Howard or Tolkien, Which of them Had The Greatest Impact On Modern Fantasy ?

Extollager said:
By the way, as a tangent wasn't Howard getting away from Conan late in his life? It seems to me he was interested in developing the Breckinridge Elkins stories; as if he felt that Conan was pretty much played out.
Click to expand...

Conan was the first stories i loved reading by Howard but being his most popular, maybe most important influence on fantasy and S&S/Heroic Fantasy i dont think its is near his best writing. His later works like the historical fiction, the horror, Solomon Kane was better prose,leaner, stronger Howard.

Also i know you are a big fan of Tolkien, his influence is immense, important but lets not forget the first important fantasy writers who wrote about the fantastical natural world with elves etc like Lord Dunsany, the likes of him decades before Tolkien.
 
Connavar said:
Conan was the first stories i loved reading by Howard but being his most popular, maybe most important influence on fantasy and S&S/Heroic Fantasy i dont think its is near his best writing. His later works like the historical fiction, the horror, Solomon Kane was better prose,leaner, stronger Howard.

Also i know you are a big fan of Tolkien, his influence is immense, important but lets not forget the first important fantasy writers who wrote about the fantastical natural world with elves etc like Lord Dunsany, the likes of him decades before Tolkien.
Click to expand...

Solomon Kane is more interesting than Conan, but I think those stories were written earlier than the Conans. In some of the Conans, at least, it seems Howard was just churning it out -- another story with a fugitive girl, a rampaging ape, and/or a lost city, etc. By contrast, as I recall no two of the Kanes tread the same path exactly.

I regarded Dunsany as one of my favorite authors back in the early Seventies, but I don't find his fantasy very interesting now. He flaunts the insubstantiality of his gods and heroes, and his confections are so different from Tolkien's fantasy as to make him, I have thought, almost the anti-Tolkien. Dunsany has influenced various fantasy writers, I'm sure, but I think often as an influence to grow out of.

But I don't know if I think Tolkien really has influenced that many fantasy writers. They may have imitated some superficial aspects of his work -- long books, multiple rational species, kingdoms at war, magical items. But as to whether the spirit of Tolkien's work has been very influential... I'm doubtful.

Whereas the pulp spirit of a Howard in Conan mode is easy to catch and, I suppose, easy for many writers to settle for. Who of us hasn't written a pseudo-barbarian yarn? I know I had my own "Koroth the barbarian" phase for a few months when I was about 15....
 
Extollager said:
Solomon Kane is more interesting than Conan, but I think those stories were written earlier than the Conans. In some of the Conans, at least, it seems Howard was just churning it out -- another story with a fugitive girl, a rampaging ape, and/or a lost city, etc. By contrast, as I recall no two of the Kanes tread the same path exactly.

I regarded Dunsany as one of my favorite authors back in the early Seventies, but I don't find his fantasy very interesting now. He flaunts the insubstantiality of his gods and heroes, and his confections are so different from Tolkien's fantasy as to make him, I have thought, almost the anti-Tolkien. Dunsany has influenced various fantasy writers, I'm sure, but I think often as an influence to grow out of.

But I don't know if I think Tolkien really has influenced that many fantasy writers. They may have imitated some superficial aspects of his work -- long books, multiple rational species, kingdoms at war, magical items. But as to whether the spirit of Tolkien's work has been very influential... I'm doubtful.

Whereas the pulp spirit of a Howard in Conan mode is easy to catch and, I suppose, easy for many writers to settle for. Who of us hasn't written a pseudo-barbarian yarn? I know I had my own "Koroth the barbarian" phase for a few months when I was about 15....
Click to expand...


Im a big Howard fan and i have studied almost everything he wrote so i know Kane was earlier and i think Solomon Kane is the only early REH works that can compete with his late works like the genres i mentioned. Kane was almost horror in S&S setting i think the stories fit naturally REH better. Conan is more interesting for world building, he created very rich world when he was churning out the stories because they were popular in Weird Tales.

