L.Sprague De Camp

[Connavar]

I saw there were no thread for this author.


I was wondering did he have works people think were famous works in SF/Fantasy ?

The only thing i know of him is really his connection to REH and Conan.


For example i saw a book called Goblin Tower that sounded good to me when i read what its about.

Is it a good read? Iansales you should know, i saw it in your mooch inventory.

 

[j d worthington]

Well, I'm not Ian but, having read a goodly chunk of de Camp's fantasy over the years, I'll take a go at this one.

Works that were seminal? Perhaps. (I'll get back to this in a moment.)

Works that are famous? Most definitely.

The Goblin Tower? Well, here's Wiki's entry on the series of which it is the first tale:

Novarian series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for seminal works... I'd say that his works with Fletcher Pratt, such as the Harold Shea stories, if not seminal were not too far from that, as they've been something of an influence on a lot of the more humorous fantasy writers since. (They are also, despite a somewhat awkward opening chapter to the first, a rather good set of stories in themselves.)

Harold Shea (fictional series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The Carnelian Cube, though much less successful, is worth a read if you can find it... though only just, at times. The Gavagan's Bar series did something of the same sort for sf, along with Clarke's Tales from the White Hart. Lest Darkness Fall, though blatantly in the mode of Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, is (with some justice) considered a classic in the sff field. His Pusâdian series is also well worth reading, though the entire set (to my knowledge) has not yet been gathered together:

Pusadian series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He also did quite a few good sf stories over the years, though perhaps the best-known of them today would be his Viagens Interplanetarias:

Viagens Interplanetarias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Amusing, but not entirely to my taste, I must admit.

If you go for de Camp's work, keep in mind that he was largely (though not exclusively) an ironist rather than a straightforward tale-teller. His work is full of humor, satire, and wry observations on humanity's foibles. I'd say his major fault as a fiction writer is an annoying habit of repeating (almost verbatim) passages from other stories now and again without any seeming reason other than to avoid rewriting a similar scene. This can be jarring if you read much of his work at a go, but spaced out over a longer period it's unlikely to be a problem.

He also wrote a lot of nonfiction, such as a book on the so-called "Scopes Monkey Trial" and a (somewhat controversial) biography of H. P. Lovecraft, as well as one on Robert E. Howard. There was also a series of articles on famous fantasy writers, gathered together as Literary Swordsmen and Sorcerers:

Literary Swordsmen and Sorcerers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He also wrote a fair number of books criticizing pseudo-history and pseudoscience, several of which are very entertaining and informative. Lands Beyond, which he wrote with Willy Ley on the subject of the reality of fabulous lands of myth, won an International Fantasy Award back in 1953, and remains a very enjoyable read today. (It was reprinted back in 1993, I believe, and is fairly easy to find....)

 

[Snowdog]

There isn't much I can add to jd's post except to say that I loved the Incompleat Enchanter when I read it, especially as I was always interested in Norse myth. I don't remember enjoying the other two books quite as much, but I haven't read them for a long time and they're due for a re-read, only I lost my copies so I can't at the moment.

 

[j d worthington]

There isn't much I can add to jd's post except to say that I loved the Incompleat Enchanter when I read it, especially as I was always interested in Norse myth. I don't remember enjoying the other two books quite as much, but I haven't read them for a long time and they're due for a re-read, only I lost my copies so I can't at the moment.

Look for a copy of The Complete Compleat Enchanter, which brings together all the Pratt-De Camp Harold Shea stories....

 

[Snowdog]

Look for a copy of The Complete Compleat Enchanter, which brings together all the Pratt-De Camp Harold Shea stories....

Yes I'll have to get them again in some form...after Christmas when I have some money!

 

[Connavar]

Nice many recommendations. Thanks !


I think i will try Novarian series ,Pusadian series and Harold Shea series.

I feel for old school fantasy rather than old school SF right now.
The Pusadian sounds very interesting just to see how It was the first post-Howard attempt at serious world-building of a fantasy setting in the Howard vein.

