Saturday, 25 March 2017
Ones who Walked Alone
I was delighted to discover that the ever wonderful Gollancz has republished two biographies written by L Sprague de Camp; one on H.P. Lovecraft and the other on Robert E. Howard.
I've long had a fascination with both pulp writers. Each was a major contributor to Weird Tales magazine in the 1930s, and each became a major influence in speculative fiction.
Lovecraft mixed horror and science fiction in stories like "The Call of Cthulhu," "The Shadow out of Time" and "At the Mountains of Madness." His brand of cosmic horror was a despairing expression of the infinite vastness and indifference of the vast, ancient universe in which we live.
Howard was the creator of Conan the Barbarian, and the originator of what de Camp terms 'heroic fantasy' (although I prefer Fritz Leiber's term, 'Sword N'Sorcery). In these, the hugely muscled Conan fights villains, apes and monsters, whilst crushing scantily clad women to his side.
All of which probably sounds terribly sexist and cliched to many of today's readers. It's worth also flagging both authors' casual racism, which is sadly typical of the era. This issue was highlighted in 2015, when it was decided, after lobbying, that the World Fantasy Award would not use a representation of Lovecraft as a trophy, because of his racist views.
This issue has become even more acute since 2015, with the rise of far right, white supremacist groups and the legitimation of racist nationalism in politics. So on balance, I feel the decision was the correct one.
However, these issues should not define either authors. One of the things that I like about de Camp's Howard biography is that he celebrates Howard's qualities as well as being honest about his failings. 'The heroic sweep of his narratives,' de Camp suggests, 'the vividness of his imagery, and his ability to convert mood, magic and mystery mark his writing as exceptional.'
In the Conan stories, Howard was able to offer escapist fiction in a raw, unfiltered way that many other authors struggle to match:
"Know, oh prince, that between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an Age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars...."
In addition, his output and literary legacy were remarkable, considering that he killed himself at the age of thirty. De Camp suggests that his stories should be considered as 'escape literature second to none, save only Tolkien's trilogy The Lord of the Rings.' My own views on the Conan stories are offered here.
Literary merits aside, there's another reason why I find both authors compelling. Both were loners who eked out a living writing and who had very troubled lives. The story of Howard's last years, and his relationship with a schoolteacher, Novalyne Price is told in a heartbreaking film titled The Whole Wide World, that I urge you to watch.
Lovecraft lived in poverty for most of his life and died of cancer at the age of forty-seven.
So both authors made much of the time that they had, despite underlying vulnerabilities.
Which brings us back to their somewhat savage political views. It's my experience that a strong hatred of the other is often the product of weakness rather than strength. Another biography of Lovecraft by Michel Hoellenbecq sees his views on race as part of a very negative, life-rejecting philosophy that seems to me to have been the product of misery and alienation.
Similarly, although Howard's suicide was triggered by his mother's terminal illness, he had within him some very destructive tendencies that were surely exacerbated by the indifference of his local town towards his talents.
So both men should perhaps be admired for producing the stories they did, in spite of their troubled minds. And the positive influence that they had on ensuing generations of fantastic writers should be celebrated.