Also many have also imitated superfial parts of Howard because everyone can write pseudo-barbarian as you said but no can write action scenes like in Conan like Howard did and at the same time being strong storyteller in horror, being the best historical adventure writer, great western, great humor writer. Howard might not be the best prose writer in fantasy but like Poe he was a master in many genres. Only his detective stories are what he really failed in of all the genres of his i have read.



Many important writers i have read have thought like HP Lovecraft try writing Dunsanian but seeing they cant replicate what he did best.

He is anti-Tolkien in positive ways for me. Tolkien fantasy i respect alot but i dont find interesting because what he is famous for is the opposite of why i adore, admire Lord Dunsany. Lord Dunsany....he can flaunt his worlds, gods how much he wants when his prose is brilliant, his themes, vision are clear in his better stories. Which is why im not big fan of the abstract, weird short god stories. World building, spirit of Tolkien i could never get into because his prose,his kind of fantasy world is not to my taste. I find interesting the direct,weird horror like S&S of Howard or the prose magic of Lord Dunsany.
 
In a way, Howard did the same thing that Tolkien later did; created a pre-history world, a forgotten age in which his characters dwell and adventure.

That seems to me to be something that not many fantasy authors do these days, they tend to just opt for completely invented worlds that have no relation to ours whatsoever (although they might be very similar in many ways). Perhaps readers these days are just more accepting of wholly invented settings and don't need any bridge from here to there (as it were).

I thought it strange when I first read E. R. Eddison's "The Worm Ouroborous" in the way the first couple of chapters the Earth bound Lessingham introduces us to the world as a projected observer but then is never referred to again. As if audiences in those days couldn't just accept being thrown straight into a made up world.

Probably no author has been quite as detailed and meticulous in inventing a secondary world as he was although I think many have gone some way at least into attempting to do so.

Personally though I just don't see the point into creating such a detailed invented world. Well, I can see why Tolkien himself might have enjoyed the process of creating it himself but I don't see what's in it for the reader. If I was going to spend so much time studying such a thing, I would be better off studying actual history.
 
Fried Egg said:
In a way, Howard did the same thing that Tolkien later did; created a pre-history world, a forgotten age in which his characters dwell and adventure.


Personally though I just don't see the point into creating such a detailed invented world. Well, I can see why Tolkien himself might have enjoyed the process of creating it himself but I don't see what's in it for the reader. If I was going to spend so much time studying such a thing, I would be better off studying actual history.
Click to expand...


Im thinking that Tolkien wanted to create a world that seem believable to his readers.

But Howard's approach to world building which is minimalist by comparison works just as well.


It's too bad that Tolkien and Howard never met each other. The conversations they would have had about literature and writing would have been interesting. :)
 
Last edited:
Fried Egg said:
>In a way, Howard did the same thing that Tolkien later did; created a pre-history world, a forgotten age in which his characters dwell and adventure. That seems to me to be something that not many fantasy authors do these days, they tend to just opt for completely invented worlds that have no relation to ours whatsoever (although they might be very similar in many ways). Perhaps readers these days are just more accepting of wholly invented settings and don't need any bridge from here to there (as it were). I thought it strange when I first read E. R. Eddison's "The Worm Ouroborous" in the way the first couple of chapters the Earth bound Lessingham introduces us to the world as a projected observer but then is never referred to again. As if audiences in those days couldn't just accept being thrown straight into a made up world. Probably no author has been quite as detailed and meticulous in inventing a secondary world as he was although I think many have gone some way at least into attempting to do so. Personally though I just don't see the point into creating such a detailed invented world. Well, I can see why Tolkien himself might have enjoyed the process of creating it himself but I don't see what's in it for the reader. If I was going to spend so much time studying such a thing, I would be better off studying actual history.
Click to expand...

