Friday, February 10, 2006

Robert Howard, King Conan, and the Arts

When it comes to depictions of unreflective low art, one need look no further than the commonly perceived opinions of Robert Howard's Conan stories. If you ask the average man on the street to describe a Conan narrative, you will likely be given a tale of lust and violence. In the tale Conan will rescue some half-naked maiden from some rampaging beast and the story will end with the woman becoming all naked as she swoons at the hero's feet. In fact, a great deal of Conan pastiche has been based on this very simple formula. The largest problem with such a vision is that it is not all that accurate. Are there tales of this sort in the Conan oevre?
Sure, but there are also tales of visionary wonder.



Like most authors, whether they write literature or Literature, Howard's writings reflect his own thoughts, experiences, and education. The writing reflects the aesthetic tastes of the author, or his/her understanding of a prospective audiences literary tastes. What makes something worth reading again and again is when an author satisfies those with "lower" tastes while providing them with some food for thought. Howard is no exception. In fact, I was surprised while I was rereading the first published Conan story, Howard's The Phoenix on the Sword to find that the author seemed to be hinting at a theory of the value of literature and its role in society.

Howard's Hyborean Age is a mythic world filled with magic and wonder, but it is also a world based on the history of the real world. Howard combined multiple eras of history so that societies whose "real world" existence is separated by centuries could co-exist narratively. Conan's own people, the Cimmerians, are based on a very real historical peoples. Both Herodotus, in his Histories, and Plutarch, in his Lives, mention the Cimmerian peoples (called Cimbri in Plutarch). In The Phoenix on the Sword, Howard appears to expect his audience to have at least a little understanding of the historical Cimmerians in his conversation of the role of literature in civilization. Conan, as protagonist, must hold ideas which the reader sympatizes with for the particular narrative of Phoenix to work.

So what kind of people were the Cimmerians? According to Plutarch they were a people who were pillagers and raiders, but not rulers.

For the Cimmerian attack upon Ionia, which was earlier than Croesus, was not a conquest of the cities, but only an inroad for plundering.
Herodotus, Histories, I, 6


What did they look like? According to Plutarch:

Their great height, their black eyes and their name, Cimbri, which the Germans use for brigands, led us merely to suppose that they were one of those races of Germania who lived on the shores of the Western Ocean. Others say that the huge expanse of Celtica stretches from the outer sea and the western regions to the Palus Maeotis and borders on Asian Scythia; that these two neighbouring nations joined forces and left their land... And although each people had a different name, their army was collectively called Celto-Scythian. According to others, some of the Cimmerians, who were the first-to be known to the ancient Greeks... took flight and were driven from their land by the Scythians. Plutarch, Life of Marius, XI


What was their temperment? According to Homer:

Thus she brought us to the deep-Rowing River of Ocean and the frontiers of the world, where the fog-bound Cimmerians live in the City of Perpetual Mist. When the bright Sun climbs the sky and puts the stars to flight, no ray from him can penetrate to them, nor can he see them as he drops from heaven and sinks once more to the earth. For dreadful night has spread her mantle over the heads of that unhappy folk. Homer, Odyssey, XI, 14


It is Homer's description of the Cimmerians that Howard uses in Phoenix to describe the mood of the people and to separate Conan from his kin. When Conan is asked why the Cimmerians are such a brooding people, Conan responds:

“Perhaps it’s the land they live in,” answered the king. “A gloomier land never was – all of hills, darkly wooded, under skies nearly always gray, with winds moaning dreaily down the valleys.” – Phoenix on the Sword

The average Cimmerian is a dour and towering barbarian who destroys civilization then returns to his gloomy homeland only to begin the process again later. Howard's typical Cimmerian is similar to that of the classical scholars, and presents a figure most unlikely to advance the literary arts. But this is where Conan differs from his kin. In The Phoenix on the Sword, Conan is an older man who has conquered on of the greatest nations of the Hyborean Age expressly to free them from tyrannical rule. He conquered to rule, and to liberate an oppressed nation. A far cry from the typical barbarian. By separating Conan from his kin, Howard simultaneously increases the audience's sympathy for the barbarian king while enabling the character to advance a theory of the value of literature.

