TheRPGSite

Whoo boy is this one a mess. A friend recently pointed this out to me from a Reddit post they saw.

https://www.rascal.news/hack-the-orcs-loot-the-tomb-and-take-the-land/

QuoteEven so, when I started to create my characters, it wasn't the brash (white) warriors who appealed to me, or the dignified (white) princelings seeking to regain their thrones, or the noble (white) paladins charging down the dragons to rescue the swooning (white) maidens in distress. These weren't characters who reflected where we lived or where we came from. I struggled with shame about my little mountain town, far from what I envisioned as the center of culture, art, and intellectual achievement, but I loved the place, too; and so, to manage the cognitive dissonance, I began imagining myself in worlds of magic and mystery where difference was valued, not despised, where the game's explicit insistence on the dungeon master's (DM's) ultimate authority as storyteller made it possible to ignore the parts that wounded and enhance those that empowered, no matter what the canonical rule books might otherwise state. The DM was the ultimate creator of worlds through story, and that was something I understood at a visceral level.

So another 50th Anniversary of D&D book thats a cover for some woke screed.

Back in junior high I had a friend who's parents bought him just about everything for D&D.  Then he went to Christian school, the first year he was fine, the next he was going through the books looking for "satanic" content and then tore up what was probably $1000 in books in 1983.  This article is the first time I've seen such ridiculous stretching matched and I used to be a regular on rpg.net.

Gygax's efforts to use available figures to represent fantasy races was racist?  What about his use of vikings to represent Fire Giants and Frost Giants does that represent deep seated hatred for Scandinavians?  Dwarves and Elves and Halflings were weaker than Humans?  Because they have level limits but are better for the only levels you ever actually play from first level forward?

QuoteAnd soon the Tolkienesque template of D&D began to chafe, as did the varied inheritors of Tolkien's literary imaginings. (The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.) As much as I loved Middle-earth, it was still a world where lordship was borne in the blood, where inheriting country gentry were served faithfully by loving and dutiful servants, of the uncertain triumph of "Western civilization" over the dark and fallen peoples who stood against it. And while Tolkien's orcs and their filmic, gaming, and media iterations have been shaped by and expanded on savagist anti-Black and anti-Asian stereotypes, they're also informed by stereotypical ideas about Indigenous primitivism (as are his Drúedain, the reclusive Woses who aid the Rohirrim on their way to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields).

I'm convinced this stupid motherfucker has never read The Lord of the Rings, let alone any other part of Tolkien's legendarium to spout such dishonest pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Never mind the fact he sounds like someone that probably bullied real D&D players in high school and only 'saw the light' when he figured out he could grift.

Makes me think of someone that buys X so he can talk about himself.

As stupid as it was, I at least understood the logic behind 'orcs are black people'. How in the actual hell are Drow racist stereotypes? I don't recall ever hearing any stereotypes about black American's being led by women or worshipping spiders. Love how he blatantly ignores Eilistraee, granted wizards has been trying to erase her for years so I suppose that's par for the course.

QuoteForgotten Realms was explicitly based on the civilized-versus-savage binary and leaned in hard on racial essentialism in its sadistic black-skinned drow led by vicious matriarchs and their terrible spider goddess, firmly melding anti-Blackness with misogyny, a once-civilized people gone feral under the debased rule of women. Ravenloft had its pseudo-Roma Vistani, complete with the worst "gypsy" stereotypes of criminality and charlatanism. And where to begin with the tribal cannibals that were the Dark Sun halflings?

This just reads as 'never have bad guys or interesting civilizations ever'.

I'm not reading any of that.

So...basically the author of this piece of garbage is a woke POS, who "Feels" guilty about his "white privilege", and is spouting NPC talking points so he can be seen as an "ally" to the Woke Mafia.

Got it.

Greetings!

I read the entire article. I find it interesting how this clown sounds *exactly* like all the other Woke morons, wallowing in being eternal victims, while at the same time exalting themselves, their personal experience, their family, and their heritage over everyone else, most importantly normal White people.

Keep crying, bitch. You got fucking conquered. You, and your entire people got conquered because you were fucking weak.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Shalashashka on May 16, 2024, 08:31:04 AMAs stupid as it was, I at least understood the logic behind 'orcs are black people'.

What "logic"?

There is no justification except on the minds of raving lunatics.

Quote from: Omega on May 16, 2024, 11:58:54 AMWhat "logic"?

There is no justification except on the minds of raving lunatics.

Considering there are actual blacks mentioned peripherally in Tolkien's lore, it makes the whole "orcs are black" argument even dumber than it sounds on its face.

This article is an excellent reminder of Why We Fight.  It's bad enough when freaks like this take over a hobby -- what if they take over the world?

Unfounded assumptions, personal anecdotes probably embellished, straw men. It's a cheap and lazy hit piece.

These people aren't happy until the things that make D&D fun have been destroyed and replaced with their personal ideologies.
And WOTC agrees with them.

"People who want to destroy civilization identify with fantasy destroyers of civilization." News at 11.

I'm in Canada and whenever the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation does a puff piece on geek culture be it comics, cosplay, or D&D  there's always this smug, denigrating, tone of superiority.

I think part of the problem is that many of these writers and commentators are ashamed that they like and play D&D and have to tear it down to show they are really grown up adults with adult attitudes and understanding.

There's also this level of ignorance where they haven't read every GM's advice section in every rpg since Tunnels and Trolls where they all have different take on race and alignment.  Never mind the letter columns in Dragon and every other magazine right down to the photocopied fanzines coming out of junior high libraries.

Gamers have always been aware of these issues and there has always been a great dare I say diversity in the opinions and attitudes.  They're not just irrational they're irrational and uninformed on the issue.

Quote from: SHARK on May 16, 2024, 11:01:03 AMGreetings!

I read the entire article. I find it interesting how this clown sounds *exactly* like all the other Woke morons, wallowing in being eternal victims, while at the same time exalting themselves, their personal experience, their family, and their heritage over everyone else, most importantly normal White people.

Keep crying, bitch. You got fucking conquered. You, and your entire people got conquered because you were fucking weak.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

There is nothing more pathetic than a member of the losing side who, rather than fantasizing about bloody revenge (which I can at least understand), instead whines and moans that those who defeated him are not as weak, servile, and toothless as he.  This not only why they lose, it is why they deserve to lose.

Oh, and I bet I've got more Cherokee in my heritage than he does.  Of course, I don't romanticize and fetishize the stone-age culture of my ancestors, so it probably doesn't count...

Quote from: Brad on May 16, 2024, 09:22:54 AMI'm not reading any of that.

This is the correct take, and Brad continues to have the the most based post per byte.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 16, 2024, 08:21:33 PM

Quote from: SHARK on May 16, 2024, 11:01:03 AMGreetings!

I read the entire article. I find it interesting how this clown sounds *exactly* like all the other Woke morons, wallowing in being eternal victims, while at the same time exalting themselves, their personal experience, their family, and their heritage over everyone else, most importantly normal White people.

Keep crying, bitch. You got fucking conquered. You, and your entire people got conquered because you were fucking weak.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

There is nothing more pathetic than a member of the losing side who, rather than fantasizing about bloody revenge (which I can at least understand), instead whines and moans that those who defeated him are not as weak, servile, and toothless as he.  This not only why they lose, it is why they deserve to lose.

Oh, and I bet I've got more Cherokee in my heritage than he does.  Of course, I don't romanticize and fetishize the stone-age culture of my ancestors, so it probably doesn't count...

Greetings!

Cherokee, huh? Interesting! I am part Cherokee as well! A very interesting and proud tribe of people. The Indians as a whole though were absolutely primitive, and also fractured and disunited. Excellent point too, about not romanticizing and fetishizing the stone-age culture of your ancestors.

You know, it is interesting how even *back then*--there were debates within the tribes--like the Cherokee--between trying to keep the whole traditional culture, or embracing the new culture of the White Man, and Christianity. This debate raged with passion back and forth, and inspired endless drama, hatreds, and long-standing feuds. In the end though, change is inevitable, new ways must be embraced.

Oh, and this clown author of the article? Evidently he is also queer, of course, and lives in British Columbia, where he is a college professor. Teaches Critical Indigenous Studies, English, blah, blah, blah. Pretty standard profile for the long line of Woke Demagogues. They all use the same arguments, the same criticisms, of D&D. And, overall, their entire personal anecdotal profiles of themselves are also always strikingly the same--they are all typically women, minorities, or gay or queer men. Always full of so much personal trauma and childhood isolation of never fitting in. Always living their lives confused, and angst-filled, often featuring them rebelling against their family, society, and everything. Even their related high school experiences--they are all the same. They were always the ugly, fat gay guy or fat lesbian girl, or some ugly thin version, but always the misfit and the social reject.

These people are full of hatred, envy, jealousy, and bitterness. Like this clown. He is in his 50's, and he is still cherishing his early high school years of being a social misfit.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on May 16, 2024, 01:30:39 AM

QuoteAnd soon the Tolkienesque template of D&D began to chafe, as did the varied inheritors of Tolkien's literary imaginings. (The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.) As much as I loved Middle-earth, it was still a world where lordship was borne in the blood, where inheriting country gentry were served faithfully by loving and dutiful servants, of the uncertain triumph of "Western civilization" over the dark and fallen peoples who stood against it. And while Tolkien's orcs and their filmic, gaming, and media iterations have been shaped by and expanded on savagist anti-Black and anti-Asian stereotypes, they're also informed by stereotypical ideas about Indigenous primitivism (as are his Drúedain, the reclusive Woses who aid the Rohirrim on their way to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields).

I'm convinced this stupid motherfucker has never read The Lord of the Rings, let alone any other part of Tolkien's legendarium to spout such dishonest pseudo-inllectual bullshit. Never mind the fact he sounds like someone that probably bullied real D&D players in high school and only 'saw the light' when he figured out he could grift.

I'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence. I think the thing that they despise there is the chapter in The Hour of the Dragon, where Conan frees a boat-load of black slaves, and leads them to slaughter their white masters. North American leftists will never get over how much that feels like what the Republicans did to the Democrats in the American Civil War.

I'm not going to read that.  I have already read it anyway.  Without reading it, I know exactly what it says and what terminology the writer uses.  I know because these things are all the same.  They make the same stupid claims.  They all make the same misrepresentations.  They phrase them the same way.  The writers all have the same anecdotes.  I don't need to read it to know that it's a reiteration of the same bullshit talking points we have seen these people using for decades.  It was worthless stupidity all of the other times and it's worthless stupidity this time too.   

Quote from: Brad on May 16, 2024, 01:10:50 PM

Quote from: Omega on May 16, 2024, 11:58:54 AMWhat "logic"?

There is no justification except on the minds of raving lunatics.

Considering there are actual blacks mentioned peripherally in Tolkien's lore, it makes the whole "orcs are black" argument even dumber than it sounds on its face.

Not only that, Tolkien described orcs as follows: "...they are (or were) squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes; in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types."
There's not the least hint that orcs are stand-ins for black people. If anyone could be offended by orcs, it would be Mongolians, but I doubt anyone has ever asked them.

Quote from: David Johansen on May 16, 2024, 07:55:52 PMI think part of the problem is that many of these writers and commentators are ashamed that they like and play D&D and have to tear it down to show they are really grown up adults with adult attitudes and understanding.

What is funny is that there are plenty of notable conservatives like Michelle Malkin who are not in the least embarrassed by enjoying Dungeons & Dragons.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1772229319511213 (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1772229319511213)

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 20, 2024, 04:28:25 AM

Quote from: David Johansen on May 16, 2024, 07:55:52 PMI think part of the problem is that many of these writers and commentators are ashamed that they like and play D&D and have to tear it down to show they are really grown up adults with adult attitudes and understanding.

What is funny is that there are plenty of notable conservatives like Michelle Malkin who are not in the least embarrassed by enjoying Dungeons & Dragons.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1772229319511213 (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1772229319511213)

Greetings!

Oh yeah, Jeff! Michelle Malkin is such a joy! The girl is definitely OLD SCHOOL. I remember seeing her hold up her original 1E AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide! She has been playing for a very long time, just like most of us. It's funny, too, as she has been married forever, and I imagine she has been playing D&D with her husband and her friends for many years, too. I remember seeing her video where she talked about how she loves D&D, and plays every week!

Can you imagine being in a campaign with Michelle Malkin as the DM? *Laughing* She is so sharp and fun, such a campaign would be very awesome, too!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on May 16, 2024, 01:30:39 AM

QuoteAnd soon the Tolkienesque template of D&D began to chafe, as did the varied inheritors of Tolkien's literary imaginings. (The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.) As much as I loved Middle-earth, it was still a world where lordship was borne in the blood, where inheriting country gentry were served faithfully by loving and dutiful servants, of the uncertain triumph of "Western civilization" over the dark and fallen peoples who stood against it. And while Tolkien's orcs and their filmic, gaming, and media iterations have been shaped by and expanded on savagist anti-Black and anti-Asian stereotypes, they're also informed by stereotypical ideas about Indigenous primitivism (as are his Drúedain, the reclusive Woses who aid the Rohirrim on their way to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields).

I'm convinced this stupid motherfucker has never read The Lord of the Rings, let alone any other part of Tolkien's legendarium to spout such dishonest pseudo-inllectual bullshit. Never mind the fact he sounds like someone that probably bullied real D&D players in high school and only 'saw the light' when he figured out he could grift.

I'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence. I think the thing that they despise there is the chapter in The Hour of the Dragon, where Conan frees a boat-load of black slaves, and leads them to slaughter their white masters. North American leftists will never get over how much that feels like what the Republicans did to the Democrats in the American Civil War.

What the guy is parroting there is the common stereotype of Conan among people who've never read Howard. It's a stereotype that arises from people parodying the many 80s knockoffs of the film and comic book adaptations of Conan, so it's about 5 steps removed from the original.

Also, bear in mind that the people we're complaining about start from the conclusion that they don't like D&D and then go in looking for reasons to dislike it.  Much like my friend on his return from church school.  (after which he decided Billy Joel was God so his parents bought him a piano)

Just my two cents on Conan.....

Even a very cursory reading of the Conan stories by Howard would show that Conan was never a rapist. In all honesty, from reading about Robert E Howard, I sincerely doubt that he would have written about a hero who forced himself on women in his stories because Howard would have considered that to be villainous.

And the pulps probably wouldn't buy a story with a rape scene in it.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 20, 2024, 02:29:06 PMJust my two cents on Conan.....

Even a very cursory reading of the Conan stories by Howard would show that Conan was never a rapist. In all honesty, from reading about Robert E Howard, I sincerely doubt that he would have written about a hero who forced himself on women in his stories because Howard would have considered that to be villainous.

And the pulps probably wouldn't buy a story with a rape scene in it.

It is implied in one story. Think Red nails? But never acted on. But that is all the fuel the woke need in order to start screeching "wapist!" Look at some of the postings here on the Shield Hero anime. Same damn thing. In the anime no such thing happens. In the original litenovel the character, who has been robbed and falsely accused of rape by a woman, briefly has some very dark thoughts. And then tosses that aside and moves on. But nooooo. He is teh horriblez wapist!

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PMI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Quote from: R.E. HowardTHE MAN SHIVERED in the coolness of the early morning. He shifted his body to relieve the pressure on his elbows.

Cautiously he peered up over the great boulder in front of him, and down the mountain side. Fire twinkled there and the man cursed. An obscene song floated up to him and his curses deepened. The song was in a rich, guttural voice.

The man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprising proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last. He was thinking as he lay there, watching the camps of his enemies.

What heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

And to add a few quotes from later in the story:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAt first the white race held its own.

But not for long. The blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

That century long warfare! The man thrilled with a savage pride as he reviewed the wonderful battle the whites gave, overwhelmed as they were with odds of a hundred to one.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It was dawning. The last white man looked about him; gathered his weapons. The rush would soon come.

The full story is pretty short. One can read it here:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Now, I still greatly enjoy Howard's writing. I ran several one-shots of the Conan RPG, like this one:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

Still, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PMI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Quote from: R.E. HowardTHE MAN SHIVERED in the coolness of the early morning. He shifted his body to relieve the pressure on his elbows.

Cautiously he peered up over the great boulder in front of him, and down the mountain side. Fire twinkled there and the man cursed. An obscene song floated up to him and his curses deepened. The song was in a rich, guttural voice.

The man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprising proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last. He was thinking as he lay there, watching the camps of his enemies.

What heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

And to add a few quotes from later in the story:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAt first the white race held its own.

But not for long. The blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

That century long warfare! The man thrilled with a savage pride as he reviewed the wonderful battle the whites gave, overwhelmed as they were with odds of a hundred to one.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It was dawning. The last white man looked about him; gathered his weapons. The rush would soon come.

The full story is pretty short. One can read it here:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Now, I still greatly enjoy Howard's writing. I ran several one-shots of the Conan RPG, like this one:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

Still, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

The post you quoted specifically referred to racism in Conan (by Howard), which was the topic being discussed.  You provided an example of a story by Howard, but having nothing to do with Conan.  Either you can't read, or you are just trying to change the subject.  Please provide evidence of racism in Conan if you wish to dispute the post.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 20, 2024, 04:48:30 PMThe post you quoted specifically referred to racism in Conan (by Howard), which was the topic being discussed.  You provided an example of a story by Howard, but having nothing to do with Conan.  Either you can't read, or you are just trying to change the subject.  Please provide evidence of racism in Conan if you wish to dispute the post.

Fair enough. Here are some excerpts from "Shadows in Zamboula".

Quote from: R.E. HowardWhich proves what?' grunted the Cimmerian.

'Aram Baksh is a demon! Nay, in this accursed city which Stygians built and which Hyrkanians rule—where white, brown and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds—who can tell who is a man, and who a demon in disguise? Aram Baksh is a demon in the form of a man! At night he assumes his true guise and carries his guests off into the desert where his fellow demons from the waste meet in conclave.'

'Why does he always carry off strangers?' asked Conan skeptically.

'The people of the city would not suffer him to slay their people, but they care naught for the strangers who fall into his hands. Conan, you are of the West, and know not the secrets of this ancient land. But, since the beginning of happenings, the demons of the desert have worshipped Yog, the Lord of the Empty Abodes, with fire—fire that devours human victims.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardIt was a gigantic black man, naked but for a loin-cloth. One hand still grasped a knotty-headed bludgeon. The fellow's kinky wool was built up into horn-like spindles with twigs and dried mud. This barbaric coiffure had given the head its misshapen appearance in the starlight. Provided with a clue to the riddle, Conan pushed back the thick red lips, and grunted as he stared down at teeth filed to points.

He understood now the mystery of the strangers who had disappeared from the house of Aram Baksh; the riddle of the black drum thrumming out there beyond the palm groves, and of that pit of charred bones—that pit where strange meat might be roasted under the stars, while black beasts squatted about to glut a hideous hunger. The man on the floor was a cannibal slave from Darfar.

There were many of his kind in the city. Cannibalism was not tolerated openly in Zamboula. But Conan knew now why people locked themselves in so securely at night, and why even beggars shunned the open alleys and doorless ruins.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardCannibalism was more than a perverted appetite with the black men of Darfar; it was an integral element of their ghastly cult. The black vultures were already in conclave. But whatever flesh filled their bellies that night, it would not be his.

To reach Aram Baksh he must climb one of the walls which separated the small enclosure from the main compound. They were high, meant to keep out the man-eaters; but Conan was no swamp-bred black man; his thews had been steeled in boyhood on the sheer cliffs of his native hills. He was standing at the foot of the nearer wall when a cry echoed under the trees.

...

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Yes, let us hasten!' begged the girl, almost hysterical again. 'My lover is wandering somewhere in the streets alone. The negroes may take him.'

'A devil of a custom this is!' growled Conan, as he led the way toward the city, paralleling the road but keeping behind the huts and straggling trees. 'Why don't the citizens clean out these black dogs?'

'They are valuable slaves,' murmured the girl. 'There are so many of them they might revolt if they were denied the flesh for which they lust. The people of Zamboula know they skulk the streets at night, and all are careful to remain within locked doors, except when something unforeseen happens, as it did to me. The blacks prey on anything they catch, but they seldom catch anybody but strangers. The people of Zamboula are not concerned with the strangers that pass through the city.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardDrawing his foot from the stirrup he stole to the angle and peered around it. Three men were moving down the road toward the palm groves, and from their slouching gait he knew they were negroes. They halted at his low call, bunching themselves as he strode toward them, his sword in his hand. Their eyes gleamed whitely in the starlight. Their brutish lust shone in their ebony faces, but they knew their three cudgels could not prevail against his sword, just as he knew it.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 20, 2024, 02:29:06 PMJust my two cents on Conan.....

Even a very cursory reading of the Conan stories by Howard would show that Conan was never a rapist. In all honesty, from reading about Robert E Howard, I sincerely doubt that he would have written about a hero who forced himself on women in his stories because Howard would have considered that to be villainous.

And the pulps probably wouldn't buy a story with a rape scene in it.

This is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

Quote from: Fritz LeiberThereafter, twining his legs about hers in such fashion that she could not knee him in the groin, and holding her snapping, spitting head in the crook of his left arm and by an ear—after futilely grasping for hair—and finally mastering with his right hand the wrists of her two sharp-nailed, flailing ones, he proceeded by gradual and not unnecessarily brutal steps to ravage her. As she ran out of spit, she quieted. Her breasts proved to be very small, but doubly delicious.

Granted that was 1973, and a very different landscape than what Howard was writing for in the 30s, and it was published in Flashing Swords!, an anthology rather than a pulp magazine. Plus, I think we're supposed to understand the word "ravish" there in the context you see these things happen in old pirate or James Bond movies, where the hero is just so dashing and manly that he can force himself on a woman, and she will become willing due to his sheer chadness.

The Mouser's sexual appetites are pretty suspect, anyway. I can't recall which story makes it explicit at the moment, but it is made clear at a couple of points that his taste in women trends uncomfortably on the young side. Pretty sure he bangs a human-mouse hybrid in The Swords of Lankhmar, too

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PMI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Quote from: R.E. HowardTHE MAN SHIVERED in the coolness of the early morning. He shifted his body to relieve the pressure on his elbows.

Cautiously he peered up over the great boulder in front of him, and down the mountain side. Fire twinkled there and the man cursed. An obscene song floated up to him and his curses deepened. The song was in a rich, guttural voice.

The man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprising proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last. He was thinking as he lay there, watching the camps of his enemies.

What heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

And to add a few quotes from later in the story:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAt first the white race held its own.

But not for long. The blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

That century long warfare! The man thrilled with a savage pride as he reviewed the wonderful battle the whites gave, overwhelmed as they were with odds of a hundred to one.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It was dawning. The last white man looked about him; gathered his weapons. The rush would soon come.

The full story is pretty short. One can read it here:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Now, I still greatly enjoy Howard's writing. I ran several one-shots of the Conan RPG, like this one:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

Still, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

Except most, probably all, of that is not "evidence" of Howard being racist and you know it.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 20, 2024, 02:29:06 PMJust my two cents on Conan.....

Even a very cursory reading of the Conan stories by Howard would show that Conan was never a rapist. In all honesty, from reading about Robert E Howard, I sincerely doubt that he would have written about a hero who forced himself on women in his stories because Howard would have considered that to be villainous.

And the pulps probably wouldn't buy a story with a rape scene in it.

This is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

Quote from: Fritz LeiberThereafter, twining his legs about hers in such fashion that she could not knee him in the groin, and holding her snapping, spitting head in the crook of his left arm and by an ear—after futilely grasping for hair—and finally mastering with his right hand the wrists of her two sharp-nailed, flailing ones, he proceeded by gradual and not unnecessarily brutal steps to ravage her. As she ran out of spit, she quieted. Her breasts proved to be very small, but doubly delicious.

Granted that was 1973, and a very different landscape than what Howard was writing for in the 30s, and it was published in Flashing Swords!, an anthology rather than a pulp magazine. Plus, I think we're supposed to understand the word "ravish" there in the context you see these things happen in old pirate or James Bond movies, where the hero is just so dashing and manly that he can force himself on a woman, and she will become willing due to his sheer chadness.

The Mouser's sexual appetites are pretty suspect, anyway. I can't recall which story makes it explicit at the moment, but it is made clear at a couple of points that his taste in women trends uncomfortably on the young side. Pretty sure he bangs a human-mouse hybrid in The Swords of Lankhmar, too

Greetings!

A Human-Mouse hybrid? *EWWW*. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 20, 2024, 02:29:06 PMJust my two cents on Conan.....

Even a very cursory reading of the Conan stories by Howard would show that Conan was never a rapist. In all honesty, from reading about Robert E Howard, I sincerely doubt that he would have written about a hero who forced himself on women in his stories because Howard would have considered that to be villainous.

And the pulps probably wouldn't buy a story with a rape scene in it.

This is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

Quote from: Fritz LeiberThereafter, twining his legs about hers in such fashion that she could not knee him in the groin, and holding her snapping, spitting head in the crook of his left arm and by an ear—after futilely grasping for hair—and finally mastering with his right hand the wrists of her two sharp-nailed, flailing ones, he proceeded by gradual and not unnecessarily brutal steps to ravage her. As she ran out of spit, she quieted. Her breasts proved to be very small, but doubly delicious.

Granted that was 1973, and a very different landscape than what Howard was writing for in the 30s, and it was published in Flashing Swords!, an anthology rather than a pulp magazine. Plus, I think we're supposed to understand the word "ravish" there in the context you see these things happen in old pirate or James Bond movies, where the hero is just so dashing and manly that he can force himself on a woman, and she will become willing due to his sheer chadness.

The Mouser's sexual appetites are pretty suspect, anyway. I can't recall which story makes it explicit at the moment, but it is made clear at a couple of points that his taste in women trends uncomfortably on the young side. Pretty sure he bangs a human-mouse hybrid in The Swords of Lankhmar, too

I'm going to have to track down that Fritz Leiber Conan story because I haven't read it. Damn, this place always gives me homework.....  :)

Quote from: Omega on May 21, 2024, 12:46:18 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PMI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Quote from: R.E. HowardTHE MAN SHIVERED in the coolness of the early morning. He shifted his body to relieve the pressure on his elbows.

