The Weird, The Strange, and The Missing Ingredient by Todd Vick

 Recently I was reading The Dark Man: The Journal of Robert E. Howard Studies (Vol. 7 No.2, 2014). The last article was a book review written by REH scholar and biographer Mark Finn titled Less an Archive, More an Agenda. The book under the microscope was The Weird: A Compendium of Strange and Dark Stories. This book is a monster at 1126 pages. The forward is written by Sci-fi/Fantasy author Michael Moorcock. It is loaded with excellent stories from a wide variety of authors between 1908 to 2010. Even so, Finn declares the book to be "less a historical celebration of the genre of the weird tale and more an international corrective to the archive of such narratives." (Finn 172) 

The list of included authors to this massive anthology is, to say the least, staggering; names such as Lord Dunsany, A. Merritt, Franz Kafka, H.P. Lovecraft, Clark Ashton Smith, Fritz Leiber, Ray Bradbury, Shirley Jackson, Robert Bloch, Daphne du Maurier, George R.R. Martin, Ramsey Campbell, William Gibson, F. Paul Wilson, Clive Barker, Octavia E. Butler, Harlan Ellison, Joyce Carol Oates, Poppy Z. Brite, Haruki Murakami, Stephen King, Tanith Lee, Michael Chabon, Neil Gaiman, Jeff VanderMeer, and dozens more. As you can see the list is filled with high caliber, quite popular writers in the weird fiction, horror, strange, and dark story genres. The subtitle is correct in its claim to be a compendium. It is certainly that. But, as Finn points out "there is one name that is conspicuously absent in this otherwise grand collection: Robert E. Howard." (Finn 173) I would also add that neither is Edgar Allan Poe, Rudyard Kipling, Robert W. Chambers, Hugh B. Cave, or August Derleth. 

Even so, according to Finn the omission of Robert E. Howard was not an oversight. No, it was a deliberate omission. Finn reported that he actually spoke with Jeff VanderMeer stating "he [VanderMeer] did not want any of Howard's more racially-charged work in a collection that included work by people of color and by people of various nationalities." (173) When Finn asked VanderMeer why he did not select stories by Howard that were not "racially-charged, such as Worms of the Earth, or The Tower of the Elephant", VanderMeer's response was merely he did not consider those. Finn offers his response to all this in his review. Read his review in that particular issue of The Dark Man to find out exactly what Finn says (feel free to use the link I provided above). In fact, I would recommend anyone reading this article to certainly read Finn's response. What I intend to do here is provide my own response. My own commentary on two main concerns I have with Jeff VanderMeer's response to Mark Finn.

VanderMeer's response to Finn is a bit disheartening. I'm left wondering if he even gave much thought to his reply to Finn. VanderMeer's answer seems to evade the question leaving us to ponder if perhaps he simply does not like Robert E. Howard or his work, or he has not read enough of Howard's work to gain a complete appreciation for one of the pioneers of early 20th century weird fiction. Even so, to create a compendium as large as this and not include Robert E. Howard is a strong indication that the VanderMeers have a serious blind spot in their reading list—something Finn also pointed out.

What's more interesting is the reasons (there are two) that Jeff VanderMeer claims he omitted Howard. First, he told Finn that he did not include Howard because of his racially charged works. VanderMeer explained that this compendium contained people of varying color and nationality, so he wanted to avoid any works that were racially charged. Prima facie I respect VanderMeer's reason for not wanting to include racially charged works in this particular volume. I can truly see VanderMeer's concern here, especially since the volume does include a wide variety of writers from various ethnic backgrounds. But that leads me to this question; if VanderMeer is omitting racially charged works due to the compendium's vast ethnic diversity, then why include any writers who are racists at all (e.g. H.P. Lovecraft)? I'll briefly discuss this question a little later.

Second, after VanderMeer's first answer, Finn inquired why he did not consider Howard's other non-racially charged works. VanderMeer's response? He simply did not consider them. Howard clearly has alternative works that could easily have been included. Finn suggested two—Worms of the Earth and The Tower of the Elephant—but there are others: The Horror From the Mound and Old Garfield's Heart. While the latter two have some minor stereotypes in them, they are certainly not racially charged and definitely worthy of consideration.