The Phoenix on the Sword is the tale of a plot to assassinate King Conan, a plot organized my a Machiavellian figure named Ascalante who desires to assume the throne. Ascalante is the product of civilization, but he is the antagonist of the story and so Howard uses his opinions of the Arts as a way to separate him from the audience's sympathy. When he describes a poet who has been brought into his conspiracy he describes the poet in perjorative terms. These terms evolve as the narrative moves from unpublished draft to final published form. Ascalante originally expresses his disdain for Rinaldo (the poet) in a long description:
“Rinaldo – a mad poet full of hare-brained visions and out-worn chivalry. A prime favorite with the people because of his songs which tear out their heart-strings. He is our best bid for popularity.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)


By the time the story is published the description is changed to the very brief, "“…Rinaldo, the hair-brained minstrel.” [Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword(published)]. In the published form, Howard leaves out the value of Rinaldo's participation in the plot because it is redundant with information presented later in the story. When Ascalante is asked what value Rinaldo has as a conspirator, Ascalante's response is similar in both the published and unpublished text, but his hatred of Rinaldo is made more clear in the draft than in the published text:

“Alone of us all, Rinaldo has no personal ambition. He sees in Conan a red-handed, rough-footed barbarian who came out of the north to plunder a civilized land. He idealizes the king whom Conan killed to get the crown, remembering only that he occasionally patronized the arts, and forgetting the evils of his reign, and he is making the people forget. Already they openly sing The Lament for the King in which Rinaldo lauds the sainted villain and denounces Conan as ‘that black-hearted savage from the abyss.’ Conan laughs, but the people snarl.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“Rinaldo – bah! I despise the man and admire him at the same time. He is your true idealist. Alone of us all he has no personal ambition. He sees in Conan a red-handed, rough-footed barbarian who came out of the north to plunder a peaceful land. He thinks he sees barbarism triumphing over culture. He already idealizes the king Conan killed, forgetting the rogue’s real nature, remembering only that he occasionally patronized the arts, and forgetting the evils under which the land groaned during his reign, and he is making the people forget. Already they open sing ‘The Lament for the King’ in which Rinaldo lauds the saintly villain, and denounces Conan as ‘that black-hearted savage from the abyss.’ Conan laughs, but at the same time wonders why the people are turning against him.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)


In both descriptions the poet is shown to be a blind idealist. Rinaldo, it appears, cannot look beyond the Cimmerian stereotypes as presented by Plutarch and Herodotus. Howard doesn't require the reader to have those preconceptions, but for the reader who has read Herodotus and Plutarch the stereotype becomes even clearer. Also by editing down the prose the author, either willingly or at editorial command, displays an amount of trust that his audience can reach the proper conclusion that barbarism typically destroys the valuable within civilization. What is interesting is that while Rinaldo is a conspirator, the poet is an antagonist, he is not a villain. He is a blind a foolish idealist, not acting in his own self interest. Ascalante even goes on to describe Rinaldo's motivations:

“Poets always hate those in power. To them perfection is always just behind the last corner, or beyond the next. They escape the present in dreams of the past and future. Rinaldo is a flaming torch of idealism, rising, as he thinks, to overthrow a tyrant and liberate the people.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“Because he is a poet. Poets always hate those in power. To them perfection is always just behind the last corner or beyond the next. They escape the present in dreams of the past and the future. Rinaldo is a flaming torch of idealism and he sees himself as a hero, a stainless knight – which after all he is! – rising to overthrow the tyrant and liberate the people.” – Ascalante in Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished First submitted draft)


Ascalante specifies what kind of idealists poets are. They seek an imagined perfect society, and will always look for it no matter how good the society they are currently in happens to be. But this is Ascalante, the Machiavellian civilized man, and his opinion about what the value of the poet is. For him the poet is an easily manipulable puppet. What about the barbarian turned king, the protagonist, and oft argued proxy for the author? (It should be noted that many argue that Conan often reflects Howard's own views, this is not an original assertion on my part.)

Conan adores the poet, and understands the criticisms. He is aware that the poet's plays are leading many among the people to despise him, but he too is persuaded of the need for justice. When his chief advisor, Prospero, discusses disdain for Rinaldo, Conan comes to the poet's (and poetry in general) defense. The text is near identical in the published and unpublished format.

