Zenos
February 24th, 2014, 01:00 AM
I am a huge fan of Conan and the writer who created him,Robert E,Howard,
But it has come to my attention that some of the 12 to 14 year olds on my school as well as others online deem both Conan and Robert E,Howard to be representative of some facist ideology. Which they base on their claims that his stories represent:
Strong celebration of masculinity, heroism, and strength
-Notions of racism/racial superiority
-The depiction of a mythologized "heroic past"
-The depiction of moral and social decay in weak societies.
Funny thing is every society in some way celebrates heroism and has a mythologized past.Also Howard was strongly against fascism and But totalitarianism. In fact, according to page 552 on "El Borak and other Desert Adventures," he would argue about his hatred for fascism with Hp Lovecraft which one of the most common arguments he would have with him in the letters they exchanged. Also, Son of the White Wolf was written as a way to reflect his hatred for fascism which made it one of his more violent and angry stories. Here is a line from the page which was written David A. Hardy, " Despite Hitler's and Mussolini's pretensions to unite progress with ancestral glories, Howard had no sympathy for with their brand of totalitarianism."
But what can one expect when political correctness meshes with someone's brain? I also disagree with any notion of patriotism belonging to fascist tendencies. Conan actually expresses his pride for his Cimmerian origins in Robert E. Howard tales and any historical barbarian (or civilized) fellow may have done that. Absolutely nothing connects an author who places these sentiments to his characters with fascism.
Also Fascism is the subordination of the individual to the State. I fail to see how a free-living barbarian who is not beholden to any authority reflects fascism in any way.
And Mr. Howard's letters show him clearly and emphatically opposed to Hitler and Mussolini.
Conan does not contains "Notions of racism/racial superiority" in the 20th century context. The Cimmerians are a tribal people (as are some of the other regions of Hyboria) that operate within extended kin networks, probably fighting each other as much as others. Conan himself wanders the ancient world making associations with all manner of people, and while he boasts of his Cimmerarian background its not a blood boast, its that his land is hard and unforgiving, so its men must become so.
Turan and its secret service operations to serve Yezdigerd's deeds, the vile Strabonus and Tarascus, Numedides' tyranny, Borna(in Kull stories) presented as a ruthless tyrant : it is clear Howard doesn't approve of despotism and clearly supports the idea of a revolution where such persons are dethroned by a single man , not a white knight but someone like Conan or Kull, brutal and savage but with a deep sense of honor when it comes to ruling .
Conan being victorious at the battle of Venarium, at a young age, is also a symbol of struggling against a corrupt and unjust expansionnist kingdom such as pre-Conan Aquilonia.
The term "fascism" is thrown around so loosely that it now it has all the content of "what I don't like." Fascism was a specific historical phenomenon of post-World War I Europe. The movement never had a particularly coherent "philosophy"; it was defined more by its characteristics — extreme nationalism; subordination of the value of the individual to that of the State; contempt for liberal democracy; and opposition to communism. Those characteristics varied. Fascism in Italy and in Spain were different from National Socialism in Germany. Originally, Fascism did not have the antisemitic bent that characterized National Socialism. In fact, in the 1920s and 30s, there were significant Jewish supporters of Mussolini, who saw in him a national revival.
This is an argument I'm finding a lot of ignorant people start where Howard and a lot of other Pulp-era writers are concerned, and personally I find it eye-rollingly tiresome and annoying. If anything, from my own point of view it says more about the pedantic, Orwellian nature of the PC crowd who seem to spawn these kind of critiques, than it does about Howard or any of his creations. For starters, it betrays a bone-headed inability to view things within the context of the period during which they were first created; secondly, it often purposely skews and misrepresents the actual content/context of the stories themselves in an attempt to push the critic's own particular very Neo-Lib/PC agenda; and thirdly (and most ironically) always seems to betray what is IMO a rather judgmental, censorious, and yes...fascistic tendency among too many of the intellectual minnows and ideologues on the 'Fringe Left' for whom nothing will ever be 'Diverse enough', 'Feminine enough', 'Green enough', or 'Progressive enough' to satisfy their fragile, cracked-glass sensitivities and princess-&-the-pea-sized problems with the universe. In fact, so many of those people seem to have gone so far Left, they've come full circle back to the Right, their particular brand of - as I see it - 21st C. 'Progressive Fascism' (???) based on the exploitation of unrealistic fears of a return to pre-1960's social values, an obsession with heroic Feminism, and the mythologizing of a Utopian (see 'Green') past. They generally despise anything they deem to be 'too Eurocentric' ('White'), 'too male', or 'too straight'. They hate traditionally masculine notions of honour and martial heroism which I guess explains right away how Howard and Conan so often leave a bad taste in their granola-crunching mouths! LOL! They demand an extreme POST-Nationalist/Globalist view, subordination of the value of the individual to the Progressive Uber-Socialist State, encourage glossocracy and demand the control of 'acceptable speech' (and by extension...thought), show contempt and open hostility for anyone who dares to so much as question their particular catechism of sacred cows, and frankly, come across as (to paraphrase Jim Goad) 'an unsavory mix of Joseph Stalin and Mother Theresa'. And they can never see it. So full of 'Haight' they don't realize how meddling, totalitarian and HATEful they've become themselves. And just as I have no time for the Limbaugh's, Tea Partiers, and Westboro Baptists of the world...neither do I have time for these increasingly numerous...and dangerous, clowns who are just the opposite side of the same rotten coin. At the end of the day they're just hot air bags and 'offense kleptomaniacs' (i.e. if there's an offense anywhere that isn't nailed down...they'll take it!) and their problems with Howard, Conan, and other Pulp-era writers are about as legitimate as the installation of a screen-door in a submarine. To Arallu with them all!!!