Here are my thoughts about VanderMeer's two answers to Finn's questions. With regard to the issue of race featured in stories by writers who wrote during a time when racist attitudes were different than ours; back then these attitudes occurred in fiction. In fact, they were fairly common. Of course, we live in a day an age where ethnicity, nationality, and race are in the forefront of our minds. We are more careful about such issues than previous generations. But there was a time when this was not the case. Writers like Agatha Christie, Fyodor Dostoevsky, D.H. Lawrence, Thomas De Quincey, Mark Twain, H.P. Lovecraft, and many others made obvious and subtle racist remarks in their stories. So how should we respond to such racial features in these older stories? Should we eliminate them from current collections or compendiums? Here's something to consider.

In an April 13th, 2015 article from The New Yorker titled "Reading Racist Literature", Elif Batuman discusses her experiences with what she thought was racist literature toward her own people, Turkish Americans. She sites that she first ran into a racist remark in the novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover. As Batuman puts it, the one passage she remembers "most clearly is this conversation between Connie, Clifford, and the Irish writer Michaelis:

“I find I can’t marry an Englishwoman, not even an Irishwoman…”
“Try an American,” said Clifford.
“Oh, American!” He laughed a hollow laugh. “No, I’ve asked my man if he will find me a Turk or something…something nearer to the Oriental.”
Connie really wondered at this queer, melancholy specimen." (Batuman "Reading Racist Literature")

This seems innocuous enough, right? Sure it does, if you are not a Turk (or Irish, English, or American for that matter). But the Turk in this list of groups is singled out as "Oriental" and considered a "queer, melancholy specimen." At the time this novel was written, these types of remarks were not even considered racist, or out of the ordinary. But to a Turkish American reader 70 years later, there it is all over the page. Batuman goes on to detail other works that she considered racially charged, giving details behind the circumstances of her encounters with them. And what was her final response to all this?

"These encounters were always mildly jarring. There I’d be, reading along, imaginatively projecting myself into the character most suitable for imaginative projection, forgetting through suspension of disbelief the differences that separated me from that character—and then I’d come across a line like 'These Turks took a pleasure in torturing children' (“The Brothers Karamazov”)."
     "But I always moved on, quickly. To feel personally insulted when reading old books struck me as provincial, against the spirit of literature. For the purposes of reading an English novel from 1830, I thought, you had to be an upper-class white guy from 1830. You had to be a privileged person, because books always were written by and for privileged people. Today, I was a privileged person, as I was frequently told at the private school my parents scrimped to send me to; someday, I would write a book. In the meantime, Rabelais was dead, so why hold a grudge?" (Batuman "Reading Racist Literature")

This is true for most of the older 19th & 20th Century stories. There is particular kind of racial history there, a particular social structure, and a way in which people acted toward others of different races. Batuman points out that 100 years from today, society will look back at us and find something offensive about what we wrote, the way we behaved, etc. Cultures move and change, views move and change, it's a fact of life. So, Batuman's conclusion?

"How do you rehabilitate your love for art works based on expired and inhuman social values—and why bother? It’s easier to just discard the works that look as ungainly to us now as “The Octoroon.” But if you don’t throw out the past, or gloss it over, you can get something like “An Octoroon”: a work of joy and exasperation and anger that transmutes historical insult into artistic strength." (Batuman "Reading Racist Literature")

Racially charged works can be works of joy, exasperation, and elicit anger that "transmutes historical insult into artistic strength." Also, historical context and a realization that these authors are actually writing about their own time periods in which various things occurred that we today might find repugnant are important things to consider. For 21st century readers historical accuracy can be more highly valued than political correctness when reading previous generation's history and fiction. Political correctness can, at times, work for us in the 21st century as we are dealing with our own moral, political, and racial issues. But to take what we think now and force it on a previous generation that had no such ideas is not only anachronistic but quite wrong headed. So for Howard to write stories that are racially charged is simply an indicative feature of his history, his time.

