Talk:Conan the Barbarian/Archive 2006

= The Character =

Barbarian of the Far North
Conan comes from an imaginary age that Howard made up. His Cimmeria is often described as being in in the far north though the lands of the Vanir and Aesir (two imaginary cultural groups roughly to Germanic peoples) were even more northerly.


 * I realize that Howard made up this world for Conan, but it's obviously based on real world settings and geography. Aesir and Vanir were Norse/German gods, so the implication is that the Hyborian age is pre-Norse/German - that these tribes are what the Norse and Germans looked to as their deities. But in a fictional sense. :) Applejuicefool 15:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Historic Cimmerians
I would just like to add that the connection between the literary Cimmerians and the real is more than coincidental (although entirely fictional). Robert E. Howard offered a pseudohistory that ties in to several historical cultures, in his essay The Hyborian Age. --Kortoso 18:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, there's no connection between historical Cimmerians and Howard's. Historical Cimmerians were a Branch of the Scythian horse nomads living in modern Crimea. Howard's live in a cold temperate country of hills, not steppe, and are settled, not nomadic, also it is fairly clear they are regarded as ancestors to the Celts not to Indo Iranian people. It is likely that Howard found the name and inspiration in book 11 of Homer's Odyssey, where Cimmerians are described as living in a land of fog and darkness at the edge of the world. --Svartalf 14:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Fear of the Supernatural
Conan, throughout his earlier adventures, has a superstitious streak that was mentioned rather frequently by Howard. Is this significant enough it should be mentioned in his description? --Moncubus 16:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

= Miscellaneous =

Historical Influence?
Does anyone know if Howard was aware of Conan Meriadoc? He fit the idea of a dark haired bloody handed warrior barbarian quite well. Johnpf 05:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Howard was widely read in medieval history, but I doubt this particular king of Brittany had any direct influence on Conan. The template for such characters as him, Kull, Turlogh Dubh O'Brien, and others stems more with his vision of the Gaels than of Brythonic Celts... to boot Meriadec was more of a mercenary chief and statesman than the classical Howardian barbarian --Svartalf 15:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Nietzschean Influence?
- |Source 1 - ''Young Conan's family is slaughtered by a gang of marauders who sell him into slavery and he is chained to a giant threshing wheel which he must push around and around for years. This practice, like the progressive-resistance training of a weightlifter, gradually transforms Conan into a muscled giant, enabling him to crush his enemies. In Nietzsche's terms, Conan was able to "self-overcome" the "all-too-human" weaknesses of the herd and become an Overman.'' That's an extract from the paragraph, it can be changed around the sentences to conform with wikipedia - Source 2] ''The movie opens with a quote from Friedrich Nietzsche - "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." And that pretty much sums up the tale of Conan.'' This pretty much does cover the entire saga of Conan, it's very Nietzschean don't you think? I think we should include Nietzsche as an influence. These are just a few of the sources you can find on a search engine, anyone object to mentioning Nietzsche in the article? --Raddicks 19:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I do. There is no evidence that Robert E. Howard was aware or exposed to Nietzsche. Including it as a reference or influence implies that his ideas drove REH to write. While the two may appear to be of related philosophy, there are no implications of influece. One must keep in mind that the movies were not done by REH, and the movies cannot be used to prove anything about his views. --L.A.F.


 * Begging pardon, but Howard's gloomy outlook and cult of strength do lead one to believe he was aware of Nietzschean philosophy as it was understood in his lifetime. Is there definite evidence that he was ignorant of it? Nietzsche was after all one of the fashionable philosophers of the time, no matter how badly he was understood, and I'd be surprised that one as widely read as REH had not at least brushed with him. --Svartalf 15:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

What about Frank Frazetta?
Someone should mention the references to Conan in Frank Frazetta's artwork.

The comments on the Kull film?
I notice that stuff I posted about the movie Kull the Conqueror has been deleted as "vandalism." If such a rant is indeed regarded that way here, I wish to apologize for it. Since my addition was in the same vein as what I put about the first Conan movie, and focused on the Conan/Howardian aspects of the movie, it was relevant and its presence justified, although I grant it was opinionated and hostile. I kindly ask whoever has authority to check the content again, and see if it's not a good idea to put it up again.

= Technicalities =

Very Long Article
This should be chopped down. Suggestions: --Jamdav86 17:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Quotes moved to WikiQuote
 * Conan the Barbarian (comics) page made


 * I agree. The recommended maximum article size is 32KB and Conan is well over at the current 52KB. As well as the above mentioned I think the The Original Robert E. Howard Conan Stories and Book editions sections could be sumarised and moved to seperate article(s). -- Waza 00:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed on all points so far. The quotes section is far to big, and comics need it's own page. Also, the "parody" section should be trimmed, or moved to it's own stub.  JG 04:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * While there is lots of great information the setting of the stories and the publishing history, this entry really needs a section on Conan himself.


