When did you discover these two epic fantasy and sword & sorcery work well with each other instead of being opposites like the secondaries in reddit said?
>>98721424I think I understood that well before I ever heard any redditors yammering their measly little opinions. Tolkien and Howard are like chocolate and vanilla, sure they taste different and look different, but they don't clash with each other, and they can be combined into a synthesis that's maybe even more delicious than chocolate or vanilla could be alone. Now wait until people discover that they can also add caramel.
>when did you discover things you like can make something else you like as a result ??When I was 5.
>WW1 PTSD + suicidal mommy issuesThat sounds like a match reddit would love.
>>98721424Both works take place prehistoric Europe
>>98721424Where Tolkien and Howard's stories are similar:>A King is only rightful so long as he is strong, but the luxury and power of the crown often brings great men to ruin. He must occasionally be reminded of his origins as a warrior (Theoden and Conan)>Civilizations grow corrupt as greed, indolence, and jealousy rot them from within, and good men must sometimes turn to violence to purge them of evil and weakness (the madness of Denethor, and his overthrow by Gandalf to save Gondor vs. Conan seizing the throne of Aquilonia from a corrupt and disastrous king and bringing the kingdom back from the precipice of ruin into a new golden age)>Evil wizards are motherfuckers (Saruman vs. too many evil sorcerers to count in Conan stories)>Their concepts of evil have many commonalities, such as the nature of evil causing people to grow ugly and stupid and cowardlyWhere they differ:>Tolkien's ideal king is powerful in all ways, but equally balanced by humility and virtue>Howard's ideal king is powerful in all ways, but retains enough of the savagery of the wilds that his instincts for rule and war are not dulled and diluted by the feeble customs of civilization>Tolkien's good is clearly self-sacrificial in nature>Howard disdains self-sacrifice and humility as a mistake, and his "good" is more about strength than it is about virtue. That said, Conan demonstrates many virtues such as honesty, but always in a way that they are presented as strengths rather than moral virtuesThere are plenty of similarities, but in the end, in a Tolkien story, Conan would be easy prey of the One Ring and Sauron, while Aragorn would be presented as a useless fop paralyzed by elvish culture and morality in a Howard story, someone Conan pities as he watches him lead his kingdom into ruin pursuing ideas like the common good.
Howard could beat Tolkien in a fightJust sayin...
>howard>everyone only discusses conanThe focus on Howard's conan is a shame because his non Conan work is far better
>>98721585Half his non-Conan work isn't even fantasy lit so I don't see your point?
>>98721526>Conan pities as he watches him lead his kingdom into ruin pursuing ideas like the common good.Wasn't Conan in favor of land ownership reformation for the common good?>the one ring.If it was Kull, he would personally Gove it back to sauron, to fight him.
>>98721545You say that, but Tolkien fought in the First World War, while Howard only ever killed one guy.
>>98721424>When did you discover these two epic fantasy and sword & sorcery work well with each other instead of being opposites like the secondaries in reddit said?When I was about 22 and I decided to check out Conan? It's rather obvious that two different writers who wrote in different formats with different goals weren't particularly interested in each other. That's kinda the point of fantasy, to explore shit through literature. Conan exploring power and endurance, and LotR exploring mythology and heroism.
>>98721589More than that, he wrote a lot of comedies and boxing tales, but some of those do have fantasy or horror elements
>>98721545Tolkien was a veteran of one of the worst wars in human history, had a loving family, and lived into old age as a successful writer and accomplished academic rather than killing himself at 30 because he couldn't cope with his elderly mother dying.Just sayin...
>>98721424I dunno man, when I was like 10? There was no reddit back then.
>>98721763Tolkien's son was a pedophile.His great grandson is a literal left wing progressive jew.Is this how tolkienfags cope?
>>98721424>TolkienCatholic and Beowulf autist>HowardTheosophy and assorted heroic myth autistIt's not really that hard to figure out.