Cautiously he peered up over the great boulder in front of him, and down the mountain side. Fire twinkled there and the man cursed. An obscene song floated up to him and his curses deepened. The song was in a rich, guttural voice.

The man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprising proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last. He was thinking as he lay there, watching the camps of his enemies.

What heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

And to add a few quotes from later in the story:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAt first the white race held its own.

But not for long. The blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

That century long warfare! The man thrilled with a savage pride as he reviewed the wonderful battle the whites gave, overwhelmed as they were with odds of a hundred to one.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It was dawning. The last white man looked about him; gathered his weapons. The rush would soon come.

The full story is pretty short. One can read it here:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Now, I still greatly enjoy Howard's writing. I ran several one-shots of the Conan RPG, like this one:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

Still, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

Except most, probably all, of that is not "evidence" of Howard being racist and you know it.

By noting most, are you saying that some of that could be evidence of Howard being racist? Let's take the final quote I gave from "The Last White Man". Howard writes:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

This is pretty clear in its statements about the black race, which are pejorative. Do you think that this section is racist against black people?

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 02:46:42 AM

Quote from: Omega on May 21, 2024, 12:46:18 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 18, 2024, 03:50:03 PMI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Quote from: R.E. HowardTHE MAN SHIVERED in the coolness of the early morning. He shifted his body to relieve the pressure on his elbows.

Cautiously he peered up over the great boulder in front of him, and down the mountain side. Fire twinkled there and the man cursed. An obscene song floated up to him and his curses deepened. The song was in a rich, guttural voice.

The man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprising proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last. He was thinking as he lay there, watching the camps of his enemies.

What heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

And to add a few quotes from later in the story:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAt first the white race held its own.

But not for long. The blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

That century long warfare! The man thrilled with a savage pride as he reviewed the wonderful battle the whites gave, overwhelmed as they were with odds of a hundred to one.

...

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It was dawning. The last white man looked about him; gathered his weapons. The rush would soon come.

The full story is pretty short. One can read it here:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Now, I still greatly enjoy Howard's writing. I ran several one-shots of the Conan RPG, like this one:

https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

Still, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

Except most, probably all, of that is not "evidence" of Howard being racist and you know it.

By noting most, are you saying that some of that could be evidence of Howard being racist? Let's take the final quote I gave from "The Last White Man". Howard writes:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe last white man laughed with savage, unholy glee.

The black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

This is pretty clear in its statements about the black race, which are pejorative. Do you think that this section is racist against black people?

You are trying to gaslight people again, jhkim. You must try harder....

Quote from: reh.world/stories/the-last-white-manIn "The Last White Man," Robert E. Howard portrays a grim and dramatic narrative of racial conflict, set in a speculative future where a once-dominant race faces its downfall due to decadence and external conquests. The story follows the last survivor of this race as he confronts the inevitability of his end amidst the ruins of his civilization.

The narrative ends with a poignant reflection on the cyclical nature of empires and the eventual decline of even the mightiest among them, driven by internal decadence and external conquests. The last white man's death symbolizes the end of an era and the complete rise of a new world order.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

Now that doesn't sound so much like a writer who is racist, but like a writer who is using the main character's racism to demonstrate why a society that embraces racism creates weak citizens and is destined to fall.

Quote from: SHARK on May 21, 2024, 12:47:56 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PMThis is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

....

The Mouser's sexual appetites are pretty suspect, anyway. I can't recall which story makes it explicit at the moment, but it is made clear at a couple of points that his taste in women trends uncomfortably on the young side. Pretty sure he bangs a human-mouse hybrid in The Swords of Lankhmar, too

Greetings!

A Human-Mouse hybrid? *EWWW*. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

In the same story, Fafhrd hooks up with a cannibal woman with transparent skin and organs. The Mouser's dodgy tastes aside, I actually find the fact that Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser are so often motivated by their dicks to be weirdly endearing. They get into probably half their adventures because they're trying to get laid, and it's also usually the reason they come out of their adventures with nothing. Leiber said he based the two characters off of himself and a friend when they were young, and I think we all knew guys like that in our 20s.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 01:22:52 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PMThis is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

Quote from: Fritz LeiberThereafter, twining his legs about hers in such fashion that she could not knee him in the groin, and holding her snapping, spitting head in the crook of his left arm and by an ear—after futilely grasping for hair—and finally mastering with his right hand the wrists of her two sharp-nailed, flailing ones, he proceeded by gradual and not unnecessarily brutal steps to ravage her. As she ran out of spit, she quieted. Her breasts proved to be very small, but doubly delicious.

I'm going to have to track down that Fritz Leiber Conan story because I haven't read it. Damn, this place always gives me homework.....  :)

Not a Conan story. Sorry I should have clarified that. I honestly forgot that everyone and their mother has written Conan over the years. It's the first story in the Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser collection Swords and Ice Magic. It's super short. You can read the whole thing here https://www.baen.com/Chapters/ERBAEN0092/ERBAEN0092___1.htm[/quote]

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMStill, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

I mean, I think I'll just enjoy it right alongside everything else he's written.

But by the modern and overly broad definition of racism, all these men were racist.  In some cases, even by the original definition of racism. And of course, by the future definition of racism, the preview of which everyone here has seen on twitter and such, everyone who is targeted politically is racist, including everyone on this board.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 21, 2024, 09:47:42 AM

Quote from: SHARK on May 21, 2024, 12:47:56 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PMThis is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

....

The Mouser's sexual appetites are pretty suspect, anyway. I can't recall which story makes it explicit at the moment, but it is made clear at a couple of points that his taste in women trends uncomfortably on the young side. Pretty sure he bangs a human-mouse hybrid in The Swords of Lankhmar, too

Greetings!

A Human-Mouse hybrid? *EWWW*. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

In the same story, Fafhrd hooks up with a cannibal woman with transparent skin and organs. The Mouser's dodgy tastes aside, I actually find the fact that Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser are so often motivated by their dicks to be weirdly endearing. They get into probably half their adventures because they're trying to get laid, and it's also usually the reason they come out of their adventures with nothing. Leiber said he based the two characters off of himself and a friend when they were young, and I think we all knew guys like that in our 20s.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 01:22:52 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 20, 2024, 11:17:16 PMThis is one of those "well actually" points, that doesn't in any way contradict what you said about Howard, but the Fritz Leiber story "The Sadness of the Executioner" does contain what is arguably a pretty explicit rape scene, and by one of the protagonists, no less.

Quote from: Fritz LeiberThereafter, twining his legs about hers in such fashion that she could not knee him in the groin, and holding her snapping, spitting head in the crook of his left arm and by an ear—after futilely grasping for hair—and finally mastering with his right hand the wrists of her two sharp-nailed, flailing ones, he proceeded by gradual and not unnecessarily brutal steps to ravage her. As she ran out of spit, she quieted. Her breasts proved to be very small, but doubly delicious.

I'm going to have to track down that Fritz Leiber Conan story because I haven't read it. Damn, this place always gives me homework.....  :)

Not a Conan story. Sorry I should have clarified that. I honestly forgot that everyone and their mother has written Conan over the years. It's the first story in the Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser collection Swords and Ice Magic. It's super short. You can read the whole thing here https://www.baen.com/Chapters/ERBAEN0092/ERBAEN0092___1.htm

[/quote]

Oh, cool! I'm a big fan of Baen Publishing.

Did jhkim just derail this thread and call REH racist? Does he have an actual fucking life?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 04:24:51 AMYou are trying to gaslight people again, jhkim. You must try harder....

Quote from: reh.world/stories/the-last-white-manIn "The Last White Man," Robert E. Howard portrays a grim and dramatic narrative of racial conflict, set in a speculative future where a once-dominant race faces its downfall due to decadence and external conquests. The story follows the last survivor of this race as he confronts the inevitability of his end amidst the ruins of his civilization.

The narrative ends with a poignant reflection on the cyclical nature of empires and the eventual decline of even the mightiest among them, driven by internal decadence and external conquests. The last white man's death symbolizes the end of an era and the complete rise of a new world order.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

Now that doesn't sound so much like a writer who is racist, but like a writer who is using the main character's racism to demonstrate why a society that embraces racism creates weak citizens and is destined to fall.

In your own link, this is what Howard wrote in a letter to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith:

Quote from: R.E. HowardI shall write a story entitled "The Last Man" as a warning to the white races. If the West falls before the East, it won't be because I haven't warned the white races. Well, maybe if I progress, which I doubt much, in a few years I'll become such a nuisance that the Dalai Lama will take notice of me and my career will end suddenly.

Again, this isn't part of a story, this is Howard writing to his friend.

Have you read the story? Again, it isn't long, and I gave a link earlier to the collection it is in.

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

In another letter, Howard wrote (regarding a rape trial in Honolulu):

Quote from: R.E. HowardI know what would have happened to them in Texas.  I don't know whether an Oriental smells any different than a nigger when he's roasting, but I'm willing to bet the aroma of scorching hide would have the same chastening effect on his surviving tribesman.

His girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 11:51:02 AM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 04:24:51 AMYou are trying to gaslight people again, jhkim. You must try harder....

Quote from: reh.world/stories/the-last-white-manIn "The Last White Man," Robert E. Howard portrays a grim and dramatic narrative of racial conflict, set in a speculative future where a once-dominant race faces its downfall due to decadence and external conquests. The story follows the last survivor of this race as he confronts the inevitability of his end amidst the ruins of his civilization.

The narrative ends with a poignant reflection on the cyclical nature of empires and the eventual decline of even the mightiest among them, driven by internal decadence and external conquests. The last white man's death symbolizes the end of an era and the complete rise of a new world order.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

Now that doesn't sound so much like a writer who is racist, but like a writer who is using the main character's racism to demonstrate why a society that embraces racism creates weak citizens and is destined to fall.

In your own link, this is what Howard wrote in a letter to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith:

Quote from: R.E. HowardI shall write a story entitled "The Last Man" as a warning to the white races. If the West falls before the East, it won't be because I haven't warned the white races. Well, maybe if I progress, which I doubt much, in a few years I'll become such a nuisance that the Dalai Lama will take notice of me and my career will end suddenly.

Again, this isn't part of a story, this is Howard writing to his friend.

Have you read the story? Again, it isn't long, and I gave a link earlier to the collection it is in.

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

In another letter, Howard wrote (regarding a rape trial in Honolulu):

Quote from: R.E. HowardI know what would have happened to them in Texas.  I don't know whether an Oriental smells any different than a nigger when he's roasting, but I'm willing to bet the aroma of scorching hide would have the same chastening effect on his surviving tribesman.

His girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

Sounds more like you desperately want to convince people that Robert E Howard was racist and will cherry pick anything in order to gaslight them into believing that. Tell me that this isn't part of your well known modus operendi.

The story reads like a Cautionary Tale. A shorter and more ham fisted To Kill A Mockingbird or Huckleberry Finn.

Quote from: Brad on May 21, 2024, 11:43:29 AMDid jhkim just derail this thread and call REH racist? Does he have an actual fucking life?

Not that I've ever seen.

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 05:13:28 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 20, 2024, 04:48:30 PMThe post you quoted specifically referred to racism in Conan (by Howard), which was the topic being discussed.  You provided an example of a story by Howard, but having nothing to do with Conan.  Either you can't read, or you are just trying to change the subject.  Please provide evidence of racism in Conan if you wish to dispute the post.

Fair enough. Here are some excerpts from "Shadows in Zamboula".
...

I note that you don't explain what is racist about any of those quotes. I would discuss it with you, but I remember when it transpired that WOTC had records of the race of everybody who had ever written a D&D product, and had chosen to hire only POCs for a new product, you refused to accept that as an example of racism, but instead dropped out of the conversation. So I won't waste my time having the same discussion twice.

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMI'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

That post-Apocalyptic story is about the decline of Western civilization due to its degeneracy and rise of African and Arab empires to replace it.  It is NOT racist to write such a story.
That story happens to be highly prescient.

Quote from: Venka on May 21, 2024, 11:14:55 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMStill, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

I mean, I think I'll just enjoy it right alongside everything else he's written.

But by the modern and overly broad definition of racism, all these men were racist.  In some cases, even by the original definition of racism. And of course, by the future definition of racism, the preview of which everyone here has seen on twitter and such, everyone who is targeted politically is racist, including everyone on this board.

Venka - these are broad generalities. You say that some of these men are racist by the original definition of racist. Do you think that "The Last White Man" is evidence of racism (original definition) on the part of R.E. Howard?

In general, I avoid using the term racism because of ambiguity and disagreement over the meaning. But "The Last White Man" isn't a murky case, any more than the MYFAROG RPG. It is openly about race war and we even have a letter from Howard saying about how he is warning white races.

Quote from: DocJones on May 21, 2024, 07:24:32 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMI'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

That post-Apocalyptic story is about the decline of Western civilization due to its degeneracy and rise of African and Arab empires to replace it.  It is NOT racist to write such a story.
That story happens to be highly prescient.

It's possible to write a story about the decline of Western civilization that is not racist. However, this story fundamentally identifies Western civilization to the white race, and declares that the black race from Africa is inherently savage and destructive. A non-racist version of the story would allow that black and brown people could be a part of Western civilization, and that the war is over culture rather than race.

As for it being prescient - it was written a century ago around 1925, but it doesn't describe well the events from 1925 to today. The events it describes are:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe Orientals allied themselves with the negroes to slaughter the hated whites. Only the Sikhs and Ghurkas in India and the Shans in Burma stood firm.

Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Balkans were overwhelmed with one rush. The black hordes, spread out, until the tips of that vast army reached from Gibraltar to Siam.

They swept over Europe like a wave. In America a savage struggle was going on, for her black inhabitants, who numbered nearly half of her entire population, had risen.

Then over the ocean came the invaders from Africa. In less than ten years, the fight had changed from a war between two great nations, to a hunting down and slaughtering of scattered remnants of the great nation which once had ruled the world. Not with ease was this accomplished. The hunted life brought back the primitive might of the race and those who survived became giants, such as the man who crouched among the boulders and cursed.

In the century since the story was written, there has been no military invasion of Europe by an Oriental/negro alliance. You might say that it is about to happen soon, but that's speculation that I disagree with. Europe has moved more towards unification than Africa has.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PM

Quote from: DocJones on May 21, 2024, 07:24:32 PMThat post-Apocalyptic story is about the decline of Western civilization due to its degeneracy and rise of African and Arab empires to replace it.  It is NOT racist to write such a story.
That story happens to be highly prescient.

It's possible to write a story about the decline of Western civilization that is not racist. However, this story fundamentally identifies Western civilization to the white race, and declares that the black race from Africa is inherently savage and destructive. A non-racist version of the story would allow that black and brown people could be a part of Western civilization, and that the war is over culture rather than race.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons.

I wonder if he had lived long enough to see Zimbabwe, South Africa, Detroit, Chicago, Malmo, London, Brighton would it have changed his mind.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PMVenka - these are broad generalities. You say that some of these men are racist by the original definition of racist. Do you think that "The Last White Man" is evidence of racism (original definition) on the part of R.E. Howard?

Yes.  But, for instance, Tolkien is definitely not.

QuoteIn general, I avoid using the term racism because of ambiguity and disagreement over the meaning. But "The Last White Man" isn't a murky case, any more than the MYFAROG RPG.

While I agree, these differ in intentions and magnitude. I suspect that disagreement isn't salient, however- the story is clearly racist.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PM

Quote from: Venka on May 21, 2024, 11:14:55 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMStill, the evidence of his racism is impossible to ignore. It's a question of putting it in context and interpreting it.

I mean, I think I'll just enjoy it right alongside everything else he's written.

But by the modern and overly broad definition of racism, all these men were racist.  In some cases, even by the original definition of racism. And of course, by the future definition of racism, the preview of which everyone here has seen on twitter and such, everyone who is targeted politically is racist, including everyone on this board.

Venka - these are broad generalities. You say that some of these men are racist by the original definition of racist. Do you think that "The Last White Man" is evidence of racism (original definition) on the part of R.E. Howard?

In general, I avoid using the term racism because of ambiguity and disagreement over the meaning. But "The Last White Man" isn't a murky case, any more than the MYFAROG RPG. It is openly about race war and we even have a letter from Howard saying about how he is warning white races.

Quote from: DocJones on May 21, 2024, 07:24:32 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMI'm not endorsing all the claims of the article from the original post. However, this last claim is ridiculous. There is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

That post-Apocalyptic story is about the decline of Western civilization due to its degeneracy and rise of African and Arab empires to replace it.  It is NOT racist to write such a story.
That story happens to be highly prescient.

It's possible to write a story about the decline of Western civilization that is not racist. However, this story fundamentally identifies Western civilization to the white race, and declares that the black race from Africa is inherently savage and destructive. A non-racist version of the story would allow that black and brown people could be a part of Western civilization, and that the war is over culture rather than race.

As for it being prescient - it was written a century ago around 1925, but it doesn't describe well the events from 1925 to today. The events it describes are:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe Orientals allied themselves with the negroes to slaughter the hated whites. Only the Sikhs and Ghurkas in India and the Shans in Burma stood firm.

Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Balkans were overwhelmed with one rush. The black hordes, spread out, until the tips of that vast army reached from Gibraltar to Siam.

They swept over Europe like a wave. In America a savage struggle was going on, for her black inhabitants, who numbered nearly half of her entire population, had risen.

Then over the ocean came the invaders from Africa. In less than ten years, the fight had changed from a war between two great nations, to a hunting down and slaughtering of scattered remnants of the great nation which once had ruled the world. Not with ease was this accomplished. The hunted life brought back the primitive might of the race and those who survived became giants, such as the man who crouched among the boulders and cursed.

In the century since the story was written, there has been no military invasion of Europe by an Oriental/negro alliance. You might say that it is about to happen soon, but that's speculation that I disagree with. Europe has moved more towards unification than Africa has.

That's because it's a work of fiction you dolt.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 08:46:15 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PM

Quote from: DocJones on May 21, 2024, 07:24:32 PMThat story happens to be highly prescient.

As for it being prescient - it was written a century ago around 1925, but it doesn't describe well the events from 1925 to today.
...
In the century since the story was written, there has been no military invasion of Europe by an Oriental/negro alliance. You might say that it is about to happen soon, but that's speculation that I disagree with. Europe has moved more towards unification than Africa has.

That's because it's a work of fiction you dolt.

A work of fiction could potentially accurately predict the future from when it was written. If so, that work would be called "prescient".

DocJones claimed that "The Last White Man" was prescient. I disagree, since its conflicts don't resemble the global wars from 1925 to the present.

As an example of being prescient, Jules Vernes' story "Paris in the Twentieth Century" in 1863 predicted a lot of technology that came to pass in the real 1960 - skyscrapers, elevators, fax machines ("picture-telegraphs"), cars ("gas-cabs"), electric lights, and more. The story is still fiction, and got many things wrong, but it did get many things right.

Quote from: Venka on May 21, 2024, 08:35:11 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PMVenka - these are broad generalities. You say that some of these men are racist by the original definition of racist. Do you think that "The Last White Man" is evidence of racism (original definition) on the part of R.E. Howard?

Yes.  But, for instance, Tolkien is definitely not.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PMIn general, I avoid using the term racism because of ambiguity and disagreement over the meaning. But "The Last White Man" isn't a murky case, any more than the MYFAROG RPG.

While I agree, these differ in intentions and magnitude. I suspect that disagreement isn't salient, however- the story is clearly racist.

Thanks, Venka. I did not expect that I would be arguing over whether "The Last White Man" is racist. It seems clear to me from reading it.

There's room for reasonable disagreement over a lot of things regarding race. I genuinely thought this one wasn't controversial to call.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 09:15:46 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 08:46:15 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 08:18:47 PM

Quote from: DocJones on May 21, 2024, 07:24:32 PMThat story happens to be highly prescient.

As for it being prescient - it was written a century ago around 1925, but it doesn't describe well the events from 1925 to today.
...
In the century since the story was written, there has been no military invasion of Europe by an Oriental/negro alliance. You might say that it is about to happen soon, but that's speculation that I disagree with. Europe has moved more towards unification than Africa has.

That's because it's a work of fiction you dolt.

A work of fiction could potentially accurately predict the future from when it was written. If so, that work would be called "prescient".

DocJones claimed that "The Last White Man" was prescient. I disagree, since its conflicts don't resemble the global wars from 1925 to the present.

As an example of being prescient, Jules Vernes' story "Paris in the Twentieth Century" in 1863 predicted a lot of technology that came to pass in the real 1960 - skyscrapers, elevators, fax machines ("picture-telegraphs"), cars ("gas-cabs"), electric lights, and more. The story is still fiction, and got many things wrong, but it did get many things right.

....

Quote from: jhkimDamnit! I know that there is a forest around here somewhere but I can't get a good look at it with all these damn trees in my way!

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 04:24:51 AMNow that doesn't sound so much like a writer who is racist, but like a writer who is using the main character's racism to demonstrate why a society that embraces racism creates weak citizens and is destined to fall.

You really think he wont try to twist it back around to suit his agenda?

Reading along...

Yep. He did.

Quote from: Brad on May 21, 2024, 11:43:29 AMDid jhkim just derail this thread and call REH racist? Does he have an actual fucking life?

You must be new here kid. Stick around. You'll see him jump through some of the most ass backwards mental jymnastics that would make a contortionist weep.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 02:46:42 AMThis is pretty clear in its statements about the black race, which are pejorative. Do you think that this section is racist against black people?

So by this fucked up logic anyone who ever writes about pejorative characters MUST themselves be racist?

Really?

This is what you are arguing now?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 12:06:39 PMThe story reads like a Cautionary Tale. A shorter and more ham fisted To Kill A Mockingbird or Huckleberry Finn.

And various waves of moral busybodies have bitched about Huckleberry Fin and claimed its wacist. Saw bits in the 70s wave, saw lots more in the 90s wave of this mental disease.

Quote from: Omega on May 22, 2024, 05:14:17 AMYou must be new here kid. Stick around. You'll see him jump through some of the most ass backwards mental jymnastics that would make a contortionist weep.

I think he needs to be on everyone's ignore list as all he does is derail any legitimate discussion. His obsession with calling dudes who've been dead for 100+ years racist is about the most pathetic attempt at virtue signaling possible.

Also, who gives a fuck if REH was racist? Does it even matter? Does it have any material impact on anyone currently alive?

Quote from: Brad on May 22, 2024, 08:59:45 AM

Quote from: Omega on May 22, 2024, 05:14:17 AMYou must be new here kid. Stick around. You'll see him jump through some of the most ass backwards mental jymnastics that would make a contortionist weep.

I think he needs to be on everyone's ignore list as all he does is derail any legitimate discussion. His obsession with calling dudes who've been dead for 100+ years racist is about the most pathetic attempt at virtue signaling possible.

Also, who gives a fuck if REH was racist? Does it even matter? Does it have any material impact on anyone currently alive?

Calling attention to such things, in the deranged mind of a leftist, justifies their endless war on Western culture and civilization. The idea in painting historical literary giants as racists is to label YOU as a racist if you enjoy and appreciate their work and contribution to Western culture. The exact same playbook is being used by WOTC to tear down Gygax and Arneson. You can see the same playbook being used by these drones over and over because none of them have an original thought. Clear thinking people don't abandon their love for great literature due to a pathetic attempt at label shaming.

Those who can get you to believe absurdities can force you to commit atrocities.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 09:29:16 PMThanks, Venka. I did not expect that I would be arguing over whether "The Last White Man" is racist. It seems clear to me from reading it.

There's room for reasonable disagreement over a lot of things regarding race. I genuinely thought this one wasn't controversial to call.

Can you, for once, not be a disingenuous fuck?

Quote from: Exploderwizard on May 22, 2024, 10:29:02 AMThose who can get you to believe absurdities can force you to commit atrocities.

There's today's dose of irony, folks!

Quote from: Exploderwizard on May 22, 2024, 10:29:02 AMCalling attention to such things, in the deranged mind of a leftist, justifies their endless war on Western culture and civilization. The idea in painting historical literary giants as racists is to label YOU as a racist if you enjoy and appreciate their work and contribution to Western culture.

This is why I talked about my appreciation for Howard as an author and explicitly pointed to my old Conan RPG material here:

https://darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/brawnythews/

I never ran a full campaign of the Conan RPG, but I enjoyed that adventure a lot.

Quote from: Brad on May 22, 2024, 08:59:45 AMI think he needs to be on everyone's ignore list as all he does is derail any legitimate discussion. His obsession with calling dudes who've been dead for 100+ years racist is about the most pathetic attempt at virtue signaling possible.

Also, who gives a fuck if REH was racist? Does it even matter? Does it have any material impact on anyone currently alive?

I'm not the one who started the subtopic of REH. There were a bunch of posts about Howard, defending him against the critique in the linked Rascal article from the original post. I specifically responded to Krazz saying that there was no evidence of racism by Howard (in reply #18).

The part that matters is the attitude regarding racism by the people here and now in this thread. I think "The Last White Man" is racist - as does Venka - but there are others who are claiming it is not racist. The issue is why we have these opposing views in the present day.

Quote from: Omega on May 22, 2024, 05:09:59 AM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 21, 2024, 04:24:51 AMNow that doesn't sound so much like a writer who is racist, but like a writer who is using the main character's racism to demonstrate why a society that embraces racism creates weak citizens and is destined to fall.

You really think he wont try to twist it back around to suit his agenda?

Reading along...

Yep. He did.

Mea Culpa

I was bored at work. I should know better.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 22, 2024, 11:52:42 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on May 22, 2024, 10:29:02 AMThose who can get you to believe absurdities can force you to commit atrocities.

There's today's dose of irony, folks!

Yes. You absolutely are.

Quote from: jhkim on May 22, 2024, 01:20:04 PMThis is why I talked about my appreciation for Howard as an author and explicitly pointed to my old Conan RPG material here:

Man I really love me some REH stories!

OMG!!!111!!! Looks at all teh WACIST stuff he wrote!!!!

Proceeds to point out things that arent racist.

Rinse repeat ad nausium.

This thread has been so thoroughly derailed by you two fuckwits. And its deliberate. You cant stand anyone pointing out your precious cult of idiocy is so abjectly wrong.

