38 replies to this topic

[korak]

El Borak's Little Brother writes- My only comment on the De Camp era is when he took other Howard stories and transformed them into Conan stories with the attitude anything non-Conan by Howard was crap. To tell the truth, De Camp was wrong, and what he did to those non-Conan stories to turn them into Conan stories was terrible. He ripped the guts out of the stories.


I think you are selling DeCamp far too short if you assume that he thought all non-Conan REH was crap. I think the opposite-- that he thought Howard's yarns were dynamite, and so he took some unpublished stories and turned them into Conan sagas. I don't agree that he should have done that either, and neither did he a few years afterward. He did those four for the Gnome Press series in the fifties, and when Lancer was going to come out with Conan paperbacks in the sixties, he told them not to reprint those "El Borak" style Conan morphs that he had done, since they were actually about another Howard character. But the editor of Lancer insisted on including them.

I also do not see how he ripped the guts out of them--- just by changing a few names, and changing the rifles to swords. Even as Conan epics, those tales are powerful stories.

[El Borak's Li'l Brother]

El Borak's Little Brother writes- My only comment on the De Camp era is when he took other Howard stories and transformed them into Conan stories with the attitude anything non-Conan by Howard was crap. To tell the truth, De Camp was wrong, and what he did to those non-Conan stories to turn them into Conan stories was terrible. He ripped the guts out of the stories.


I think you are selling DeCamp far too short if you assume that he thought all non-Conan REH was crap. I think the opposite-- that he thought Howard's yarns were dynamite, and so he took some unpublished stories and turned them into Conan sagas. I don't agree that he should have done that either, and neither did he a few years afterward. He did those four for the Gnome Press series in the fifties, and when Lancer was going to come out with Conan paperbacks in the sixties, he told them not to reprint those "El Borak" style Conan morphs that he had done, since they were actually about another Howard character. But the editor of Lancer insisted on including them.

I also do not see how he ripped the guts out of them--- just by changing a few names, and changing the rifles to swords. Even as Conan epics, those tales are powerful stories.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You test my memory. My copies of the Ace/Lancer books are out of reach, but I do remember in one of the Forwards De Camp mentioned that other than Conan, all other characters/stories weren't much. I believe he was speaking more other character than story yet it's all the same and De Camp was wrong. With every character he created -- Conan, Solomon Kane, Kull, El Borak... -- Howard created something special.

Yes, Korak, he ripped the guts out of them. He did far more than just change a few names and rifles to swords. Case in point, if my memory is with me, is the De Camp Conan story The Flame Knife which I believe he rewrote from an El Borak story called Three-Bladed Doom. De Camp butchered the original story in that rewrite, ripping out Howard's prose which gave the story its guts and glory.

[korak]

Well, you know, as great as those stories are, they have seldom been in print over the years. Most fans are probably a lot more familiar with Flame Knife than Three Bladed Doom, though I myself happen to own copies of both. I own all the El Borak type books Howard wrote. But I think most people that read Howard are looking for his horror/fantasies. I know that DeCamp did not say anything bad about Howard's fiction, so you must be thinking of some remark he made that Howard's heroes are similar enough that they can be somewhat interchangeable. That is a debatable point, but not the same thing.

[Roquefort Raider]

I know that DeCamp did not say anything bad about Howard's fiction, so you must be thinking of some remark he made that Howard's heroes are similar enough that they can be somewhat interchangeable. That is a debatable point, but not the same thing.

"Interchangeable" is indeed a point of contention, but for my part I think that heroes like Turlogh or Cormac FitzGeoffrey could easily have been Conan's brothers or first cousins, if one forgets that millenia separate them. Roy Thomas adapted stories like "the dark man", "gods of Bal-Saggoth" and "the blood of Belshazzar" as Conan tales with great success.

That doesn't mean that I would shortchange the celtic flavour of the Turlogh stories or the unique outremer canvas that Howard painted for his crusader tales, but the nature of its protagonists and the plot of the stories are quite suitable for adaptations as Conan adventures. The success of the latter depends on the talent of the re-writer.

Even Howard wasn't above rewriting his own stories and changing its main characters; had he been, Conan and Black Vulmea would never have existed.