As the editor of the compendium, VanderMeer is well within his right to not include Howard's racially charged works. I will not fault him for that decision even though I think Batuman provides a good explanation as to why these works should still be read and enjoyed. Even so, consider this. By including any racist author, such as H.P. Lovecraft, VanderMeer has, to a certain degree, contradicted himself in his response to Finn. How so? Anyone who might find the stories that were included by H.P. Lovecraft enjoyable, and thus turn around to read more of Lovecraft's works on that basis, will inevitably end up reading one of Lovecraft's more racially charged works. Did Jeff VanderMeer think this far ahead when he chose to include racist authors's works that were not racially charged? Once again, if race were truly the issue, then the omission of any racist author from the volume would be the consistent thing to do. But for the sake of argument, let's just set aside the issue of race and turn our attention to VanderMeer's second response to Finn: the dismissive consideration of Howard's non-racially charged works.

For VanderMeer to tell Finn he didn't even take the time to consider other non-racially charged works by Howard is really not an answer to Finn's question. At best it's dismissive. This is especially strange given the fact that Robert E. Howard was a pioneer in the realm of weird fiction. Moreover, the back of the VanderMeers compendium reads:

"From Lovecraft to Borges to Gaiman, a century of intrepid literary experimentation has created a corpus of dark and strange stories that transcend all known genre boundaries. Together these stories from The Weird, and among its practitioners number some of the greatest names in twentieth-and-twenty-first century literature. (VanderMeer, Back Book Cover)

How does Robert E. Howard not fit into that description, especially given the fact that he set new trends in weird fiction by not only mixing tropes when no one else was, but including specific elements in his various weird stories that no other author had ever done before? The Horror from the Mound is a prime example of a "dark and strange story that transcends all known genre boundaries." Howard's work is, by definition, what the VanderMeers claim they are including in this compendium. But I'm left wondering why Jeff VanderMeer did not even consider Howard's other non-racially charged works. His response is void of a genuine answer leaving me to conclude that perhaps VanderMeer may simply be biased against Robert E. Howard and his work.

Regardless of VanderMeer's response to Finn, I highly recommend the compendium. It is well worth the price for all the great material that is included. And, it is one of the better collected volumes of weird stories in print, despite the glaring omission of one of history's pioneering weird fiction writers.


Bibliography

Batuman, Elif. "Reading Racist Literature - The New Yorker." The New Yorker. N.p., 13 Apr. 2015. Web. 23 June 2015.

Finn, Mark. "Less an Archive, More an Agenda." The Dark Man: The Journal O Robert E. Howard Studies 7.2 (2014): 172-74. Print.

VanderMeer, Ann, and Jeff VanderMeer. The Weird: A Compendium of Strange and Dark Stories. New York: Tor, 2012. Print.

Robert E. Howard Days 2015: A Report by David Piske

One day five years ago my good friend, Todd Vick (the guy responsible for this venerable blog), said to me, "Hey, you wanna take a trip next month to Cross Plains to see the home of Robert E. Howard?" I am usually game for a trip out of town to see new sights (and sites). And I am a life-long geek for sci-fi and fantasy movies and TV shows (especially Star Trek). However, I read mostly nonfiction, so naturally I replied to Todd's question with a quizzical look. "The home of who?" Thus began my interest (and education), first in Conan, then in Robert E. Howard.

The REH Days banner in front
of the REH House & Museum

 This past weekend was the third time I traveled with Todd to Cross Plains, TX for Robert E. Howard Days, and already I think this informal fan (mini-)convention is something special, with potential to become a much bigger deal. This year the informal theme of the gathering, which was fleshed out in two panels, was the relationship between Robert E. Howard and fellow pulp writer, H.P. Lovecraft. The guest of honor was Mark Schultz, an artist with a number of credits related to REH, including comics work with King Kull in Savage Sword of Conan, and illustrations in Conan the Cimmerian (by Wandering Star Books, and later reprinted in the Del Rey books). In addition to participating in a Q&A, Schultz delivered the keynote presentation at the banquet on Friday night, summarizing the history of REH-related illustrations with slides featuring the works of numerous artists including himself, Roy Krenkel, Jeffrey Jones, and (of course) Frank Frazetta.