Quote from: SHARK on May 16, 2024, 11:01:03 AMGreetings!

I read the entire article.

You're braver than me, Shark.

I stopped the moment I saw "Tolkien was racist" excerpt quoted by Insane Nerd Ramblings. And, just for the record, I think the author of that text has never ever read any of Tolkien's works.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 11:51:02 AMHis girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

Hearsay your honor, the prosecution knows full well they can't prove this "conversation" ever transpired.

Quote from: Omega on May 22, 2024, 03:07:50 PMThis thread has been so thoroughly derailed by you two fuckwits. And its deliberate. You cant stand anyone pointing out your precious cult of idiocy is so abjectly wrong.

Yep.  Once the topic starts making the left look bad, the jhkim-bot rides in to save the day by picking a minor, ancillary point and running away with it in order to deflect attention.

The reality is that fantasy literature and RPGs, having become popular, must be tortured into the service of the woke ideology, and that means tearing down the ideas and tropes that built that popularity.  The left is composed of abject fools: they are always trying to rebuild pyramids starting with the top block...

I will admit that given some of the things he wrote both privately and in public, especially as regards Black Canaan and The Last White Man, many of REH's books were racially charged. That's fair and prospectively somewhat important to acknowledge. But he also lived in an age where racism was a lot more common, and prior to the civil rights movement. So many of his thoughts on the subject of race assumed things we wouldn't today, especially with respect to innate ethnic biological traits and the like being substantively meaningful and blah. He also wrote pulp, where that kind of shorthand characterization was more common all told. In short, a man of his time,  though his views on race and marginalized ethnicities such as Jewish folks did seem to evolve as he aged and his portrayals arguably became more sympathetic and less essentialist over time. Had he not died early, who knows what he would have ultimately believed or become.


Part of the problem, though, I feel, is that one cannot judge those of the past as though they had the knowledge and civilizational benefits of the present, because they didn't. They ultimately built those things, but they never got to live with them. Unluckily or perhaps even at times luckily the morals of modern day liberalism (in the classical and not "progressive" sense: free speech, individual rights, democracy, equal treatment under the law) also was not as widespread or even much a thing back then. Hell, for a long time phrenology of all things was considered a science,  which kind of just goes to show that folks' from the past's understanding of reality and not just their moral takes on it were pretty much utterly divorced from how most folks see things now. They were working not just with different morals but with a completely different world and alleged set of facts.

We cannot neglect the history of where we came from, nor the great works of the past, as written in the times as some such literary works were. Yet all too often I feel we act as though those with flaws in one or more areas of their personal lives or worldviews should not be acknowledged for accomplishments elsewhere, even when they are historic. Likewise, a myopic obsession with judging all prior decision making and thought as though it were arrived at through the lens of present facts and culture I feel obscures the real wins that took place in the building of what we have within present civilization(s). Probably something to be said there about oppression being judged only within a somewhat antiquated American cultural context or only within the context of specific demographics blinding us to some of the problems of the present, too, though I digress a bit there.


Point being, that kind of myopic thought is arguably at the core of the critiques folks want to level at the history of D&D. Only worse, in that the present "facts" and "values" being used are oftentimes centered in a blinding woke obsession with identity politics as an inherent good. Rather than a threat giving rise to inequality in treatment on the basis of innate attributes, both institutionally and corporately, and even under the law. Which under critical theory is apparently the "only solution" to current racism. Past discirimination requiring present discrimination to correct, and that in turn requiring more discrimination, forever.

Quote from: Omega on May 22, 2024, 03:07:50 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 22, 2024, 01:20:04 PMThis is why I talked about my appreciation for Howard as an author and explicitly pointed to my old Conan RPG material here:

Man I really love me some REH stories!

OMG!!!111!!! Looks at all teh WACIST stuff he wrote!!!!

Proceeds to point out things that arent racist.

Rinse repeat ad nausium.

This thread has been so thoroughly derailed by you two fuckwits. And its deliberate. You cant stand anyone pointing out your precious cult of idiocy is so abjectly wrong.

I'm discussing the topic of the thread. Disagreeing with you isn't derailing.

As for pointing at things that aren't racist, I stand firm that Howard's "The Last White Man" clearly expresses racism. It describes the black race as destroyers who can't create without white people, and a future where destructive black hordes pour out of Africa to wipe out all other races.

To have any discussion of what is or isn't racist, there needs to be some agreement on what racism is.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 22, 2024, 05:27:33 PMPart of the problem, though, I feel, is that one cannot judge those of the past as though they had the knowledge and civilizational benefits of the present, because they didn't. They ultimately built those things, but they never got to live with them. Unluckily or perhaps even at times luckily the morals of modern day liberalism (in the classical and not "progressive" sense: free speech, individual rights, democracy, equal treatment under the law) also was not as widespread or even much a thing back then. Hell, for a long time phrenology of all things was considered a science,  which kind of just goes to show that folks' from the past's understanding of reality and not just their moral takes on it were pretty much utterly divorced from how most folks see things now. They were working not just with different morals but with a completely different world and alleged set of facts.

We cannot neglect the history of where we came from, nor the great works of the past, as written in the times as some such literary works were. Yet all too often I feel we act as though those with flaws in one or more areas of their personal lives or worldviews should not be acknowledged for accomplishments elsewhere, even when they are historic. Likewise, a myopic obsession with judging all prior decision making and thought as though it were arrived at through the lens of present facts and culture I feel obscures the real wins that took place in the building of what we have within present civilization(s). Probably something to be said there about oppression being judged only within a somewhat antiquated American cultural context or only within the context of specific demographics blinding us to some of the problems of the present, too, though I digress a bit there.

Well said.  This needs to be stickied at the top of the internet.

Quote from: Greywolf76 on May 22, 2024, 03:26:29 PM

Quote from: SHARK on May 16, 2024, 11:01:03 AMGreetings!

I read the entire article.

You're braver than me, Shark.

I stopped the moment I saw "Tolkien was racist" excerpt quoted by Insane Nerd Ramblings. And, just for the record, I think the author of that text has never ever read any of Tolkien's works.

Greetings!

GREYWOLF76! Hey there, my friend! *Laughing* Yes, well, I do like to be thorough, and I like to know all about precisely what and who I am talking about. Yes, as you wish, my friend, you saved yourself the pain of reading the slop. Of wading through so much BS it is mind-boggling!

And yeah, that clown has never read Tolkien. On the other hand, theoretically it is possible--but these types of Marxist Demagogues, Marxist Shock Troops--they can read something you and I have read--and they then proceed to interpret such a book through their own distorted, Marxist, Racist, Feminist, Queer lens. And yes, they are insane. The Marxist ideology that serves as their philosophical foundation actually corrupts their mind, and erodes and pollutes their thinking, their mental faculties. It is laborious dealing with these kinds of people in any way, Greywolf76! Sadly, our corrupt society is actually creating MORE and MORE of these kinds of hate-filled monsters.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Holy shit this is tiresome.

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 03:15:21 PMThere is tons of evidence of racism on the part of R.E. Howard. Here is the start of his story "The Last White Man",

Not a Conan story. Not the opinion of the author.

So not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here.

Quote from: jhkim on May 20, 2024, 05:13:28 PMFair enough. Here are some excerpts from "Shadows in Zamboula".

Conan story. Not the opinion of the author.

If your intent was to demonstrate racist themes in Conan, you should have started here. But you didn't.

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 11:51:02 AMIn your own link, this is what Howard wrote in a letter to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith:

Quote from: R.E. HowardI shall write a story entitled "The Last Man" as a warning to the white races. If the West falls before the East, it won't be because I haven't warned the white races. Well, maybe if I progress, which I doubt much, in a few years I'll become such a nuisance that the Dalai Lama will take notice of me and my career will end suddenly.

Again, this isn't part of a story, this is Howard writing to his friend.

Have you read the story? Again, it isn't long, and I gave a link earlier to the collection it is in.

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

In another letter, Howard wrote (regarding a rape trial in Honolulu):

Quote from: R.E. HowardI know what would have happened to them in Texas.  I don't know whether an Oriental smells any different than a nigger when he's roasting, but I'm willing to bet the aroma of scorching hide would have the same chastening effect on his surviving tribesman.

His girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

Not a Conan story. Opinion of the author.

If your intent was to expose the author's racists proclivities, then you should have started here. But you didn't.

Not sure which is more irritating, this tedious goalpost moving where I'm still not sure what your point is, or how every response keeps denying/excusing the obvious racism.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 22, 2024, 05:27:33 PMI will admit that given some of the things he wrote both privately and in public, especially as regards Black Canaan and The Last White Man, many of REH's books were racially charged. That's fair and prospectively somewhat important to acknowledge.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 22, 2024, 05:27:33 PMWe cannot neglect the history of where we came from, nor the great works of the past, as written in the times as some such literary works were. Yet all too often I feel we act as though those with flaws in one or more areas of their personal lives or worldviews should not be acknowledged for accomplishments elsewhere, even when they are historic. Likewise, a myopic obsession with judging all prior decision making and thought as though it were arrived at through the lens of present facts and culture I feel obscures the real wins that took place in the building of what we have within present civilization(s).

I agree that there have been real wins and progress in terms of race. To demonstrate those wins, though, we have to be able to point to and call out the racism of 100 years ago -- and then say how things are different now.

This is why I hate sanitizing / bowdlerizing of old stories to remove the offensive parts. People should see the past as it was, not how they idealize it to be.

It's a basic reality check that "The Last White Man" expresses racism. Yes, there are people today who go too far in calling everything racist, to the point that I actively avoid using the term in discussion. But "The Last White Man" is clearly past the line.

---

KindaMeh - you use the more neutral term "racially charged". I think no one disagrees that it has clear racial themes. But, say, jeff37923 suggests that it is opposed to racism in society, comparing it to _To Kill a Mockingbird_. (Replies #35 and #41)

Do you think I'm being myopic and wrong in calling it racist? I think it's damn clear, and I'm just calling it what it is. If one wants to oppose critiques that D&D is racist -- I think defending "The Last White Man" as non-racist makes one less credible, and thus weakens one's position rather than strengthening it.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 23, 2024, 06:36:48 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 21, 2024, 11:51:02 AMHis girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

Not a Conan story. Opinion of the author.

If your intent was to expose the author's racists proclivities, then you should have started here. But you didn't.

Not sure which is more irritating, this tedious goalpost moving where I'm still not sure what your point is, or how every response keeps denying/excusing the obvious racism.

You say that the stories are irrelevant because they're not Howard's real-life views -- but if I had only quoted from his personal letters, then I'm sure that posters would have shot back that it was irrelevant. Howard might have been racist in his private life, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with his legacy and stories, so I was just engaging in a personal vendetta to smear him.

A story can in itself express racist views. MYFAROG, for example, is a racist RPG. It isn't just that Varg Vikernes is a racist privately, but he expresses his views in the game - like the attribute modifiers for the Darkling and Weakling races. "Birth of a Nation" (1915) is a fictional movie - but the KKK would hold screenings of it at their recruitment drives in the 1920s, because it expresses a racist point of view that they wanted to instill. 

I'm claiming that "The Last White Man" is itself racist. The story has a racist message. That's not the same thing as there being a racist character in the fiction. For example, the story has descriptions of the black race and what they do when they invade Europe to kill the hated whites, until there is only a single white man left.

It's not subtle.

As for what my point is -- I'd like to understand why so many posters insist that there is no racism here, when it seems very obvious and clear to me. If we can't agree on what I consider this very obvious case, I think it's showing some core issue.

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 07:46:10 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 22, 2024, 05:27:33 PMI will admit that given some of the things he wrote both privately and in public, especially as regards Black Canaan and The Last White Man, many of REH's books were racially charged. That's fair and prospectively somewhat important to acknowledge.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 22, 2024, 05:27:33 PMWe cannot neglect the history of where we came from, nor the great works of the past, as written in the times as some such literary works were. Yet all too often I feel we act as though those with flaws in one or more areas of their personal lives or worldviews should not be acknowledged for accomplishments elsewhere, even when they are historic. Likewise, a myopic obsession with judging all prior decision making and thought as though it were arrived at through the lens of present facts and culture I feel obscures the real wins that took place in the building of what we have within present civilization(s).

I agree that there have been real wins and progress in terms of race. To demonstrate those wins, though, we have to be able to point to and call out the racism of 100 years ago -- and then say how things are different now.

This is why I hate sanitizing / bowdlerizing of old stories to remove the offensive parts. People should see the past as it was, not how they idealize it to be.

It's a basic reality check that "The Last White Man" expresses racism. Yes, there are people today who go too far in calling everything racist, to the point that I actively avoid using the term in discussion. But "The Last White Man" is clearly past the line.

---

KindaMeh - you use the more neutral term "racially charged". I think no one disagrees that it has clear racial themes. But, say, jeff37923 suggests that it is opposed to racism in society, comparing it to _To Kill a Mockingbird_. (Replies #35 and #41)

Do you think I'm being myopic and wrong in calling it racist? I think it's damn clear, and I'm just calling it what it is. If one wants to oppose critiques that D&D is racist -- I think defending "The Last White Man" as non-racist makes one less credible, and thus weakens one's position rather than strengthening it.

You may have wanted to quote the segments I had right after and right before the limited  segments you quoted, wherein I noted he came from a time with greater racism, and that he had written both personally and professionally things with racial messaging supporting essentialism. I even brought up Black Canaan, which could have had an easy use for you in terms of tangible literary evidence of vibes and stance within the REH discussion. You can latch onto a single phrasing to try to make it seem like I didn't portray things as they were or am somehow in denial, but that's not really gonna work as a good use of time. Firstly, in that it only wastes time for anyone who read the full post properly.

As regards myopia, I gave I feel a very clear argument as to what I felt was myopic thought within the context of the analysis of historical achievements. As well as with respect to the analysis of modern society. At no point therein did I talk about you specifically or even quote your posts, so whether you felt attacked or not by my reasoning has very little to do with me.

It likewise certainly had nothing to do with whether you, like myself, viewed REH to be something of a racial essentialist from a more racist time.

If you wish to discuss my reasoning and arguments regarding myopic historical or modern analysis and the like, therefore, let's just get into that directly. Or if you disagree with my last little paragraph, the one about D&D criticism within the context of that, identity politics, and discrimination on the basis of innate traits, maybe we can talk directly about that in an expanded manner, within the relevant context of the topic of this thread. Heck, maybe it was all just a misunderstanding, and you don't actually want to spend time on that right now. Regardless, I stand by what I wrote, and would be happy to try and discuss whatever. (Though I may be in and out in terms of availability.)

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMYou say that the stories are irrelevant because they're not Howard's real-life views

No, I literally did not. In fact the only thing relevant to the editorial in question and this discussion are the Conan stories.

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMbut if I had only quoted from his personal letters, then I'm sure that posters would have shot back that it was irrelevant.

Which would be fair as it absolutely was.

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PM"Birth of a Nation" (1915) is a fictional movie - but the KKK would hold screenings of it at their recruitment drives in the 1920s, because it expresses a racist point of view that they wanted to instill.

But did the director share those views I ask rhetorically.

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMI'm claiming that "The Last White Man" is itself racist.

Which again is irrelevant in a discussion about Conan.

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMI'd like to understand why so many posters insist that there is no racism here, when it seems very obvious and clear to me.

I suspect part of it is simply a reaction to how you conducted yourself here.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 10:18:33 AMI noted he came from a time with greater racism, and that he had written both personally and professionally things with racial messaging supporting essentialism.

This is no excuse, and plenty of folks during that time were far less racists.

Dude, I hate racial essentialism. As well as any discrimination on the basis of any born identity. REH's thoughts on racial essentialism are not my own nor do I condone them. So I guess we're in agreement on that.

I only put that in there because jhkim was saying I didn't think he or his works were influenced by that kind of thought, which is to say biological essentialist racism. I thought I made it pretty clear. Apparently not.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 10:18:33 AMAs regards myopia, I gave I feel a very clear argument as to what I felt was myopic thought within the context of the analysis of historical achievements. As well as with respect to the analysis of modern society. At no point therein did I talk about you specifically or even quote your posts, so whether you felt attacked or not by my reasoning has very little to do with me.

I didn't mean to say you attacked me. I tried to ask as a question, to clarify where you stood compared to myself and others in the thread.

The prior conversation had been that I said that "The Last White Man" and Howard as its author showed evidence of racism. Others pointedly disagreed with me. I wasn't clear about where you stood.

I don't want to dwell on a single phrase of yours, but it seemed to me that you have consciously avoided using "racism" to describe either Howard or his stories. You instead used other descriptions like that he was a "race essentialist from a more racist time", and that two of his stories were "racially charged".

I want to understand if this means that you think it is wrong to apply the term "racism" here.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 10:18:33 AMIf you wish to discuss my reasoning and arguments regarding myopic historical or modern analysis and the like, therefore, let's just get into that directly. Or if you disagree with my last little paragraph, the one about D&D criticism within the context of that, identity politics, and discrimination on the basis of innate traits, maybe we can talk directly about that in an expanded manner, within the relevant context of the topic of this thread.

Broadly speaking, I think that the most strident political voices are bad at any sort of analysis.

I think that D&D and other fantasy often does make statements about real-world races, but it isn't as simplistic as many partisans often make it out to be. Tolkien's dwarves, for example, are a parallel to Jewish people. Tolkien explicitly said so in an interview, and it's clear from how he based their language on Hebrew as well as other aspects that he explicitly named. On the other hand, Tolkien's orcs are not a parallel for black people. They are first and foremost a symbol of industrialization, but as such, they are also a stand-in for the urban lower class, and there is an element of classism in them.

Going further, though, both dwarves and orcs aren't the same in later adaptations as they are in Tolkien's work. For example, dwarves were re-interpreted as more Scottish rather than Jewish. Orcs have lost their industrial aspect.

So it's complicated, and there's room for disagreement - as is always true in literary interpretation. It's not right to say that fantasy races always mean nothing with respect to real-world races. That doesn't mean that they are inherently white supremacy or biological essentialism, either, though. Like with any analysis, it takes going into more specifics.

---

But the elephant in the room is that if we can't even agree that there is racism in Howard's "The Last White Man", then that's a huge roadblock to any sort of more in-depth analysis.

I feel like I'm either not communicating well or not being heard. I've given 3 responses to that question that I do not feel were unclear. The most recent in the post right above the one you just gave. I've used the terms racial essentialism, biological essentialist racism, racist times, and more, in reference to multiple of the strains within his writings and thought. Including Black Canaan and The Last White Man specifically. I also have made it clear, especially in my post right after Anon's, where I stood with respect to racial essentialism, (edit: I obviously hate it and don't approve of or appreciate discrimination based on inborn physical traits, just to be sure you get this.) though I had previously assumed that went unsaid. So I feel like there is no elephant in the room, and had never been.

 Does that clear things up on what you were asking?

 Also, did you have direct comment related to what I specifically wrote, with respect to the wandering off into Dwarves and Orcs and the like? (I do applaud Tolkien on having tried to be anti-prejudiced against Jewish folks, and disagree that orcs are emblematic of the lower class, but I don't really see the relevance here.) If so, could you perhaps phrase the connection specifically?

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMYou say that the stories are irrelevant because they're not Howard's real-life views

Are you even able to differentiate fantasy from reality?

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 02:01:58 PMI feel like I'm either not communicating well or not being heard. I've given 3 responses to that question that I do not feel were unclear.

This is what he does all the damn time.

Quote from: jhkim on May 24, 2024, 01:51:49 PMBut the elephant in the room is that if we can't even agree that there is racism in Howard's "The Last White Man", then that's a huge roadblock to any sort of more in-depth analysis.

No, the elephant in the room is that you have proven to be incapable of in-depth analysis.  You start with a conclusion, then cherry-pick and nit-pick towards it thereafter.

The article we are speaking about states the following:

QuoteThe other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.

Do you agree that REH's works, especially Conan, have no beauty, grace, romance?  That they have only blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism?  That is the "analysis" of this author.  Now, I'm sure you want to go down the rabbit hole of what the other members of this board think about racism, et al. (because that is a convenient way to derail this examination), but it is irrelevant to the evaluation of Daniel Justice's analysis.  You are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly this quote is accurate and acceptable?

Were there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.  Were they all that was in the works?  Were they even an appreciable part of the works?  Most certainly not.  As someone pointed out above, such "analysis" is so simplistic it would be like declaring Huckleberry Finn a thoroughly racist book because it has the n-word in it.

Were you actually capable of "in-depth" literary analysis, you would recognize that one of the, if not the, most important elements in understand a work of fiction is the theme.  You conjure The Birth of a Nation as an example in your posts above.  Well, that film can easily be said to have at its core a very racial (and racist) theme.  To define it by that theme is neither inappropriate nor reductive.  But the Conan stories?  Their themes are far different, primarily dealing with the decadence and duplicity of civilization.  Conan is often the more moral character, not because of some racist theme or trope, but because he chooses an ethic based in personal responsibility and loyalty (see the famous courtroom scene in Queen of the Black Coast). Asserting a consistent theme of racism in Conan is both wrong and reductive.

So, Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis."

Now, do you agree?

Also, on the topic of Conan and civilization, and Daniel Justice and D&D...

Hopefully this is topic relevant and not taking things down a weird rabbit hole, but how does the article author's alleged savage vs civilized D&D theme with the latter as the "good guys" map onto traditionally lawful evil groups? Like, devils and hobgoblins have a very rigid and hierarchical society. And lawful is part of the name. Even ignoring the organizational predilections of specific species and whatnot, how does lawful evil or chaotic good map at all?

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 05:39:10 PMAlso, on the topic of Conan and civilization, and Daniel Justice and D&D...

Hopefully this is topic relevant and not taking things down a weird rabbit hole, but how does the article author's alleged savage vs civilized D&D theme with the latter as the "good guys" map onto traditionally lawful evil groups? Like, devils and hobgoblins have a very rigid and hierarchical society. And lawful is part of the name. Even ignoring the organizational predilections of specific species and whatnot, how does lawful evil or chaotic good map at all?

I think civilization vs. savage is rather independent of alignment or at least not quite aligned on the law vs. chaos axis particularly cleanly.

A chaotic good barbarian village is likely less savage than a lawful evil hobgoblin military fort.

Savagery really is just a synonym for "evil" in much of the D&D context... rule by the whims of the strong. By contrast Civilization generally implies some limit on the capriciousness of the rulers... it may not be "good" but it is probably safer for the weak than under savagery.

The distinction is also just kinda "off" in relation to Conan in particular as much of the underlying themes are how civilization leads to decadence while the "savage" Conan is how life should be lived (in this case it's more "strength enough to live free" vs. oppression of those weaker)... which is basically the opposite of the article author's claims (again pointing out that he's just spouting Lefty talking points and hasn't actually read any Conan).

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 23, 2024, 06:36:48 PMhow every response keeps denying/excusing the obvious racism.

I was just gonna let this go, but figured I really can't.

This is a fucking messageboard devoted to discussing nerdy elf games. REH, in my opinion, is the best pulp writer ever, and if you know anything about the origins of D&D, you know how much pulp influenced its creation. Hence, REH is an important figure when discussing nerdy elf games. His alleged racism, real or nonexistent, is entirely immaterial to any discussion about fucking nerdy elf games. Bringing it up all the time is akin to sitting in a military history class and whenever the Gallic Wars are discussed the same jackass in the back of the class talks about how "problematic" the topic is because Caesar was a slave owner. I could make the argument that even if you were doing a literary analysis of REH, the "racism" crap is functionally irrelevant simply because, unless you're directly addressing a theme of one of his stories, his personal beliefs aren't germane. Unfortunately, a lot of fucktard self-stylized "intellectuals" feel the need to deconstruct everything in an effort to destroy Western culture because they're nothing more than Marxist sycophants. They hate everything about Western morality, ideals, accomplishments, etc., because THEY are incapable of producing anything of value. They're critics because they suck at making art.

So basically, fuck them and if you think it's tiresome that people are saying REH's racism doesn't matter, maybe start with the root cause and kill all the commies; the problems would magically disappear.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 24, 2024, 01:31:33 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2024, 09:46:01 PMI'd like to understand why so many posters insist that there is no racism here, when it seems very obvious and clear to me.

I suspect part of it is simply a reaction to how you conducted yourself here.

People were already discussing Howard and saying that there was no evidence of racism on his part before I jumped into the conversation with my reply to Krazz. It's why I jumped in.

And yes, I did bluntly tell people they were wrong about something obvious. Yes, I know that's going to ruffle some feathers. But theRPGsite isn't a fucking tea party -- it's Mos Eisley. Sometimes feathers deserve to be ruffled.

---

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 02:01:58 PMI've given 3 responses to that question that I do not feel were unclear. The most recent in the post right above the one you just gave. I've used the terms racial essentialism, biological essentialist racism, racist times, and more, in reference to multiple of the strains within his writings and thought. Including Black Canaan and The Last White Man specifically. I also have made it clear, especially in my post right after Anon's, where I stood with respect to racial essentialism, (edit: I obviously hate it and don't approve of or appreciate discrimination based on inborn physical traits, just to be sure you get this.) though I had previously assumed that went unsaid. So I feel like there is no elephant in the room, and had never been.

 Does that clear things up on what you were asking?

Yes, that does clarify, thanks. Also, my comment about "the elephant in the room" wasn't about you - and I'm sorry if I implied it was. There are several other posters who explicitly disagreed that "The Last White Man" showed any racism on the part of Howard. That's a huge gulf of disagreement, bigger than any subtle issue of literary interpretation. That gulf is what I'm calling the elephant in the room.

I find it tricky to talk about more subtle issues with you, when at the same time, I'm trying to argue with those posters who disagree that "The Last White Man" demonstrates racism.

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 02:01:58 PMAlso, did you have direct comment related to what I specifically wrote, with respect to the wandering off into Dwarves and Orcs and the like? (I do applaud Tolkien on having tried to be anti-prejudiced against Jewish folks, and disagree that orcs are emblematic of the lower class, but I don't really see the relevance here.) If so, could you perhaps phrase the connection specifically?

There, I was trying to relate some of my disagreements with the Rascal article. I was not trying to imply anything about your positions. I was trying to state my positions about fantasy races and racism to show where I am at, and see if there was any discussion to be had over those.

