Howard or Tolkien, Which of them Had The Greatest Impact On Modern Fantasy ?

[Extollager]

Until LOTR came into print the, Hobbit had been all but forgotten . Right ?

My impression is that it was well remembered ... as a children's book. I guess it has never been out of print in over 75 years.

 

[Extollager]

Interesting. I seem to recall reading that the Hippies loved Tolkien's works.

Some truth in that.

http://www.ethangilsdorf.com/ethanfreak-blog/2011/6/1/tolkien-hippie-stickers-resurface.html

http://www.amoeba.com/blog/2013/01/...bit-rock-exploring-a-beloved-micro-genre.html

 

[Extollager]

Tolkien's works inspired quite a few fanzines, too -- the whole 'zine, or at least parts.

http://efanzines.com/TFR/

By the way, an issue of the fanzine Niekas printed a really good interview with JRRT in its 18th issue, whichs omeone has kindly placed online:

http://efanzines.com/Niekas/

For quite a while, on the other hand, I think the only REH 'zines were Amra, and the semi-pro Howard Collector -- which I would hesitate to call a fanzine. That was Glenn Lord's little magazine that printed scraps of unpublished REH, etc.

 

[j d worthington]

Until LOTR came into print the, Hobbit had been all but forgotten . Right ?

Eh? It was because The Hobbit was so perennially popular that LotR even came to be, period. It originally was to be Tolkien's "new Hobbit", as members of the Inklings called it. Only later did it take on a life of its own (see the volumes of The History of Middle-earth covering the writing of LotR for extensive details). And, as Extollager noted, the book has not been out of print since it was first published, and has been translated into numerous languages, often well before LotR was published (see Douglas Anderson's annotated edition for more details)....

 

[BAYLOR]

Eh? It was because The Hobbit was so perennially popular that LotR even came to be, period. It originally was to be Tolkien's "new Hobbit", as members of the Inklings called it. Only later did it take on a life of its own (see the volumes of The History of Middle-earth covering the writing of LotR for extensive details). And, as Extollager noted, the book has not been out of print since it was first published, and has been translated into numerous languages, often well before LotR was published (see Douglas Anderson's annotated edition for more details)....

Ill put this on under the heading of what was I thinking. Apparently i wasn't doing that in this case.

 

[hitmouse]

Some truth in that.


http://www.amoeba.com/blog/2013/01/...bit-rock-exploring-a-beloved-micro-genre.html

Funnily enough, I have several albums from that list. I never really thought of it as Hobbit Rock, more like psychedelic Brit folk music, which would include early T Rex. It does tend towards Tolkeinesque tweeness at times (even if it does not actually reference LOTR), which explains the popularity with those of a romantic and rural bent who liked to sit on a hillside in the Autumn sunshine, eating the special sort of mushrooms that grow in British fields at that time of year. Of course that sort of thing would be illegal these days and no one does it any more.

I would recommend anything by Forest,Vashti Bunyan, Heron (who recorded their albums outside in fields and woods) and Liege & Lief by Fairport Convention.

Some of this was a bit proto-prog. A loose relationship to the Canterbury bands and early Pink Floyd.

E.g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXWZrwAHxPM

 

[soulsinging]

I often do.

Oh. Wait. Yes, that's it. Thanks.

Randy M.

Also the Battle of Evermore:

"the ring wraiths ride in black, riiiide on"

 

[Grimward]

Thanks for the links to the music, hitmouse. Especially liked the Vashti Bunyan piece. Definitely stuff that's off today's beaten path!

You might want to limit the links to no more than 2 per post (but you can post multiple times, of course); in another thread (several, actually) Brian has advised that inserting more than two media links wreaks havoc on some folks' browsers.

 

[hitmouse]

Then there is this topical classic:

 

[Grimward]

Oh...my. Not sure whether we should consider that a tribute to Nimoy or not...

Tolkien survived long enough to have seen Star Trek if he so chose, wonder what he thought about it. But I'll wonder about it somewhere else so as not to hijack the thread!

 

[Extollager]

Tolkien survived long enough to have seen Star Trek if he so chose, wonder what he thought about it.

Interesting. In a letter he did say that he was a "fan" -- in context, a fan of popular imaginative literature and perhaps specifically of sf. He read Asimov (though he spelled the author's name "Azimov") and John Christopher's No Blade of Grass, etc. My guess is that he would have been put off by various Americanisms and the somewhat juvenile aspects of most of the teleplays, if he ever gave it a try -- but one does wonder. The series was first broadcast in England in July 1969:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/BBC

So Tolkien could have seen them. I wonder what was broadcast opposite them -- if whatever was shown opposite would have been more likely to appeal to JRRT or to his wife (who died in late 1971).

I note that the BBC initially declined to show three third-season episodes. True, those three were quite lousy shows!

 

[BAYLOR]

Interesting. In a letter he did say that he was a "fan" -- in context, a fan of popular imaginative literature and perhaps specifically of sf. He read Asimov (though he spelled the author's name "Azimov") and John Christopher's No Blade of Grass, etc. My guess is that he would have been put off by various Americanisms and the somewhat juvenile aspects of most of the teleplays, if he ever gave it a try -- but one does wonder. The series was first broadcast in England in July 1969:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/BBC

So Tolkien could have seen them. I wonder what was broadcast opposite them -- if whatever was shown opposite would have been more likely to appeal to JRRT or to his wife (who died in late 1971).

I note that the BBC initially declined to show three third-season episodes. True, those three were quite lousy shows!

Who could forget such classics as Spock's Brain and And the Children Shall Lead.

 

[Extollager]

Who could forget such classics as Spock's Brain and And the Children Shall Lead.

Yes... further third-season travesties.

