)

                April               "Iron Shadows in the Moon" (Weird Tales)

                May                "Queen of the Black Coast" (Weird Tales)

                Augus             "The Devil in Iron" (Weird Tales)

                September      "The People of the Black Circle" (1) (Weird Tales)

                October          "The People of the Black Circle" (2) (Weird Tales)

                November       "The People of the Black Cirlce" (3) (Weird Tales)

                December       "A Witch Shall Be Born" (Weird Tales)

1935       March              "The Servants of Bit-Yakin (Weird Tales)

                May                 "Beyond the Black River" (1) (Weird Tales)

                June                      "Beyond the Black River" (2) (Weird Tales)

                November          "The Man-Eaters of Zamboula" (Weird Tales)

                December           "The Hour of the Dragon" (1) (Weird Tales)

1936       January                "The Hour of the Dragon" (2) (Weird Tales)

                February              "The Hour of the Dragon" (3) (Weird Tales)

                March                   "The Hour of the Dragon" (4) (Weird Tales)

                April                       "The Hour of the Dragon" (5) (Weird Tales)

                July                        "Red Nails" (1) (Weird Tales)

                August                  "Red Nails" (2) (Weird Tales)

                September         "Red Nails" (3) (Weird Tales)

                October               "Red Nails" (4) (Weird Tales)

1938                                       "The Hyborian Age"

1950                                       Conan the Conqueror (Gnome)

1952                                       The Sword of Conan (Gnome)

                                                "The God in the Bowl" (Space Science Fiction)

1953                                       The Coming of Conan (Gnome)

1953                                       King Conan (Gnome)

                                                "The Black Stranger" (Fantasy Magazine)

1954                                       Conan the Barbarian (Gnome)

1955                                       Tales of Conan (Gnome)

1957                                       The Return of Conan (Gnome)

1965                                       "Cimmeria" (The Howard Collector)

1966                                       Conan the Adventurer (Lancer)

1967                                       Conan the Warrior (Lancer)

                                                Conan the Usurper (Lancer)

                                                Conan the Conqueror (Lancer)

                                                "The Vale of Lost Women" (Magazine of Horror)

1968                                       Conan (Lancer)

                                                Conan the Freebooter (Lancer)

                                                Conan the Wanderer (Lancer)

                                                Conan the Adventurer (Lancer)

                                                Conan of the Isles (Lancer)

1969                                       Conan of Cimmeria (Lancer)

1970       October               Conan the Barbarian #1 (Marvel)

1971                                       Conan the Buccaneer (Lancer)

                                                Savage Tales #1 (Marvel, first issue)

1974                                       The People of the Black Circle (Donald M. Grant)

                                                Giant-Size Conan #1 (Marvel)

                August                  The Savage Sword of Conan #1 (Marvel)

1975                                       A Witch Shall Be Born (Donald M. Grant)

                                                Red Nails (Donald M. Grant)

                                                Savage Tales #5 (Marvel, final issue)

                                                Giant-Size Conan #5 (Marvel, final issue)

1976                                       Rogues in the House (Donald M. Grant)

1977                                       Conan of Aquilonia (Lancer)

                August                  The Hour of the Dragon (Berkley)

                September         The People of the Black Circle (Berkley)

                October               Red Nails (Berkley)

1978                                       Queen of the Black Coast (Donald M. Grant)

                August                  Conan the Swordsman (Bantam)

1979                                       Jewels of Gwahlur (Donald M. Grant)

                                                Black Colossus (Donald M. Grant)

                February              Conan the Liberator (Bantam)

                May                       Conan: The Sword of Skelos (Bantam)

                October               Conan: The Road of Kings (Bantam)

1980                                       King Conan #1 (Marvel, first issue)

                July                        Conan the Rebel (Bantam)

                December           Conan and the Spider God (Bantam)

1982       May                       Conan the Barbarian (Universal)

                                                Conan the Barbarian Adaptation (Bantam)

                June                      Conan the Invincible (Tor)

                December           Conan the Defender (Tor)

1983       April                       Conan the Unconquered (Tor)

                October               Conan the Triumphant (Tor)

1984                                       Conan: Hall of Volta (Datasoft)

                May                       Conan the Magnificent (Tor)

                June                      Conan the Destroyer (Universal)

