Three years into their written correspondence, and nearly
one year into their debate on barbarism and civilization, the proportions of
the "controversy" between Robert E. Howard (REH) and H.P. Lovecraft
(HPL) expands with each exchange of letters. As the controversy advances, and
at times intensifies, secondary topics that began without any intended
connection to the debate become more and more directed toward this one issue,
to the point that sometimes in discussing them, either the criticism or the
defense of civilization is explicitly mentioned by one or the other. This is
especially the case in their conversations about the relative value of the mind
vs. the body, of art and intellect vs. other human endeavors (especially
contrasting creativity and commerce), and the extent of human freedom and the
degree to which different types of societies allow for it.
Letter 82: REH to HPL (June 15, 1933)
REH opens the current letter expressing happiness that they
have come to terms with their apparently merely semantic argument about the
value of the mental and the physic. Though with regard to the value of art, REH
yet has much to argue, taking a decidedly commercial stand. He claims that the
reason he writes as a profession is not out of a desire to create, but because
of the money, and the freedom writing affords him. He respects that the joy of
creativity can be "the breath of life" for artists, but denies a
special status for creativity for its own sake, or to recognize special
privileges for those engaged in it. Further, while he denies being an
anti-intellectual, he refuses to "indiscriminately worship"
intellectuals (592). And he admits to resenting the "sneers of the
sophisticated" and hating anything that reflects a "supercilious
viewpoint" (594). He denies special privilege and judges men on their
merits alone:
"A man is only a man, regardless of how many books he has read, or written. Neither wealth nor erudition gives him any more fundamental rights than is due any man. That’s why I love the memory of the frontier; there a man was not judged by what he had or what he knew, but by what he was" (594).Here, perhaps, REH demonstrates some vulnerability. The detestation and hatred which he admits to feeling seems to be born out of the sting of some slight, whether real or perceived. As he says, "I’ll be damned if I can see any reason why they should be loved and worshiped by the people they flay as boobs, morons and fools" (592). It seems only natural, then, that REH would long to return to a state in which his qualities would be recognized and valued, rather than criticized and depreciated.