Panel: Conan Vs. Cathulhu
Mark Finn, Jeffrey Shanks, & Scott Cupp

Like any convention, one of the biggest draws to REH Days is the panels. Or at least it should be, because the panels have improved every year I have attended, mostly due, I think, to sharpening topical focus. For me, the highlight was a panel on Saturday: "A Means of Freedom: The Letters of Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft", which was about the complicated, and sometimes heated written correspondence between these two pulp titans. The panelists, Rusty Burke, Jonas Pridas, and Dierk Guenther spoke about the contours of the conversation the two writers carried on by mail from 1930 to 1936. For months I have been reading these letters, analyzing the rhetoric both men employed in their "controversy" about the relative merits of barbarism and civilization. So, naturally, I hung on every word. The panelists observed that REH developed his ideas about barbarism as he debated with Lovecraft, and that this development can be seen in the Conan stories he wrote during the course of this debate. The panel also observed how the two writers' correspondence differed from what we might expect from a similar argument today.

Panel: A Means To Freedom: Letters of REH & HPL
Rusty Burke, Jonas Pridas & Dierk Guenther

Their disagreement grew more bitter over time, yet they both continued to include details about their lives in their letters. As Guenther quipped, if such a correspondence were held today, for example over social networking, it would likely end with someone being "unfriended"!

In the panel on "REH and Gaming," Patrice Louinet, Jeffrey Shanks, and Mark Finn discussed the ongoing development of two different games. Louinet brings his attention to detail and a purist's zeal to a Conan board game being produced by Monolith Board Games. With his role in the production, he gets the final word on what characters and story details are included in the game and how they will look. Anticipation for this game is tangible. At the start of the game's Kickstarter campaign the goal was $80,000, but supporters soon blew the top off, raising a total of $3.3 million. Role playing fans also have something to look forward to. Shanks (as well as Finn and Louinet) are involved in the development of an RPG by Modiphius Entertainment called, Robert E. Howard's Conan: Adventures in an Age Undreamed Of. The game and its expansions will offer players adventures that are truer to Howard's stories than many previous adaptations of Conan. Players who got to sit down for a game test (in the living room of the Howard home) attest to its flexible game play.

The Howard Family Bible
Brad Howard, Amanda Howard-Williford,
Patrice, & Jeff Howard

 In another panel, Louinet interviewed cousins of REH, Brad and Jeff Howard, and Brad's daughter, Amanda Howard-Williford. They seemed amused and bewildered by Louinet's (and Rob Roehm's) detailed knowledge of their family history, and expressed gratitude for the dedication of fans that have kept REH's legacy alive. Panel attendees were rapt as the Howards revealed a few family artifacts. Even Louinet had not seen the items beforehand. He inspected a first edition hardcover of the Breckinridge Elkins novel, A Gent from Bear Creek, and could not contain his glee as a family Bible, published in 1857, was revealed. Louinet personally inspected its hand-written genealogy pages, discovering the names and dates of birth/death of many members of the Howard family, including REH.

Mark Schultz & Rusty Burke

In one panel Rusty Burke interviewed guest of honor, Mark Schultz. And in another, the connections between the stories of REH and HPL were discussed (highlighting especially REH's horror stories, such as "The Black Stone"). On Friday the REH Foundation awarded several people for their achievements in Howard studies. Among the winners were Deke Parsons, Jeff Shanks, Rob Roehm, and Damon Sasser. (See here for a full list of awards and winners.) Also, the yearly post-banquet "panel", Fists at the Ice House, featured a somewhat avant-garde reading-in-the-round of various Howard writings by Shanks, Finn, and Chris Gruber. Each year, behind the taxidermy shop that now stands there, it is easy to picture the gritty scene after hours at the ice house, where rough men, including Howard, exchanged blows and settled scores.  

Fun at the Pavilion

While the panels are an obvious part of the attraction to Howard Days, it is impossible to downplay the satisfaction of interacting with fellow Howard Heads. It was my pleasure to make new acquaintances with folks like Scott (comic-book enthusiast), Russell (fellow connoisseur of Earl Grey tea), Chris (generous sharer of beer), James (fan of classic blues), and Aurelia (de facto poet laureate of this year's Howard Days). Though the absence of REH Days' Scottish contingent was felt, as well.