 * Quite a rambling mess.--Son of Somebody 21:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Created Conan (comics) and moved all the comics stuff there. There would be some need for nice writing in the article for someone more able... I left summaries on the main Conan page Reding 20:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikiquote
I've copied over and reformatted the Quotations section to Wikiquote. See Conan the Barbarian. I've not a) removed the material from here nor b) placed a Wikiquote referral template message here as I wasn't sure if you would want to do either of those things. I find, however, that there is a second article in Wikiquote at Conan the Barbarian. I'm going to toss up a "merge" template on the pages, but you might want to step in there at some point as I'll not personally pursue the merger myself at this time. --Courtland 02:12, 2005 Mar 12 (UTC)

All those quotes really do not belong. I think they should come out. -- Beardo 18:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Picture
Why has the excellently done Conan picture been removed? It was quite fearsome and very fitting for the character.


 * The edit summary said, "Removing image with no copyright information. Such images that are older than seven days may be deleted at any time." Tom Harrison Talk 01:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Category shenanigans
What's that stuff about "1950 introductions" and "1932 establishment" ? Those categories are quite unclear; it might be useful to explain them precisely, and just what happened to Conan in 1950 to put it in the earlier category?


 * Presumably a reference to the first Gnome Press book - but is republishing magazine stories in a book sufficient to warrant that ? -- Beardo 15:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

= Other =

Pastiche
The description of later Conan works as pastiches seems to be trying to denigrate the later works. Surely a more NPOV term should be used ? -- Beardo 23:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, "pastiche" is the official term used by Conan fans when describing the later works and, oddly, by the writers of those novels themselves. Karl Edward Wagner (author of Conan and the Road of Kings) and countless other renowned writers self-labeled their Conan forays as "pastiches." As such, the term is generally accepted and not deemed offensive in this context. -- Flask 06:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Though that doesn't necessarily make it NPOV. Any idea when that started ?  Did De Camp or Carter ever refer to pastiches ?  I get the impression that Conan fandom wants to emphasise Howard's work as pure and later additions as much less valid.  That seems to ignore the fact that even Howard was not averse to rewriting stories to change the main character, in order to make the sale.  -- Beardo 18:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * My reply was to your first sentence and not your NPOV argument. In answer to your query, both DeCamp and Carter extensively used the term "pastiche" when referring to their Conan tales in the 1960s. The term was further popularized by the later Conan scribes in the 1970s and onwards. By the 1980s, the term "pastiche" was universally adopted by Conan writers, fantasy connoisseurs and literary circles when discussing the novels. As such, it's a widely-accepted categorical term used for over forty years when documenting the world of Conan. Personally, I have no sentiments about the term: Just another word in the lexicon of Conan literature. Do what you will. -- Flask 09:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I fear that "pastiche," unfortunately, is the proper term to use, as all those I've had the unluck to read (even those by Karl Wagner) have been far inferior to Howard's originals, and often introduced continuity incompatibilities in the general biography in the character, instead of filling voids. Some were only worse than the others. --Svartalf 15:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The inferiority or not is still POV. And the use by fans & writers doesn't match the dictionary definition.  It is fanspeak, and not encyclodedic.
 * Duggy 1138 00:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Popularity/publications
So Conan was out of print between 1936 and 1950. What prompted Gnome Press to publish ? How popular was Conan before the 1960s editions ? -- Beardo 12:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Page protection
Seems the anonymous user wouldn't quit? 惑乱 分からん 09:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I just put it in here, anyway, seems to be mostly direct quotes from written material that leads to these reactions. This has gone on for days, now...

However much contemporary readers with leftist political sympathies may dislike it, a distinctly anti-modernist and Nietzschean Aryan racialism underlies much of Howard's ideology and literature:

The ancient empires fall, the dark-skinned peoples fade and even the demons of antiquity gasp their last, but over all stands the Aryan barbarian, white-skinned, cold-eyed, dominant, the supreme fighting man of the earth. (Wings In The Night)