>>98721763>"He drank tea at the army hq in the war, y'know, show some respect"
>>98721424I've actually always thought they were more similar than they were different. Howard was also a poet, like Tolkien, though his pedigree is obviously far lower. I will say that Conan and Solomon Kane were much more tightly focused stories and Howard's flair for description is honestly a lot more punchy and enjoyable than Tolkien's, whereas Tolkien's mytho-poetic flavor is obviously peerless.They definitely compliment each other, between the two and perhaps Moorcock you can basically get a pretty seamless picture of what Anglosphere fantasy is all about. In that trio Moorcock is probably the lowest quality but Elric is pretty fun.
>>98721850He was a battalion signal officer at the fucking Somme dude, these were the guys who had to put down telephone cables while being shelled by the Germans. Junior Officers like him suffered higher casualty rates than enlisted men.
>>98721823>>98721850Neither of you could remotely qualify as being Men
>>98722080Yeah, signaling the waiter for another cup of coffee at the Cafe Somme
>>98721451FPBP. Probably the best food analogy I've seen here in a long time.
>>98721424but.. THE SPICE MUST FLOW
>>98721823Having shitty kids is better than no kids and killing yourself. Only natural that Howardfags have to project cope onto others because they have literally no way to defend him. Even by the standards of mommy-issues, killing yourself as a grown adult because of your ageing mother's death is incredibly retarded. Grieve like a normal person
>>98722341Cooking is a hobby that will always pay dividends to get into.
>>98721424How the hell do you know what Reddit says?
Alright, I'll bite.How do you do a "dual" adventure, both tolkienian and howardian?
>>98722382>Howard>kings are based>Tolkien>kings are based if power is held in the right hands>Herbert>there are no right hands to hold the powerKind a summary of the 20th century.
>>98722481There is literally no historic Tolkien/Howard rivalry. The two never interacted in any capacity. Where do you people come up with these retarded feuds? They didn't even compete, Howard was a pulp author who made his bones in the magazines before Tolkien even published.
>>98722382Boring motherfucker.
>>98722614Supposedly Tolkien read some of Howard's stuff and said he liked Howard's use of American English but that the action adventure genre wasn't his thing.
>>98721823>Tolkien's son was a pedophileThat's a new one.
>>98722652I had no idea. Well I'm glad he liked it. Makes sense that the genre isn't his thing though, I would've expected him to take actual moral issue with Conan's circumspect relationship with good and evil.
>>98722614>There is literally no historic Tolkien/Howard rivalryYes, i think it was caused by Howard's successors, who latch on him as a weapon against Tolkien and his rip-offs
>>98722581>>kings are based if power is held in the right handsI'd say that is more Howard's viewpoint, actually. (I was always under the impression that Conan himself wasn't ABSURDLY good at being a king, just that he was smart, honest, gave a fuck about poor people and not corrupt like the last Aquilonian kings)
>>98722702Kull too, he killed the snake men lobbyist.
>>98721424They both share the same basic idea, that being a yearning for a pre-industrial, romantic world (Tolkien obviously being more romantic than Howard). Where they differ is in their worldview, Tolkien was a scholar, immersed in mythologies and languages, built on top of his firm catholicism, while Howard was more the folk-tale type, no academic background to speak of except what books he read, and general agnosticism if not outright atheism. The life experience argument doesn't really hold given the quality of output that Howard put out before his death compared to Tolkien, if he had lived and perhaps fought (and maybe died) in WWII the conversation might be much different. In any case, Howard is far more deserving of the "American Tolkien" moniker than Martin.
>>98722652I'd be really curious about what he would've tought about HPL, myself. Not really for muh cosmic horror (at the very least, Tolkien didn't care much for scifi), but I feel like he would either hate or love his poesque use of adjectives and shit.
>>98722748Ultimately, I think Tolkien would find Lovecraft's overall cosmology to be viscerally offensive. Tolkien felt very strongly that good and evil are real things with a basis in the metaphysics of the world, and Lovecraft's view that the gods are incomprehensible and wholly amoral would really bother him.That said, Ungoliant is basically just an arachnid version of Shub-Niggurath.