 

[GOLLUM]

Hi Conn.

Once again I also wrote a bio of De Camp, so I'll send this one to you too. His most famous works are probalby Lest Darkness Fall and the Enchanter (Shea) series with Pratt.

Needless to say I have copies of these along with other works.

He also problematically revisited some of Howard's Conan tales, there's a whole controversy brewing on this front although he is recognised as lifting Howard's profile.

Goblin Tower is OK but I wouldn't lose sleep over obtaining it.

 

[Connavar]

What controversy?

I thought most REH fans of today should be glad for him being one of the guys that made sure REH fame lasted to our time. The thought of never having read Conan and REH scares me.....

I know alot about his editing and writing of Conan tales. I thank for him making sure there are as many REH stories out there that there is. Usually i get angry for people writing things that were created by my fav dead authors. But De Camp i cant get angry at for writing Conan tales.

I have enourmous respect for him just cause of how much good he did for REH's name being as famous today as it is. I read how many decades REH fame was practicly gone until De Camp and co, the comics etc

 

[GOLLUM]

You're correct, I believe he did much more good than harm on balance but there are many Howard scholars and fans who don't like him to this day because of the heavily edited REH Conan works he got into print. Those bios I'll send you have some more details on that.

Personally I have a healthy respect for De Camp. An amazing person when you look at how long he lived for and the people he knew. Don't forget he's also an SFWA Grandmaster, which puts him in pretty select company.

 

[Connavar]

You're correct, I believe he did much more good than harm on balance but there are many Howard scholars and fans who don't like him to this day because of the heavily edited REH Conan works he got into print. Those bios I'll send you have some more details on that.

Personally I have a healthy respect for De Camp. An amazing person when you look at how long he lived for and the people he knew. Don't forget he's also an SFWA Grandmaster, which puts him in pretty select company.

Those fans apparently takes for granted what he did for REH.


Hehe this made me smile when i read why he was in The Swordsmen and Sorcerers' Guild of America (SAGA)
(for his Pusadian tales and his work popularizing Robert E. Howard's Conan)

Atleast his colleouges respected him for that.

 

[j d worthington]

De Camp also faced a lot of criticism for his biography of Lovecraft (as well as the one he did of Howard). Yes, there were serious mistakes in both, and yes, he did far too much armchair psychoanalyzing for someone who simply couldn't understand either writer's approach to life, but nonetheless I felt that both books were worth reading, and his Lovecraft: A Biography has a lot to offer (though I'd advise new readers to approach it with at least a few grains of salt when it comes to de Camp's views, and it has been largely superseded by Joshi's exhaustive treatment).

As for his Howardian pastiches and his "editing" (read: rewriting) of non-Conan Howard stories to make them Conan tales... yes, there are grave problems with this, and I recognize that. However, Howard himself did this to a great degree with a lot of his work, and de Camp tended to show an awful lot of respect for Howard's methods when he did this, as well. (Besides, to be entirely truthful, this is how I first encountered Howard, in the old Lancer/Ace editions of Conan and Kull, and I have a great deal of sentimental attachment to that series....)

 

[GOLLUM]

AH yes thanks for reminding me about the controversey around the Lovecraft Bio. I think that's in my own bio of De Camp. I'll have to go check now...

The world certainly owes a certain debt to De Camp and I guess those editing issues have been resolved by more recent publications. In the end I'm glad he did bring greater notice to Howard's work, otherwise I may not have had the enjoyment I have had in reading all those wonderful stories.

 

[Anthony G Williams]

I loved the original Harold Shea books when I first read them in the 1960s, so much that I bought a compendium volume some years ago. Mine is titled The Intrepid Enchanter (Sphere 1988) and is supposed to include everything.

The Glory That Was... is a good read, as well. An artificial ancient Greece recreated in the 27th century.

 

[BigBadBob141]

Haven't read any De Camp novels yet, but plenty of his short stories.
Must get around to some of them soon, all in all a 1st class writer!!!