 

[BAYLOR]

Yes... further third-season travesties.

It's interesting that the man who produced the 3rd season of Trek Fred Freidberger was the same man that produced the really underwhelming second season of Space 1999.

 

[hitmouse]

Interesting. In a letter he did say that he was a "fan" -- in context, a fan of popular imaginative literature and perhaps specifically of sf. He read Asimov (though he spelled the author's name "Azimov") and John Christopher's No Blade of Grass, etc. My guess is that he would have been put off by various Americanisms and the somewhat juvenile aspects of most of the teleplays, if he ever gave it a try -- but one does wonder. The series was first broadcast in England in July 1969:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/BBC

So Tolkien could have seen them. I wonder what was broadcast opposite them -- if whatever was shown opposite would have been more likely to appeal to JRRT or to his wife (who died in late 1971).

I note that the BBC initially declined to show three third-season episodes. True, those three were quite lousy shows!

There were only 3 TV channels in the UK at that stage (a fourth appeared in the early 80s) so there was not much competition.

 

[Extollager]

I can't find now the place wherein Tolkien said he was a "fan." It doesn't seem to be the letter in which he mentioned Asimov after all. I am sure the place exists even if I haven't found it. Of course, there's no reason to think he was thinking of Star Trek when he said that. I am just about 100% sure that he was thinking of printed sf.

His son Christopher has been a great source for information about JRRT's life, but CJRT is very elderly now. He is certainly entitled to privacy and peace, especially given his heroic service to his father and his father's readers over several decades. However, one wishes there could be a nice, rambling interview that asked even such silly questions as, Did JRRT ever watch Star Trek and, if so, did he say anything about it?

'Cause, after all: sure, lots of us would like to know!

More likely is that he saw the original King Kong movie, since his friend C. S. Lewis did, in 1933; years later, Lewis wrote to I. O. Evans ["author of science fiction, ancient history and popular science"] that he thought parts of the movie "magnificent" -- "especially where the natives make a stand after he's broken the gate"; but he thought "the New York parts contemptible"! (24 Jan 1949) Lewis went to the movie because it sounded Rider Haggardish; and Tolkien read and enjoyed some Haggard too.

 

[BAYLOR]

By chance has anyone read Douglass Anderson book Tales before Tolkien The Roots of Modern Fantasy? It's quite a god anthology.

 

[BAYLOR]

And there is a new Tolkien Book coming out soon.

 

[Lafayette]

There is very little I can add to this conversation, if anything, except for their influence on me as an aspiring writer. I read something (or more than something) by Howard many, many moons ago on a suggestion and a loan by a very good friend who was into him.

I was not impressed. Why? At that time I felt (and still do to a certain extent) that heroes are supposed to be virtuous. Conan was not. In the story, I read Conan's wife was kidnapped and he went on a journey to regain her. That is a virtue. Good man, Conan. However along the way he has a one night stand with an old flame. BOO! It made me wonder how much did he really love his wife. My impression Conan was not feeling lonely or missing an emotional attachment of his wife but was just plain horny. Real men control their sexual urges.

Upon today's reflection, I believe Conan was motivated by pride and possessiveness. Pride: I am Conan the King. Possessiveness: how dare you take what is mine? This indicates to me that his wife to him was an object, not a real person. This is my toy give it back!

This also now makes me ponder did Robert E. Howard look upon women as objects? Was he married? Did he have any girlfriends?

On the other hand, Tolkien's characters were motivated by the well being of others not just themselves. Tolkien's characters were willing and prepared to sacrifice their comfort and lives for the sake of others. This is a true virtue.

In my novel, most of my characters despite their flaws, in the long run, do the right thing for the benefit of others.

I know in real life this is not always the true story. Case in point, our civil war. Originally it was about preserving the union not freeing slaves (that came later).

This is one of the reasons I love fantasy. In it, as a writer, I can make people, creatures, and things behave the way I want them to behave. Others may not agree with me, but to a certain degree, I don't care.

 

[BAYLOR]

There is very little I can add to this conversation, if anything, except for their influence on me as an aspiring writer. I read something (or more than something) by Howard many, many moons ago on a suggestion and a loan by a very good friend who was into him.

I was not impressed. Why? At that time I felt (and still do to a certain extent) that heroes are supposed to be virtuous. Conan was not. In the story, I read Conan's wife was kidnapped and he went on a journey to regain her. That is a virtue. Good man, Conan. However along the way he has a one night stand with an old flame. BOO! It made me wonder how much did he really love his wife. My impression Conan was not feeling lonely or missing an emotional attachment of his wife but was just plain horny. Real men control their sexual urges.

Upon today's reflection, I believe Conan was motivated by pride and possessiveness. Pride: I am Conan the King. Possessiveness: how dare you take what is mine? This indicates to me that his wife to him was an object, not a real person. This is my toy give it back!

This also now makes me ponder did Robert E. Howard look upon women as objects? Was he married? Did he have any girlfriends?

On the other hand, Tolkien's characters were motivated by the well being of others not just themselves. Tolkien's characters were willing and prepared to sacrifice their comfort and lives for the sake of others. This is a true virtue.

In my novel, most of my characters despite their flaws, in the long run, do the right thing for the benefit of others.

I know in real life this is not always the true story. Case in point, our civil war. Originally it was about preserving the union not freeing slaves (that came later).

This is one of the reasons I love fantasy. In it, as a writer, I can make people, creatures, and things behave the way I want them to behave. Others may not agree with me, but to a certain degree, I don't care.

The problem is that what you end up with are Characters that are predicable,fantasy stereotypical and boring. You may not believe this but , an absence of compelling characters will in the long run , cause readers to stop reading your stories. This is something that you as a writer need to care about.