Which is what i like about Howard even the weaker Conan stories he uses well the rich world he has build so well with so few pages compared fantasy novels after his time. I never saw that world was created for him enjoying the process but it was clear to help the reader with the stories.

Im not well read on Tolkien but the little i have read i can see what you mean you can overdo studiying, recreating huge world that doesnt automaticly add much to some stories. I have seen thatin many modern fantasy authors that followed Tolkien school. Fat, bloated world building for not much gain. Just because they think its expected to spend so many pages on pseudo fantasy world that is pale version, thin copy of the real much more interesting historical times. Historical fiction authors are better with the real histories for that....
 
Last edited:
Howard was able to give readers just enough information and then allowed them to fill in the gaps about the world. I think it engages the reader in a more direct and basic emotional level. In many ways I think this is a better method of world building than Tolkien's method of hyper-detailed writing. But then Tolkien was trying to create a mythology really.

And I don't think Howard and Tolkien would have gotten on at all.
 
I have just returned form a week in the West Country, home to some very nice beer, and a huge amount of half-baked Arthurian type silliness. Wander down the street in Tintagel or Glastonbury and one cannot help but notice that all those new age shops owe a tremendous debt to Tolkein. Not much Conan in evidence in this part of the world.
 
hitmouse said:
I have just returned form a week in the West Country, home to some very nice beer, and a huge amount of half-baked Arthurian type silliness. Wander down the street in Tintagel or Glastonbury and one cannot help but notice that all those new age shops owe a tremendous debt to Tolkein. Not much Conan in evidence in this part of the world.
Click to expand...

I dont like comparing two imporant authors like this but of course you can see Tolkien more in his own part of the world , his own culture and in the british isles. Its clear Tolkein is more mainstream with his fame coming with the book sales, huge film series globally.

But the way you said it like its a given Howard influence is clearer in USA, in Texas , places he is a literary hero for different reasons.
 
The success of the LOTR and The Hobbit films combined with the box off failure of the 2011 Conan film give Tolkien the edge here
 
Interesting bit of history
gg2.jpg
GandalfPhoto4.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandalf's_Garden
 
I suppose a slightly different question might be: Howard or Tolkein: which had the greatest impact on modern culture?

Another intersting bit of history (and quite a good album)
On the cover is Steve Peregrine Took and Marc Bolan.

tranusorus.jpg
 
You guys know there were Led Zepplin lyrics referring to LOTR? Can't recall the song(s) off the top of my head.

LOTR came out in the 1950s, as I recall, and sold reasonably well, I believe. The big boost came when it appeared in mass market paperbacks in the 1960s. The baby boomer generation took it to heart.


Randy M.
 
Randy M. said:
You guys know there were Led Zepplin lyrics referring to LOTR? Can't recall the song(s) off the top of my head.

LOTR came out in the 1950s, as I recall, and sold reasonably well, I believe. The big boost came when it appeared in mass market paperbacks in the 1960s. The baby boomer generation took it to heart.


Randy M.
Click to expand...


Until LOTR came into print the, Hobbit had been all but forgotten . Right ?
 
Led Zep (excerpt from Ramble On):

Mine's a tale that can't be told, my freedom I hold dear
How years ago in days of old, when magic filled the air
T'was in the darkest depths of Mordor, I met a girl so fair
But Gollum, and the evil one crept up and slipped away with her, her, her....
Yeah
Ramble On
And now's the time, the time is now, to sing my song
I'm goin' 'round the world, I got to find my girl, on my way
I've been this way ten years to the day
Ramble On
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
johnnyjet Howard Waldrop RIP Obituaries 3
S (Found) Android/Robot Manservant Elopes (Resembles Leslie Howard) Book Search 3
R An academic journal devoted to Robert E Howard! Magazines 3
S Robert E. Howard’s Kelly the Conjure-Man Reviews & Interviews 0
S Robert E. Howard’s The Touch of Death Review Reviews & Interviews 0

Similar threads


Back
Top