 

[Extollager]

De Camp also faced a lot of criticism for his biography of Lovecraft ... Lovecraft: A Biography has a lot to offer (though I'd advise new readers to approach it with at least a few grains of salt when it comes to de Camp's views, and it has been largely superseded by Joshi's exhaustive treatment).

I ended up donating this book with a lot of other things to the university library many years ago, but I loved it, or anyway most of it, at the time. (I got it as soon as it came out.) It was so readable!

 

[nomadman]

That's one thing I'll say about de Camp: he was always readable. Which may sound like a bit of a back-handed compliment but isn't, really. He also had a knack for injecting a genuine sense of fun into a story the way Pratchett is (or was) able to do.

 

[j d worthington]

Haven't read any De Camp novels yet, but plenty of his short stories.
Must get around to some of them soon, all in all a 1st class writer!!!

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to agree with that last (I feel there are some serious flaws with de Camp on many levels)... but I do agree with the following that he was (almost) always a very readable writer, and more often than not very enjoyable.

I ended up donating this book with a lot of other things to the university library many years ago, but I loved it, or anyway most of it, at the time. (I got it as soon as it came out.) It was so readable!

I didn't get it quite that quickly... I first became aware of it through a review in The Houston Chronicle, got a copy at the library, and then put the book on my "wish list" for Christmas of that year... and then read the darned thing so many times I finally had to replace it..... I also have a later B&N edition, as my copy of the Doubleday is a first, hence does not include the revisions he made later on.

That's one thing I'll say about de Camp: he was always readable. Which may sound like a bit of a back-handed compliment but isn't, really. He also had a knack for injecting a genuine sense of fun into a story the way Pratchett is (or was) able to do.

I wouldn't call it back-handed... many a writer -- even writers very worth reading, such as David Lindsay -- cannot necessarily make that claim. Whatever his faults (and he had many!) de Camp always did his best to engage the reader and be both clear and informative. Even with his Howardian pastiches, he nearly always managed the first and second, and with his non-fiction he certainly managed more often than not to do all three. He was no scholar, but he was well-read and also worth reading. (Even if I disagree wholeheartedly with his assessment of The Faerie Queen....)

 

[Extollager]

....He was no scholar, but he was well-read and also worth reading. (Even if I disagree wholeheartedly with his assessment of The Faerie Queen....)

That's Extollager-bait: what was de Camp's view of Faerie Queene? I've read the Harold Shea Castle of Iron, but that was more than 40 years ago. My guess is that de Camp thought the FQ quaint and perhaps silly; he would have had no sympathy for Spenser's beliefs and use of allegory, the repetition of knight-against-knight combats, etc. If he encountered FQ in a college class, the approach taken there may have been such as to emphasize the idea of decoding the allegory, etc. -- not the right way to read it. (The right way is, I think, that suggested by C. S. Lewis in a short essay in his collection on medieval and Renaissance literature, "On Reading the Faerie Queene," etc. By the way, it seems that about as soon as Lewis met Tolkien he felt him out on the FQ and found that Tolkien didn't go for it either.)

 

[j d worthington]

Many years ago, I had the good fortune to meet Sprague and his wife Catherine at a book signing. In between his signings, we had quite a long conversation on various topics; one of those introduced was the worlds Shea visited, and when it came to The Faerie Queen, he made no bones about the fact that he found going through it (research for writing the novel) tremendously tedious; he hated it. On the other hand, he was very fond of the Orlando Furioso, which he also had to read as background for that piece....

 

[neopeius]

Many years ago, I had the good fortune to meet Sprague and his wife Catherine at a book signing. In between his signings, we had quite a long conversation on various topics; one of those introduced was the worlds Shea visited, and when it came to The Faerie Queen, he made no bones about the fact that he found going through it (research for writing the novel) tremendously tedious; he hated it. On the other hand, he was very fond of the Orlando Furioso, which he also had to read as background for that piece....

I grew up on the Incomplete Enchanter. I never could get through the Castle of Iron, though, and I definitely remember enjoying the first half of the former book more than the latter.

I reviewed Incomplete Enchanter here.