                July                        Conan the Destroyer adaptation (Tor)

                November          Conan the Victorious (Tor)

1985       September         Conan the Victorious (Tor)

1986                                       The Pool of the Black one (Donald M. Grant)

                February              Conan the Fearless (Tor)

                April                       Conan the Renegade (Tor)

                October               Conan the Raider (Tor)

1987       April                       Conan the Champion (Tor)

                October               Conan the Defiant (Tor)

1988       January                Conan the Marauder (Tor)

                March                   Conan the Warlord (Tor)

                October               Conan the Valiant (Tor)

1989                                       The Hour of the Dragon (Donald M. Grant)

                                                Conan (Mindscape)

                                                King Conan #55 (Marvel, final issue)

                February              Conan the Hero (Tor)

                April                       Conan the Bold (Tor)

                                                Conan the Great (Tor)

                October               Conan the Indomitable (Tor)

1990       February              Conan the Freelance (Tor)

                November          Conan the Formidable (Tor)

1991                                       Conan: The Mysteries of Time (Mindscape)

                                                Conan: The Cimmerian (Virgin/Synergistic)

                January                Conan the Guardian (Tor)

                April                       Conan the Outcast (Tor)

                November          Conan the Rogue (Tor)

1992       April                       Conan the Relentless (Tor)

                October               Conan the Adventurer (Jetlag/Sunbow)

                November          Conan the Savage (Tor)

1993       February              Conan of the Red Brotherhood (Tor)

                May                       Conan and the Gods of the Mountain (Tor)

                November          Conan and the Treasure of Python (Tor)

                December           Conan the Barbarian #275 (Marvel, final issue)

1994                                       Conan and the Young Warriors (DiC)

                                                Conan the Adventurer #1 (Marvel)

                January                Conan the Hunter (Tor)

                April                       Conan, Scourge of the Bloody Coast (Tor)

                October               Conan and the Manhunters (Tor)

                November          Conan at the Demon's Gate (Tor)

1995                                       Conan the Adventurer #14 (Marvel)

                                                Conan the Savage #1 (Marvel)

                                                Conan #1 (Marvel, first issue)

                January                Conan and the Gladiator (Tor)

                April                       Conan and the Amazon (Tor)

                July                        The Savage Sword of Conan #235 (Marvel)

                August                  Conan and the Mists of Doom (Tor)

                November          Conan and the Emerald Lotus (Tor)

1996                                       Conan the Savage #10 (Marvel, final issue)

                                                Conan #11 (Marvel, final issue)

                January                Conan and the Shaman's Curse (Tor)

                April                       Lord of the Black River (Tor)

                November          Conan and the Grim Grey God (Tor)

1997       January                Conan and the Death Lords of Thanza (Tor)

                September         Conan: The Adventurer (Keller)

2000       August                  The Conan Chronicles, Volume 1 (Gollancz)

2001                                       Conan: The Road of Kings (Tor)

                                                The Conan Chronicles, Volume 2 (Gollancz)

                October               Conan the Rebel (Tor)

2002                                       Conan and the Spider God (Tor)

                February              Conan: The Sword of Skelos (Tor)

                June                      Conan the Liberator (Tor)

                December           Conan the Swordsman (Tor)

2003                                       Conan of Cimmeria: Volume 1 (Wandering Star)

                                                The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian (Del Rey)

2004                                       Conan of Cimmeria: Volume 2 (Wandering Star)

                                                Conan #1 (Dark Horse, first issue)

                                                Conan: The Dark Axe (TDK Mediactive)

                                                Conan and the Daughters of Midora (Dark Horse)

                January                Sagas of Conan (Tor)

                July                        Conan of Venarium (Tor)

2005                                       Conan of Cimmera: Volume 3 (Wandering Star)

                                                The Bloody Crown of Conan (Del Rey)

                                                The Conquering Sword of Conan (Del Rey)

                                                Conan and the Demons of Khitai (Dark Horse)

                                                Conan and the Midnight God (Dark Horse)

                                                Conan and the Jewels of Gwahlur (Dark Horse)

2006                                       The Complete Chronicles of Conan (Gollancz)

                                                Conan and the Songs of the Dead (Dark Horse)