>>98722748Tolkien did like Dunsany, however.And that guy inspired both REG, HPL and Tolkien.Some early dreafts of The Silmariullion apparently had some humans worshipping entities that were nameless gods, rather than connected to Valar or Eru.Tolkien later got rid of it, of course, but still.
>>98722811As much as I love both Tolkien and HPL, I think this is a correct assessment.Lovecraft was fairly neurotic and I can imagine him being rather tiresome company when in one of his moods. Otherwise, Lovecraft was a fairly fun guy to be around according to those who knew him and he sang rather well.
>>98722847>Tolkien did like Dunsany, however.Noice, well, everybody likes Dunsany really. Where does he say that?
>>98722852In one of his letters, I think.People back then wrote shitloads of letters.
>>98722811Tolkien view of morality was much more nuanced than evil vs good, people just haven't read him enough. Guy was writing dark fantasy before dark fantasy was a thing. I think he would find Lovecraft's works fascinating (Lovecraft himself was an anglophile). Like this anon said >>98722847 Tolkien played with various horror and "abstract" cults. He never completed it because the guy was a hyper perfectionist.
Fun fact: Tolkien was the guy that gave Nodens his name.As in, real-world Nodens. Yes, this means that (technically) he was a full-fledged cthulhian scholar studying a genuine Old God under the guise of a celtic healing god.Unfortunately, he did no archeology on pic related fighting demons from beyond. He just gave his filologist opinion on the inscription on the ring found in said (definitely more comfy than creepy) shrine. Still, quite a connection!Cute coincidences aside, did he ever say something about Machen? Because THAT would be interesting. Tolkien while being all about ruined worlds dind't really riff of real world ruins and 1800s classical world love/hate vibes. All the while being in old britain countryside...
>>98722924A extra funny bit is that Nodens is the inspiration for the one ring; a Roman soldier invoked him to curse a ring thief.
>>98722924Hm, what are the chances? And yet it happened. It really would have been interesting seeing these guys interacting.
>>98722811There is also the nameless things that gets mentioned once or twice by Tolkien that are basically Lovecraftian Elder Things or similar. >"Ever he clutched me, and ever I hewed him, till at last he fled into dark tunnels. They were not made by Durin’s folk, Gimli son of Gloin. Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he. Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day."There aren't many things older than Sauron, much less things that he wouldn't know about.
>>98721424Who and who
>>98721424I love both of them. The have more incommon than most people assume.
>>98723691Conan is really very different than what the public might think he is
>>98721673>Huh, who did Howard ki--oh>ohhYou cheeky little buddy.
>>98721526As I've seen someone else put it.Tolkein would be a Trekkie.Howard would be a 40kiddie.
>>98721424>tolkien and howard are oppositeswhat does that make moorcock? elric of melinibone is anti-tolkien and anti-conan
>>98723793>Gene Roddenberry >atheist who supposedly believed people can be ethical and fulfilled without believing in religion or a god>absolute douche canoe in real life who cheated on every woman he ever had a relationship with >bad man, bad father>banned from contacting the woman he loved for five years until he turned 21, then had to win her backlol lmao even Tolkien would have saw Gene for the garbage human he was and rejected his gay future
>>98723874Tolkien didn't seem to care much for TV and Film anyway.
>>98721451So Lovecraft, Howard and Tolkien making the epic of all fantasy epics giving I guessing that's the caramel being added to the chocolate and vanilla.
>>98721526Nah, Conan was NOT a fan of magic. So a magical ring that promise power would be seen as a trap and something not to trust. At best I would say Conan would see Aragorn as a man he could respect fully. Remember Aragorn was a ranger not just a king used to the trappings and customs of civilization. However depending on which part of Conan life when they met Aragorn would have 3 very different views on Conan
>>98723793Howard and Tolkein both would be more of a Heinlein's Starship Troopers fan than 40k or Star Trek.
