[quote name='deuce' post='90705' date='May 31 2008, 10:13 PM']korak' posted=No I have never said that DeCamp's pastiches were canonical. In fact I don't know anyone who does, and I never have since I was a teenager.
Then you DID think so, at one time.[/quote]
No, wrong. I never have. I started reading REH as a teenager.
[quote]Well, you can release me from the "extremist loony bin", guvna, 'cuz I've NEVER been opposed to "competent" pastiches of REH. I've been fairly vociferous in my praises of Wagner, Roberts and Hocking in that regard.
The problem is, I
, unlike you, DON'T see LSdC's efforts as being "competent". His world-view was diametrically different than that of Robert E. Howard. HOW could he authentically
recreate the atmosphere of the Hyborian Age and set Conan
stories therein? He was dabbling in things he was incapable of understanding and that shows in the results.
I apologise for confusing your constant (some might
call it "fanatical" or "obssessive") defense of de Camp's efforts in regard to Robert E. Howard's writings/concepts as meaning that you saw his works as "canonical". Reading back through your erudite posts, I see that isn't the case. Too bad you don't return the courtesy.[/quote]
I don't agree that Mr. DeCamp was incompetent. He got REH in so many ways that some guys won't ever even begin to comprehend, obviously. He was a doer, not an amateur. He was a veritable founder of Howard studies, demonstrated by his articles in Blade of Conan and Spell of Conan. He was one of a few lifetime Grand Masters of Science Fiction. He wrote almost all his Conan stories in collaboration because he knew he couldn't come close to reaching Howard's level alone. It is easy for amateur critics to pummel DeCamp's memory with slander and propaganda, because they themselves are not only unwilling but incapable of writing a Conan story, thus no one can compare their own efforts with someone who actually tried to contribute to the fantasy. He wasn't perfect and made mistakes, and he was not the genius REH was, but no one else is a perfect genius like REH either. It is easy to claim that a person comprehends REH's genius when there is no way to prove it.
Beethoven scholars can dissect Beethoven's musical scores all day long, my friend, but I don't recall one ever writing a Beethoven symphony. That's why I don't read Beethoven scholars--- if I get bored with Beethoven I listen to Brahms or Stravinsky or Bernstein-- someone who can actually produce something of value.
[quote]However, in the "context" of this discussion, my faux pas
pales in comparison to your confusion of "Stygians" with "Lemurians" (and the wacky theory derived therefrom). I'm sure there was a good reason for your being so slapdash and cavalier with REH's concepts.[/quote]
Yeah, it's called a typo.
[quote]korak wrote-I don't put all pastiche into the same level or grouping. Any time you find wiggle room to misinterpret my words, you generally will take the opportunity.
lose no opportunity to insinuate that I'm "fanatical", "arbitrary", "obsessed" or untruthful whenever possible, in regards to my observations about Robert E. Howard's "pseudo-history", simply because my views differ from yours.[/quote]
That doesn't really justify misinterpreting my words, does it? In fact, its just changing the subject...
[quote]There has been a great deal of "information communicated" and "quotes put on the table" in the course of this topic by a diverse array of knowledgeable REH fans. You have (apparently) ignored all of those posts and thereby slapped in the face all who spent time and effort to "communicate" that "information". If such was NOT the case, my apologies. It's just very hard to discern that you've done anything besides misread the information that Robert E. Howard gave us and THEN come up with some baseless theory.
Here are the post #s of posts that contain the "quotes" which you demand and seek for (my apologies to any I leave out): #1, #5, #11, #22, #27, #30, #39, #43, #44, #52, #74, #75, #78 and #79.
It seems that, in every discussion of this type, you demand that "quotes" must be delivered unto you, all in a very magisterial manner. I've pointed this out before. In THIS case, the "quotes" are right there are on the same thread
. Great Gonzo must've graduated from your school of "Internet Forum Usage". You
(apparently) feel that you're so "amazingly smart" that there is no need to even "slow read" the posts of others.
I've admitted errors/lapses in knowledge numerous
times on this forum. Quite recently. as a matter of fact.[/quote]
Well, you just wasted an enormous amount of verbiage instead of just relisting relevant quotes, which would not have taken half the wordage, so again avoiding the subject by griping about me. I don't ask for all quotes relating to the subject, just the smoking guns. You don't got any of 'em, dude. Intimidating talk takes up the slack. This is no scholarly academics board (and even if it were, your aggression would be markedly inappropriate, especially coming from a moderator, who is expected to curb their attitude out of respect for their higher position of authority). This is a casual message board for any Conan fans of whatever level of interest.
[quote]No "weird sarcasm" involved. Perhaps you spot it easier than I do. I'm not surprised that you don't "need" it. My point was that, you seem to think MY views of Robert E. Howard's "pseudo-history" somehow "cripple" his "creative genius". Meanwhile, YOUR attempts to squeeze Acheron into the straitjacket provided by The Hyborian Age
guideline ALSO "cripple/set arbitrary limits/crush/hamper/etc..." Robert E. Howard's "incredible imagination".[/quote]
Your misinterpretation of my own ideas indicates to me just how much you are capable of misintepreting REH.
provided "quotes" long ago (see above). So far, you've provided nothing but a theory that is demonstrably NOT based on Robert E. Howard's writings. Like I said, if you're so worried about Robert E. Howard's "intentions", read the quotes.
Once again, your repeated demands for quotes could
be construed as "insinuations" of deception on my part.
As I said above, I think we just got off on the wrong foot. Hopefully, that can be corrected.
Not at this rate, friend! Backhanded apologies are not that effective, coming at the end of a long passage of personal gripes. You know, there is a lot more to "getting REH" than just tinkering with continuity. Do you have a set of weights in your garage like Howard had? Are you a faster runner than anyone on your block, like King Kull of Atlantis? Is your skin tanned almost black by the sun like Conan? Do you ever indulge with your local fight club, or is your skill mainly at wrestling with words?
As far as I am concerned, all that is part of "getting" REH. I realize that my philosophy doesn't sit well with some nerds and geeks.
Edited by korak, 01 June 2008 - 09:11 PM.