OK, quick obvious questions.

Can a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them. Mark Twain is not racist because he wrote Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee is not a racist because he wrote To Kill A Mockingbird Thus Robert E Howard was not a racist for writing The Last White Man .

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 25, 2024, 03:43:32 PMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them. Mark Twain is not racist because he wrote Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee is not a racist because he wrote To Kill A Mockingbird . Thus Robert E Howard was not a racist for writing The Last White Man .

I agree that the presence of a racist character doesn't make a story racist. But stories do have a message that is different than the views of any single character.

For example, in "Birth of a Nation" (1915), pure black characters are portrayed as all simple, stupid, and superstitious. Black characters can even be heroic - like the beefy enslaved house maid who defends her lady against raping Union soldiers with her fists. But they are ultimately shown as simple-minded and in need of firm control, like the early scene when a black man sees the main character who accidentally has a white sheet over him and runs away for fear of a ghost. This becomes the inspiration for the white robes and hoods of the KKK, who in the end heroically keep superstitious black people away from the voting polls.

The film portrays these as an objective (camera-eye) view of events, not just the point of view of an individual racist character.

Likewise, in Howard's "The Last White Man", the world history describes that the negroes in Africa ally with the Orientals to invade Europe and wipe out the hated white men, continuing until there is only one white man left. That's not portrayed as a delusion of the titular character. It's portrayed as events that happened. The offensive part about that isn't the use of the n-word. It's that the people of Africa are portrayed as intent and acting on wholesale racial slaughter.

It doesn't matter whether the titular character is racist or not. It's a question of how the events reflect on the races.

---

To be clear, there are some stories with unreliable narrators. For example, the film "Rashomon" (1950) is famous for having three characters describe events that are then filmed, but they are all contradictory. Even though things appear on film, they might or might not have actually happened. But the existence of "Rashomon" doesn't mean that we can say "Birth of a Nation" isn't racist because maybe the camera's point of view isn't what really happened. There is nothing in "Birth of a Nation" to suggest that the camera view is unreliable.

Likewise, there is nothing in "The Last White Man" to say that the world events described are a delusion.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 25, 2024, 03:43:32 PMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them. Mark Twain is not racist because he wrote Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee is not a racist because he wrote To Kill A Mockingbird . Thus Robert E Howard was not a racist for writing The Last White Man .

I agree that the presence of a racist character doesn't make a story racist. But stories do have a message that is different than the views of any single character.

For example, in "Birth of a Nation" (1915), pure black characters are portrayed as all simple, stupid, and superstitious. Black characters can even be heroic - like the beefy enslaved house maid who defends her lady against raping Union soldiers with her fists. But they are ultimately shown as simple-minded and in need of firm control, like the early scene when a black man sees the main character who accidentally has a white sheet over him and runs away for fear of a ghost. This becomes the inspiration for the white robes and hoods of the KKK, who in the end heroically keep superstitious black people away from the voting polls.

The film portrays these as an objective (camera-eye) view of events, not just the point of view of an individual racist character.

Likewise, in Howard's "The Last White Man", the world history describes that the negroes in Africa ally with the Orientals to invade Europe and wipe out the hated white men, continuing until there is only one white man left. That's not portrayed as a delusion of the titular character. It's portrayed as events that happened. The offensive part about that isn't the use of the n-word. It's that the people of Africa are portrayed as intent and acting on wholesale racial slaughter.

It doesn't matter whether the titular character is racist or not. It's a question of how the events reflect on the races.

---

To be clear, there are some stories with unreliable narrators. For example, the film "Rashomon" (1950) is famous for having three characters describe events that are then filmed, but they are all contradictory. Even though things appear on film, they might or might not have actually happened. But the existence of "Rashomon" doesn't mean that we can say "Birth of a Nation" isn't racist because maybe the camera's point of view isn't what really happened. There is nothing in "Birth of a Nation" to suggest that the camera view is unreliable.

Likewise, there is nothing in "The Last White Man" to say that the world events described are a delusion.

So, once again you invoke The Birth of a Nation, but ignore the objections to equate it with Conan.  I'll repeat it all for you, since you have obviously ignored it (so as to continue your derailing...):

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 24, 2024, 04:54:13 PMThe article we are speaking about states the following:

QuoteThe other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.

Do you agree that REH's works, especially Conan, have no beauty, grace, romance?  That they have only blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism?  That is the "analysis" of this author.  Now, I'm sure you want to go down the rabbit hole of what the other members of this board think about racism, et al. (because that is a convenient way to derail this examination), but it is irrelevant to the evaluation of Daniel Justice's analysis.  You are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly this quote is accurate and acceptable?

Were there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.  Were they all that was in the works?  Were they even an appreciable part of the works?  Most certainly not.  As someone pointed out above, such "analysis" is so simplistic it would be like declaring Huckleberry Finn a thoroughly racist book because it has the n-word in it.

Were you actually capable of "in-depth" literary analysis, you would recognize that one of the, if not the, most important elements in understand a work of fiction is the theme.  You conjure The Birth of a Nation as an example in your posts above.  Well, that film can easily be said to have at its core a very racial (and racist) theme.  To define it by that theme is neither inappropriate nor reductive.  But the Conan stories?  Their themes are far different, primarily dealing with the decadence and duplicity of civilization.  Conan is often the more moral character, not because of some racist theme or trope, but because he chooses an ethic based in personal responsibility and loyalty (see the famous courtroom scene in Queen of the Black Coast). Asserting a consistent theme of racism in Conan is both wrong and reductive.

So, Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis."

Now, do you agree?

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 25, 2024, 03:43:32 PMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them. Mark Twain is not racist because he wrote Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee is not a racist because he wrote To Kill A Mockingbird . Thus Robert E Howard was not a racist for writing The Last White Man .

I agree that the presence of a racist character doesn't make a story racist. But stories do have a message that is different than the views of any single character.

For example, in "Birth of a Nation" (1915), pure black characters are portrayed as all simple, stupid, and superstitious. Black characters can even be heroic - like the beefy enslaved house maid who defends her lady against raping Union soldiers with her fists. But they are ultimately shown as simple-minded and in need of firm control, like the early scene when a black man sees the main character who accidentally has a white sheet over him and runs away for fear of a ghost. This becomes the inspiration for the white robes and hoods of the KKK, who in the end heroically keep superstitious black people away from the voting polls.

The film portrays these as an objective (camera-eye) view of events, not just the point of view of an individual racist character.

As soon as you brought up the film Birth of a Nation, I knew that this was just another attempt by you to mislead people.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PMLikewise, in Howard's "The Last White Man", the world history describes that the negroes in Africa ally with the Orientals to invade Europe and wipe out the hated white men, continuing until there is only one white man left. That's not portrayed as a delusion of the titular character. It's portrayed as events that happened. The offensive part about that isn't the use of the n-word. It's that the people of Africa are portrayed as intent and acting on wholesale racial slaughter.

Events in South Africa of white farmers being murdered for their land show that this is indeed possible.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PMIt doesn't matter whether the titular character is racist or not. It's a question of how the events reflect on the races.

---

To be clear, there are some stories with unreliable narrators. For example, the film "Rashomon" (1950) is famous for having three characters describe events that are then filmed, but they are all contradictory. Even though things appear on film, they might or might not have actually happened. But the existence of "Rashomon" doesn't mean that we can say "Birth of a Nation" isn't racist because maybe the camera's point of view isn't what really happened. There is nothing in "Birth of a Nation" to suggest that the camera view is unreliable.

Likewise, there is nothing in "The Last White Man" to say that the world events described are a delusion.

So what?

And what does this have to do with Conan, anyways?

Quit trying to gaslight people and instead try to argue the premise. Or do you believe that all literary authors are their works of fiction?

Quote from: jhkim on May 24, 2024, 01:51:49 PM.....

I've got to ask why you keep posting here. You never argue in good faith and usually choose whatever the most woke position possible is in order to cause division. Is that your purpose? To frustrate the forum users of this Bastion of Free Speech so that they throw their hands up in disgust and leave? Is your goal to destroy worthwhile conversation here to the point that it no longer is an actual forum for discussion?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 25, 2024, 11:52:24 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 25, 2024, 03:43:32 PMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them. Mark Twain is not racist because he wrote Huckleberry Finn and Harper Lee is not a racist because he wrote To Kill A Mockingbird . Thus Robert E Howard was not a racist for writing The Last White Man .

I agree that the presence of a racist character doesn't make a story racist. But stories do have a message that is different than the views of any single character.

For example, in "Birth of a Nation" (1915), pure black characters are portrayed as all simple, stupid, and superstitious. Black characters can even be heroic - like the beefy enslaved house maid who defends her lady against raping Union soldiers with her fists. But they are ultimately shown as simple-minded and in need of firm control, like the early scene when a black man sees the main character who accidentally has a white sheet over him and runs away for fear of a ghost. This becomes the inspiration for the white robes and hoods of the KKK, who in the end heroically keep superstitious black people away from the voting polls.

The film portrays these as an objective (camera-eye) view of events, not just the point of view of an individual racist character.

As soon as you brought up the film Birth of a Nation, I knew that this was just another attempt by you to mislead people.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PMLikewise, in Howard's "The Last White Man", the world history describes that the negroes in Africa ally with the Orientals to invade Europe and wipe out the hated white men, continuing until there is only one white man left. That's not portrayed as a delusion of the titular character. It's portrayed as events that happened. The offensive part about that isn't the use of the n-word. It's that the people of Africa are portrayed as intent and acting on wholesale racial slaughter.

Events in South Africa of white farmers being murdered for their land show that this is indeed possible.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 08:50:33 PMIt doesn't matter whether the titular character is racist or not. It's a question of how the events reflect on the races.

---

To be clear, there are some stories with unreliable narrators. For example, the film "Rashomon" (1950) is famous for having three characters describe events that are then filmed, but they are all contradictory. Even though things appear on film, they might or might not have actually happened. But the existence of "Rashomon" doesn't mean that we can say "Birth of a Nation" isn't racist because maybe the camera's point of view isn't what really happened. There is nothing in "Birth of a Nation" to suggest that the camera view is unreliable.

Likewise, there is nothing in "The Last White Man" to say that the world events described are a delusion.

So what?

And what does this have to do with Conan, anyways?

Quit trying to gaslight people and instead try to argue the premise. Or do you believe that all literary authors are their works of fiction?

Greetings!

Hey there Jeff! You know, I have a whole collection of Conan books. I have read them all. I can't say that I have ever seen REH, the author, as being racist. Strangely, I have needed Leftist shills to lecture me on REH's alleged racism over and over again.

And yet, I remain undeterred. I love the Conan stories. REH is a huge, foundational figure to fantasy writing, Pulp genres, and more. Such a brilliant, gifted master!

Just like with your quoted examples, somehow we are arguing about an onscure story, "The Last White Man." Not a Conan story, as you noted well. It is by REH, though, so on that count Jhkim is correct. Interesting though, as you especially highlighted, even in "The Last White Man", it is *The CHARACTER IN THE STORY* that appears to be racist--not the real-world author, REH.

Strange that Jhkim has not addressed this important observation. Instead, Jhkim wants to ponder on REH being racist.

I always find these kinds of discussions of limited interest with Leftists, because it ultimately turns out to really being an exercise in attempted mind reading, trying to guess with certainty!--what the author genuinely felt and thought *then* or at different years of the author's life. All in the effort to conclude that REH is a terrible, horrible racist. Then it devolves into being a struggle session, essentially.

I just sigh and enjoy smoking my pipe, and enjoying reading the Conan stories. I continue to hold fast to my considered judgement that REH is a giant father of fantasy and pulp story writing, and was a gifted, brilliant genius, and a master at his craft.

Does it make me a terrible man that I don't give a fuck about if REH was racist? Or I don't give a fuck about his relationship with women? Or what his relationship with his parents or family was like? All of these kinds of speculations about a man no one here or anywhere has known, as REH is of course long deceased. As an aside, I have noticed that Leftists love taking a conversation ostensibly about Conan, and instead of talking about REH's skills and talent as an author, as a writer--the Leftists *ALWAYS* seek to change the discussion into a huge struggle session.

As I smoke my pipe, and enjoy a fresh cup of coffee, I can't help but wonder how angry and sad and unhappy Leftists' are as people. Leftists enjoy doing this all the time, with every kind of author, and every kind of subject.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Is this a good thread to post a tutorial about how to block people on this site?

Quote from: BadApple on May 26, 2024, 07:39:17 AMIs this a good thread to post a tutorial about how to block people on this site?

Nah.  If you were going to block anyone, there are a couple of complete trolls who should definitely be first on the list.  Jhkim does talk about RPGs (sometimes).

Honestly, he's kind of funny.  It's why I've nicknamed him the "jhkimAIbot."  Look at any thread he posts in.  Usually, he takes a small, mostly inconsequential, fragment of the discussion (you know, like whether REH was racist in a discussion about some dingleberry's ridiculous evaluation of D&D), disagrees with it, and posts his personal "experience" or interpretation as his evidence that this minor point is wrong.  He never engages with the larger point (as you can see from his avoidance of my questions for him... twice!).  He is the personification of the internet meme "Well, ackshually..."  Once you see the pattern, it's impossible to unsee.

Really, I feel kind of sorry for him.  I'm sure he's sitting at home, convinced he's owning us chuds, and bringing civilization to the savages on the RPGSite (though he could never frame it that way... because "colonization" and [insert woke verbiage here]).  But if you look at all of his commentary, it is all hopelessly bound up in himself.  I ran, I've seen, I think, etc.  He can't even have a conversation unless we all agree on the definition of "racist" (by which he means, "agree to use my definition").  This is a dude who basically argued in another thread that his "Christianity" doesn't include the sins he's committed which are directly labeled in the Bible, by Jesus himself, as sins.  But this is typical of leftists.  Part of what makes them woke/leftists is the inability to separate themselves from whatever concept they are discussing.  It's all about them, even when it isn't.

So, no, personally I wouldn't block him.  There's too much to learn from him... but probably not what he thinks he's teaching...

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 26, 2024, 12:00:33 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 24, 2024, 01:51:49 PM.....

I've got to ask why you keep posting here. You never argue in good faith and usually choose whatever the most woke position possible is in order to cause division. Is that your purpose? To frustrate the forum users of this Bastion of Free Speech so that they throw their hands up in disgust and leave? Is your goal to destroy worthwhile conversation here to the point that it no longer is an actual forum for discussion?

jhkim is usually arguing in better faith than half the opposition... But the loud voices seem to win, or shout him down, too often.

I think I've said before how I've lost players from my work game by having the least hint of anti-PC racism; I'm a little more hopeful this time, since the player who was told "Hey, tieflings are by-the-book subject to pretty strong prejudice and abuse, and <here's their exact status in this world that helps explain how that evolved, whether or not it's justified>" went ahead to play one anyway, (ab)using 5e's easy cantrips to at least gesture towards hiding his nature in causal interactions even knowing it'll slip out over long contact.

But these players are still a bit sensitive to standard-to-my-expectations xenophobia / fantasy racism. Dwarves overly proud of their backwater town? Humans scorning the dwarven merchants for being over-focused on profit and not willing to stay around for the feast day? (That last one was meant to be purely cultural, but they saw the racial lens fit too...) We'll see how they shake out, particularly if they start exploring more the goblin vs dwarf divide.

As a general note, I'm attending KublaCon (https://kublacon.com/) this weekend, so I haven't had a lot of time for my replies. I'm trying to keep up and eventually get to the points made here, but it will take some time to get to them all.

Quote from: SHARK on May 26, 2024, 06:34:05 AMJust like with your quoted examples, somehow we are arguing about an onscure story, "The Last White Man." Not a Conan story, as you noted well. It is by REH, though, so on that count Jhkim is correct. Interesting though, as you especially highlighted, even in "The Last White Man", it is *The CHARACTER IN THE STORY* that appears to be racist--not the real-world author, REH.

Strange that Jhkim has not addressed this important observation. Instead, Jhkim wants to ponder on REH being racist.

I addressed this specifically in Reply #87 (https://www.therpgsite.com/index.php?msg=1284084). In "The Last White Man", the racism of the story is not the racism of the character.

In the future described in the story, blacks in Africa invade Europe to wipe out the hated white men, and continue to invade America and wipe out all the whites there - joined by the 50% African-Americans in the U.S. The racism in the story is expressed through the larger events that happen and the descriptions, not by the character being racist.

Quote from: SHARK on May 26, 2024, 06:34:05 AMDoes it make me a terrible man that I don't give a fuck about if REH was racist? Or I don't give a fuck about his relationship with women? Or what his relationship with his parents or family was like? All of these kinds of speculations about a man no one here or anywhere has known, as REH is of course long deceased. As an aside, I have noticed that Leftists love taking a conversation ostensibly about Conan, and instead of talking about REH's skills and talent as an author, as a writer--the Leftists *ALWAYS* seek to change the discussion into a huge struggle session.

If you don't give a fuck about whether REH was racist, then it would be no big deal to just admit that he was racist and just go on to talking about how great a writer he is and how we run our Conan games.

The thing that makes this a "huge struggle session" isn't an inherent quality of my stance. It's that we have a strong disagreement over the point. It takes two sides both committed to make this into a struggle. In some other social groups, the point might be over quickly either way.

In general, though, I enjoy not talking in an echo chamber, and I like a good argument.

(Again, I might be slow in replying further. Just because I answered SHARK right now doesn't mean I'm ignoring all other points - it just takes time to get to it.)

That's all beside the point that the writer of the article, by showing himself to be too fragile to read something extremely mild like Conan, or by being unable to read it and take away that it held anything of value, I'm unsure which from the guy's writing, his opinions are safe to completely disregard.  His take on Conan as "no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism" is either willfully ignorant or lying, depending on whether he ever read a single page of it.

Quote from: BadApple on May 26, 2024, 07:39:17 AMIs this a good thread to post a tutorial about how to block people on this site?

(Insert your favorite deity or demigod here) Wept... Yes!

Quote from: Valatar on May 26, 2024, 10:34:33 PMThat's all beside the point that the writer of the article, by showing himself to be too fragile to read something extremely mild like Conan, or by being unable to read it and take away that it held anything of value, I'm unsure which from the guy's writing, his opinions are safe to completely disregard.  His take on Conan as "no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism" is either willfully ignorant or lying, depending on whether he ever read a single page of it.

Makes you wonder how bad the rest of the book is.

Quote from: Naburimannu on May 26, 2024, 03:03:22 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 26, 2024, 12:00:33 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 24, 2024, 01:51:49 PM.....

I've got to ask why you keep posting here. You never argue in good faith and usually choose whatever the most woke position possible is in order to cause division. Is that your purpose? To frustrate the forum users of this Bastion of Free Speech so that they throw their hands up in disgust and leave? Is your goal to destroy worthwhile conversation here to the point that it no longer is an actual forum for discussion?

jhkim is usually arguing in better faith than half the opposition... But the loud voices seem to win, or shout him down, too often.

Well, we've just seen this before, a lot. It has been jhkim's modus operendi for years now.

I am more than happy to engage someone in a discussion where we have a difference of opinion based upon intellectual honesty. I in particular have enjoyed debating the merits of WEG d6 Star Wars vs FFGs Star Wars with tenbones, but he didn't cherry pick his sources or outright lie about his experiences.

Quote from: Naburimannu on May 26, 2024, 03:03:22 PMI think I've said before how I've lost players from my work game by having the least hint of anti-PC racism; I'm a little more hopeful this time, since the player who was told "Hey, tieflings are by-the-book subject to pretty strong prejudice and abuse, and <here's their exact status in this world that helps explain how that evolved, whether or not it's justified>" went ahead to play one anyway, (ab)using 5e's easy cantrips to at least gesture towards hiding his nature in causal interactions even knowing it'll slip out over long contact.

But these players are still a bit sensitive to standard-to-my-expectations xenophobia / fantasy racism. Dwarves overly proud of their backwater town? Humans scorning the dwarven merchants for being over-focused on profit and not willing to stay around for the feast day? (That last one was meant to be purely cultural, but they saw the racial lens fit too...) We'll see how they shake out, particularly if they start exploring more the goblin vs dwarf divide.

See, what you are introducing here is, IMHO, not a problem with your gamemastering or the material but a problem with the players that you have in your game. If they are so fragile that they are turned off of a game due to fantasy racism or culturalism in the game setting, then how will they react in Real Life? Would they fail an American Literature course because they refused to read Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn since it has the n-word in it or Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird since it has the n-word in it?

Just to mix things up with a hot take: Is fictional racism wrong outside the context of modern politics? Because one of the fundamental strengths of fiction is being able to treat things allegorically as opposed to literally. And even when taken literally kind sticking with kind is the norm in nature. Regardless groups have to be a color of some kind, allegory needs clear identifiers, and hateful groups aren't likely to tolerate diversity.

So what do?

Quote from: KindaMeh on May 24, 2024, 01:36:09 PMDude, I hate racial essentialism. As well as any discrimination on the basis of any born identity. REH's thoughts on racial essentialism are not my own nor do I condone them. So I guess we're in agreement on that.

I only put that in there because jhkim was saying I didn't think he or his works were influenced by that kind of thought, which is to say biological essentialist racism. I thought I made it pretty clear. Apparently not.

It all depended on whether we were focusing on the author or their work, which @jhkim made exceptionally if not deliberately difficult to determine. Of course REH's racism influenced his work. Who cares? Of course REH's story about a global race war was racist. Who cares? The only thing relevant was the possible racism in Conan, which @jhkin eventually provided a (solid) example of.

Quote from: Brad on May 25, 2024, 08:49:00 AMHis alleged racism, real or nonexistent, is entirely immaterial to any discussion about fucking nerdy elf games.

Agreed.

Quote from: Brad on May 25, 2024, 08:49:00 AMSo basically, fuck them and if you think it's tiresome that people are saying REH's racism doesn't matter, maybe start with the root cause and kill all the commies; the problems would magically disappear.

Magically indeed.

The idea that it's worth the cost, let alone even possible, to eliminate everyone who adopts an opposing ideology is precisely the delusional thinking behind this retarded culture war.

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 11:54:45 AMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them.

In this case however the author has both included racist themes in their work as well as expressed racists views in their personal correspondence.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 27, 2024, 03:07:08 AMMagically indeed.

The idea that it's worth the cost, let alone even possible, to eliminate everyone who adopts an opposing ideology is precisely the delusional thinking behind this retarded culture war.

Communists aren't people, and they don't have "an opposing ideology", they are psychopathic meat robots whose only goal is totalitarianism and complete control over the masses. This is demonstrated throughout history, hence, yes, the cost is absolutely worth it. Legitimate political disagreements should be debated and discussed. Communists just through out ad hominems instantly, then dox your ass if you don't follow along. So, to reiterate, fuck them and they can all burn in Hell.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 27, 2024, 03:07:08 AMThe only thing relevant was the possible racism in Conan, which @jhkin eventually provided a (solid) example of.

Did he? I saw a bunch of quotes from Shadows in Zamboula. Can you explain which is a solid example of racism, and exactly what is so solidly racist about it please?

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 27, 2024, 03:07:08 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2024, 11:54:45 AMCan a story be racist? No, but the characters in the story can be and sometimes must be in order to have an effective story.

If characters in a story are racist, does that mean the author is racist? No, because that same logic would indicate that any horror writer must be a murderous sociopath since they write about them.

In this case however the author has both included racist themes in their work as well as expressed racists views in their personal correspondence.

Sorry for being nitpicky about this, but where in personal correspondence? Is this just the "normal" racism that was accepted in the 1920s or does it show a personal and exceptional targeting and denigration of races?

Here's Shadows in Zamboula (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/42196/pg42196-images.html), now, can anyone point EXACTLY where is the racismism?

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 27, 2024, 03:07:08 AMOf course REH's racism influenced his work. Who cares? Of course REH's story about a global race war was racist. Who cares? The only thing relevant was the possible racism in Conan, which @jhkin eventually provided a (solid) example of.

You say it's obvious that "The Last White Man" is racist. I agree, as have Venka and KindaMeh. (Apologies to KindaMeh for not catching all of it.) On the other hand, krazz, jeff37923, Omega, and SHARK have all argued that it isn't racist.

The relevance to me about "The Last White Man" is why we disagree. How is it that you (Anon) say "of course" it is racist, but others strongly argue against that conclusion? I think that core disagreement is going to also apply to any discussion of Conan stories.

I don't mean to lump posters into just two sides, though. Notably, jeff37923 that a story cannot be racist - it can only have racist characters. (reply #86) Eirikrautha had an earlier reply (#81) where he thought some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 24, 2024, 04:54:13 PMWere you actually capable of "in-depth" literary analysis, you would recognize that one of the, if not the, most important elements in understand a work of fiction is the theme.  You conjure The Birth of a Nation as an example in your posts above.  Well, that film can easily be said to have at its core a very racial (and racist) theme.  To define it by that theme is neither inappropriate nor reductive.  But the Conan stories?  Their themes are far different, primarily dealing with the decadence and duplicity of civilization.

I wouldn't say that "The Birth of a Nation" is defined by its racist theme. I'll admit that I only watched it because of it being famous for racism, but it was hailed as an artistic masterpiece for decades after its release - and reasonably so. It is an extremely innovative movie, with themes about the identity of the U.S. reconciling after the Civil War.

I'd say Howard's "The Last White Man" is at least as much about race as "The Birth of a Nation" is - but again, that doesn't mean that it - or any other story - is defined by racism. His other stories are less centered on race, but that doesn't mean that racism is only in this story and no others. In particular, "The Last White Man" was written years before the first Conan story, but it shows clearly the themes of civilization falling into decadence that you mention.

From "The Last White Man":

Quote from: R.E. HowardWhat heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Then the decadence set in. It had been first noticeable in the sports and athletics. Fewer and fewer of the race had gained fame in the great games. More and more men of other races seized the prizes.

The ruling race forgot the art of war, forgot all except the search for newer pleasures, and in so doing, they descended to the depths of degeneracy.

Always some new strong race sprang up then, the man reflected, thinking of the hazy legends of the ancients, of great empires known as Greece, Rome, Nineveh, Sumeria.