                                                Conan: The Book of Thoth (Dark Horse)

2007                                       Conan (Nihilistic)

2008                                       Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures (Funcom)

                                                Conan #50 (Dark Horse, final issue)

                                                Conan the Cimmerian #0 (Dark Horse, first issue)

2010                                       Conan: Road of Kings

2011       June                      Conan the Barbarian Novelization (Del Rey)

                July                        Conan the Barbarian (Del Rey)

                August                  Conan the Barbarian (Lionsgate)

"Conan has been done an awful lot in comics, books and video games, but not so much in movies.  With the sheer number of stories that have been told over the years, even for the half-century before the 1982 movie, it's actually quite astonishing that there haven't been more films made."

What The Uninformed Masses and People Who Don't Know How To Use The Internet Know

1982       May                      Conan the Barbarian (Universal)

1984       June                      Conan the Destroyer (Universal)

2011       August                  Conan the Barbarian (Lionsgate)

"OH MY GOD HOLLYWOOD HAS RUN OUT OF IDEAS YOU CAN'T TOP THE ORIGINAL HOW CAN THEY REMAKE CONAN THE BARBARIAN AHNOLD WAS PERFECT THIS IS SACRILEGE BLASPHEMY OUTRAGEOUS"

The Fall of Johann Hari

Similarly, the films which established Arnie as a movie star, the 'Conan the Barbarian' series, have a strong resemblance to the fascist myths of a heroic Nordic pre-civilisation, when strapping Aryans would fight against vicious hoardes of savages. The Waffen SS could have used Conan's philosophy, "I burn with life, I love, I slay and am content."
 - Johann Hari on Arnold Schwarzenegger's impending reign, and I guess it would be too much to expect that he'd know about Howard's profound hatred of the Nazis and Fascism in general

I never liked Johann Hari even before I found out some of the garbage he said about Lord of the Rings, as noted by Brian Murphy in a passionate recent post, where he has outed Hari as a goddamn hypocrite.  I didn't even find out until today that he had the above to say about Conan.  My dislike of Hari goes beyond simple disagreements with his assessment of literature and authors I happen to like, and into disgust for his arrogance, pretentiousness, shameless sensationalism, lack of journalistic integrity, brazen plagiarism, woolly association with the truth, and most of all, his penchant for just making things up.

So ultimately, what Mr Hari says about The Lord of the Rings and Tolkien, or Conan and Robert E. Howard matters little, considering what a hash he makes of things like statistics, economics, politics and the like.  If he can't do basic fact-checking about the stuff he does for his job, how can we possibly expect him to know what he's talking about when it comes to the arts?

Rarely do I outright use such strong terms, but Johann Hari...

He bothers me.

... You see why I try not to bring politics into the blog?

6 Deleted Scenes That Prove The Book Isn't Always Better

Ah, Cracked.  Sometimes you provide some nice information that the inattentive masses on the internet wouldn't otherwise be aware of, and other times you're saying Sauron was an alright guy.  And now you turn your daft eye towards The Lord of the Rings and Starship Troopers.

And, naturally, they bring up Tom Goddamn Bombadil as evidence that The Book Isn't Always Better.  Because, as we all know, there isn't a single second, nary a frame, of stupid belief-suspension-failure comedy in Jackson's Lord of the Rings film trilogy, right?

This is why you shouldn't block me.

Because I can't correct this minor error on Filmshaft:

I don't think it's unfair for me to say that there's more than a few fans out there who are overly cautious about Millennium Pictures' long awaited reboot of Conan the Barbarian, and with good reason too. It has taken the project several years to get off of the ground, with production dates being pushed further and further back as a result. Also, to be fair, the original films, starring Arnold Schwarzenegger are hardly classics, so what could be worth looking forward to in the reboot which crashes into cinemas later this year?

Well to start with, you may (or may not, take your pick) breath a sigh of relief to find out that the new film, directed by Marcus Nispel, is NOT based on Arnie's movies, but rather the Robert E. Howard comicbooks.

Of course, I can't comment, because evidently Martyn Conterio is still peeved that I patiently and helpfully corrected him, and...

And unless some other good soul corrects Craig Sharp, his article will continue to reflect poorly on him.