“Rinaldo is largely responsible,” answered Prospero, drawing up his sword-belt another notch. “He sings songs that make men mad. Hang him in his jester’s garb to the highest tower in the city. Let him make rhymes for the vultures.”
“No, Prospero, he’s beyond my reach. A great poet is greater than any king. His songs are mightier than my scepter, for he has hear ripped the heart from my breast when he chose to sing for me. I will die and be forgotten, but Rinaldo’s songs will live forever.” – Phoenix on the Sword (unpublished first submitted draft)

“Rinaldo is largely responsible,” answered Prospero, drawing up his sword-belt another notch. “He sings songs that make men mad. Hang him in his jester’s garb to the highest tower in the city. Let him make rimes for the vultures.”
“No, Prospero, he’s beyond my reach. A great poet is greater than any king. His songs are mightier than my scepter; for he has near ripped the heart from my breast when he chose to sing for me. I shall die and be forgotten, but Rinaldo’s songs will live for ever.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)




For Conan, the atypical Cimmerian, poems and the arts have more power than weapons or royal authority. Not only that, but it is right and just that this is the case. Conan, the barbarian, is the defender of the value of literature, while Ascalante, the civilized man, sees literature as only a tool used to manipulate the foolish. Conan would seek to discuss the past and future, the ideal ones, with the poet, while Ascalante would merely use Rinaldo to destroy what he opposes. Conan's conflict between desiring a free press and swift justice, and the eventual melee that will result because of his favoring of the press, are made clear in the poetic prologue to the final chapter of the narrative.


What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie?
I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky.
The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing;
Rush in and die, dogs – I was a man before I was a king. – The Road of Kings Phoenix on the Sword (published)




Surprisingly, Conan's love of literature and the arts, and his defense of them, is so deeply rooted that he initially refuses to kill Rinaldo when Rinaldo attacks him. He still believes he can reason with the poet, it is only when he is left no other alternative that he kills the poet (the text is identical in both published and unpublished forms).


“He rushed in, hacking madly, but Conan, recognizing him, shattered his sword with a short terrific chop and with a powerful push of his open hand sent him reeling to the floor.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)

“He straightened to meet the maddened rush of Rinaldo, who charged in wild and wide open, armed only with a dagger. Conan leaped back, lifting his ax.

‘Rinaldo!’ his voice was strident with desperate urgency. ‘Back! I would not slay you ..’

‘Die, tyrant!’ screamed the mad minstrel, hurling himself headlong on the king. Conan delayed the blow he was loth to deliver, until it was too late. Only when he felt the bite of the steel in his unprotected side did he strike, in a frenzy of blind desperation.

Rinaldo dropped with his skull shattered and Conan reeled back against the wall, blood spurting from between the fingers which gripped his wound.” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)


What is interesting in the narrative is that of all the conspirators, there are twenty in all, none are able to injure Conan with the success of the poet. The poet has both damaged Conan's regime and his body and yet Conan was ever reluctant to, though in the end capable of, slay his greatest enemy.

“’See first to the dagger-wound in my side,’ he bade the court physicians. ‘Rinaldo wrote me a deathly song there, and keen was the stylus.’

‘We should have hanged him long ago,’ gibbered Publius. ‘No good can come of poets..’” – Phoenix on the Sword (published)


What does this tell us of Howard's thoughts regarding the arts? We know that Conan loves them, but we also know how they were used to manipulate the populace and how his own love for them almost cost him his life. Is Howard trying to discuss how Plato's critique of the poets is a good one, while at the same time defending the possible nobility of the poet (as Aristotle does in his Rhetoric)? I think these are questions intentionally posed in the narrative (I know...never guess at intentionality), and make it clear why Conan's first story The Phoenix on the Sword was so compelling to readers when they first read it.

It should be noted that the story was originally submitted as a Kull tale, though I have yet to analyze that draft like I have these two subsequent writings. The Kull version was rejected by Weird Tales and the final (rather than the first) Conan version was the first appearance of what has become a culturally iconic figure.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Free Enterprise Special Edition Available March 7


The late '90s saw the release of two quintessential Gen-X films, Swingers (1996)and Free Enterprise (1998). Both films center their narratives on small, tight knit, groups of friends dealing with the romantic struggles typical of Gen-X 20-somethings. In a way, they are both a kind of Generation X version of Diner, but unlike Diner, the films star members of the generation the narrative is about, a kind of Diner in real time.