Cheers,

- Ben

[korak]

Roquefort Raider writes-"Interchangeable" is indeed a point of contention, but for my part I think that heroes like Turlogh or Cormac FitzGeoffrey could easily have been Conan's brothers or first cousins, if one forgets that millenia separate them. Roy Thomas adapted stories like "the dark man", "gods of Bal-Saggoth" and "the blood of Belshazzar" as Conan tales with great success.


Yes, some Roy did were really good-- I remember my awe and delight when CTB #3 first came out, with Grey God Passes. Others were really bad, like when Roy Conanized Marchers of Valhalla, one of the worst comics he ever wrote. But for me the reason that Howard's characters are semi-similar is because of the innate reincarnation theme in REH--- many of his heroes can fall into the category of "Eternal Champion" types, reincarnations of each other. Thus, not only is Conan the literary reincarnation of Kull but very well might be his physical incarnation; Turlogh might be that same warrior reborn in our own history. Bran is the reincarnation of Brule. Kull notes that Bran looks exactly like Brule. Just my impression.

[Roquefort Raider]

Yes, some Roy did were really good-- I remember my awe and delight when CTB #3 first came out, with Grey God Passes. Others were really bad, like when Roy Conanized Marchers of Valhalla, one of the worst comics he ever wrote.

Some of the Old West stories that were Conanized in later SSoC issues were also a bit clunky.

But for me the reason that Howard's characters are semi-similar is because of the innate reincarnation theme in REH--- many of his heroes can fall into the category of "Eternal Champion" types, reincarnations of each other. Thus, not only is Conan the literary reincarnation of Kull but very well might be his physical incarnation; Turlogh might be that same warrior reborn in our own history. Bran is the reincarnation of Brule. Kull notes that Bran looks exactly like Brule. Just my impression.

Do you think that was a conscious choice on Howard's part (at least part of the time) or did it have to do with his interest in opposing the raw and wild nature of men against whatever life could throw at them? Characters like Esau Cairn, Cormac Fitzgeoffrey or Turlogh O'Brien are not far from their savage and primal nature. As a consequence, they usually hack and slash their way through problems, and triumph through sheer force of will and sinew. The impression I get from whatever biographical info I read on Howard is that he pretty much wished he could have done that with his own life, too... except that it was frowned upon by our civilized world.

Cheers,

- Ben

[korak]

roquefort raider writes-Do you think that was a conscious choice on Howard's part (at least part of the time) or did it have to do with his interest in opposing the raw and wild nature of men against whatever life could throw at them? Characters like Esau Cairn, Cormac Fitzgeoffrey or Turlogh O'Brien are not far from their savage and primal nature. As a consequence, they usually hack and slash their way through problems, and triumph through sheer force of will and sinew. The impression I get from whatever biographical info I read on Howard is that he pretty much wished he could have done that with his own life, too... except that it was frowned upon by our civilized world.


My impression is that Howard considered most of the history of mankind to be a brutal struggle to survive, therefore, protagonists like HPL's "sensitive nerd" types were irrelevant. But one hallmark of a great writer is that he has a trademark stamp to his style and to his protagonists, as though he somehow is able to project himself into the character, giving it his own presence and charisma, like classic authors such as Hemingway (a REH contemporary), Poe, and Byron. Bob Howard usually did this, making his heroes instantly recognizable, not as incarnations of each other, but as incarnations of himself. IMHO.

[Nicronous]

I read the original 12 Lancer/Ace Books series back in the late 70's early 80's and I loved it. Today I decided to re-read the entire series so see that those book are not really available, and I found out that what I grew up on may be edited and basterdized works of the original. So now what do I do, well I turn to the fans. I have 2 questions:

1) What is the difference between Robert E. Howard versions and the L. Sprague de Camp edits?
2) If you could get any comprehensive work which is the best to pick up?

I think I can get all of the Sprague de Camp versions used but am I missing out on something if I do?

[Reaver]

The thing about the Lancer/Aces is that many of the stories are DeCamp's "adaptations" of non-Conan stories to be Conan stories that fit within a timeline. He then filled in the gaps with his own, original pastiche stories.