Reading Howard With A Sense of Humour

I may have come under fire for wasting everyone's time yesterday, but hopefully this'll be more worthwhile. Unlike Arthur Knowledge, the commentators of this article appear to be intelligent, reasonable human beings who happen to be grossly misinformed. It is my duty as a Howard fan to correct and enlighten them on several key issues.

The place: Discover Magazine Blog.  (Why is it always the sources that are supposed to be informed and intelligent that end up getting things the most wrong?).  The gentleman in question is Razib Khan, but a certain chap named Leviticus says some things that are just... Well, you'll see.

OK, last one, then I'm done.

I never thought I'd read a worse review of Game of Thrones than that one in The Guardian, but The Telegraph managed to do it.

Looks like I'm not alone against the Game of Thrones pundits

"You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."
 - Harlan Ellison

No sooner do I have my say about the useless media coverage around A Game of Thrones, then Cimmerian Shield Wall alum Brian Murphy has a comprehensive round-up of some of the absolute worst, some of which I was going to comment on, but then I realised Brian did more in his swift dismissal than I could. Especially since most, like that utterly odious piece from The Guardian (that old Bête Noire) which I hated the most for its attempt to come off as so very mature that ends up doing the very opposite, aren't even worth the effort of point-by-point disintegration.

Luckily, there are others.

Wandering the Wertzone

Well, this is interesting.  I've posted my response, but as always, I'll provide it here in case Blogger eats it.

The problem with the essay is that its author has fundamentally misread Tolkien and Howard.

On the contrary, I feel that the problem here is that you have misread his position.

For one thing, you are missing one extremely salient point: that both Tolkien and Howard differ from the nihilists Grin mentioned because there is genuine heroism, hope and exultation in their works.

Tolkien is full of loss, sorrow and decline, but it's also full of great men doing great things, be they humble Hobbits, or heroic Kings of Men. Howard's stories are full to the brim of similar examples.

THAT is what Leo is talking about which is missing in the stories of which he speaks. There are no heroes, no beacons of humanity to show that while the universe is a dark, cruel, unforgiving place, there are those who defy it with shining beacons of optimism, altruism, and bravery. How can anyone describe anything like that as Nihilistic? Surely if a work is nihilistic, then there would be no victories, no heroism, no hope?

There are no Frodos, Aragorns, Theodens, Balthuses, Solomon Kanes or Kulls in the works Leo is decrying. In short, there are no heroes in these particular works. You say The Lord of the Rings isn't a happy ending: true, but vastly preferable to the alternative. It is an ending I can happily call bittersweet: victory and peace at great cost. Nihilistic? Certainly not.

Your mention of Grin's dismissal of Wheel of Time, and your similar argument that Grin seeks a more "black versus white" approach, is also inaccurate, in my opinion. I read his argument as being that there should be more distinction between the shades of grey going on. Black, white and grey, not just lighter and darker shades of grey.

I'm actually not sure if my rebuttal was sufficient: doubtless someone like Brian would do a better and more articularted job of explaining how, no, Leo did not misread Tolkien or Howard.  I'm convinced that the blog author has simply misread Leo's argument, not that he disagrees with his points.  Either that, or he really thinks Tolkien's a nihilist...

Special mention should be given to Maurice's comment, which is the most profound misinterpretation of a Conan story since Unhappy "Conan threatened to rape Yasmina in the burning ruins of her palace" Anchovy:

I remember also thinking about characters like Conan being chivalrous until a friend of mine told me to actually read an original Howard, The Frost Giant's daughter, where he basically chases and kills a woman's family of giants just so he can rape her.

I'm impressed with how easily you colour that story by the choice omission of several extremely important details to give a completely fallacious and disingenuous impression of the plot in order to make Atali and her brothers out to be the helpless, innocent victims of a brutish Conan.

You miss out the extremely important detail that the woman in question was hypnotically compelling Conan to follow him to his death. She has done this to unnumbered men through the millennia, appearing to dying men on the battlefield, luring them to their doom through sexual manipulation and supernatural compulsion. Men may be bleeding to death and exhausted, but a "strange madness" forces them to walk leagues upon leagues far from civilization in pursuit of a mocking, taunting goddess. Said family of giants, by the way, were lying in wait in preparation to murder him - once again, as they have done to COUNTLESS others - and sacrifice his heart to their father-god.