And a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

They were a mighty, a prolific race. First they overran their own continent. Rebellions swept Africa. The negroes pushed the Arab races to the north and the Arabs and Europeans slew each other, until from Cape Town to Tangiers, and from Kimberly to Suez only black men ruled.

The whites should have seen that they could not stand before them. The black race doubles itself in forty years, the brown in sixty, the white in eighty. And the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased. Moreover, the race was decimated by fierce wars, wherein white man fought white man.

First of all, I think that his theme here is racist. It projects a fundamental conflict between white people and black people, as entities, rather than race being an incidental trait. That seems obvious to me, but there are posters who disagree.

Second, I think that this is clearly connected to common themes in his later writing - especially his Conan stories.

To those who deny that this is racist, I think it's clearly ignoring a part of him - that connects into his themes of civilization.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 27, 2024, 04:49:24 PMHere's Shadows in Zamboula (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/42196/pg42196-images.html), now, can anyone point EXACTLY where is the racismism?

GeekyBugle, I quoted a number of sections in Reply #29 (https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/rascal-article-on-dd-50th-book-hack-the-orcs-loot-the-tomb-and-take-the-land/msg1283777/#msg1283777). I can discuss the individual quotes more.

But to clarify first, do you think that there is racism in Howard's story "The Last White Man"? If so, how would you point out where that racism is to posters who disagree?

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:21:12 AM

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 27, 2024, 03:07:08 AMOf course REH's racism influenced his work. Who cares? Of course REH's story about a global race war was racist. Who cares? The only thing relevant was the possible racism in Conan, which @jhkin eventually provided a (solid) example of.

You say it's obvious that "The Last White Man" is racist. I agree, as have Venka and KindaMeh. (Apologies to KindaMeh for not catching all of it.) On the other hand, krazz, jeff37923, Omega, and SHARK have all argued that it isn't racist.

The relevance to me about "The Last White Man" is why we disagree. How is it that you (Anon) say "of course" it is racist, but others strongly argue against that conclusion? I think that core disagreement is going to also apply to any discussion of Conan stories.

I don't mean to lump posters into just two sides, though. Notably, jeff37923 that a story cannot be racist - it can only have racist characters. (reply #86) Eirikrautha had an earlier reply (#81) where he thought some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 24, 2024, 04:54:13 PMWere you actually capable of "in-depth" literary analysis, you would recognize that one of the, if not the, most important elements in understand a work of fiction is the theme.  You conjure The Birth of a Nation as an example in your posts above.  Well, that film can easily be said to have at its core a very racial (and racist) theme.  To define it by that theme is neither inappropriate nor reductive.  But the Conan stories?  Their themes are far different, primarily dealing with the decadence and duplicity of civilization.

I wouldn't say that "The Birth of a Nation" is defined by its racist theme. I'll admit that I only watched it because of it being famous for racism, but it was hailed as an artistic masterpiece for decades after its release - and reasonably so. It is an extremely innovative movie, with themes about the identity of the U.S. reconciling after the Civil War.

I'd say Howard's "The Last White Man" is at least as much about race as "The Birth of a Nation" is - but again, that doesn't mean that it - or any other story - is defined by racism. His other stories are less centered on race, but that doesn't mean that racism is only in this story and no others. In particular, "The Last White Man" was written years before the first Conan story, but it shows clearly the themes of civilization falling into decadence that you mention.

From "The Last White Man":

Quote from: R.E. HowardWhat heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Then the decadence set in. It had been first noticeable in the sports and athletics. Fewer and fewer of the race had gained fame in the great games. More and more men of other races seized the prizes.

The ruling race forgot the art of war, forgot all except the search for newer pleasures, and in so doing, they descended to the depths of degeneracy.

Always some new strong race sprang up then, the man reflected, thinking of the hazy legends of the ancients, of great empires known as Greece, Rome, Nineveh, Sumeria.

And a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

They were a mighty, a prolific race. First they overran their own continent. Rebellions swept Africa. The negroes pushed the Arab races to the north and the Arabs and Europeans slew each other, until from Cape Town to Tangiers, and from Kimberly to Suez only black men ruled.

The whites should have seen that they could not stand before them. The black race doubles itself in forty years, the brown in sixty, the white in eighty. And the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased. Moreover, the race was decimated by fierce wars, wherein white man fought white man.

First of all, I think that his theme here is racist. It projects a fundamental conflict between white people and black people, as entities, rather than race being an incidental trait. That seems obvious to me, but there are posters who disagree.

Second, I think that this is clearly connected to common themes in his later writing - especially his Conan stories.

To those who deny that this is racist, I think it's clearly ignoring a part of him - that connects into his themes of civilization.

Since jhkim is adamant about The Last White Man being racist and not just a story using racist characters to further the plot, obviously jhkim is also racist for only seeing this aspect.

Do you now see how your own logic works?

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:21:12 AMI don't mean to lump posters into just two sides, though. Notably, jeff37923 that a story cannot be racist - it can only have racist characters. (reply #86) Eirikrautha had an earlier reply (#81) where he thought some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 24, 2024, 04:54:13 PMWere you actually capable of "in-depth" literary analysis, you would recognize that one of the, if not the, most important elements in understand a work of fiction is the theme.  You conjure The Birth of a Nation as an example in your posts above.  Well, that film can easily be said to have at its core a very racial (and racist) theme.  To define it by that theme is neither inappropriate nor reductive.  But the Conan stories?  Their themes are far different, primarily dealing with the decadence and duplicity of civilization.

I wouldn't say that "The Birth of a Nation" is defined by its racist theme. I'll admit that I only watched it because of it being famous for racism, but it was hailed as an artistic masterpiece for decades after its release - and reasonably so. It is an extremely innovative movie, with themes about the identity of the U.S. reconciling after the Civil War.

I'd say Howard's "The Last White Man" is at least as much about race as "The Birth of a Nation" is - but again, that doesn't mean that it - or any other story - is defined by racism. His other stories are less centered on race, but that doesn't mean that racism is only in this story and no others. In particular, "The Last White Man" was written years before the first Conan story, but it shows clearly the themes of civilization falling into decadence that you mention.

From "The Last White Man":

Quote from: R.E. HowardWhat heights his race had reached before luxuries, idleness and pleasures had sapped their might; had made of them a race of degenerate weaklings. He cursed beneath his breath.

There had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Then the decadence set in. It had been first noticeable in the sports and athletics. Fewer and fewer of the race had gained fame in the great games. More and more men of other races seized the prizes.

The ruling race forgot the art of war, forgot all except the search for newer pleasures, and in so doing, they descended to the depths of degeneracy.

Always some new strong race sprang up then, the man reflected, thinking of the hazy legends of the ancients, of great empires known as Greece, Rome, Nineveh, Sumeria.

And a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

They were a mighty, a prolific race. First they overran their own continent. Rebellions swept Africa. The negroes pushed the Arab races to the north and the Arabs and Europeans slew each other, until from Cape Town to Tangiers, and from Kimberly to Suez only black men ruled.

The whites should have seen that they could not stand before them. The black race doubles itself in forty years, the brown in sixty, the white in eighty. And the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased. Moreover, the race was decimated by fierce wars, wherein white man fought white man.

First of all, I think that his theme here is racist. It projects a fundamental conflict between white people and black people, as entities, rather than race being an incidental trait. That seems obvious to me, but there are posters who disagree.

Second, I think that this is clearly connected to common themes in his later writing - especially his Conan stories.

To those who deny that this is racist, I think it's clearly ignoring a part of him - that connects into his themes of civilization.

Bullshit.  I'm not letting you get away with your duplicity.  First, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

QuoteWere there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.

So you know your statement is a lie.  Of course Howard's work could be racist.  Especially depending on whose sensibilities you use.  The point is that Howard's Conan stories had other major themes, and that racism was not a major theme, or even a minor one, in Conan.  The fact that you would try and rehabilitate The Birth of a Nation to try and buttress your argument is ludicrous.  One of the primary themes of the whole film is racial distrust!  But you are claiming that that's not a main theme of the movie?  You sound like a white supremacist with these excuses!  (Just for your info, the primary reason The Birth of a Nation is considered a "classic" today and studied is because of its cinematography, direction, and editing innovations (like the fade cut, etc.), and not for its themes).  So, no, Conan is NOT thematically comparable to The Birth of a Nation.

But you're not going to use a brief mention (and misrepresentation) to avoid the main questions I asked.  So, here it is a THIRD time:

QuoteYou are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly [Daniel Justice's evaluation] is accurate and acceptable?

...Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis.  Do you agree?"

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 29, 2024, 05:59:12 AMSince jhkim is adamant about The Last White Man being racist and not just a story using racist characters to further the plot, obviously jhkim is also racist for only seeing this aspect.

Do you now see how your own logic works?

I think it has been firmly established that Marxists are, indeed, insanely racist and hide it under the guise of "inclusion". They remove all "problematic" material which results in actual cultural erasure so they can implement their own version of the truth.

ANYWAY, I think at this point we can assume anything released for D&D(tm) in the future is going to be a complete waste of money. SAD!

Quote from: Brad on May 29, 2024, 09:18:07 AM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 29, 2024, 05:59:12 AMSince jhkim is adamant about The Last White Man being racist and not just a story using racist characters to further the plot, obviously jhkim is also racist for only seeing this aspect.

Do you now see how your own logic works?

I think it has been firmly established that Marxists are, indeed, insanely racist and hide it under the guise of "inclusion". They remove all "problematic" material which results in actual cultural erasure so they can implement their own version of the truth.

ANYWAY, I think at this point we can assume anything released for D&D(tm) in the future is going to be a complete waste of money. SAD!

Please add "post-modernism is a load a fetid dingo's kidneys" in regards to this discussion as well.

Why?

When talking about REH and HPL, is very easy for someone to impose post-modernist ideas onto their writings, points-of-view etc. which as a historian I despise. Taking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they lived and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may be viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:21:12 AMYou say it's obvious that "The Last White Man" is racist. I agree, as have Venka and KindaMeh. (Apologies to KindaMeh for not catching all of it.) On the other hand, krazz, jeff37923, Omega, and SHARK have all argued that it isn't racist.

I've done nothing of the sort. I've not even read the story, so I wouldn't argue one way or the other, and I've not discussed it prior to this post. From what you've written, it sounds as racist as Planet of the Apes is anti-ape for showing a conflict along species lines. It's a story.

Unfortunately, I bear responsibility for knocking this whole discussion off track when I posted this:

QuoteI'm pretty sure he's never read any Howard either. No beauty? Good luck finding an ugly woman in Howard's works. They're there, but few and far between. No grace? In Conan's first story, he's saved at the will of a god to save the world from evil. No romance? Conan often gave up his dreams to save a woman. And these claims of "overt racism" never seem to have any evidence.

I still think that does a good job of destroying what I was arguing against, regardless of racism.

I was referring to the Conan stories, and I was a little sloppy talking about "any Howard". And note the quote: "overt racism". So not "I know what he had in mind, and trust me, he was racist". The claim was that there was overt racism in Howard's works, particularly his Conan stories. I still maintain that nobody has provided evidence of overt racism in any of Howard's works, and in particular his Conan stories, which were what was under discussion.

Here's a quote from HP Lovecraft that contains overt racism:

QuoteThe organic things—Italo-Semitico-Mongoloid—inhabiting that awful cesspool could not by any stretch of the imagination be call'd human.

Since people are arguing that overt racism is in Howard's works, could someone post something similar from a Howard story? Preferably a Conan one, to at least keep this thread vaguely on-track.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:25:14 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 27, 2024, 04:49:24 PMHere's Shadows in Zamboula (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/42196/pg42196-images.html), now, can anyone point EXACTLY where is the racismism?

GeekyBugle, I quoted a number of sections in Reply #29 (https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/rascal-article-on-dd-50th-book-hack-the-orcs-loot-the-tomb-and-take-the-land/msg1283777/#msg1283777). I can discuss the individual quotes more.

But to clarify first, do you think that there is racism in Howard's story "The Last White Man"? If so, how would you point out where that racism is to posters who disagree?

IDGAFF about "The Last White Man", the discussion is about Conan.

In your quotes it's obscured that the one complaining about interacial breeding is a Zuagir, themselves not white but Middle Eastern, who also calls Conan his brother.

You quote several pasages with "negroes" guess that's raicismism too, but omit the part where Conan looks at the BROWN legs of a woman with healthy appreciation.

You also want to conflate the Darffar cannibals with ALL the black people from Conan's world.

I guess you chose that story to isolate BECAUSE it contains bad words for your modern sensibilities. Being a Mexican and having first read Conan in Spanish I don't carry the same cultural baggage as you, nor do I feel the need to blame myself for the sins of people who happen to look like me.

Now, is the Zuagir being raicismist? YES, does this mean the AUTHOR himself is racist? I guess to you it does.

So, if someone writes ANY character with some istophobia that makes them istophobes to you, but not to me.

I've read all of Conan's stuff, from the originals to the pastiches to the new stuff that has only the names in common.

I guess by your logic that makes REH racist against white people for writing the Hyperboreans as he did.

But to you commiefornians he should have written as a modern day seattleite.

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

It's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning. Yes, racism was common in REH's time -- but even at the time, there were people who used the term "racism" and opposed it. When "The Birth of a Nation" (1915) was released, there were huge protests over its racism - and it was banned in several major cities including Chicago and St. Louis.

It's moral relativism to say that the same terms don't apply to people from a different society.

Just because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

If I read a story and don't know who the author is or when it was written, I can still describe it objectively and factually using words, including "racism".

---

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMFirst, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

QuoteWere there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.

So you know your statement is a lie.  Of course Howard's work could be racist.  Especially depending on whose sensibilities you use.

Because of the passive voice, I read your quote as saying "Other people today would consider REH to be racist" - with the implication that they were wrong. I didn't think it defined your opinion.

But I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'd ask for clarification. Do you think that any of Howard's work is racist? As in, you would consider them racist by your understanding of the true meaning of the word?

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PM

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

It's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning. Yes, racism was common in REH's time -- but even at the time, there were people who used the term "racism" and opposed it. When "The Birth of a Nation" (1915) was released, there were huge protests over its racism - and it was banned in several major cities including Chicago and St. Louis.

It's moral relativism to say that the same terms don't apply to people from a different society.

Just because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

If I read a story and don't know who the author is or when it was written, I can still describe it objectively and factually using words, including "racism".

---

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMFirst, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

QuoteWere there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.

So you know your statement is a lie.  Of course Howard's work could be racist.  Especially depending on whose sensibilities you use.

Because of the passive voice, I read your quote as saying "Other people today would consider REH to be racist" - with the implication that they were wrong. I didn't think it defined your opinion.

But I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'd ask for clarification. Do you think that any of Howard's work is racist? As in, you would consider them racist by your understanding of the true meaning of the word?

Answer my question about Daniel Justice's analysis, and I'll be happy to answer yours.  I'm just tired of your disingenuous derailing...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMYou are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly [Daniel Justice's evaluation] is accurate and acceptable?

...Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis.  Do you agree?"

That's a fair request. I'll quote Justice's comment on Howard again for clarity.

Quote from: Daniel Justice(The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.)

I disagree that this is intended as analysis of any sort. It is a single sentence in explicit parentheses, and it is phrased as a personal reaction -- i.e. "held no appeal for me".

As a personal statement of his reaction, it sounds like that was genuinely his reaction to REH's writing. Based on that, I'm pretty sure that he hasn't read the entire REH corpus, given that he didn't like it.

I enjoy much of Howard's writing, but I don't feel any need to say that people are objectively wrong if they don't like it. For example, I can understand how a gay man like Justice finds no romance or beauty in the Conan stories.

I might respond that I enjoy Howard's stories to a fair degree because they are brutal and unromantic, and also primal and visceral and sensual, expressing in a powerful and iconic way key male fantasies. I don't agree with Howard's racism, and especially as a Christian, I don't endorse the savagery that he extols as a philosophy in real life, but I can still enjoy it as fantasy.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PM

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

It's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning. Yes, racism was common in REH's time -- but even at the time, there were people who used the term "racism" and opposed it. When "The Birth of a Nation" (1915) was released, there were huge protests over its racism - and it was banned in several major cities including Chicago and St. Louis.

It's moral relativism to say that the same terms don't apply to people from a different society.

Just because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

If I read a story and don't know who the author is or when it was written, I can still describe it objectively and factually using words, including "racism".

---

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMFirst, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

QuoteWere there passages in REH works that would be considered racist today?  Yes.

So you know your statement is a lie.  Of course Howard's work could be racist.  Especially depending on whose sensibilities you use.

Because of the passive voice, I read your quote as saying "Other people today would consider REH to be racist" - with the implication that they were wrong. I didn't think it defined your opinion.

But I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'd ask for clarification. Do you think that any of Howard's work is racist? As in, you would consider them racist by your understanding of the true meaning of the word?

You do you jhkim....you do you...

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:21:12 AMYou say it's obvious that "The Last White Man" is racist. I agree, as have Venka and KindaMeh. (Apologies to KindaMeh for not catching all of it.) On the other hand, krazz, jeff37923, Omega, and SHARK have all argued that it isn't racist.

I've done nothing of the sort. I've not even read the story, so I wouldn't argue one way or the other, and I've not discussed it prior to this post.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PMThe claim was that there was overt racism in Howard's works, particularly his Conan stories. I still maintain that nobody has provided evidence of overt racism in any of Howard's works, and in particular his Conan stories, which were what was under discussion.

OK, I'm confused by this. It sounds like you're saying that I haven't provided evidence of racism in any of Howard's works, when I thought I had -- which is why I included you with others who have been explicitly arguing that "The Last White Man" isn't racist.

Could you read "The Last White Man"? It's much shorter in word count than either the Rascal article or this thread, and it's by R.E. Howard so it should be interesting if you like his writing. Here's the link again:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up


I can understand a position of "_The Last White Man_ is racist, but none of Howard's Conan stories are racist." But if you make a claim that there's no evidence of racism, but then refuse to read cited evidence of racism, that feels like intentional ignorance.

EDIT: corrected misspelling

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:37:54 PMOK, I'm confused by this. It sounds like you're saying that I haven't provided evidence of racism in any of Howard's works, when I thought I had -- which is why I included you with others who have been explicitly arguing that "The Last White Man" isn't racist.

I said what I did before The Last White Man was mentioned. So, no, I didn't argue that that story didn't contain overt racism. I said that, although I'd heard claims of overt racism in Howard's works (and I was talking about the Conan ones specifically), I'd never seen those claims backed up. Disclaimer: many of Howard's works are copyrighted and hard-to-find, so I've not read them all. Even some of the copyrighted Conan stories I haven't read in decades, so they might contain overt racism that I don't recall. My point was that I wasn't taking such claims seriously without evidence.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:37:54 PMCould you read "The Last White Man"? It's much shorter in word count than either the Rascal article or this thread, and it's by R.E. Howard so it should be interesting if you like his writing. Here's the link again:

I can understand a position of "_The Last White Man_ is racist, but none of Howard's Conan stories are racism." But if you make a claim that there's no evidence of racism, but then refuse to read cited evidence of racism, that feels like intentional ignorance.

I made the claim that nobody had ever provided me with evidence of overt racism in the stories, not that it didn't exist. The discussion was about the Conan stories and other influences on D&D, and this is derailing the thread. But fine, I've now read TLWM. Not Howard's best work, but the Conan canon tends to far outshine everything else he wrote, in my opinion. The story is about racism. That doesn't make the story racist. And rereading the original Daniel Justice quote I disagreed with, it's not clear whether it refers to in-world racism, or that the stories themselves are racist.

So fine, let me give an updated response to:

Quote(The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.)

The stories by Howard that influenced D&D, especially his Conan works, have oodles of explicit beauty and romance, as well as some grace. They also contain blood, brutality and butchery, which to many adds to their charm. I've not seen any evidence of any of Howard's stories being overtly racist, though some contain in-world racism.

There. Do you disagree with any of that?

I sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Anybody who reads much REH is likely to come away with the impression that the concept of race loomed pretty large in his thought (as it did of many authors of his time), and he had a particularly high opinion of the Celtic and Anglo-Saxon races. I think it's completely fair to say that "The Last White Man" expresses a degree of animosity and/or fear to what Howard would have thought of as "the African Race", but from what I can find, the version we have is an unfinished manuscript, and we don't know what Howard submitted to Weird Tales as a finished product. It's also interesting that the story appears to have been written in or around 1925, very early in Howard's career. That would mean it was followed shortly thereafter with the Solomon Kane stories (published 1928-32, with the first probably being written in 1927), which are probably the Howard stories in which Africans are most positively portrayed.

As far as the Conan stories go, I'd be reluctant to ascribe racial animosity to anything in them, simply because Howard pretty universally stereotypes and/or caricatures real world cultures to come up with their Hyborian analogues, and he can be surprisingly even-handed. Just as the Africans who get a pretty rough characterization in "Shadows in Zamboula" get a much more sympathetic one in something like "Wings in the Night" or "The Footfalls Within", Howard's own beloved Picts get remade from the Kull stories, in which they are noble savages par excellence, to the Conan ones, where they are made out savages of the least noble kind, and then get kind of rehabilitated via the Bran Mak Morn stories.

All of that is a long way round to go to say that I'm not enough of a Howard scholar to pronounce judgment on his racial views. What I will say is this: Howard is usually discussed in the same breath as HP Lovecraft. The stance I've long taken on Lovecraft is that whatever his suspect attitudes on topics like race might have been, he deserves some extra leeway because he was a spectacularly neurotic person, and we probably owe that neuroticism in no small degree for the extraordinary imagination that gave us his best work. I generally get a lot of agreement on that point. Howard hasn't been anywhere near as thoroughly psychoanalyzed in the years since his death, but given that he committed suicide at age 30, he probably deserves some of the same charity.

At any rate, there's something pretty distasteful about spitting on a man's grave while profiting hugely from his life's work. Any one who appreciates fantasy, horror, historical fiction, or sword-and-sorcery should probably be prepared to cut REH an immense amount of slack on whatever his personal failings might have been, out of regard for his contributions to the culture.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Yep. According to the activists, Howard is racist because white people are inherently racist.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Anybody who reads much REH is likely to come away with the impression that the concept of race loomed pretty large in his thought (as it did of many authors of his time), and he had a particularly high opinion of the Celtic and Anglo-Saxon races. I think it's completely fair to say that "The Last White Man" expresses a degree of animosity and/or fear to what Howard would have thought of as "the African Race", but from what I can find, the version we have is an unfinished manuscript, and we don't know what Howard submitted to Weird Tales as a finished product. It's also interesting that the story appears to have been written in or around 1925, very early in Howard's career. That would mean it was followed shortly thereafter with the Solomon Kane stories (published 1928-32, with the first probably being written in 1927), which are probably the Howard stories in which Africans are most positively portrayed.

As far as the Conan stories go, I'd be reluctant to ascribe racial animosity to anything in them, simply because Howard pretty universally stereotypes and/or caricatures real world cultures to come up with their Hyborian analogues, and he can be surprisingly even-handed. Just as the Africans who get a pretty rough characterization in "Shadows in Zamboula" get a much more sympathetic one in something like "Wings in the Night" or "The Footfalls Within", Howard's own beloved Picts get remade from the Kull stories, in which they are noble savages par excellence, to the Conan ones, where they are made out savages of the least noble kind, and then get kind of rehabilitated via the Bran Mak Morn stories.

All of that is a long way round to go to say that I'm not enough of a Howard scholar to pronounce judgment on his racial views. What I will say is this: Howard is usually discussed in the same breath as HP Lovecraft. The stance I've long taken on Lovecraft is that whatever his suspect attitudes on topics like race might have been, he deserves some extra leeway because he was a spectacularly neurotic person, and we probably owe that neuroticism in no small degree for the extraordinary imagination that gave us his best work. I generally get a lot of agreement on that point. Howard hasn't been anywhere near as thoroughly psychoanalyzed in the years since his death, but given that he committed suicide at age 30, he probably deserves some of the same charity.

At any rate, there's something pretty distasteful about spitting on a man's grave while profiting hugely from his life's work. Any one who appreciates fantasy, horror, historical fiction, or sword-and-sorcery should probably be prepared to cut REH an immense amount of slack on whatever his personal failings might have been, out of regard for his contributions to the culture.

10 yard penalty for having a reasonable, thought out post. :D

This is all of course a distraction from the point that the original article is terrible and very likely the author hasn't spent nearly as much time considering REH and Conan as has been spent in this discussion. He's simply using activist shorthand for "problematic content" in the hobby to justify his activism.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 29, 2024, 04:01:59 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.
....

Any one who appreciates fantasy, horror, historical fiction, or sword-and-sorcery should probably be prepared to cut REH an immense amount of slack on whatever his personal failings might have been, out of regard for his contributions to the culture.

10 yard penalty for having a reasonable, thought out post. :D

This is all of course a distraction from the point that the original article is terrible and very likely the author hasn't spent nearly as much time considering REH and Conan as has been spent in this discussion. He's simply using activist shorthand for "problematic content" in the hobby to justify his activism.

LOL.

I mean honestly, I didn't think the original article was even worth discussing. It's the kind of low-thought, low-effort tripe that identity politics grifters are probably able to crap out on automatic pilot, and do on a regular basis. The only thing that makes it worth the bits it's printed on is that people on this forum decided to use it as a jumping off point to discuss topics with a degree of substance to them.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PM

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

It's about facts, not feelings.

It's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning. Yes, racism was common in REH's time -- but even at the time, there were people who used the term "racism" and opposed it.

By claiming that it is not postmodernism to think that "racism" should have the same definition as today as 100 years ago is something only a racist like jhkim would think!

Thinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

EDIT: Also, I did not know until today that Robert E Howard wrote sleazy bodice-ripper romance stories under the pseudonym "Sam Walser". It is a pity those aren't still in print, because they're probably hilarious.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 05:05:17 PMThinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

EDIT: Also, I did not know until today that Robert E Howard wrote sleazy bodice-ripper romance stories under the pseudonym "Sam Walser". It is a pity those aren't still in print, because they're probably hilarious.