In this context, Conan embodies Howard's anti-modernist concept of the embattled Nietzschean Aryan Overman, "supreme fighting man of the earth", overcomer of external and internal obstacles. 惑乱 分からん 22:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I see some of this is also in Robert E. Howard. "The ancient empires fall, the dark-skinned peoples fade..." So this is a direct quote from Wings In The Night. It might be helpful to include a page number in the citation, so that's completely clear. I think 'leftist political sympathies' have little to do with it; most contemporary readers would find this jarring. Otherwise, I think it's not too controversial to talk about "distinctly anti-modernist and Nietzschean Aryan racialism underlies much of Howard's ideology and literature." Howard was after all a man of his time. But something like "Conan embodies Howard's anti-modernist concept of the embattled Nietzschean Aryan Overman..." should probably be cited to a critical work by a recognized authority, if only because it's too close to original research. Tom Harrison Talk 23:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * With slight adaptation, the same three paragraphs have been showing-up in Conan the Barbarian (film) too.  They are based on a web-published essay "A Critical Appreciation of John Milius’s Conan the Barbarian", certainly not a recognized authority or one to which we should give in-line attribution. I agree with the text's removal from both articles as original research. ×Meegs 00:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The quote is actually not about Conan anyway, but about Solomon Kane. Tom Harrison Talk 00:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw that. So, it's a direct quote, but perhaps still not fitting? What about article protection? 惑乱 分からん 09:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. Wings of the Night is not a Conan story, but a Solomon Kane story; hence, no relation to Conan the Cimmerian. If that Wings of the Night excerpt is intended to show the racist proclivities of Robert E. Howard, then perhaps that should be addressed in the Robert E. Howard article.--Flask 18:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


 * While the incriminated text may not come from a recognized authority, and actually source itself in non Conan material, I'm afraid the gist is correct. Since Conan is Howard's best known creation, and his protagonists were largely cast from a single mold, I believe it is correct to include that, or an edited form of it in the Conan article... although I do think also that the parts applying to milius fall under the "original research" prohibition. --Svartalf 23:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Is this correct?
"His skin is frequently characterised as bronzed from constant exposure to the sun and his garb is most commonly a loincloth, sandals and a sword of some description, depending on his fortunes and location."

I was under the impression that Conan wore armor a lot more than most people believe based on the comics and movies, which put him in a loincloth because they required a more distinctive look. (Granted, it's been over a decade since I last read any Conan prose.)


 * Comes from selective reading and remembering of the stories where he's in a loincloth more than those where he's fully dressed or armored... if you add in the fact that the carter-de camp pastiches probably added a lot to the body of loincloth stories, and the popularity of the Frazetta illustrations, and you have the loincloth legend firmly entrenched --Svartalf 08:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Quotes
Do the movie quotes really belong here? Wouldn't it be more logical to have them in the Conan the Barbarian movie article - especially since this article is rather long.

I have taken the movie quotes out - but think the rest of the quotes should go, too. -- Beardo 19:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have since inserted the moved Movie Quotes into the Conan the Barbarian (film) article. However, I believe the quotes from the original Conan stories by R.E. Howard should remain on this page. -- Flask


 * Surely quotes belong in Wikiquote. This random list of quotes does not belong here.  -- Beardo 23:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm with Beardo; move things to Wikiquote. --  Epimetreus 23:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * All right. I moved the literary quotes to Wikiquote and deleted the section from the article. -- Flask

Page length
The page is too long. Should the bibliography be moved to a separate page ? -- Beardo 03:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * In comparison to the Batman, Superman and other such articles, I do not believe this page is that long; however, I agree the bibliography is very lengthy and should be moved to its own article. -- Flask


 * All right. I have moved the bibliography which was taking up 25% to 35% of the article. --Flask 21:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Documentary hype spamming

 * Examining the page history, I notice that user 71.106.19.156 has recently spammed a multitude of comic title and comic creator pages with OFF TOPIC alleged "Other media" information which in fact is nothing more than thinly veiled self-promotion for their own upcoming "Digital Comics" documentary, even going so far as to introduce completely unrelated independent links to their film website within the various "External links" sections of those topics.
 * Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Anderson ...The fact that a given artist's work happens to appear on screen doesn't make said film vitally related to either a comic book title or an artist, unless perhaps they were prominently interviewed in the film (which apparently none of them were, since they're not listed in the film's "Cast" section).
 * Can someone please help to revise those many spammed Wikipedia pages? See 71.106.19.156's contribution list, and possibly watch for more of the same abuse: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=71.106.19.156
 * That's what it looked like to me, but I wasn't sure.
 * And it all links to a very badly made page.
 * Duggy 1138 07:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Cutting to size...
I added the Chronology section, but have since cut it back an made a new article for it and feel the same should be done for other sections, especially the section about book releases/collection. However, I don't feel I'm the person to do it. Anyone wish to volunteer? Duggy 1138 12:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)