The general fan consensus will no doubt be that DeCamp's additions to Conan lore detract from the overall experience. And that your money would be better spent on the three Conan volumes from Del Rey. Personally, I liked a lot of DeCamp's stuff, but I do understand that there are differences, and since you have read all of the Lancer/Aces, the Del Reys might give you a more fresh experience.

You may also want to consider getting the other, non-Conan volumes in the Del Rey series.

[johnnypt]

I'll second what Reaver said. I was the same way: bought all the Aces back in the early 80s and read them all the time. Reading the Del Reys was an absolute revelation, especially since they are arranged in the order they were written (other recent compilations have them in order of publication). If you want to get the old Aces and read the stories for their own enjoyment, by all means pick them up. But if you want Conan through the eyes of his creator, the Del Reys are the only way to go.

[Ironhand]

I began reading the Lancer/Ace Conans in my early college years and enjoyed them all. Over the years, I read and re-read them, and over the years, I gradually came to understand that deCamp's take on Conan was different from REH's. DeCamp had a tendency to get Conan into trouble he couldn't get out of, then save him with divine interventions or deus ex machinas.

[Reaver]

I began reading the Lancer/Ace Conans in my early college years and enjoyed them all. Over the years, I read and re-read them, and over the years, I gradually came to understand that deCamp's take on Conan was different from REH's. DeCamp had a tendency to get Conan into trouble he couldn't get out of, then save him with divine interventions or deus ex machinas.

That's definitely true. Sometimes it worked, and made for a good story. But he did seem to rely on that, now that you mention it. It's funny, when I first read them I didn't pay any attention to who wrote what. So, in my young mind, they were all REH. Now that I know the difference, and my literary sensibilities have matured, I can definitely see how deCamp strayed.

[Libaax]

There is no real choice, get Del Rey books of Conan,Kane,Kull etc


Robert E Howard stories first to see why these stories are so famous.

Del Rey are original texts,complete collections.

[Arcadian]

Like you, Nicronus, I loved the Lancer/Ace series back in the 70s/80s when I first read them, but unlike you, I kept my copies. Then about a year and a half ago, I picked up the new Solomon Kane collection from Del Rey. From there my choice was clear, I donated my Lancer/Ace set to my public library and bought all of the Del Reys, including the three Conan books.

De Camp rewrote a number of the stories to make Conan and his world more resemble Tolkien's Middle Earth, with added attention to the world and an imagined chronology, sometimes changing the plot to bridge one story to another. IMHO Conan reads better as a series of taut adventures, interlinked by a past and a current of events that is never quite clear.

[Rolfson]

It's no contest.  Go with the Del Reys.  They present the stories as REH originally intended.  I got lucky,
the first Conans I read were from Berkley in the late 70's, these were not as edited as the Lancer/Ace editions.

[Ironhand]

Like you, Nicronus, I loved the Lancer/Ace series back in the 70s/80s when I first read them, but unlike you, I kept my copies. Then about a year and a half ago, I picked up the new Solomon Kane collection from Del Rey. From there my choice was clear, I donated my Lancer/Ace set to my public library and bought all of the Del Reys, including the three Conan books.

I'm sorry you did that. It may have been a disservice to library patrons for whom that will be their first exposure to Conan.

[Nicronous]

Like you, Nicronus, I loved the Lancer/Ace series back in the 70s/80s when I first read them, but unlike you, I kept my copies. Then about a year and a half ago, I picked up the new Solomon Kane collection from Del Rey. From there my choice was clear, I donated my Lancer/Ace set to my public library and bought all of the Del Reys, including the three Conan books.

I'm sorry you did that. It may have been a disservice to library patrons for whom that will be their first exposure to Conan.

Any exposure to Conan is good exposure, especially the older stuff, it always seemed to me that the further you got from the source the weaker the stories became. I always assumed that the source was the Lancer/Ace now that I can go back even further I am really hyped about picking these up

Thanks for all the advice I will deffinitly buy the Del Ray coppies.

[deuce]

I know a couple of forumites have asked about the differences between the De Camp-edited Conan yarns and the "straight" REH. Here's the thread.

[deuce]

I know a couple of forumites have asked about the differences between the De Camp-edited Conan yarns and the "straight" REH. Here's the thread.

Actually, THIS thread looks a lot more closely at LSdC's editorial tampering:

http://www.conan.com...topic=1755&st=0