But it has come to my attention that some of the 12 to 14 year olds on my school as well as others online deem both Conan and Robert E,Howard to be representative of some facist ideology. Which they base on their claims that his stories represent:
Strong celebration of masculinity, heroism, and strength
-Notions of racism/racial superiority
-The depiction of a mythologized "heroic past"
-The depiction of moral and social decay in weak societies.
Funny thing is every society in some way celebrates heroism and has a mythologized past.Also Howard was strongly against fascism and But totalitarianism. In fact, according to page 552 on "El Borak and other Desert Adventures," he would argue about his hatred for fascism with Hp Lovecraft which one of the most common arguments he would have with him in the letters they exchanged. Also, Son of the White Wolf was written as a way to reflect his hatred for fascism which made it one of his more violent and angry stories. Here is a line from the page which was written David A. Hardy, " Despite Hitler's and Mussolini's pretensions to unite progress with ancestral glories, Howard had no sympathy for with their brand of totalitarianism."
But what can one expect when political correctness meshes with someone's brain? I also disagree with any notion of patriotism belonging to fascist tendencies. Conan actually expresses his pride for his Cimmerian origins in Robert E. Howard tales and any historical barbarian (or civilized) fellow may have done that. Absolutely nothing connects an author who places these sentiments to his characters with fascism.
Also Fascism is the subordination of the individual to the State. I fail to see how a free-living barbarian who is not beholden to any authority reflects fascism in any way.
And Mr. Howard's letters show him clearly and emphatically opposed to Hitler and Mussolini.
Conan does not contains "Notions of racism/racial superiority" in the 20th century context. The Cimmerians are a tribal people (as are some of the other regions of Hyboria) that operate within extended kin networks, probably fighting each other as much as others. Conan himself wanders the ancient world making associations with all manner of people, and while he boasts of his Cimmerarian background its not a blood boast, its that his land is hard and unforgiving, so its men must become so.
Turan and its secret service operations to serve Yezdigerd's deeds, the vile Strabonus and Tarascus, Numedides' tyranny, Borna(in Kull stories) presented as a ruthless tyrant : it is clear Howard doesn't approve of despotism and clearly supports the idea of a revolution where such persons are dethroned by a single man , not a white knight but someone like Conan or Kull, brutal and savage but with a deep sense of honor when it comes to ruling .
Conan being victorious at the battle of Venarium, at a young age, is also a symbol of struggling against a corrupt and unjust expansionnist kingdom such as pre-Conan Aquilonia.
The term "fascism" is thrown around so loosely that it now it has all the content of "what I don't like." Fascism was a specific historical phenomenon of post-World War I Europe. The movement never had a particularly coherent "philosophy"; it was defined more by its characteristics — extreme nationalism; subordination of the value of the individual to that of the State; contempt for liberal democracy; and opposition to communism. Those characteristics varied. Fascism in Italy and in Spain were different from National Socialism in Germany. Originally, Fascism did not have the antisemitic bent that characterized National Socialism. In fact, in the 1920s and 30s, there were significant Jewish supporters of Mussolini, who saw in him a national revival.
This is an argument I'm finding a lot of ignorant people start where Howard and a lot of other Pulp-era writers are concerned, and personally I find it eye-rollingly tiresome and annoying. If anything, from my own point of view it says more about the pedantic, Orwellian nature of the PC crowd who seem to spawn these kind of critiques, than it does about Howard or any of his creations. For starters, it betrays a bone-headed inability to view things within the context of the period during which they were first created; secondly, it often purposely skews and misrepresents the actual content/context of the stories themselves in an attempt to push the critic's own particular very Neo-Lib/PC agenda; and thirdly (and most ironically) always seems to betray what is IMO a rather judgmental, censorious, and yes...fascistic tendency among too many of the intellectual minnows and ideologues on the 'Fringe Left' for whom nothing will ever be 'Diverse enough', 'Feminine enough', 'Green enough', or 'Progressive enough' to satisfy their fragile, cracked-glass sensitivities and princess-&-the-pea-sized problems with the universe. In fact, so many of those people seem to have gone so far Left, they've come full circle back to the Right, their particular brand of - as I see it - 21st C. 'Progressive Fascism' (???) based on the exploitation of unrealistic fears of a return to pre-1960's social values, an obsession with heroic Feminism, and the mythologizing of a Utopian (see 'Green') past. They generally despise anything they deem to be 'too Eurocentric' ('White'), 'too male', or 'too straight'. They hate traditionally masculine notions of honour and martial heroism which I guess explains right away how Howard and Conan so often leave a bad taste in their granola-crunching mouths! LOL! They demand an extreme POST-Nationalist/Globalist view, subordination of the value of the individual to the Progressive Uber-Socialist State, encourage glossocracy and demand the control of 'acceptable speech' (and by extension...thought), show contempt and open hostility for anyone who dares to so much as question their particular catechism of sacred cows, and frankly, come across as (to paraphrase Jim Goad) 'an unsavory mix of Joseph Stalin and Mother Theresa'. And they can never see it. So full of 'Haight' they don't realize how meddling, totalitarian and HATEful they've become themselves. And just as I have no time for the Limbaugh's, Tea Partiers, and Westboro Baptists of the world...neither do I have time for these increasingly numerous...and dangerous, clowns who are just the opposite side of the same rotten coin. At the end of the day they're just hot air bags and 'offense kleptomaniacs' (i.e. if there's an offense anywhere that isn't nailed down...they'll take it!) and their problems with Howard, Conan, and other Pulp-era writers are about as legitimate as the installation of a screen-door in a submarine. To Arallu with them all!!!