50 replies to this topic

[MilkManX]

Not much to add.

Read this one again.

The imagery alone in the fight scene is worth the full price of admission.

Love it!

[muskrat]

The notion of lounging about in a opium-like stupor waiting for Thak to carry them away is chilling. Some really thought provoking stuff. And the kinky scene with Natala and Thalis is icing on the cake for a 'damned degenerate' like me. I'll give it 9 out of 10.

[matsellah]

Just re-read this. In fact, spent the whole weekend re-reading the Howard originals.

Natala stands out as the damsel in distress because she's much removed from the rest of Howard's femme fatals. She's the prototypical blond, which lends the hint of amusement that permeates this story. And let's face it; outside of the beating Conan takes from Thog, there's not much in Xuthal that's much of a threat, so the goings-on are somewhat comical.

But the thing that stands out for me was the whole Thalis-Natala thread; Howard basically writing about how women tear each other apart for nothing more than being threatened by the other's presence.

Something that happens every day.

[Boot]

A couple of comments and questions...

1. I'm not sure why I like this story. It's got a wierd ending. Actually, it seems like there is no climax, or the climax is the fight with Thog. Strange, but I like this tale.

2. The two fight scenes are fan-freaking-tastic.

3. I liked the motivation of Thalis. And, her background is haunting!

4. Thog is a fantastic bad guy. I got a real Hellraiser vibe from it (more appropriately, a Lovecraftian vibe).

5. The tale seems...unfinished.



And, I've got a question. Did Conan buy Natalia? Does Conan actually own a slave in this tale, even though he doesn't treat her like one?

Why do I think Conan might have actually bought a slave?

Because of this sentence from the start of Xuthal of the Dusk: The girl was a brythunian, whom Conan had found in the slave-market of a stormed Shemite city, and appropriated.

The city was stormed by Almuric's horde of mercenaries. I can guess, knowing what I know of the barbarian, that the situation was more like Conan finding the slave girl among the rest, grabbing her arm, and saying, "You're coming with me".

What are your thoughts?

Edited by Boot, 05 April 2012 - 05:43 AM.

[Ironhand]

I imagine that Conan didn't bother to pay for her. You can read my take on this in my adaptation of XotD in The Scrolls of Ironhand (see my signature).

[Boot]

I imagine that Conan didn't bother to pay for her. You can read my take on this in my adaptation of XotD in The Scrolls of Ironhand (see my signature).

Tried to. The Essay section says "Check back for updates".

[Taranaich]

The girl was a brythunian, whom Conan had found in the slave-market of a stormed Shemite city, and appropriated.

I'm of the opinion Conan didn't buy Natala. A couple of things should be noted:

- It was a stormed Shemite city. I can't really see any merchant in a city that was just savaged by a 30,000-strong army being in any position to sell anything to anyone.
- Howard specifically said "appropriated," not "bought." The most technical definition of the word from the Latin means "to take as one's own": this to me doesn't suggest any sort of transaction or exchange.

Not that I'm making Conan out to be a white knight by any means: I really don't think he would deign to compensate a merchant for his "wares" when he could easily just take what he wanted, at sword-point if necessary.

[Boot]

The girl was a brythunian, whom Conan had found in the slave-market of a stormed Shemite city, and appropriated.

I'm of the opinion Conan didn't buy Natala. A couple of things should be noted:

- It was a stormed Shemite city. I can't really see any merchant in a city that was just savaged by a 30,000-strong army being in any position to sell anything to anyone.
- Howard specifically said "appropriated," not "bought." The most technical definition of the word from the Latin means "to take as one's own": this to me doesn't suggest any sort of transaction or exchange.

Not that I'm making Conan out to be a white knight by any means: I really don't think he would deign to compensate a merchant for his "wares" when he could easily just take what he wanted, at sword-point if necessary.

You spoke to the question of whether Conan bought a slave. I'm more interested in if he acquired a slave, no matter how it came into his possession.

As you say, I don't think he traded for her. It sounds like he just took her--looted her, if you will.

But, how did he treat her? Was she actually Conan's slave? Did she consider herself to be his property? It's not that easy to tell from the story. In the scene where the two of them find the food, she starts to whine, and Conan just grabs her by the scruff of the neck, sets her down, and orders her to eat.

So, is this, indeed, evidence that Conan owned a slave at one time? Or, is it something else?

[amster]

The girl was a brythunian, whom Conan had found in the slave-market of a stormed Shemite city, and appropriated.

I'm of the opinion Conan didn't buy Natala. A couple of things should be noted:

- It was a stormed Shemite city. I can't really see any merchant in a city that was just savaged by a 30,000-strong army being in any position to sell anything to anyone.
- Howard specifically said "appropriated," not "bought." The most technical definition of the word from the Latin means "to take as one's own": this to me doesn't suggest any sort of transaction or exchange.

Not that I'm making Conan out to be a white knight by any means: I really don't think he would deign to compensate a merchant for his "wares" when he could easily just take what he wanted, at sword-point if necessary.

You spoke to the question of whether Conan bought a slave. I'm more interested in if he acquired a slave, no matter how it came into his possession.

As you say, I don't think he traded for her. It sounds like he just took her--looted her, if you will.

But, how did he treat her? Was she actually Conan's slave? Did she consider herself to be his property? It's not that easy to tell from the story. In the scene where the two of them find the food, she starts to whine, and Conan just grabs her by the scruff of the neck, sets her down, and orders her to eat.

So, is this, indeed, evidence that Conan owned a slave at one time? Or, is it something else?

This has been the subject of much discussion, so much in fact that Natala got her own thread:

http://www.conan.com...la&fromsearch=1

[Ironhand]

I imagine that Conan didn't bother to pay for her. You can read my take on this in my adaptation of XotD in The Scrolls of Ironhand (see my signature).

Tried to. The Essay section says "Check back for updates".

It's not an essay. Look in Screenplays for Xuthal of the Dusk.

Edited by Ironhand, 21 April 2012 - 06:35 AM.

[Fernando]

"Twisting her head, Natala saw Thalis unhook a jewel-handled whip from where it hung on the wall, near the ring. The lashes consisted of seven round silk cords, harder yet more pliant than leather thongs".

I wonder... is the whip's origin Stygian or "Xuthalan"?

Edited by Fernando, 30 July 2012 - 02:12 PM.