The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian by Robert E. Howard: Book Review (Scripted)
Video version of an old post (as I explained about HERE)
For the original post, see:
http://joelswagman.blogspot.com/2007/01/coming-of-conan-cimmerian-by-robert.html
Monday, February 03, 2020
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Oho -- so you're the reason for the uptick on my Conan post! Well, thank you.
Re: Howard's racism -- he kept a robust correspondence with H.P. Lovecraft. They'd commiserate over the usual writerly concerns -- no money, no respect, etc. -- then go on a tear over their chief preoccupations. Neither man could ever be framed as a humanist, never mind an optimist, so most of these monologues were pretty predictable. However, even Howard felt compelled to call out his treasured pen-pal Lovecraft on his racism -- which is saying something!
I can't recall if you've covered Lovecraft or not, but you might dig the Christian Humanist discussion of him. Their coverage is surprisingly catholic, given their three choices of short story. They even discuss "Arthur Jermyn" which contemporary readers typically dismiss as "just more Loveraftian racist rubbish." The Humanists beg to differ, suggesting that Lovecraft is reaching for -- and finding -- conclusions about humanity that are considerably more disturbing than something a Eugenics freak might extoll.
Interesting. I'm currently at work now, but I'll try to give that podcast a listen once I get home tonight, and hopefully report back tomorrow.
I never did read any H.P. Lovecraft. I had a friend in Cambodia who used to talk about him, and it got me curious for a while, but I never actually got around to it. Apart from the usual problem of tracking books down in Asia, I've been cautious in part due to your words of wisdom:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5940197&postID=8009389345373003416
"The dirty secret of the Cthulhu mythos is that their originator, HP Lovecraft, wasn't a very good writer." Sad but true. Any troubles you had while reading Robert E. Howard will be magnified reading Lovecraft.
After I listened to the podcast I yakked a bit with Michial Farmer (one of the Humanists). I said something like, "Lovecraft is someone I enjoy reading about a great deal more than I enjoy reading." Which still applies. The one Lovecraft volume I own is a recent annotated doorstop. It's difficult to assay just who's contributed more words -- the author, or his devoted scholar. Still, two or three short stories give you the gist of what makes Lovecraft "work" I think.
Okay, I finished the podcast.
Interesting, someone on that podcast said something very similar to you. "I didn't enjoy reading these stories, but I'm enjoying talking about them" (Was that Farmer? I didn't catch their names.)
Anyway, a wide ranging discussion. Thank you for the link. They touched on his influences, his racism, his writing process... very interesting.
I get the impression from these guys, though, that the first thing I need to go back and read Poe first before going on to Lovecraft. They keep talking about how much like Poe it is. And I suppose Poe is the real canonical author, so maybe I ought to check him off my list first.
It's been a while since I listened to that podcast (five years, I guess) but I think it was probably Gilmour who said it. He has the lowest voice of the three. I think he also copped to being the least predisposed to the sort of prose Poe and Lovecraft committed to.
So you've not read Poe? I didn't think a person could get to Grade 10 without reading The Telltale Heart and The Pit And The Pendulum. Or Lord of the Flies, but that's another story (so to speak).
No, you're right. I have read Poe. I think it was pretty much 10th grade as well. (Might have been 9th, but thereabouts.) There was at least one short story assigned in my High School English class. I don't even remember which one it was. I'm familiar with most of his more famous stories by reputation (Telltale Heart and Pit and the Pendulum, as you mentioned, add to which the Fall of the House of Usher)
But I think I was too young to appreciate him back then. I liked the gothic horror element (all youngsters do), but found the prose confusing, and only half understood what I was reading.
But I'm not going to check him off my list of author's I've read until I've read a proper collection of his stories from cover to cover.
...hmm, next reading project?
Post a Comment