I wasn't aware of that. The good news? Some are out of copyright and available online: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Robert_Ervin_Howard#Spicy_stories

I know what I'm reading this evening.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 03:42:54 PMSo fine, let me give an updated response
...
The stories by Howard that influenced D&D, especially his Conan works, have oodles of explicit beauty and romance, as well as some grace. They also contain blood, brutality and butchery, which to many adds to their charm. I've not seen any evidence of any of Howard's stories being overtly racist, though some contain in-world racism.

There. Do you disagree with any of that?

Thank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 05:05:17 PMThinking about it a bit further, it might not be fair to use "The Last White Man" to evaluate Howard at all. If it was written in or before 1925, Howard was probably 20 or 21 at the time. The fact that later in life, he didn't re-work it and try to get it published (which he routinely did with rejected stories) suggests he probably didn't think it was his best work. I know I wouldn't want to be held to either my political opinions or the quality of my prose at that age.

I don't claim that either Howard's writing or his politics at that age define him later. Like everyone, he changes over time. He is more than this one story. Still, particularly if one enjoys an author, it is worthwhile and interesting to read their early works, like Tolkien's unpublished "Book of Lost Tales" that has a lot of his later mythology.

None of that denies that this story is, in fact, racist - and it shows evidence of his racist thought at this time.

This is a sticky point because there are many posters who are insisting that it is not racist.

I am happy to discuss more about evidence of racism in Conan stories, but discussion of that should be in the context of this disagreement over "The Last White Man".

Quote from: Omega on May 15, 2024, 11:24:32 PMWhoo boy is this one a mess. A friend recently pointed this out to me from a Reddit post they saw.

https://www.rascal.news/hack-the-orcs-loot-the-tomb-and-take-the-land/

QuoteEven so, when I started to create my characters, it wasn't the brash (white) warriors who appealed to me, or the dignified (white) princelings seeking to regain their thrones, or the noble (white) paladins charging down the dragons to rescue the swooning (white) maidens in distress. These weren't characters who reflected where we lived or where we came from. I struggled with shame about my little mountain town, far from what I envisioned as the center of culture, art, and intellectual achievement, but I loved the place, too; and so, to manage the cognitive dissonance, I began imagining myself in worlds of magic and mystery where difference was valued, not despised, where the game's explicit insistence on the dungeon master's (DM's) ultimate authority as storyteller made it possible to ignore the parts that wounded and enhance those that empowered, no matter what the canonical rule books might otherwise state. The DM was the ultimate creator of worlds through story, and that was something I understood at a visceral level.

So another 50th Anniversary of D&D book thats a cover for some woke screed.

Look, not everyone is going to be into the sort of pulpy sword and sorcery sort of fantasy that D&D was initially based on. I can appreciate it but it's not my preferred sort of fantasy. But this sorry excuse for a person is complaining about their own lack of imagination. If all I want are strong warrior women, Red Sonja has been there for years. One of my favorite types of heroines are the jungle goddesses of comic books who live alongside dangerous animals in the wild rainforests. There is not and was never a limitation on what sort of skin tone or gender you could give your characters. There is not and was never a limitation on what sorts of stories you can tell with this system. There is not and was never a reason why this article should have been released for D&D 50th anniversary.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

In fairness to Jhkim, he did provide quotes, but they're back on page 2 of the thread. I don't know how to link previous posts, but it's comment #27.

Here's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms. These days, "racist" has so many varied and nebulous meanings that it really has to be clarified to be properly discussed. That's why I don't use the term if I can instead use something more precise or descriptive. Even just saying "so-and-so doesn't like black people" is a lot clearer nowadays than saying "racist".

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 08:17:16 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 06:00:24 PMThank you for the clarification (and for reading the story), but yes, I do disagree with that.

I think that "The Last White Man" is overtly racist as a story. The depiction of black people invading Europe to kill off all the hated whites is not portrayed as a delusion, but as events that actually happened. That is not a function of the character - it is a depiction by the author. The race war depicted and the characterizations of the black race all are evidence of racist thinking in the world events themselves, not just the mind of the protagonist.

There's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist? You're the one who's been making these claims for pages in this thread, so you need to justify them with quotes and reasoning.

In fairness to Jhkim, he did provide quotes, but they're back on page 2 of the thread. I don't know how to link previous posts, but it's comment #27.

Here's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms. These days, "racist" has so many varied and nebulous meanings that it really has to be clarified to be properly discussed. That's why I don't use the term if I can instead use something more precise or descriptive. Even just saying "so-and-so doesn't like black people" is a lot clearer nowadays than saying "racist".

In fairness to Jhkim, he dragged TLWM into a discussion about Conan because he thinks that if he can convince you that the story is raicismist it makes REH raicismist for writing it and by his logic this proves that any and all accusations of raicismism in Conan (or other stories) fully proven.

I wonder if the cannibals in Shadows in Zamboula were White and the reaction was the same from the other characters he would condemn it for raicismism against White people, or if he thinks the Hyperboreans prove REH was also raicismist against White people.

He's doing his usual, defending a far left leftard and derailing the thread to distract from the fact that the leftard is retarded.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 08:17:16 PMHere's where I suspect that the conversation goes no further if people don't start defining their terms.

To paraphrase GE Moore, I shouldn't have to define every word I'm using in a discussion just because some Marxists are disingenuous. The moment we can't communicate with a general understanding of what commonly used terms mean is the moment we need to haul out the shotguns and clean house.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:53:49 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMYou are normally the person here who objects to gross generalizations and reductive statements, yet suddenly [Daniel Justice's evaluation] is accurate and acceptable?

...Daniel Justice's "analysis" of the Conan stories is superficial and reductive.  It cherry-picks a few elements, ignoring the overarching themes, and is the kind of thing one would expect from a first year lit student.  I.e., it's garbage "analysis.  Do you agree?"

That's a fair request. I'll quote Justice's comment on Howard again for clarity.

Quote from: Daniel Justice(The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.)

I disagree that this is intended as analysis of any sort. It is a single sentence in explicit parentheses, and it is phrased as a personal reaction -- i.e. "held no appeal for me".

As a personal statement of his reaction, it sounds like that was genuinely his reaction to REH's writing. Based on that, I'm pretty sure that he hasn't read the entire REH corpus, given that he didn't like it.

I enjoy much of Howard's writing, but I don't feel any need to say that people are objectively wrong if they don't like it. For example, I can understand how a gay man like Justice finds no romance or beauty in the Conan stories.

I might respond that I enjoy Howard's stories to a fair degree because they are brutal and unromantic, and also primal and visceral and sensual, expressing in a powerful and iconic way key male fantasies. I don't agree with Howard's racism, and especially as a Christian, I don't endorse the savagery that he extols as a philosophy in real life, but I can still enjoy it as fantasy.

What the actual f....?  In one breath you assert:

QuoteIt's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning...  It's moral relativism to say that the same terms don't apply to people from a different society.

Just because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

Then you follow this up with:

QuoteI enjoy much of Howard's writing, but I don't feel any need to say that people are objectively wrong if they don't like it. For example, I can understand how a gay man like Justice finds no romance or beauty in the Conan stories.

So, you object to relativism when it comes to racism, but find it perfectly fine when it comes to claims of beauty , romance, and grace?  Hypocrisy much?

See, you cannot on one hand claim that there is an objective meaning to the word "racism" that is true for every person in every time period, then excuse Justice because he doesn't define "beauty," "romance," and "grace" the same way we do.  No!  Just no!  Either the word "beauty" has a clear, permanent meaning, or "racism" doesn't.  You don't get to be a relativist when it is convenient.  You must hold Justice to the same standard you hold the people here to.

I'm not even going to go into your complete conflation of descriptive moral relativism vs. metaethical moral relativism, because if I thought you were simply ignorant such a discussion might be productive.  But you have given me no evidence (and numerous counterfactuals) that your mistakes are innocent and not simple disingenuous strategy.

Now, to answer your question clearly and honestly (something I doubt you are capable of):

My statement previous is totally dependent on the definition of racism, which is highly fluid depending on time and context.  If we take racism to mean "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other," which is the classic definition of racism, it is arguable that some REH stories may contain racist themes, but such an argument is not cut and dried.  It has a lot to due with the definition of the word "inferior," which is definitely contextual, and on the categorical nature of the claim (is the cause of the "degeneracy" the membership in the race?  Or just a description of those members of a race?).  But I would entertain the argument as being in good faith, and also be open to agreeing with it, having done my due diligence in reading the stories, context, and themes.

On the other hand, in a modern context, "racism" has been defined as "attributing some quality or behavior to members of a racial group based on statistical preponderance or personal experience, especially if those qualities might be viewed negatively."  Under this definition, there's a lot of the writing in REH's works that would fit.  This standard is exactly the standard used to argue that Sheetz convenience stores have discriminated against black applicants by requiring a criminal background check.  This is the same standard that is used to claim that making fun of BVE (ebonics) is racist (despite the fact that the majority of black people in the world don't even speak English).  This is the same standard that asserts that objecting to the tenets of Islam is racist against Arabs (a claim that is made frequently under the term "Islamophobia," but is defined as a kind of racism).  Heck, based on this definition, you have made racist statements on this very website about the Japanese.

And there are more than just these potential definitions of racism.  You've complained that racism has a permanent and unchanging definition (which is patently false, descriptively speaking), but you've never actually articulated that definition and its predicates.  So, if we are going to discuss racism in REH, we need to delineate the meaning of the term.

Of course, that would then mean that we can speak of "beauty" as an objective standard as well, so you could evaluate Justice's claims as being true or false.  So, none of your bullshit relativism.  Is there no beauty in REH's Conan stories, or is Justice wrong?

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 10:43:21 PMSo, you object to relativism when it comes to racism, but find it perfectly fine when it comes to claims of beauty , romance, and grace?  Hypocrisy much?

To clarify, I am opposed to MORAL relativism. I do not believe that different moral system are all equivalent, and that we cannot judge people from a different system. I think we need to be informed about other views, but just like there is an objective scientific reality, there is also an objective reality in morals. I'm not always sure what the right thing is, but I think that there is an objective truth that I'll search for.

However, I think relativism is fine to apply to things like beauty and taste. I think it is pointless and dumb to argue with someone that they are wrong about their favorite flavor of ice cream, or which movie star is hottest.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 10:43:21 PMIf we take racism to mean "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other," which is the classic definition of racism, it is arguable that some REH stories may contain racist themes, but such an argument is not cut and dried.  It has a lot to due with the definition of the word "inferior," which is definitely contextual, and on the categorical nature of the claim (is the cause of the "degeneracy" the membership in the race?  Or just a description of those members of a race?).  But I would entertain the argument as being in good faith, and also be open to agreeing with it, having done my due diligence in reading the stories, context, and themes.

OK, fair enough. Have you read "The Last White Man"? As I mentioned to Krazz, it is short. I'll give the link again.

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

Krazz asked for arguments to demonstrate that it is racist. I'm still compiling those arguments, but I'll try to present them for both you and him.

I think your classic definition of racism is fine, and I'll try to stick to it in my arguments regarding "The Last White Man".

EDITED TO ADD: On reflection, I have some doubts that definition, because it allows for things like anti-miscegenation laws and "separate but equal" in general. I believe that anti-miscegenation laws are racist - but that might be covered by thinking that mixed-race people are inherently inferior, though. Anti-miscegenation has at its root the idea that racial purity is a pure good, and thus mixed race people (like myself) are inferior. Also, someone could say that they think black people are dumb, but it isn't racist because they also think black people make up for it by being good at sports and dancing and rhythm - so they're not really inferior. I'll try to clarify that "race essentialism" is the unscientific belief that race is more important than it is in reality. It often overlaps with racism but there could be some distinction.

So, looking over "The Last White Man", and looking for racism defined (by Eirikrautha) as "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other."

Note that I will use "white race" and "black race" to describe the groups in the stories, because that is what the story describes -- but I also think this falls into racial essentialism, thinking that those are objectively important categories as far as genetics, and are important for dividing masses of people.

But sticking to just the racism part:

---

Let's take direct descriptions of the races. From the opening paragraphs, here's how the story describes the white race:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprizing proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last.

and also

Quote from: R.E. HowardThere had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Emphasis mine there in the end.

Now, the story also says that the blacks were strong, but it describes them differently. Here's a description of them:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

and

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Now, blacks are described as strong when here at their prime, but they are clearly mentally and morally inferior to the whites. Physically, there is some see-saw described. Whites are described as superior physically at first, but they lost their physical edge, only gaining it back towards the end. On other fronts, the blacks are clearly inferior, except for their "animal-like rate of birth" which I don't think is intended as a positive trait.

---

Beyond the direct description, though, the events of the race wars show this. The blacks lead the charge to wipe out all the white of Europe, then invade the U.S. to invade there. That is a negative portrayal of black people, which demonstrates their desire to "slaughter and plunder" even if the story hadn't used those exact words to describe the black race.

Also, in the end, they charge using only spears - which illustrates how they are unable to create weapons like rifles. The story says that they can't create weapons, and it also illustrates it by how they attack.

The general theme of the story is the danger of the black race, who will wipe out the whites if given the chance. That is the future being portrayed, which he described to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith via letter as a "warning to the white races" (from jeff37923's link (https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/)).

---

The leader of the blacks was not black himself, but that isn't a counter to the idea of black inferiority. As the story describes the leader:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThey were a strong, young race. Their day was yet to come. All they lacked was a leader.

And a leader had risen. A mixed-breed Arab, whose ambition was without measure, whose genius was Satanic.

He welded them into one great mass, gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

Describing him as "Satanic" is clearly a negative. Moreover, it implies that the blacks are unable to have a leader of their own race. I don't think that is a positive for either black people or mixed-breed people.

---

I'll stop there for now.

As a brief aside, Eirikrautha said this about me earlier:

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 26, 2024, 10:54:09 AMReally, I feel kind of sorry for him.  I'm sure he's sitting at home, convinced he's owning us chuds, and bringing civilization to the savages on the RPGSite (though he could never frame it that way... because "colonization" and [insert woke verbiage here]).

So, around here I will sometimes argue like I think I'm right. Again, I appreciate the Mos Eisley atmosphere of this forum, and Pundit's strong free speech position. Sometimes I'll be blunt, without putting a lot into sparing other people's feelings.

Even so, I think I'm at least above-average as far as talking respectfully to people I disagree with by theRPGsite standards, rather than treating them like chuds.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMSo, looking over "The Last White Man", and looking for racism defined (by Eirikrautha) as "a belief that human beings have certain heritable traits due to their race that will determine that all members of one race will be inferior to the other."

Note that I will use "white race" and "black race" to describe the groups in the stories, because that is what the story describes -- but I also think this falls into racial essentialism, thinking that those are objectively important categories as far as genetics, and are important for dividing masses of people.

But sticking to just the racism part:

---

Let's take direct descriptions of the races. From the opening paragraphs, here's how the story describes the white race:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe man was a wonder, physically. Over six feet in height, his chest and shoulders were those of a giant. Weighing far over two hundred pounds, he yet gave the impression of sinuous speed. His face was sullen, savage, almost primitive, small black eyes glittering through tangled strands of sandy hair. In one hand he clutched a rifle. A curved scimitar of surprizing proportions lay beside him.

He was a splendid example of a wonderful race. A race which reached physical perfection, sank to the depths of degeneracy and then regained the heights just before their fall. He was the last.

and also

Quote from: R.E. HowardThere had been an age when his race had ruled the world. Their cities dotted the fertile plains. Their ships had furrowed the seas, bringing back the wealth of every land. Their armies had gone forth conquering and subjugating.

None could stand before them in the more peaceful sports. Their athletes defeated all others with ease. They were all giants, physically and mentally.

Emphasis mine there in the end.

Now, the story also says that the blacks were strong, but it describes them differently. Here's a description of them:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe blacks were physical giants, mighty fighting organisms, whose highest wish was slaughter and plunder.

and

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Now, blacks are described as strong when here at their prime, but they are clearly mentally and morally inferior to the whites. Physically, there is some see-saw described. Whites are described as superior physically at first, but they lost their physical edge, only gaining it back towards the end. On other fronts, the blacks are clearly inferior, except for their "animal-like rate of birth" which I don't think is intended as a positive trait.

---

Beyond the direct description, though, the events of the race wars show this. The blacks lead the charge to wipe out all the white of Europe, then invade the U.S. to invade there. That is a negative portrayal of black people, which demonstrates their desire to "slaughter and plunder" even if the story hadn't used those exact words to describe the black race.

Also, in the end, they charge using only spears - which illustrates how they are unable to create weapons like rifles. The story says that they can't create weapons, and it also illustrates it by how they attack.

The general theme of the story is the danger of the black race, who will wipe out the whites if given the chance. That is the future being portrayed, which he described to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith via letter as a "warning to the white races" (from jeff37923's link (https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/)).

---

The leader of the blacks was not black himself, but that isn't a counter to the idea of black inferiority. As the story describes the leader:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThey were a strong, young race. Their day was yet to come. All they lacked was a leader.

And a leader had risen. A mixed-breed Arab, whose ambition was without measure, whose genius was Satanic.

He welded them into one great mass, gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

Describing him as "Satanic" is clearly a negative. Moreover, it implies that the blacks are unable to have a leader of their own race. I don't think that is a positive for either black people or mixed-breed people.

---

I'll stop there for now.

And what's the relevance when talking about Conan? Are you claiming Conan is the protagonist?

IMNSHO the only "relevance" is you trying to establish that REH himself was a raicismist, ergo everything he wrote must be judged under that particular lens.

IIRC you mounted a staunch defense of Coyote & Crow claiming the author wasn't racist even tho his premise is that without the Huwhite devil the "diversity" would build an utopia. You were very adamant in this.

So, that piece of fiction tells us nothing about it's author but TLWM tells us everything we need to know about REH.

I'll ask you one last time, stick to Conan and argue your case about the raicismism in the Conan stories since that's the point of the thread.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMBullshit.  I'm not letting you get away with your duplicity.  First, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

He only reads what fits his narrative.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

Usually with each wave of this mental disease some term gets twisted out of shape. All to often its rape or racism. Also usually by people who can not differentiate fiction from reality. This 2010 wave is just exponentially worse than any prior.

The Rascal article is just a recent example. jhkim is a not so recent example.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:38:49 AMAs a brief aside, Eirikrautha said this about me earlier:

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 26, 2024, 10:54:09 AMReally, I feel kind of sorry for him.  I'm sure he's sitting at home, convinced he's owning us chuds, and bringing civilization to the savages on the RPGSite (though he could never frame it that way... because "colonization" and [insert woke verbiage here]).

So, around here I will sometimes argue like I think I'm right. Again, I appreciate the Mos Eisley atmosphere of this forum, and Pundit's strong free speech position. Sometimes I'll be blunt, without putting a lot into sparing other people's feelings.

Even so, I think I'm at least above-average as far as talking respectfully to people I disagree with by theRPGsite standards, rather than treating them like chuds.

Then do it in one of Pundits threads and keep doing it when he tells you to fuck off and see how long before you get deleted. You have wasted page after page in just this thread desperately trying to convert any rube you can to your cult.

Thanks for the detailed claims of racism. Let's take them one by one.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Now, blacks are described as strong when here at their prime, but they are clearly mentally and morally inferior to the whites. Physically, there is some see-saw described. Whites are described as superior physically at first, but they lost their physical edge, only gaining it back towards the end.

I don't see anything that says that blacks are "mentally and morally inferior". They're fighting a war, and the weapons factories of Europe and then the Americas are destroyed. The book doesn't suggest that blacks were unable to learn how to make weapons. And I don't see anything that questions their morality. Indeed, it's made clear in the story that the blacks have a reason for their all-out war:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

So they're not fighting because of a moral failing on their part.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMOn other fronts, the blacks are clearly inferior, except for their "animal-like rate of birth" which I don't think is intended as a positive trait.

Isn't it? It's what gives them the edge and lets them win the war. The story also says:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased.

So there you see that the whites are doomed even without the other races fighting them, because of their almost non-existent birth rate. I think a higher birth rate is clearly something good to have in the world of this story.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMBeyond the direct description, though, the events of the race wars show this. The blacks lead the charge to wipe out all the white of Europe, then invade the U.S. to invade there. That is a negative portrayal of black people, which demonstrates their desire to "slaughter and plunder" even if the story hadn't used those exact words to describe the black race.

As I pointed out, the blacks in the story are given a reason for their actions beyond some inherent badness. You could just as easily claim that it's a negative portrayal of white people because they enslaved another race for ages, or because they became decadent and:

Quote from: R.E. HowardHe ... gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

The story gives a mixture of good and bad actions to all races, often rising and falling as they degenerate or become better people. I don't see any evidence that one race is treated particularly badly in that way.

Quote from: R.E. HowardAlso, in the end, they charge using only spears - which illustrates how they are unable to create weapons like rifles. The story says that they can't create weapons, and it also illustrates it by how they attack.

Because the weapon factories were in Europe and the Americas, which is where the fighting was. And the story makes clear that the blacks increase in number, so once the factories are destroyed, there are going to be fewer and fewer good weapons and more men, so of course it's going to become rarer and rarer for blacks to have good weapons. On the other hand, I doubt the titular last white man knows how to build a rifle either. He's got a weapon and ammo from a prior time, presumably passed down through his dwindling family. If his family had had lots of children at each generation, he'd probably have had to make do with a spear.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMThe general theme of the story is the danger of the black race, who will wipe out the whites if given the chance. That is the future being portrayed, which he described to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith via letter as a "warning to the white races" (from jeff37923's link (https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/)).

It's a story in which the blacks wipe out the whites. That doesn't make it inherently a warning that such a thing will happen in the real world. And I'm going to ignore Howard's letter; we've gone from "overt racism" in the Conan stories, to overt racism in his wider body of work. Please don't try to shift the goalposts to covert racism in Howard's wider body of work. If it's overt, you don't need substantiating evidence, you can just point to the quotes that make it clear.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMThe leader of the blacks was not black himself, but that isn't a counter to the idea of black inferiority.

All that shows is that the blacks are open minded enough to allow themselves to be led by a non-black. I'd say that was another positive for them. And the blacks win the war; they're clearly not inferior. The leader is described as "a mixed-breed Arab". It's not clear what "mixed-breed" means there, but I think it means he's part Arab and part black. So we see someone with black ancestry having great mental abilities. So much for the claim of them being mentally inferior in the story!

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMAs the story describes the leader:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThey were a strong, young race. Their day was yet to come. All they lacked was a leader.

And a leader had risen. A mixed-breed Arab, whose ambition was without measure, whose genius was Satanic.

He welded them into one great mass, gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

Describing him as "Satanic" is clearly a negative."

It's a negative on one man. There's no suggestion that it's a racial Satanic genius, just that one man had it.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMMoreover, it implies that the blacks are unable to have a leader of their own race. I don't think that is a positive for either black people or mixed-breed people.

Where does it imply that? They needed a great leader to arise, but it doesn't say that such a man couldn't have been black. By way of counter-example, I'm British. The majority of Brits are white, yet our Prime Minister is Asian. Does that imply to you that white Brits are "unable to have a leader of their own race"? Or just that they're open-minded people, who don't hate others based on not being the same race as them? And this goes back to your suggestion of moral failings for them launching a race war. They're not anti-everyone else, as their choice of leader shows. The story gives another reason for their war.

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 05:29:25 AMThanks for the detailed claims of racism. Let's take them one by one.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Now, blacks are described as strong when here at their prime, but they are clearly mentally and morally inferior to the whites. Physically, there is some see-saw described. Whites are described as superior physically at first, but they lost their physical edge, only gaining it back towards the end.

I don't see anything that says that blacks are "mentally and morally inferior". They're fighting a war, and the weapons factories of Europe and then the Americas are destroyed. The book doesn't suggest that blacks were unable to learn how to make weapons. And I don't see anything that questions their morality. Indeed, it's made clear in the story that the blacks have a reason for their all-out war:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

So they're not fighting because of a moral failing on their part.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMOn other fronts, the blacks are clearly inferior, except for their "animal-like rate of birth" which I don't think is intended as a positive trait.

Isn't it? It's what gives them the edge and lets them win the war. The story also says:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased.

So there you see that the whites are doomed even without the other races fighting them, because of their almost non-existent birth rate. I think a higher birth rate is clearly something good to have in the world of this story.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMBeyond the direct description, though, the events of the race wars show this. The blacks lead the charge to wipe out all the white of Europe, then invade the U.S. to invade there. That is a negative portrayal of black people, which demonstrates their desire to "slaughter and plunder" even if the story hadn't used those exact words to describe the black race.

As I pointed out, the blacks in the story are given a reason for their actions beyond some inherent badness. You could just as easily claim that it's a negative portrayal of white people because they enslaved another race for ages, or because they became decadent and:

Quote from: R.E. HowardHe ... gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

The story gives a mixture of good and bad actions to all races, often rising and falling as they degenerate or become better people. I don't see any evidence that one race is treated particularly badly in that way.

Quote from: R.E. HowardAlso, in the end, they charge using only spears - which illustrates how they are unable to create weapons like rifles. The story says that they can't create weapons, and it also illustrates it by how they attack.

Because the weapon factories were in Europe and the Americas, which is where the fighting was. And the story makes clear that the blacks increase in number, so once the factories are destroyed, there are going to be fewer and fewer good weapons and more men, so of course it's going to become rarer and rarer for blacks to have good weapons. On the other hand, I doubt the titular last white man knows how to build a rifle either. He's got a weapon and ammo from a prior time, presumably passed down through his dwindling family. If his family had had lots of children at each generation, he'd probably have had to make do with a spear.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMThe general theme of the story is the danger of the black race, who will wipe out the whites if given the chance. That is the future being portrayed, which he described to his friend Tevis Clyde Smith via letter as a "warning to the white races" (from jeff37923's link (https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/)).

It's a story in which the blacks wipe out the whites. That doesn't make it inherently a warning that such a thing will happen in the real world. And I'm going to ignore Howard's letter; we've gone from "overt racism" in the Conan stories, to overt racism in his wider body of work. Please don't try to shift the goalposts to covert racism in Howard's wider body of work. If it's overt, you don't need substantiating evidence, you can just point to the quotes that make it clear.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMThe leader of the blacks was not black himself, but that isn't a counter to the idea of black inferiority.