Swingers is the more frequently discussed film, having a kind of Sundance indie cred, but as well as Swingers captures the feel of Gen X as society understands it Free Enterprise captures Generation X as I experienced it. While the "youth culture" market and teen culture first emerged in the post-war Rock-n-Roll era, that market came into its developmental zenith with Generation X.

People who were born in the late-60s to late-70s experienced the first wave of what has been a continuing explosion of popular culture. Kids in the 40s could actually purchase every comic book published, and every fantasy/scifi novel, etc. But Generation X has been a generation both obsessed with, and struggling to keep up with the expansion of, popular culture. Generation X was exposed, thanks to syndication and cable television, to both new and old entertainment media. It is not uncommon to hear a Generation X member have a discussion of how much they love Alfred Hitchcock, Harold Lloyd, The Cure, Superman, G.I. Joe (the original "action figure", the smaller real action figures, and the cartoon), Beethoven, Rollerball, the O.C., and their Xbox 360. In fact, that list barely scratches the surface.

Sure, members of older -- and younger -- generations may discuss the same things, but the explosion and resulting obsession happened during the youth of Generation X and is as defining a characteristic as Drive-ins and drag-racing were for the "American Graffiti" generation, or protests and the "Summer of '69" were for boomers. A large part of what defines a generation is shared cultural experience, and for X-ers that generally means popular culture.

A few of key pop cultural experiences that most Gen-Xers share are Star Trek, Logan's Run, and Star Wars. In fact, when I was an undergrad fraternity member, the question I used to ask "young women" when they were at fraternity parties to see if they were old enough to hit on was, "So...how old were you when you saw Star Wars on the big screen?" It was a quick and easy way to see if they were 18, and one that didn't seem unnatural for most of the people I met.

Free Enterprise is the story of Generation X turning 30. I would say growing up, but that isn't what actually happens; at least not in the way that term is typically used. Generation X has a long way to go before they "put aside childish things" as Paul did in 1 Corinthians 13:11. Generation X is almost entirely defined by those childish things. To tell its story Free Enterprise centers its narrative on the lives of two men approaching "Last Day," a Logan's Run (movie) reference to their 30th birthdays.

Robert (Rafer Weigel) and Mark (Eric McCormack of Will & Grace) are two friends struggling through life in Southern California attempting to make a living with activities associated with their obsessions. Mark is the editor of Geek magazine, who has hopes of becoming a screenwriter/director and has been pitching his latest idea "Bradykiller" in the hopes of achieving that goal. Bradykiller is a kind of The Brady Bunch meets Silence of the Lambs film. Robert is a struggling editor at a direct to video production company. But Mark and Robert have a deeper connection than their interests in popular culture; they both have had William Shatner as an imaginary friend. Shatner (the imaginary friend) has "helped" both of these young men at one time or another in their pasts, and Captain Kirk is the major hero of these men's lives.

Little do these Star Trek, the original series only please, fans know how their lives are about to change when they meet the real William Shatner (played by William Shatner) while they are stopping by a Southern California used book store, the very real Iliad Bookshop. They are looking for pulp paperbacks when they stumble upon their idol. From their first meeting with William Shatner, Mark and Robert begin to discover how much they have in common with their hero and how human their hero is. As they learn that William Shatner is not Captain Kirk, and have to deal with the shock of such a revelation, they find that Shatner is a very human and very likable, if very eccentric, man.

Shatner does wonderful self-parody in this film. My favorite moments with him are when he tries to explain to Mark how it would be great if Mark would help him create his next great project. Shatner wants to do a rap version of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, with Shatner in all the roles.

The film is a witty, cool, and savvy film about geeks coping with growing up that manages to produce laughter without ever being cruel. The film has so many easter eggs, you have to watch it at least twice.

I highly recommend this film.

For further reading, a great deal of cool trivia regarding the movie can be seen here. Mindfire Entertainment should be releasing a sequel some time this year.


Wednesday, February 08, 2006

What is the Internet for?

Other than Fantasy Baseball, that is.

This link features a streaming video of singing World of Warcraft characters answering that very question. Don't worry if you don't like massive multiplayer online video games, that isn't a pre-requisite to enjoying this film. What is required is a tolerance for blue language, so if you are a child or easily offended avoid the link.