It was also a treat to talk with Howard experts. Patrice Louinet exuded passion for REH and gratitude to Glen Lord when he spoke of the origin of his own interest in Howard. He also opined on how L. Sprague de Camp did not really rescue Conan from obscurity; given an opportunity, Donald Wollheim would have done much more for Conan's fame. And Louinet called attention to something not all REH fans have come to terms with: that Conan is an asshole. While he is compelling, a thinker, and multi-faceted, Conan's acts included attempted rape and the slaughter of innocents. Frank Coffman offered perspective on contradictions that appear in REH's ideas about barbarism, noting that Conan is a complex of characters, rather than a single, coherent character. He also suggested a source of inspiration to Howard: G.K. Chesterton, especially his "The Ballad of the White Horse." And in talking with Mark Finn at the outdoor barbecue I found affinity in our overlapping taste in beer and appreciation for art.

Cat & Barb Bq
Photo courtesy of Rob Roehm

 Speaking of the barbecue, this year it was held on the museum grounds instead of at the usual spot at Caddo Peak Ranch. I believe the change in location was due to recent rainfall and the presence of poisonous snakes. I barely missed the sunset viewed from the peak, though. My attention was monopolized by the beef brisket smoked on-site by Cat & Barb Bq.

As I would at any convention, I hunted down new additions to my collection. Opportunities to part from my money abounded; between the museum's gift shop, the swap meet, and the silent auction, it's a wonder how I will still pay my bills this month. I was outbid at the auction, yet even on my modest budget I came away with some new volumes for my Howard library. I still await a reissue of The Collected Poetry of Robert E. Howard, but Paul Hermon explained that the release of an expanded second edition is being held up by licensing issues. One of the collectibles I will prize most from this weekend is the one I spent the least on. I will display on my bookcase the postcards that were stamped at the Cross Plains post office with a postal cancellation mark (specially designed for this year's Howard Days by Mark Schultz).

REH Gravesite at Greenleaf
Cemetery 

Aside from the activities of Howard Days, the trip to Cross Plains provided an opportunity for a geeky side adventure. On Sunday Todd and I followed in some of REH's steps, guided by Rob Roehm's well-researched Howard's Haunts. To begin, we visited the Howard family grave site at GreenleafCemetery in Brownwood, TX. Then, we drove to Menard County, TX and explored the various buildings and ruins of the old frontier outpost, Fort McKavett. We also visited the ruins of Presidio de San Sabá, an outpost established by the Spanish in 1757 to protect the nearby mission. Howard never documented a visit to this site, but because it is on the road to McKavett, it is hard to believe he did not stop at least briefly. Visiting these sites and absorbing the Texas countryside along the way feeds my historical imagination and gives me some insight into the way Howard's environment might have shaped him.

The Presidio de San Saba

Mark Finn, Jeff Shanks & Patrice Louinet

Cross Plains was part of REH, and it is also part of REH Days. And that's part of its appeal. Howard fans do not gather in a place like San Diego. Cross Plains, and thus Howard Days, is small and out of the way. It lends a sense that those who attend just "get it", that they are in on something that no one else is. I imagine many well-known conventions started out similarly. Yet sharing one's passion is part of being a fan, too, and I get the sense that even many long-time Howard Heads believe that REH has not gotten the attention befitting one of the three great pulp writers. Accordingly, the media projects of REH evangelists like Shanks, Finn, and Louinet aim at generating a fresh wave of interest. Cross Plains can never host enormous crowds, but as interest in Howard grows, I would like to see Howard Days serve as a rallying point for both veteran and beginning fans, even if it will involve some growing pains.