All that shows is that the blacks are open minded enough to allow themselves to be led by a non-black. I'd say that was another positive for them. And the blacks win the war; they're clearly not inferior. The leader is described as "a mixed-breed Arab". It's not clear what "mixed-breed" means there, but I think it means he's part Arab and part black. So we see someone with black ancestry having great mental abilities. So much for the claim of them being mentally inferior in the story!

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMAs the story describes the leader:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThey were a strong, young race. Their day was yet to come. All they lacked was a leader.

And a leader had risen. A mixed-breed Arab, whose ambition was without measure, whose genius was Satanic.

He welded them into one great mass, gave them white man's weapons, furnished by Americans and Europeans who would have as quickly and readily sold their own sisters' souls if the price were high enough.

Describing him as "Satanic" is clearly a negative."

It's a negative on one man. There's no suggestion that it's a racial Satanic genius, just that one man had it.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:17:44 AMMoreover, it implies that the blacks are unable to have a leader of their own race. I don't think that is a positive for either black people or mixed-breed people.

Where does it imply that? They needed a great leader to arise, but it doesn't say that such a man couldn't have been black. By way of counter-example, I'm British. The majority of Brits are white, yet our Prime Minister is Asian. Does that imply to you that white Brits are "unable to have a leader of their own race"? Or just that they're open-minded people, who don't hate others based on not being the same race as them? And this goes back to your suggestion of moral failings for them launching a race war. They're not anti-everyone else, as their choice of leader shows. The story gives another reason for their war.

Greetings!

Nice counter-analysis, Krazz!

Yes, it is why I generally ignore the Blah Blah claims and assertions that REH was racist! It all comes down to framing and interpretation. According to the typical begaviour and attitudes of the Woke, virtually *everyone* is racist! Whaah, whaah, whaah, you know?

I just dismiss most such Woke assessments quickly. Yeah? Good! I just don't give a fuck who they think is racist. They believe Lincoln was racist, Washington, and you know, the list goes on and on. They are meaningless. Then we see the Woke crying about REH being racist. Yeah, whatever. They should keep believing that BS. As many have mentioned, it all fits into and has roots in the Commie playbook. Label everything and everyone as terrible, racist, otherwise a deplorable human being, institution, or custom. That way it can be thus marked and destroyed. We see the Woke trying to infect, pollute, and destroy so many things in society currently.

Resisting sophistry is an important skill. I circle back to my collection of Conan books. I don't believe I have read anything within REH's Conan books that I would label as racist. Robert E. Howard was a great author, and a fantastic founding creator of Fantasy and Sword and Sorcery Pulp genre of fiction.

Insisting that Woke troglodytes stick to the subject restrains them, because they cannot effectively tap-dance and employ sophistry to try and change the nature of the conversation. By shifting it, they can rhetorically weasel the discussion into a kind of trial mode, where at first REH is depicted as being guilty--and then, at least the implications are so sweetly *hinted* at--for all the people that have loved someone like REH for decades--what does that mean about themselves? And on and on the sophistry and tap dancing goes. It is all Commie BS. Post Modern BS is rooted in the Marxist philosophy as well. That kind of degenerate BS typically gets taught and promoted in every university.

Just as your analysis has shown here, everything that the Woke declare as being examples of racism, whaah, whaah, is really just how they choose to frame it and interpret REH's writing. The Woke *want* to find racism everywhere, in everything, so of course REH is racist.

Say NO to the Jello! *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on May 30, 2024, 08:54:13 AMGreetings!

Nice counter-analysis, Krazz!

Thanks. I'm glad you liked it. And I agree - we have to stand up to any claims about the foundations of the hobby that aren't well substantiated. Racism is an easy accusation to throw out, but much harder to prove.

Quote from: SHARK on May 30, 2024, 08:54:13 AMResisting sophistry is an important skill. I circle back to my collection of Conan books. I don't believe I have read anything within REH's Conan books that I would label as racist. Robert E. Howard was a great author, and a fantastic founding creator of Fantasy and Sword and Sorcery Pulp genre of fiction.

You've inspired me to add a signature to my posts. I hope you like it!

Quote from: Omega on May 30, 2024, 04:11:55 AM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMBullshit.  I'm not letting you get away with your duplicity.  First, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.  In fact, right below the passage you quoted, I said,

He only reads what fits his narrative.

True, but it is fun to watch him squirm in his mental gymnastics.

Couldn't help but noticed my value inquiry remains unaddressed.

Quote from: Brad on May 27, 2024, 09:12:20 AMCommunists aren't people, and they don't have "an opposing ideology", they are psychopathic meat robots whose only goal is totalitarianism and complete control over the masses. This is demonstrated throughout history, hence, yes, the cost is absolutely worth it. Legitimate political disagreements should be debated and discussed. Communists just through out ad hominems instantly, then dox your ass if you don't follow along. So, to reiterate, fuck them and they can all burn in Hell.

Ironically they feel exactly the same way about folks like you.

Quote from: Krazz on May 27, 2024, 02:36:57 PMDid he? I saw a bunch of quotes from Shadows in Zamboula. Can you explain which is a solid example of racism, and exactly what is so solidly racist about it please?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 27, 2024, 02:50:42 PMSorry for being nitpicky about this, but where in personal correspondence? Is this just the "normal" racism that was accepted in the 1920s or does it show a personal and exceptional targeting and denigration of races?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 27, 2024, 04:49:24 PMHere's Shadows in Zamboula (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/42196/pg42196-images.html), now, can anyone point EXACTLY where is the racismism?

#QED

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 02:21:12 AMThe relevance to me about "The Last White Man" is why we disagree. How is it that you (Anon) say "of course" it is racist, but others strongly argue against that conclusion?

Because they hold a single ideological interpretation and adopting any other would be siding with the enemy.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 29, 2024, 05:59:12 AMSince jhkim is adamant about The Last White Man being racist and not just a story using racist characters to further the plot, obviously jhkim is also racist for only seeing this aspect.

Do you now see how your own logic works?

...being racist

...using racist characters

Yeah not seeing any logic at work here at all.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 29, 2024, 07:22:16 AMI'm not letting you get away with your duplicity.  First, point out where in my quote I said "some stories could be racist - but this couldn't apply to Howard."  This is a blatant misrepresentation, and you know it.  Nowhere in that did I say Howard couldn't be racist.

He does this and then wonders why people react negatively to his comments...

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PMI've done nothing of the sort. I've not even read the story, so I wouldn't argue one way or the other, and I've not discussed it prior to this post.

...over and over again.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PMFrom what you've written, it sounds as racist as Planet of the Apes is anti-ape for showing a conflict along species lines.

Fun fact: The ape actors ate lunch together based on the species they were dressed as. So even arbitrary visual identifiers can drive this sort of behavior.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PMI was referring to the Conan stories, and I was a little sloppy talking about "any Howard".

Seems everyone got the memo except for one.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 12:12:07 PMI still maintain that nobody has provided evidence of overt racism in any of Howard's works, and in particular his Conan stories, which were what was under discussion.

I see lots of goalposts moving about.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PMIt's not postmodernist to think words like "racism" should have a consistent and objective meaning.

Indeed, but we're currently fighting a culture war over who gets to decide that consistent and objective meaning.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMI sometimes think we need like a 20 year moratorium on the word "racism", until we can all chill out and agree on what it actually means.

20 years is a rather ambitious timeframe for humans to chill out and agree on anything.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 29, 2024, 03:52:26 PMAs far as the Conan stories go, I'd be reluctant to ascribe racial animosity to anything in them, simply because Howard pretty universally stereotypes and/or caricatures real world cultures to come up with their Hyborian analogues, and he can be surprisingly even-handed. Just as the Africans who get a pretty rough characterization in "Shadows in Zamboula" get a much more sympathetic one in something like "Wings in the Night" or "The Footfalls Within", Howard's own beloved Picts get remade from the Kull stories, in which they are noble savages par excellence, to the Conan ones, where they are made out savages of the least noble kind, and then get kind of rehabilitated via the Bran Mak Morn stories.

Fair.

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PMThere's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist?

So what makes a story about a race war with large amounts of racism in it overtly racist?

...

No idea.

I'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 05:29:25 AMI don't see anything that says that blacks are "mentally and morally inferior". They're fighting a war, and the weapons factories of Europe and then the Americas are destroyed. The book doesn't suggest that blacks were unable to learn how to make weapons. And I don't see anything that questions their morality.

It explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable? 

You argue later that "animal-like rate of birth" is intended as a positive, but can you really suggest anyone - black or white - who would take kindly to be complimented on their group's "animal-like rate of birth"?

More generally, is there any story or game that you do consider racist? For example, Eirikrautha earlier suggested he thought The Birth of a Nation (1915) was racist. Alternately, GeekyBugle cited Coyote & Crow (2022) as racist. Could you demonstrate your standard of proof in showing how something fulfills it?

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 30, 2024, 02:05:04 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 29, 2024, 06:26:04 PMThere's a race war in the story. I'm not suggesting it's a delusion. There's clearly a large amount of racism in-story. But what makes the story itself overtly racist? What are "the characterizations of the black race" that are overtly racist?

So what makes a story about a race war with large amounts of racism in it overtly racist?

...

No idea.

I thought the text you quoted made this clear. Let me give you a simile: Schindler's List contains a lot of anti-Semitism. A lot. Does that make the film "overtly anti-Semitic"? Now do you see that a story about racism isn't itself necessarily racist?

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMI'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

QUOTE FROM A CHARACTER IN A STORY WRITTEN BY ROBERT E HOWARD YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!

What the fuck! Is every character a writer creates now a stand-in for the writer? Is every character or non-player character you roleplay in a game now actually just you?

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 05:29:25 AMI don't see anything that says that blacks are "mentally and morally inferior". They're fighting a war, and the weapons factories of Europe and then the Americas are destroyed. The book doesn't suggest that blacks were unable to learn how to make weapons. And I don't see anything that questions their morality.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMIt explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable? 

You argue later that "animal-like rate of birth" is intended as a positive, but can you really suggest anyone - black or white - who would take kindly to be complimented on their group's "animal-like rate of birth"?

More generally, is there any story or game that you do consider racist? For example, Eirikrautha earlier suggested he thought The Birth of a Nation (1915) was racist. Alternately, GeekyBugle cited Coyote & Crow (2022) as racist. Could you demonstrate your standard of proof in showing how something fulfills it?

Um, those people who you keep saying are the victims of racism won the war in the story. So they are both the winners and the victims at the same time to you?

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMI'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 05:29:25 AMI don't see anything that says that blacks are "mentally and morally inferior". They're fighting a war, and the weapons factories of Europe and then the Americas are destroyed. The book doesn't suggest that blacks were unable to learn how to make weapons. And I don't see anything that questions their morality.

It explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable?

You argue later that "animal-like rate of birth" is intended as a positive, but can you really suggest anyone - black or white - who would take kindly to be complimented on their group's "animal-like rate of birth"?

More generally, is there any story or game that you do consider racist? For example, Eirikrautha earlier suggested he thought The Birth of a Nation (1915) was racist. Alternately, GeekyBugle cited Coyote & Crow (2022) as racist. Could you demonstrate your standard of proof in showing how something fulfills it?

Because "They did not even know the art of making weapons." Meaning MODERN weapons of course.

But more importantly, since you OBVIOUSLY read my posts, care to tell us WHY is TLWM in any way shape or form RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan stories?

My guess is you don't and won't because I nailed your reason to keep dragging and derailing the thread to it:
You think it proves REH a raicismist and by extension all of his works are raicismist too.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 02:37:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMI'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

QUOTE FROM A CHARACTER IN A STORY WRITTEN BY ROBERT E HOWARD YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!

What the fuck! Is every character a writer creates now a stand-in for the writer? Is every character or non-player character you roleplay in a game now actually just you?

Only the ones written by the wrong kind of people, since he engages in passionate defense of shit like Coyote & Crow, both claiming it's not racist and the author isn't either.

But in C&C the "diversity", as soon as the Huwhite Devil is extinct engages in cumbaya and reaches a utopia.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PMJust because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

If I read a story and don't know who the author is or when it was written, I can still describe it objectively and factually using words, including "racism".

 Tell that to the Solidarity movement in Poland during the Cold War. Or the Order of the White Rose in Germany, students who opposed Nazis in their own country. They were opposed to communism and Nazism in their respective countries and were in no way, shape or form communists or Nazis. You made a blanket statement that holds no water.

Same goes for racism. you can live in a racists society, but it doesn't make you a racist. And people speak out against it. Ya know, like repealing Jim Crow laws and the civil rights movement of the 60s.

If someone uses racism as part of the story, including characters who reflect that, it does not make the author racist, unless that author explicitly states they are IRL (people can also change over time too). I'd think the author of Lovecraft Country and Spielberg about Schiendler's List would agree. There are many more I could cite, but I'm sure you could find more.

I'm done. Have a nice day.

I now eagerly await seeing how you'll move the goal posts.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMIt explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable? 

But it doesn't differentiate the races by their capacity for progress. Let's not forget that whites still exist at that point. Why aren't they still progressing? Because everyone is focused on the global war. It doesn't strike me as realistic - in real world wars, military technology improved greatly. But that's how it is in this story - when things kick off, nobody progresses any more.

As to why they didn't create new factories, the story isn't clear. But you can't just create them out of nothing. The infrastructure to smelt iron, extract industrial levels of coal, move it by rail, etc., takes a long time to create, and the various components support each other. It took Europe centuries to reach that level. If war has decimated that infrastructure, it's not going to be easily or quickly replaced. Maybe the real reason is the REH was racist, and thought that blacks were incapable. But the story is not overt in pointing that out, which was your claim.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMYou argue later that "animal-like rate of birth" is intended as a positive, but can you really suggest anyone - black or white - who would take kindly to be complimented on their group's "animal-like rate of birth"?

It doesn't strike me as less kind than:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd the white race was exhausted by dissipation; birth rate almost ceased.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMMore generally, is there any story or game that you do consider racist? For example, Eirikrautha earlier suggested he thought The Birth of a Nation (1915) was racist. Alternately, GeekyBugle cited Coyote & Crow (2022) as racist. Could you demonstrate your standard of proof in showing how something fulfills it?

I've never watched that film or read/played that RPG, but from what I've heard of them, they sound racist. I'm not going to watch a 3-hour film over an Internet debate, but a quick search gave me this from C&C:

QuoteIf you do not have heritage Indigenous to the Americas, we ask you not to incorporate any of your knowledge or ideas of real world Native Americans into the game.

That's racist. They're asking that people refrain from doing things based on their race. No heritage indigenous to the Americas, but an expert on it? Pretend you're not. A little bit of heritage, but all you know you gleaned from watching a couple of westerns? Go ahead. That's overt racism.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 11:56:21 PMTo clarify, I am opposed to MORAL relativism. I do not believe that different moral system are all equivalent, and that we cannot judge people from a different system....  However, I think relativism is fine to apply to things like beauty and taste.

Well, who cares?  I know that narcissistic personality disorder goes hand-in-hand with being woke, but you are not the arbiter of what qualities are relative and which aren't.  Bluntly, your opinion doesn't matter.  Either "racism" is a term with an objective meaning that can be directly demonstrated, or it can't.  The same holds true for "beauty."  Daniel Justice claims that he had no love for Conan stories because there was no beauty in them.  The "to me" refers to the appeal, not the beauty.  He states the lack of beauty as if it is a factual statement, the same way he does the racism.  So either both are objective and factual, or they both aren't.  And that you want to dodge this inconsistency is irrelevant to whether or not it is inconsistent.  So, no, I reject your separation of the two elements.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 11:56:21 PMI'll try to clarify that "race essentialism" is the unscientific belief that race is more important than it is in reality. It often overlaps with racism but there could be some distinction.

Except that's not a "clarification" at all, without delineating what "important" means in this context and describing what reality you are referring to.  Is race "important" in medicine?  Is it important in jurisprudence?  In education?  Much of what people today term as race is in fact a product of culture, as most behaviors (outside of well-know instances like addiction and schizophrenia) have little to no genetic determinants.  So, unless you can clearly define "racial essentialism," it's nothing more than a subjective dodge.

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 11:56:21 PMI think your classic definition of racism is fine, and I'll try to stick to it in my arguments regarding "The Last White Man".

Once again, who cares?  You do not define the limits of conversation here, and that story (which I have not read and have no intention of reading) has nothing to do with my original questions.  Justice used REH's Conan stories as his argument, and asserted that they held no beauty, grace, or romance.  This is an objective assertion (once again, the to me refers to the "appeal").  Is this assertion correct?

I understand that you dare not contradict Justice, otherwise the woke left will cast you out like garbage, but that is the topic of this discussion.  Your evaluation of what is or isn't moral, what is or isn't subjective, etc. really doesn't matter.  I reject the idea that you could act as an authority on morality, anyway, based on your own admissions on this site.  Quite frankly, it's not about you, or what you think, you value, or you believe.  It's about Justice's statement about the Conan stories and their influence on D&D.  Now, is Justice correct, is he accurately describing D&D, or is he wrong?

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 30, 2024, 04:00:56 PMOnce again, who cares?  You do not define the limits of conversation here, and that story (which I have not read and have no intention of reading) has nothing to do with my original questions.  Justice used REH's Conan stories as his argument, and asserted that they held no beauty, grace, or romance.  This is an objective assertion (once again, the to me refers to the "appeal").  Is this assertion correct?

As I pointed out earlier, Justice is objectively wrong about the stories containing no beauty, grace or romance. To take the first one:

The Frost Giant's Daughter:

QuoteFor an instant he stood frozen, awed by her terrible beauty as she posed naked against the snows.

Queen of the Black Coast:

QuoteIt was high of stern, with a tall curving prow; broad in the waist, sloping beautifully to stem and stern.

The Hour of the Dragon:

QuoteA flood of joy lighted her beautiful face.

Red Nails:

QuoteShe was tall and lithe, by far the most beautiful woman in the room.

People of the Black Circle:

QuoteIt was a woman who had entered unannounced, a woman whose gossamer robes did not conceal the rich garments beneath them any more than they concealed the suppleness and beauty of her tall, slender figure.

The Devil in Iron:

QuoteHe went silently in his soft leather boots, his gaze sifting every shadow in eagerness to catch sight of the splendid tawny-haired beauty of whom he had dreamed ever since he had seen her in the pavilion of Jehungir Agha by Fort Ghori.

Shadows in Zamboula:

QuoteBeauty like yours might drive a man mad.

A Witch Shall be Born:

QuoteTaramis was still beautiful, in spite of her rags and the imprisonment and abuse of seven weary months.

Shadows in the Moonlight:

QuoteThe form was of a man, but no mortal man ever wore such an aspect of inhuman beauty.

Jewels of Gwahlur:

QuoteYelaya was coldly beautiful, even in death.

The claim that there is no beauty in the stories is as silly as to claim that there is no combat in them. It's spelt out explicitly, usually in narration that is not even hinted at being unreliable. And it applies to men, women and inanimate objects. I can't believe we're still discussing this. Justice's statement was objectively very, very wrong.

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 04:59:15 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 30, 2024, 04:00:56 PMOnce again, who cares?  You do not define the limits of conversation here, and that story (which I have not read and have no intention of reading) has nothing to do with my original questions.  Justice used REH's Conan stories as his argument, and asserted that they held no beauty, grace, or romance.  This is an objective assertion (once again, the to me refers to the "appeal").  Is this assertion correct?

As I pointed out earlier, Justice is objectively wrong about the stories containing no beauty, grace or romance. To take the first one:

The Frost Giant's Daughter:

QuoteFor an instant he stood frozen, awed by her terrible beauty as she posed naked against the snows.

Queen of the Black Coast:

QuoteIt was high of stern, with a tall curving prow; broad in the waist, sloping beautifully to stem and stern.

The Hour of the Dragon:

QuoteA flood of joy lighted her beautiful face.

Red Nails:

QuoteShe was tall and lithe, by far the most beautiful woman in the room.

People of the Black Circle:

QuoteIt was a woman who had entered unannounced, a woman whose gossamer robes did not conceal the rich garments beneath them any more than they concealed the suppleness and beauty of her tall, slender figure.

The Devil in Iron:

QuoteHe went silently in his soft leather boots, his gaze sifting every shadow in eagerness to catch sight of the splendid tawny-haired beauty of whom he had dreamed ever since he had seen her in the pavilion of Jehungir Agha by Fort Ghori.

Shadows in Zamboula:

QuoteBeauty like yours might drive a man mad.

A Witch Shall be Born:

QuoteTaramis was still beautiful, in spite of her rags and the imprisonment and abuse of seven weary months.

Shadows in the Moonlight:

QuoteThe form was of a man, but no mortal man ever wore such an aspect of inhuman beauty.

Jewels of Gwahlur:

QuoteYelaya was coldly beautiful, even in death.

The claim that there is no beauty in the stories is as silly as to claim that there is no combat in them. It's spelt out explicitly, usually in narration that is not even hinted at being unreliable. And it applies to men, women and inanimate objects. I can't believe we're still discussing this. Justice's statement was objectively very, very wrong.

i think you're being way too literal here. Just because a story contains the word beauty/beautiful, doesn't mean the work invokes a sense of beauty, which is what Justice was stating (not that I agree with him, but that's his opinion).

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 30, 2024, 02:05:04 PMIronically they feel exactly the same way about folks like you.

Imagine thinking I give a fuck what Satanic pedophiles think of me...

EDIT: Also immaterial bullshit, as I've already said multiple times. Marxists can't allow any sort of discussion to take place that they're not in control of, hence the constant injection of "isms" into every single fucking conversation. Your "both sides" nonsense is arguably worse than their moronic positions.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 30, 2024, 05:11:26 PMi think you're being way too literal here. Just because a story contains the word beauty/beautiful, doesn't mean the work invokes a sense of beauty, which is what Justice was stating (not that I agree with him, but that's his opinion).

So when he said

QuoteRobert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism

he didn't mean that the stories contained no beauty, grace or romance, or that they contained blood brutality, butchery or overt racism, but instead they didn't invoke a sense of beauty, grace or romance. Conversely, he was filled with a sense of blood, brutality, butchery and racism. He sounds pretty fucked up when you put it that way.

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMTaking REH and HPL out of the context of the time they live and wrote does a disservice to them. Yes, they may have been racist viewed from a "modern" standpoint, but it doesn't matter. Their view on race for the time period was considered normal. It doesn't make it right or wrong. It's a product of it's time. So, those of you saying REH and HPL racists are taking them out of historical context, no matter how truthful and uncomfortable that makes you feel.

Quote from: blackstone on May 30, 2024, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 29, 2024, 01:05:18 PMJust because someone comes from a communist society, that doesn't mean that they're not communist. They're still a communist - it's just that their reasons for being communist should be considered to fully understand them. The same applies for racism.

If I read a story and don't know who the author is or when it was written, I can still describe it objectively and factually using words, including "racism".

 Tell that to the Solidarity movement in Poland during the Cold War. Or the Order of the White Rose in Germany, students who opposed Nazis in their own country. They were opposed to communism and Nazism in their respective countries and were in no way, shape or form communists or Nazis. You made a blanket statement that holds no water.

Same goes for racism. you can live in a racists society, but it doesn't make you a racist. And people speak out against it. Ya know, like repealing Jim Crow laws and the civil rights movement of the 60s.

I apologize for my phrasing that you bolded, which wasn't clear. My point was that if someone comes from a racist society and they have views that are normal for their racist society, then it is reasonable to call them racist. So if it is the norm to have anti-miscegenation laws and Jim Crow laws in someone's society, that is racist - and also, the people who support them are racist.

In your original statement that I quote above, you said that REH and HPL had views on race that are normal for their time, and because of this, it is wrong to call them racist.

Quote from: blackstone on May 29, 2024, 11:26:54 AMIf someone uses racism as part of the story, including characters who reflect that, it does not make the author racist, unless that author explicitly states they are IRL (people can also change over time too). I'd think the author of Lovecraft Country and Spielberg about Schiendler's List would agree. There are many more I could cite, but I'm sure you could find more.

You say that it's only true if they express views in real life. Back in Reply #40, I gave two quotes from R.E. Howard in real-life conversations.

Quote from: R.E. HowardI shall write a story entitled "The Last Man" as a warning to the white races. If the West falls before the East, it won't be because I haven't warned the white races. Well, maybe if I progress, which I doubt much, in a few years I'll become such a nuisance that the Dalai Lama will take notice of me and my career will end suddenly.

In another letter, Howard wrote (regarding a rape trial in Honolulu):

Quote from: R.E. HowardI know what would have happened to them in Texas.  I don't know whether an Oriental smells any different than a nigger when he's roasting, but I'm willing to bet the aroma of scorching hide would have the same chastening effect on his surviving tribesman.

His girlfriend Novalyne Price wrote about a conversation with him where he told her, "I guess you know if a Negro is found on the streets after dark in Coleman, Santa Anna, and several other towns around here, they run him out of town.  Chances are they might tar and feather him." When Novalyne reacted negatively, Howard elaborated, "Let me tell you something, girl, that you don't seem to know.  Those people come from a different line.  They have different blood -"

I'll add a bit from a letter Howard wrote to H.P. Lovecraft talking about "murder ranches" in Texas.

Quote from: R.E. HowardHis son now has a ranch some hundreds of miles west of here, and some twelve or fifteen years ago killed a Mexican, sewed the corpse up in a cow-hide and flung it out on the prairie to rot. The Cattlemen's Association sent out a detective — just why so much trouble was taken about a Mexican I cannot understand, unless he was some way connected with the Association — and this detective, playing the part of a deaf mute, worked for months on the murderer's ranch and finally got full evidence.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:33:55 PMI'll add a bit from a letter Howard wrote to H.P. Lovecraft talking about "murder ranches" in Texas.

LOL

You just won't give it up, will you?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 02:37:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMI'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

QUOTE FROM A CHARACTER IN A STORY WRITTEN BY ROBERT E HOWARD YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!

What the fuck! Is every character a writer creates now a stand-in for the writer? Is every character or non-player character you roleplay in a game now actually just you?

I've already several times brought up the possibility of an unreliable narrator -- and in reply #127, Krazz, at least, agreed with me that he didn't think it was a delusion. This is a very short story with only a single character, through whose thoughts we understand the history of the world.