Quick answer...The internet is for porn.

Fantasy Baseball Time!!!

Anyone who is interested in joining Cinerati's fantasy baseball team...leave a message in the comments section.

Crazy Kill Bill Parody!

This is why I love the Interwebosphere!

Monday's article discussed the upcoming CBS/Aardman Animations production Creature Comforts. I am running through my, four times and hour, check to see if Cinerati has had any visitors/comments and lo and behold I have a comment!

Only I have no idea what it says. I don't speak Spanish or Portuguese, and I can't really tell the difference between the two when written, so you'll have to translate yourself.

Uiss, qué chuloo, qué buena pinta tiene, mola la animación aunque sea con plastilina en lugar de 3d
^_^


I have never received spam in the haloscan hosted comments before, the comments appeared to have the words "animation and 3D", and the commentator had left a kind emoticon, so I clicked onto Azusa's homepage.

What I found there was one of the bright spots in my day. It appears that Azusa is working on an animated parody of Kill Bill entitled Bill Kill. Anyway, it features a superdeformed rendition of Uma that has to be seen to be believed.

Azusa, and your assistant P Chan (an entertaining character from Ranma 1/2, thanks for stopping by Cinerati.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Blogging the Black Dahlia

As I mentioned in my post discussing my recent car break-in, I attended an LA Press Club event discussing the Black Dahlia murders. Donald Wolfe, the author of The Black Dahlia Files discussed his thesis while attempting to maintain enough mystery to convince the audience to purchase the book. Cathy Seipp, among others, was not convinced of Wolfe's conclusions, but still wanted to read the book. I purchased the book for future reference, but I lack the expertise to critique the book even after I finish reading it.

Larry Harnisch, on the other hand, seems to have the expertise and the time to give a detailed critique of the book and its arguments. Since February 3rd, he has been "blogging the book," and it has made for and interesting experience. Only one problem, if you don't read it regularly the "recent post" functionality of blogger lists the articles in reverse order. So...I thought I would give you the links of the first few in the order they were written.

  1. Blogging the Wolfe Book
  2. Blogging the Wolfe Book, "The Monster"
  3. Blogging the Wolfe Book, Extra! Extra!
  4. Blogging the Wolfe Book, Sniff Test
  5. Blogging the Wolfe Book, the Boy on the Bicycle
  6. Blogging the Wolfe Book, Weather Report

Quick warning, Larry has only reached page 7 in his critique so get ready for some serious nitpicking.

Solving the Transportation Needs of the 21st Century With Mid-20th Century Technology.

Ray Bradbury, speculative author of numerous Sci-Fi classics, has an opinion piece in today's Los Angeles Times. Bradbury laments the growing transportation crisis the Southland will be facing in the next decade and offers a solution reminicent of Robert Heinlein's classic "The Roads Must Roll." It is Bradbury's opinion that the Southland abandon its current plans of Subway expansion, subways are for cold climates, and should begin immediately building a fast, efficient, and clean monorail system.

According to Bradbury, "Anyone who has ridden the Disneyland or Seattle monorails knows how quietly they move."

I'm sorry..."anyone who has ridden the Disneyland..." What the?! Are you kidding me? Should we be looking to yesterdays imagined accomplishments to solve today's problems?

To be fair the same could and should be said about that 19th century innovation, the Subway.

I don't think that solutions that would have worked had they been built at a time when they would have been visionary is the solution to today's problems. And I do honestly believe that Bradbury's early advocacy of the Monorail was visionary, but now it would take too long and cost too much. What we need more of is finding ways to remove the necessity of commuting at all. It is time for a number of businesses in Los Angeles to move, or move at least a segment, of the business to where the employees are.

For many jobs in our modern information/communication age, it doesn't matter where the employees are located. It only matters that the employees have the ability to communicate with one another swiftly and efficiently. I say, "tear down the financial skyscraper!" Let the stock advisors advise their middle class clients close to where they live. Why do we need "centralized" management and oversight? Can we not track efficiency that is remote?

Let us think beyond transportation! Let us use communication! If we can sign business deals with Chinese corporations from our living room, can't we sign local contracts from there as well?

Though...thinking about it...a monorail would be cool. I'd use it, at least until I acquired my flying car.