 I did not know of Robert E. Howard five years ago. As a Johnny-come-lately to this party, it is easy to feel like an outsider. Such is the experience of beginning anything worthwhile. But my adventure and education in the writings of Robert E. Howard are now linked to this annual pilgrimage to Cross Plains, TX. I know I will have conversations there that I do not have anywhere else. I also now have acquaintances there that I will miss the rest of the year, and want to see again. I expect the panels to continue to stimulate, perhaps as Howard's other characters are intentionally brought out of the shadows. No doubt the deals on books and swag is a plus, but they are outweighed by the sense of history that one feels while reading Howard's poetry on his porch, visiting the ruins that ignited his imagination, and standing on the boxing spot where he might have got the crap knocked out of him a time or two, and in turn knocked the crap out of others. And did I mention the barbecue?

". . . if you come to visit me, I will do my best to entertain you. I certainly hope you will come."

—Robert E. Howard to Tevis Clyde Smith

Study This, Not That!: A Suggested Bibliography for REH Studies, Part One

Have you ever seen those bestselling books titled Eat This, Not That! ? They contrast the kinds of food it is best to eat with the kinds of food it is best not to eat. They are quite informative. Interestingly enough, in the realm of Robert E. Howard studies there is certainly material on both sides of the line, so speak. In other words, there is available material that is actually good to study, and available material that is not so good to study. This article's intent is to inform the serious seeker in REH studies about the best research material to study and the reasons why. 

In any field of study/research there is always material that is better than others. What one may not understand though is what makes some material better than others and how you tell the difference? A good question to ask when embarking on research is do the data and methods used support the conclusions? In terms of historical research—which is what most REH scholars are essentially working with outside of REH's manuscripts—new data is often discovered which can render old data outdated or sometimes obsolete/wrong. The point of research is to investigate ideas, facts, events, etc. and uncover useful knowledge. Useful knowledge is obtained from eyewitness accounts, documents, manuscripts, recorded history, pictures, letters/correspondence, etc. You get the idea. This is why when new data arises it tends to out-date or sometimes make obsolete older research material. That does not necessarily mean that older material is always "bad" or rendered useless. But it certainly helps to know how new data overrides old data. 

Quality research also demands good judgment, honesty, and proper context. Poor research is usually easy to spot. It entails poor judgments, contradictory evidence, quick/poor assumptions, and/or a lack of solid evidence. While all of the above is certainly not exhaustive, it is a pretty solid foundation from which to start when considering research methodology. 

All the above considered, let me now suggest some research material that I have used to further my knowledge in REH studies. I'll attempt to explain why I think that one might want to study this and not that. It should be noted that I am simply suggesting what I have considered better research material. Also, it is always a good thing to research all material within the arena of your topic. The key factor in doing so is an ability to discern what material is best. That being the case, let's take a look at what's out there:

REH Biographies

Study This . . .

Blood & Thunder by Mark Finn

First Edition

Monkey Brain Books

2006

ISBN: 9781932265217

Second Edition

REH Foundation Press

2011

There are two editions of Mark's work. The second edition makes improvements on grammatical/textual errors from the first edition. Plus, the second edition adds new material based on current research findings, etc. However, even though the second edition is updated, the first edition still holds its own. I own a copy of both editions for purposes of actually being able to see improvements between the two texts and to be able to contrast the updated material between the two editions. The works themselves draw heavily on REH's letters, first person accounts, historical documents, and corrections of silly myths that have developed over the years about Robert E. Howard. There is also an emphasis on the fact that Robert E. Howard was a Texas writer, something that certainly influenced his works. To miss this point, Mark emphasizes, is to miss the man in his work. To this date, this is the definitive REH biography and an important addition to REH studies.

One Who Walked Alone: Robert E. Howard: The Final Years by Novalyne Price Ellis

Donald M. Grant Publishers
ISBN: 093798678X
First published in 1986

This is not your typical biography. In other words Novalyne did not do the standard footwork on the life of Howard like a biographer who had never met Robert E. Howard would be forced to do. This biography is more a kin to an autobiography because Novalyne actually knew Robert E. Howard. In fact the two of them dated toward the end of Howard's life. This work is an account of her experiences with Howard during that time frame. The information is taken directly out of a personal journal she wrote at the time they dated. So not only is this work a first hand account, but it's written in such a style that makes it very readable and personable. In fact, the book was so well received that popular independent film director Dan Ireland based his film The Whole Wide World on this work. So the movie and the book have had a significant cultural impact. The importance of the book lies in the fact that there is no other account of REH's life like it. It provides the reader/researcher intimate insight into the life of the writer and the man. Moreover, there are personal conversations about politics, Texas history, religion, teaching, writing, etc. Howard details his characters, how he creates them, his writing style, why he sells various stories over others, what was selling at that time, and interesting conversations about what both Novalyne and Robert were reading at the time. This book is well worth the time invested.