The guy who wrote the article must have never read one of Howard's works.

Leo Grin is one of the most respected Robert E. Howard scholars out there. His journal, The Cimmerian, is highly regarded, and twice nominated for the World Fantasy Award. He most certainly has controversial opinions not all Howardists agree with - many Howardists disagree on multiple subjects - but to allege he has never read Howard's work, or that he has misread them, is simply preposterous.

Given your grotesque misreading/misrepresentation of "The Frost-Giant's Daughter," I have to question how on earth you came to such a conclusion - or even if you've read the story at all.

In fairness, the near-rape aspect of "The Frost-Giant's Daughter" is often misunderstood: however, the way he implies that Conan just raged into a peaceful giant's town and slaughtered an innocent girl's family as a counterpoint to Conan's chivalry is actually rather nauseating.

Fantasy Fans and Science Fiction Fans: Who Are Dumber?

Quite an elucidating article, and some rather hilarious comments. I particularly reccommend reading the comments of Steve Davidson, who offers this as his explanation as to why he openly criticizes fantasy and fantasy fans:

Why diss Fantasy? Honestly? …because it’s increasing dominance on the book shelves is a clear indicator that wish-fulfillment and living in dreamland has won the war over intelligence and reason and every time I see the word I’m reminded of how doomed we are and how increasingly fast the end is coming.

Speaking as a guy who loves his Bester, Asimov, Haldeman, Ellison, Stapledon, Matheson, Ballard, Wyndham, Wells and Verne, I can't laugh heartily enough at such a moronic generalization.  Because, as we all know, science fiction is completely bereft of wish fulfillment and living in dreamlands, and fantasy is similarly free of intelligence and reason.  Apparently.

Here’s an analogy: fantasy is the couch potato watching exercise programs on cable tv. SF is Arnold Schwazenegger pumping iron and turning himself into the terminator.

So SF is all about building up muscles that are purely for show? Great analogy, doofus.  Actually, that's a perfect analogy for certain types of SF fans: puffed up on their own self importance and sense of superiority over that escapist nonsense, much like Arnold's muscular hypertrophy distended his thews into massive dimensions, yet didn't actually make him any stronger for all that.

Weirdly enough, I spend my formative years reading both fantasy and SF.  Then I spent my teen years reading nothing but science fiction, eschewing fantasy entirely.  Now I read both, but tend to read more fantasy.  Does that mean I've gotten dumber with age?  Probably, according to this chap.

Sauron: A Misunderstood Hero?

What, me evil?

I'm not kidding, this is actually an argument put forward by Cezary Jan Strusiewicz.  One could argue that, since it's on Cracked.com, it shouldn't be taken too seriously - but then, every other "famous movie villain who was right all along" on the list had compelling, reasonable and logical arguments.  So why shouldn't we believe the argument that Sauron was the victim of a terrible smear campaign was similarly made in all honesty? According to Strusiewicz, Sauron, the enemy of freedom, peace, love and anything good, was just misunderstood.

Just so you can understand the immensity of insanity, I'm going to post the segment in its entirety here, and address it.

A Shadow from the Dark Days of Fantasy "Scholarship"

Michal Wojcik of One Last Sketch and The Lurking Humour, also known as Taran in the blogosphere and beyond, is a very smart chap, and very knowledgeable. A while back, he mentioned a particular essay by Hans Joachim Alpers, which he felt may have been an encapsulation of a great deal of ill will towards fantasy fiction that had been formulating in science fiction circles.*  Rusty Burke, impressed by Taran's studiousness, suggested that he investigate the matter further, and address it.  Well, wait no longer, for "Spacesuit, Blaster, and Science(!)" has arrived, and fired a withering broadside against a hideous little piece of work masquerading as scholarship that has evaded criticism for far too long. I think Taran's done a great job here.