>>98721526I could see Tolkien giving Conan a sop of wisely recognizing he wants nothing to do with this ring. It was possible for people to do so - Aragorn, Galadriel. Conversely Aragorn is more like the fellow in the Beyond the Black River who is Howard's own standin - half barbarous but that's not enough in a truly barbarous environment. Aragorn fits perfectly as the sword and sandal hero since he's half-in half-out of civilization and something of a half breed.>>98721763It feels incredibly vulgar to engage in an unnecessary pepsi vs coka cola red vs blue horseshit where there is none. If you want that kind of X versus Y then it's Tolkien vs Moorcock, and Tolkien still pulls ahead just for how much of a miserable little asshole Moorcock was. Alternatively Tolkien vs >>98722382 but a normal fucking person doesn't need to engage in manichean struggles for every fucking thing and can enjoy two diametrically opposed things at once.>>98722748I feel like Tolkien might like the most the furtive pygmy, so easily forgotten - I mean the third of the early 20th century Trio who gets forgotten, Clark Ashton Smith. Little (very) thick on purple prose but lacking the bitterness in Howard or Lovecraft's work.
>>98724007>Nah, Conan was NOT a fan of magicDepends, he would be bewildered by the existence of elves, hobbits, ents and dwarves.
>>98724057>. If you want that kind of X versus Y then it's Tolkien vs Moorcock, and Tolkien still pulls ahead just for how much of a miserable little asshole Moorcock was.This is because Moorcockian writers use Conan as a weapon Tolkien.
>>98722865He also as I recall just found it very dreary and depressing to deal with the fact that after the Lord of the Rings the flawed nature of mankind would mean conspiracies and cults would rise back up and the dark lord wouldn't be gotten rid of. It makes perfectly sense why that would be demoralizing - imagine if CS Lewis had a similar trajectory of Christianity after Christ's sacrifice for the lion the witch and the wardrobe so narratives of dismal persecution and suffering or dreary narratives of seeing the faith corrupted and fouled up with politics and sectarianism and without any messiah's arrival to look forward to.>>98723053I always like that foreboding sense of the universe. We get hung up on the narrative of nothing existing before a creator when the oldest narratives (polytheistic they may be) worked fine with the creator(s) just creating that which is good and orderly from disorderly chaos, primordial waters and all. In theory if Ungoliant/Leviathian existed before Ilumvatar/God created the world that doesn't mean you should worship the malevolent ancient thing because the creator is better. But if I was beign tinfoil hat the rational reason to run the>Nothing existed before the creatornarrative is to prevent the inevitable cultists worshipping said dark, nameless ancient things. >>98724063Judging from the elephant in the spider tower he'd have that animalistic acclimatizing to something once he's digested what it is. A dwarf is just a short man, a hobbit is a hairy child that speaks and acts like a man, an elf is a disturbingly beautiful and elegant human, an ent is to be shown that animalistic respect of distance and not mucking with, and orcs is for killing by crom.
>>98724057>It was possible for people to do soThe movies overstate how powerful/corrupting the ring was. In the books, Faramir was just like, 'lol no fucking way' without blinking an eye. No doubt. No hesitation. Movies did him dirty. Humans are consistently portrayed as most susceptible to the temptation of power and Tolkien shows us that a man can still flat out reject it through his own convictions. He's a much better example that Aragorn because Strider has the deck stacked way in his favor, comparatively. Movies did Faramir dirty.
>>98721424>>>/lit/
>>98722924>Fun fact: Tolkien was the guy that gave Nodens his name.Tolkien travelled back in time and wrote Nodens' name on artefacts excavated at that temple nearly 100 years before Tolkien was born? Tolkien faked the evidence of the inscriptions? How exactly did Tolkien give the name to Nodens when the Roman Britain era inscriptions already bore Nodens' name centuries before Tolkien lived?
>>98724108He took part in the archeological research, the temple was excavated twice
>>98724063No more than anyone would be around something something new and exotic. He would quickly get used to elves, hobbits, dwarves and other beings. However he would see the one ring as a cursed item over a item of great power. Which he rather destroy and get rid of over try to use.