The Last Celt: A Bio-Bibliography of Robert E. Howard by Glenn Lord

Glenn Lord's work, though no longer in print, is well worth tracking down. There are still copies to be had at various online bookstores (in fact here's one such place).

Berkley Windhover Books
ISBN: 0425036308
November 1977

This work contains Robert E. Howard's autobiography, essays on/about his life, an account of his suicide, family photographs, original artwork by Howard, letters from publishers, a detailed bibliography, and so much more. Glenn Lord was single-handedly responsible for current research being as effective as it has been. Not only for his own published material but for his work and help with all of the most important current REH scholars and their work. In fact, this work is merely a drop in the bucket of all the material Glenn Lord has provided for current REH research. The Last Celt is one of the best starting places for doing REH research, even though it is somewhat dated. The material is reliable, the research is well performed, and the footwork that Lord performed to garner the material is astounding. I owe much of my early research about Howard to this single volume. It is well worth tracking down.

Not That . . .

Dark Valley Destiny: The Life of Robert E. Howard by L.Sprague de Camp

The main reason I place this work in the "not that" group is due to it's lack of objective research. For too long this biography was the only one available. Unfortunately the repercussions still linger from this work today. However, those repercussions are waning due to current scholarship. I can't stress enough the poor research quality of this work. L. Sprague de Camp (henceforth de Camp) apparently took it upon himself to speculate about various things for which he was unable to find supporting facts. de Camp is not bashful about his speculations either. In fact, he prefaces those speculations with phrases such as "I suspect", "I believe", "It probably . . .", etc. Additionally, because of de Camp's background in psychology, he takes it upon himself to psychoanalyze Robert E. Howard, who at the time was long dead. And de Camp did this despite the fact that at the time psychoanalysis was being seriously questioned about its genuine validity. Today the practice has all but been dismissed as faulty and outdated. If you do decide to tackle this work do it with a full salt shaker and an active discerning mind. The small redeeming qualities of this book are its photographs of Cross Plains (from the 70s) and the REH home from the late 70s early 80s, and its early bibliography.

Robert E. Howard: The Supreme Moment by Francis DiPietro

Unless you are glutton for punishment, I would avoid this biography altogether. Of all the biographical

material I've read (and I've read pretty much everything that's available) this is the worst. In fact, DiPietro prefaces his biography by explaining that he is not a biographical writer. Is that an apology or merely self loathing? However, he does detail his previous works/credentials, all are fictional parodies based on Robert E. Howard's works (e.g. The Hour of the Dragon). Additionally, he admits to researching all the current REH scholars and lists each of their names. All the names are from the standard lot. It should be noted here that by listing names all he in fact accomplished was admitting that his work is derivative of their work. Perhaps derivative is too complimentary a term, a type of plagiarism would be closer to the truth. Regardless, the material in this work is more speculative than de Camp's biography. Despite the poor narrative quality of DiPietro's work he doesn't add any meaningful material to Howard studies. When I say 'meaningful' I mean DiPietro has done nothing to further the research, he has merely taken what is already available and speculated upon it. The most frustrating thing about this work is when DiPietro writes various claims or statements and then leaves them with no further explanation or support. Why? This does nothing but frustrate careful readers. I certainly do not recommend this work at all.


REH Primary Works

Study This . . .