Alpers does not seem to realize that the authors he cites for support were opposed to fascism in their personal lives.  J.R.R. Tolkien, for instance, made his views of Nazism and “that ruddy little ignoramus Adolf Hitler,” (Letters no.45) quite obvious.  Michael Moorcock describes himself as “an anarchist and a pragmatist,” (Mythmakers & Lawbreakers: Anarchist Writers on Fiction) who goes out of his way to critique British Imperialism and yes, Nazism in many of his novels.  Robert E. Howard, whose work scholars often mislabel as latently fascistic, held a long correspondence with H.P. Lovecraft decrying fascism and Nazism; the groupthink of Nazism and obeisance to authority did not gel with Howard’s extreme individualism.  We are more likely to find empires fall than get built in Howard’s works.[*] 

Indeed, one need not look far to see what Howard truly thought of the Nazis and fascism in general. I'll have to get a "Robert E. Howard and Fascism" post for the Newcomer's Guide finished, which'll probably just consist of a bunch of quotes from the letters.

[*] Alpers’s belief that heroic fantasy’s barbarians mirror “the barbarism of concentration camps and aggressive war” comes as an unimaginative conflation; the “barbarism” he refers to and the barbarism found in sword & sorcery constitute two completely different terms, one modern, one historical.  Barbarians, in heroic fantasy, would never stoop to the excesses of the Nazis—that only becomes possible with the decadence of civilization.  I believe the Holocaust would have come as no surprise to Howard, had he lived to see it.  It is the ultimate example of modernity gone wrong.

Heh,  this reminded me of a few Howard quotes in regards to the different contexts of "barbarism":

Considering it again, I am not so sure that even cultural and artistic things will not suffer as civilization “advances” along its present lines. You seem to take it for granted that Fascism would guarantee absolute freedom of thought and mental research. I wonder if this faith is justified. I don’t notice any hilarious renaissance emanating from Germany or Italy or Austria resulting from the exhilarating freedom of dictatorship.

I’m not surprized at the massacre of helpless people, the torturing and abuse of women and children. It’s what I expect of cultured Europeans. It’s what I’ll expect of the people of this country when they get sufficiently imbued with European culture and civilization. It didn’t surprize me when Dolfuss [sic] murdered the helpless women and children of his enemies. That’s the “superior European” style. It didn’t surprize me when his enemies assassinated him; that too was in keeping with the best traditions of European culture. Reading in one of the biggest capitalistic dailies of the state - which is above all charges of “radical” - I noted the outrages committed on women by the Fascists of Germany and Austria. That too is characteristic, both of the Fascist movement and of the European character.

- Robert E. Howard, letter to H.P. Lovecraft, December 1934

Well done, Taran!

*And cheers for the clarification.

In the name of the wee man...

The unthinkable has happened: they're going to censor Huck Finn.

Publishers Weekly reported on Monday that a soon to be released edition of Mark Twain’s classic of American literature, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, will replace all instances of the ‘n-word,’ “the singularly offensive word” used to refer to African Americans throughout the late 19th-century text. Editors have also decided to do away with the word “injun,” replacing it as well with “slave.”

Yeah.  Now, I'm normally one who has to wait, count to ten, calm down, and then make a ruling on something.  After all, there are plenty of "classics for tots" series that take the bare bones of a great story, and present it in more simple language for tinies.  That, I don't mind too much, though I'd rather kids waited to experience the story as it was originally written. This isn't that, though.  This is the original text, except with a Find/Replace on all uses of the word nigger - the mere fact these people use "the n-word" shows they fundamentally lack the maturity to even discuss it - as well as injun. In other words, bowdlerisation.

I particularly have to laugh at this final paragraph in the National Post's article:

We’d like to know what you think. Is taking the n-word and other slurs out of Mark Twain censorship, or a step in the right direction in terms of getting younger people better acquainted with literature of the U.S. Civil War era? Let us know in the comments below.

Are they kidding? A group of people are seeking to subvert Mark Twain's* freedom of expression by mangling his literature.  This is practically the very definition of censorship.  As for the latter statement, how on earth are younger people supposed to get better acquainted with literature of the U.S. Civil War era if you're going to remove the language of that era? The literature of the period included words like nigger, which are naturally highly insensitive today, but it's an important lesson.  You can't whitewash history: all you can do is wait until a child is old and mature enough to be able to deal with it.

In attempting to make history more palatable for children, they're making a mockery of the real struggle the Civil War was about, in many ways.  Are they going to censor To Kill a Mockingbird next?

*As if accusations of my preoccupation with Howard weren't loud enough, I mistakenly put Mark Finn here.  Not that I think I do either Mark much a disservice, of course.