The Del Rey Robert E. Howard Works

Del Rey Books
ISBN: 0345461517
December 2003

Del Rey Books
ISBN: 0345461509
July 2004

In 2003 Del Rey published a volume titled The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian illustrated by Mark Schultz with an introduction by Patrice Louinet. This volume took what was previously done on Wandering Star a few years earlier and made the price accessible to everyone. Morever, buzz about the authenticity of the stories being based solely on the original submitted manuscripts by REH to Weird Tales made the volume all the more appealing. Plus, the appendices included Patrice Louinet's work titled Hyborian Genesis, part one of a three part essay on the historicity of the creation of Conan and the chronology of those manuscripts. The other parts of Hyborian Genesis would continue in the two subsequent Del Rey Conan volumes. Besides the Conan volumes from Del Rey, other volumes would soon follow. All said, 11 Del Rey volumes would be published, including volumes devoted to Solomon Kane, Bran Mak Morn, Kull, El Borak, REH's Horror Stories, historical adventures, etc. The only pitfall I can think of regarding these volumes is that there were no volumes of REH's western and boxing stories. But the REH Foundation would soon remedy that. All of the Del Rey volumes include first rate artwork, excellent introductions, and informative appendices. Each volume is a must for any serious REH reader or researcher.

Not That . . .

The Lancer/Ace Conan Series

Unless you're just into collecting Frazetta's artwork, I would not recommend the Lancer or Ace Conan series. Granted, there are a few volumes where Robert E. Howard's work is present, albeit edited. And, these are not the purist copies. Even though many fans discovered Robert E. Howard (me included) through these volumes, L.Sprague de Camp and Lin Carter included too much of their own work. That's right, the volumes are filled with pastiches from de Camp and Carter, and the Howard works are edited (sometimes quite heavily). Don't misunderstand me here, I'm not slamming de Camp or Carter for their own efforts, it's just if you want to read the real Robert E. Howard stories then stick with the Del Rey editions. Moreover, the introductions to the de Camp/Carter volumes are wrought with problems/issues. No different than the problems/issues in de Camp's biography about REH (DVD). Even so, when I was younger and first introduced to REH (back in 1981) through the Ace editions of these books, I certainly could tell the difference in writing styles/voice/quality between the de Camp/Carter stories and the REH stories. All this being the case, buy them for comparisons to the Del Rey stories and see how they stack up. If you are doing textual analysis then by all means collect these and see how the stories were re-worked/edited compared to the original Weird Tales publications (or original manuscripts). It is for that very reason I own all the Lancer and Ace editions. Otherwise, pass 'em up.

(More to come . . .)

Pigeons from Hell: The Graphic Novel

The other day I traveled to north Dallas with a good friend of mine to visit Titan Comics. While I was there I found this . . .

I had no idea this existed, so when I saw it and jumped at the wall to grab it and shouted, "oh, man!", heads turned in the store wondering what this crazy guy was doing. I have not sat down to read it yet, so I am uncertain if it sticks with REH's original story. The artwork, by Nathan Fox and Dave Stewart (of Marvel & DC fame), is quite nice.

The back of the novel reads: Master horror storyteller Joe R. Lansdale throws his scathing wit and wild, otherworldly creations into the mix as he brings Robert E. Howard's classic tale of dark revenge to the present . . . and into the unwilling lives of the Blassenville mansion heirs, twin sisters Claire and Janet. When Griswell fled the Blassenville estate those many years ago, he couldn't have imagined the grotesque horrors that would eclipse the ones he saw then - but they're here!

Online booksellers detail this graphic novel with these words: With more than twenty books to his credit, Joe R. Lansdale is an acclaimed storyteller. He's been called "an immense talent" by Booklist; "a born storyteller" by Robert Bloch; and The New York Times Book Review declares he has "a folklorist's eye for telling detail and a front-porch raconteur's sense of pace." He's won a ton of awards, including five Bram Stoker horror awards, a British Fantasy Award, the American Mystery Award, the Horror Critics Award, the "Shot in the Dark" International Crime Writer's award, the Booklist Editor's Award, the Critic's Choice Award, and a New York Times Notable Book award.

Additionally, on the back of this edition it declares: "This collected edition also includes an afterword by Robert E. Howard scholar Mark Finn, a look into Nathan Fox's sketchbook, and bonus never-before-seen pinups from Guy Davis, Greg Ruth, Tomer Hanuka, Jim Mahfood, and others!

I'm excited to have found this item and look forward to reading it.