If you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 02:37:51 PMUm, those people who you keep saying are the victims of racism won the war in the story. So they are both the winners and the victims at the same time to you?

In short, yes. The story is supposed to be a tragedy where the bad guys win - as Howard said to his friend Tevis, a warning to the white races. The unnamed last white man is described in positive terms as "a splendid example of a wonderful race". The prolific blacks who kill him are described negatively with terms like "bestial", "animal-like" and similar.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:54:52 PMI've already several times brought up the possibility of an unreliable narrator -- and in reply #127, Krazz, at least, agreed with me that he didn't think it was a delusion. This is a very short story with only a single character, through whose thoughts we understand the history of the world.

Reading the quoted parts of the story, I got a strong feeling that the narration was from the character POV. "The trees were swaying in the wind" is fairly neutral, "The beautiful trees were swaying in the wind like graceful dancers" is from a subjective POV, very likely the character viewing the trees, since that's why the trees are being described in the first place. "The ugly trees swayed menacingly" could be said from the POV of another character about the same trees swaying in the wind. I'm sure I could dig up some relevant passages from any book. Tolkien especially springs to mind.

QuoteIf you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

It's almost like you have to think about the story and not just have your opinions spoon fed for you.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 30, 2024, 06:44:24 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:54:52 PMIf you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

It's almost like you have to think about the story and not just have your opinions spoon fed for you.

You're just dropping into hominem instead of actually giving an answer.

I claim that the narrator is reliable in the story. This isn't _Rashomon_. I supported that by showing how the large-scale events (like how blacks couldn't create) were well-matched by the immediate, objectively-narrated events like how the attackers rushed the rifle-armed man with spears.

Likewise, the narrator is objectively described and called "a splendid example of a wonderful race" in the fourth paragraph -- which matches his thinking of the rise, fall, and rise again of his own white race.

Someone can claim that there is no vampire in Dracula - the only thing that happens is that people write letters. But without some clear argument about why we shouldn't believe a given narration, I don't think that's supportable. The clear intent of Dracula is that there is a real vampire.

So, if you think the narrator is unreliable in "The Last White Man", make a case for that. What part of the narration is right and what is wrong, and how do you know that? Is he really the last white man? And was there a race war?

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 07:19:34 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 30, 2024, 06:44:24 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:54:52 PMIf you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

It's almost like you have to think about the story and not just have your opinions spoon fed for you.

You're just dropping into hominem instead of actually giving an answer.

I claim that the narrator is reliable in the story. This isn't _Rashomon_. I supported that by showing how the large-scale events (like how blacks couldn't create) were well-matched by the immediate, objectively-narrated events like how the attackers rushed the rifle-armed man with spears.

Likewise, the narrator is objectively described and called "a splendid example of a wonderful race" in the fourth paragraph -- which matches his thinking of the rise, fall, and rise again of his own white race.

Someone can claim that there is no vampire in Dracula - the only thing that happens is that people write letters. But without some clear argument about why we shouldn't believe a given narration, I don't think that's supportable. The clear intent of Dracula is that there is a real vampire.

So, if you think the narrator is unreliable in "The Last White Man", make a case for that. What part of the narration is right and what is wrong, and how do you know that? Is he really the last white man? And was there a race war?

And this is RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan HOW?

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 30, 2024, 05:11:26 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 30, 2024, 04:59:15 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 30, 2024, 04:00:56 PMOnce again, who cares?  You do not define the limits of conversation here, and that story (which I have not read and have no intention of reading) has nothing to do with my original questions.  Justice used REH's Conan stories as his argument, and asserted that they held no beauty, grace, or romance.  This is an objective assertion (once again, the to me refers to the "appeal").  Is this assertion correct?

As I pointed out earlier, Justice is objectively wrong about the stories containing no beauty, grace or romance. To take the first one:

The Frost Giant's Daughter:

QuoteFor an instant he stood frozen, awed by her terrible beauty as she posed naked against the snows.

Queen of the Black Coast:

QuoteIt was high of stern, with a tall curving prow; broad in the waist, sloping beautifully to stem and stern.

The Hour of the Dragon:

QuoteA flood of joy lighted her beautiful face.

Red Nails:

QuoteShe was tall and lithe, by far the most beautiful woman in the room.

People of the Black Circle:

QuoteIt was a woman who had entered unannounced, a woman whose gossamer robes did not conceal the rich garments beneath them any more than they concealed the suppleness and beauty of her tall, slender figure.

The Devil in Iron:

QuoteHe went silently in his soft leather boots, his gaze sifting every shadow in eagerness to catch sight of the splendid tawny-haired beauty of whom he had dreamed ever since he had seen her in the pavilion of Jehungir Agha by Fort Ghori.

Shadows in Zamboula:

QuoteBeauty like yours might drive a man mad.

A Witch Shall be Born:

QuoteTaramis was still beautiful, in spite of her rags and the imprisonment and abuse of seven weary months.

Shadows in the Moonlight:

QuoteThe form was of a man, but no mortal man ever wore such an aspect of inhuman beauty.

Jewels of Gwahlur:

QuoteYelaya was coldly beautiful, even in death.

The claim that there is no beauty in the stories is as silly as to claim that there is no combat in them. It's spelt out explicitly, usually in narration that is not even hinted at being unreliable. And it applies to men, women and inanimate objects. I can't believe we're still discussing this. Justice's statement was objectively very, very wrong.

i think you're being way too literal here. Just because a story contains the word beauty/beautiful, doesn't mean the work invokes a sense of beauty, which is what Justice was stating (not that I agree with him, but that's his opinion).

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:54:52 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 02:37:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PMI'm going to focus on just the first passage here.

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

QUOTE FROM A CHARACTER IN A STORY WRITTEN BY ROBERT E HOWARD YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!

What the fuck! Is every character a writer creates now a stand-in for the writer? Is every character or non-player character you roleplay in a game now actually just you?

I've already several times brought up the possibility of an unreliable narrator -- and in reply #127, Krazz, at least, agreed with me that he didn't think it was a delusion. This is a very short story with only a single character, through whose thoughts we understand the history of the world.

If you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 02:37:51 PMUm, those people who you keep saying are the victims of racism won the war in the story. So they are both the winners and the victims at the same time to you?

In short, yes. The story is supposed to be a tragedy where the bad guys win - as Howard said to his friend Tevis, a warning to the white races. The unnamed last white man is described in positive terms as "a splendid example of a wonderful race". The prolific blacks who kill him are described negatively with terms like "bestial", "animal-like" and similar.

So let's start by looking at jhkim's delusional nature. You've been using The Last White Man as a source for your argument. Yet The Last White Man is an unfinished manuscript by REH and that unfinished manuscript was never published until after he died, so how can you claim that it is representative of his works? Since it's only relation to the Conan stories is that they are by the same author, how can you claim that it is representative of the Conan stories?

And where is your source for this quote from Howard to Tevis?

I think that you are being delusional jhkim and using this as an excuse to beat the social Marxist drumhead just to hear it say Woke! Woke! Woke!

argle bargle edit stuff.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 07:19:34 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 30, 2024, 06:44:24 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 05:54:52 PMIf you want to argue that the narrator is delusional, thinking untrue thoughts, then what is the story supposed to be saying? Is any of the history of the world true? If so, how can you determine which parts are true, and which parts are false claims because of the racism of the character?

It's almost like you have to think about the story and not just have your opinions spoon fed for you.

You're just dropping into hominem instead of actually giving an answer.

It doesn't help that you cut out my answer when you replied. I can do both. :D

QuoteI claim that the narrator is reliable in the story. This isn't _Rashomon_. I supported that by showing how the large-scale events (like how blacks couldn't create) were well-matched by the immediate, objectively-narrated events like how the attackers rushed the rifle-armed man with spears.

Likewise, the narrator is objectively described and called "a splendid example of a wonderful race" in the fourth paragraph -- which matches his thinking of the rise, fall, and rise again of his own white race.

Someone can claim that there is no vampire in Dracula - the only thing that happens is that people write letters. But without some clear argument about why we shouldn't believe a given narration, I don't think that's supportable. The clear intent of Dracula is that there is a real vampire.

So, if you think the narrator is unreliable in "The Last White Man", make a case for that. What part of the narration is right and what is wrong, and how do you know that? Is he really the last white man? And was there a race war?

I didn't say the narrator was unreliable. I said I think the narration is in part or in full reflecting the POV of the protagonist.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable?

Because "They did not even know the art of making weapons." Meaning MODERN weapons of course.

So a century after the 1920s, black people have unified, invaded Europe and then America - and they never learn how to make guns. ?!? Yes, I agree the story says that they never learned the art -- and it also says that they reverted to savagery, could not make progress, and couldn't build.

I'd submit that this is a negative portrayal of the black race as incompetent - and implausibly so to a monumental degree. By 1920, Africans had already warred with Europeans using guns for centuries. The first shots of the French conquest of Algeria, say, were the Dey directing cannon fire at blockading French ships. Yes, European guns were superior to African guns, but that doesn't mean that Africans were limited to spears.

In short, this is racist by portraying black people as inferior.

(https://www.ambroseantiques.com/images/guns/flongarms/kabe2.jpg)
(Algerian camel gun circa 1830)

---

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PMBut more importantly, since you OBVIOUSLY read my posts, care to tell us WHY is TLWM in any way shape or form RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan stories?

The general thread isn't about Conan stories. It is about the Rascal article by Daniel Justice, who made a broad comment on R.E. Howard's writing in general, "especially" Conan but not exclusively.

If you don't care about "The Last White Man", don't respond. If people let it drop, then we can move on to discussion of Conan stories. I think the discussion of "The Last White Man" is interesting because it clearly highlights some of our differences in how we evaluate racism. Also, it's interesting because the character is clearly very Conan-like and it describes similar themes about the rise and fall of civilizations compared to his later work.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMYou've been using The Last White Man as a source for your argument. Yet The Last White Man is an unfinished manuscript by REH and that unfinished manuscript was never published until after he died, so how can you claim that it is representative of his works? Since it's only relation to the Conan stories is that they are by the same author, how can you claim that it is representative of the Conan stories?

I don't claim that "The Last White Man" is representative of Howard in general. It's his most racist story that I know of. I cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part, and I felt that it was clear evidence.

However, Krazz and others have strongly disagreed about that and claim there is no racism there, which I found surprising. A few of other posters (Venka, KindaMeh, and anon) have agreed that it is obviously racist.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMAnd where is your source for this quote from Howard to Tevis?

My source for that quote is the link that you yourself cited in Reply #35 (https://www.therpgsite.com/index.php?msg=1283828). I'll give it again below.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable?

Because "They did not even know the art of making weapons." Meaning MODERN weapons of course.

So a century after the 1920s, black people have unified, invaded Europe and then America - and they never learn how to make guns. ?!? Yes, I agree the story says that they never learned the art -- and it also says that they reverted to savagery, could not make progress, and couldn't build.

I'd submit that this is a negative portrayal of the black race as incompetent - and implausibly so to a monumental degree. By 1920, Africans had already warred with Europeans using guns for centuries. The first shots of the French conquest of Algeria, say, were the Dey directing cannon fire at blockading French ships. Yes, European guns were superior to African guns, but that doesn't mean that Africans were limited to spears.

In short, this is racist by portraying black people as inferior.

(https://www.ambroseantiques.com/images/guns/flongarms/kabe2.jpg)
(Algerian camel gun circa 1830)

---

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PMBut more importantly, since you OBVIOUSLY read my posts, care to tell us WHY is TLWM in any way shape or form RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan stories?

The general thread isn't about Conan stories. It is about the Rascal article by Daniel Justice, who made a broad comment on R.E. Howard's writing in general, "especially" Conan but not exclusively.

If you don't care about "The Last White Man", don't respond. If people let it drop, then we can move on to discussion of Conan stories. I think the discussion of "The Last White Man" is interesting because it clearly highlights some of our differences in how we evaluate racism. Also, it's interesting because the character is clearly very Conan-like and it describes similar themes about the rise and fall of civilizations compared to his later work.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMYou've been using The Last White Man as a source for your argument. Yet The Last White Man is an unfinished manuscript by REH and that unfinished manuscript was never published until after he died, so how can you claim that it is representative of his works? Since it's only relation to the Conan stories is that they are by the same author, how can you claim that it is representative of the Conan stories?

I don't claim that "The Last White Man" is representative of Howard in general. It's his most racist story that I know of. I cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part, and I felt that it was clear evidence.

However, Krazz and others have strongly disagreed about that and claim there is no racism there, which I found surprising. A few of other posters (Venka, KindaMeh, and anon) have agreed that it is obviously racist.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMAnd where is your source for this quote from Howard to Tevis?

My source for that quote is the link that you yourself cited in Reply #35 (https://www.therpgsite.com/index.php?msg=1283828). I'll give it again below.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

Then if the unfinished manuscript The Last White Man is not representative of your claimed racism of Robert E Howard, then why do you keep using it as proof? Why do you keep saying that his Conan stories are racist?

Why do you continue to be intellectually dishonest?

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 02:18:31 PM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

It explicitly says "when they slew white men, progress ceased". That differentiates the races by their capacity for progress. Why wouldn't the black people make weapons and weapon factories for themselves, if they were capable?

Because "They did not even know the art of making weapons." Meaning MODERN weapons of course.

So a century after the 1920s, black people have unified, invaded Europe and then America - and they never learn how to make guns. ?!? Yes, I agree the story says that they never learned the art -- and it also says that they reverted to savagery, could not make progress, and couldn't build.

I'd submit that this is a negative portrayal of the black race as incompetent - and implausibly so to a monumental degree. By 1920, Africans had already warred with Europeans using guns for centuries. The first shots of the French conquest of Algeria, say, were the Dey directing cannon fire at blockading French ships. Yes, European guns were superior to African guns, but that doesn't mean that Africans were limited to spears.

In short, this is racist by portraying black people as inferior.

(https://www.ambroseantiques.com/images/guns/flongarms/kabe2.jpg)
(Algerian camel gun circa 1830)

---

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 02:45:22 PMBut more importantly, since you OBVIOUSLY read my posts, care to tell us WHY is TLWM in any way shape or form RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan stories?

The general thread isn't about Conan stories. It is about the Rascal article by Daniel Justice, who made a broad comment on R.E. Howard's writing in general, "especially" Conan but not exclusively.

If you don't care about "The Last White Man", don't respond. If people let it drop, then we can move on to discussion of Conan stories. I think the discussion of "The Last White Man" is interesting because it clearly highlights some of our differences in how we evaluate racism. Also, it's interesting because the character is clearly very Conan-like and it describes similar themes about the rise and fall of civilizations compared to his later work.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMYou've been using The Last White Man as a source for your argument. Yet The Last White Man is an unfinished manuscript by REH and that unfinished manuscript was never published until after he died, so how can you claim that it is representative of his works? Since it's only relation to the Conan stories is that they are by the same author, how can you claim that it is representative of the Conan stories?

I don't claim that "The Last White Man" is representative of Howard in general. It's his most racist story that I know of. I cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part, and I felt that it was clear evidence.

However, Krazz and others have strongly disagreed about that and claim there is no racism there, which I found surprising. A few of other posters (Venka, KindaMeh, and anon) have agreed that it is obviously racist.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2024, 07:51:37 PMAnd where is your source for this quote from Howard to Tevis?

My source for that quote is the link that you yourself cited in Reply #35 (https://www.therpgsite.com/index.php?msg=1283828). I'll give it again below.

https://reh.world/stories/the-last-white-man/

And a little over a century after 1920 how many gun manufacturers are in Africa? With ANY quality as to compete with the rest of the world?

Building a makeshift gun is relatively easy, manufacturing an AR-15 not quite.

How many of you Americans would buy guns made by the Mexican manufacturer?

Ours are obviously inferior, not because of our "race" but lack of competition and free market.

But lets say you're 100% correct on your lecture of an unfinished manuscript, so, whatever character a writer creates is nothing but the writer's self insert? Or is this reserved for those you want to tar with charges of istophobia?

So, REH, having written more than one female led story was really trans?

Therefore, Simon and Kirby by creating the Red Skull & Captain America were at the same time (Jewish) nazis and anti-nazis?

Ergo Garth Ennis & Darick Robertson by creating The Boys are a couple of sociopaths?

And YOU by creating whatever evil NPC AND roleplaying it are nothing but whatever type of evil said NPCs were, right?

ALSO:

QuoteAnd soon the Tolkienesque template of D&D began to chafe, as did the varied inheritors of Tolkien's literary imaginings. (The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.) As much as I loved Middle-earth, it was still a world where lordship was borne in the blood, where inheriting country gentry were served faithfully by loving and dutiful servants, of the uncertain triumph of "Western civilization" over the dark and fallen peoples who stood against it. And while Tolkien's orcs and their filmic, gaming, and media iterations have been shaped by and expanded on savagist anti-Black and anti-Asian stereotypes, they're also informed by stereotypical ideas about Indigenous primitivism (as are his Drúedain, the reclusive Woses who aid the Rohirrim on their way to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields).

Why you always lying?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 07:46:49 PMAnd this is RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan HOW?

It's not and he knows its not. He's basically threadcrapping.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 09:24:25 PMALSO:

QuoteAnd soon the Tolkienesque template of D&D began to chafe, as did the varied inheritors of Tolkien's literary imaginings. (The other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.) As much as I loved Middle-earth, it was still a world where lordship was borne in the blood, where inheriting country gentry were served faithfully by loving and dutiful servants, of the uncertain triumph of "Western civilization" over the dark and fallen peoples who stood against it. And while Tolkien's orcs and their filmic, gaming, and media iterations have been shaped by and expanded on savagist anti-Black and anti-Asian stereotypes, they're also informed by stereotypical ideas about Indigenous primitivism (as are his Drúedain, the reclusive Woses who aid the Rohirrim on their way to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields).

I just clocked this now, but the fact that he calls Howard "The other great influence on D&D's worldbuilding" as if Tolkien and Howard are the only two, or they stand head and shoulders above other influences, betrays a profound ignorance of the influences of D&D. You have to wonder if this guy is totally ignorant of Fritz Leiber, Poul Anderson and Jack Vance, all of whom are as influential on D&D if not moreso.

At any rate, this thread does have a silver lining: it got me to pull out my REH collection again to fill in the gaps in my reading. Cracked open "Sword Woman and other Historical Tales" last night, and have been enjoying the Bran Mak Morn audiobook in the car all day.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 09:24:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

So a century after the 1920s, black people have unified, invaded Europe and then America - and they never learn how to make guns. ?!? Yes, I agree the story says that they never learned the art -- and it also says that they reverted to savagery, could not make progress, and couldn't build.

I'd submit that this is a negative portrayal of the black race as incompetent - and implausibly so to a monumental degree. By 1920, Africans had already warred with Europeans using guns for centuries. The first shots of the French conquest of Algeria, say, were the Dey directing cannon fire at blockading French ships. Yes, European guns were superior to African guns, but that doesn't mean that Africans were limited to spears.

And a little over a century after 1920 how many gun manufacturers are in Africa? With ANY quality as to compete with the rest of the world?

Building a makeshift gun is relatively easy, manufacturing an AR-15 not quite.

How many of you Americans would buy guns made by the Mexican manufacturer?

There are vast oceans between the claims:

(A) Local African gun makers aren't competitive on the global market with American and Russian gun makers.

(B) The black race doesn't know how to make guns, and if whites stopped supplying them they would go back to chucking spears.

The latter is what the story says, and you're trying to support it by pointing out (A).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 09:24:25 PMBut lets say you're 100% correct on your lecture of an unfinished manuscript, so, whatever character a writer creates is nothing but the writer's self insert? Or is this reserved for those you want to tar with charges of istophobia?

None of my arguments have rested on the nature of the character. The key is events of the world history -- like Africans having to go back to spears when they can't get guns from the white man.

Are you claiming that the world events are unreliable narration -- that the blacks really had guns, and it was just the main character's racism that made him think they were using spears?

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 12:47:48 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 09:24:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PM

Quote from: R.E. HowardThe black race was doomed. They were destroyers, not builders. When they slew the white men, progress ceased. The blacks reverted to savagery. They did not even know the art of making weapons. They had destroyed and could not rebuild. And they were going back to bestial savagery, and to a slaughtering of one another which even their animal-like rate of birth could not control.

So a century after the 1920s, black people have unified, invaded Europe and then America - and they never learn how to make guns. ?!? Yes, I agree the story says that they never learned the art -- and it also says that they reverted to savagery, could not make progress, and couldn't build.

I'd submit that this is a negative portrayal of the black race as incompetent - and implausibly so to a monumental degree. By 1920, Africans had already warred with Europeans using guns for centuries. The first shots of the French conquest of Algeria, say, were the Dey directing cannon fire at blockading French ships. Yes, European guns were superior to African guns, but that doesn't mean that Africans were limited to spears.

And a little over a century after 1920 how many gun manufacturers are in Africa? With ANY quality as to compete with the rest of the world?

Building a makeshift gun is relatively easy, manufacturing an AR-15 not quite.

How many of you Americans would buy guns made by the Mexican manufacturer?

There are vast oceans between the claims:

(A) Local African gun makers aren't competitive on the global market with American and Russian gun makers.

(B) The black race doesn't know how to make guns, and if whites stopped supplying them they would go back to chucking spears.

The latter is what the story says, and you're trying to support it by pointing out (A).

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 09:24:25 PMBut lets say you're 100% correct on your lecture of an unfinished manuscript, so, whatever character a writer creates is nothing but the writer's self insert? Or is this reserved for those you want to tar with charges of istophobia?

None of my arguments have rested on the nature of the character. The key is events of the world history -- like Africans having to go back to spears when they can't get guns from the white man.

Are you claiming that the world events are unreliable narration -- that the blacks really had guns, and it was just the main character's racism that made him think they were using spears?

Enough with your threadcrapping, i'm just gonna ignore you in this or any other thread you choose to derail.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on May 30, 2024, 11:16:12 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 30, 2024, 07:46:49 PMAnd this is RELEVANT in a discussion about Conan HOW?

It's not and he knows its not. He's basically threadcrapping.

And I'm guilty for playing along, but no more.

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PMThe general thread isn't about Conan stories. It is about the Rascal article by Daniel Justice, who made a broad comment on R.E. Howard's writing in general, "especially" Conan but not exclusively.

The claim he made and that you are defending is that Howard's work, especially his Conan stories, are full of overt racism.  If that were true, it should be easy to find several example of this especially from the Conan stories.  You haven't done that though.  You haven't even attempted to do that.  You have cherry-picked a single story that's not a Conan story and talked incessantly about that one story.  It's a story that he wrote when he was 17 years old.  It's a story that was not published until nearly three decades after his death.  It's a story that only survives as an unfinished manuscript.  How about this.  Give me 5 examples of overt racism in Conan stories that survive in complete form and were published during his life time.  If Howard's work is as full of overt racism as this guy claims, there should be plenty of examples.  There shouldn't be any need to talk solely about a single marginal example

You aren't doing something like this because you can't and you know it.  An actual, fair examination of Howard's work would show that it is not full of overt racism as claimed.  That's why you are doing everything you can to talk about this one story and only this one story and avoid talking about the actual topic under discussion.  This is just more of your usual disingenuous antics.   

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PMI cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part.

I did no such thing. The question of whether Howard was racist is:

1) Off-topic
2) Something I have made no claims about
3) Something I'm not interested in

Let's move the goalposts back where they started, shall we? If you want to discuss whether Howard was racist, I suggest making a new thread outside the RPG area.

So the quote that started this off was:

QuoteThe other great influence on D&D's world-building, Robert E. Howard, especially his Conan works, held no appeal for me whatsoever, as there was no beauty, no grace, no romance—just blood, brutality, butchery, and overt racism.

So it's not a claim that Howard was racist, but that his works that influenced D&D, especially the Conan stories, were overtly racist.

My statement, made on page 2, was that I'd never seen any evidence of these claims of Howard's works being overtly racist. I still stand by that statement.

What would make me change my mind? Quotes from those stories showing overt racism. Instead, we have discussion of an unfinished manuscript which has suggestions of racism in it. But nothing overt. The blacks in the story can't make guns. Is that because they're too stupid to, or because the factories are destroyed? We don't know. Overt racism would make that clear, and we'd have a line such as "the blacks were too stupid to make guns like the whites before them". We don't have any such line.

So 10 pages further into the discussion, and my statement still stands: I've yet to see any evidence of Howard's work being overtly racist. If such quotes existed, I strongly suspect we'd have seen them in this thread by now.

Quote from: Brad on May 30, 2024, 05:12:17 PM

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on May 30, 2024, 02:05:04 PMIronically they feel exactly the same way about folks like you.

Imagine thinking I give a fuck what Satanic pedophiles think of me...

EDIT: Also immaterial bullshit, as I've already said multiple times. Marxists can't allow any sort of discussion to take place that they're not in control of, hence the constant injection of "isms" into every single fucking conversation. Your "both sides" nonsense is arguably worse than their moronic positions.

 Ditto.  The time for tolerance is coming to an end.

As for racism in Conan stories...guess what in any time period where Conan-like things were happening everyone was very racist.  I am fine with calling Conan and REH racists.  I am also fine with reading and enjoying his stories more now than ever.

  Of course REH was flawed in his examination of Africa and how it was functioning in his time (if we assume the character's statements are a metaphor for what Howard was seeing-or thought he saw in the real world).  If only he could see now how the continent has become a shining beacon of civilization and technological advancement.  Too bad he died before he could witness that. 

Quote from: yosemitemike on May 31, 2024, 02:20:23 AMAn actual, fair examination of Howard's work would show that it is not full of overt racism as claimed.  That's why you are doing everything you can to talk about this one story and only this one story and avoid talking about the actual topic under discussion.

The problem is how to identify overt racism in a story. I believe that "The Last White Man" has overt racism that is blatant and obvious. There were at least a few posters who agreed with me on this point (Venka, KindaMeh, anon).

But a bunch of other posters have shot back that there is no evidence of overt racism in "The Last White Man".

According to them, I haven't shown anything and the story isn't overtly racist. I still think that the stuff that I've pointed to in the story *is* overtly racist -- we are just disagreeing over this point.

Since we're continuing to disagree over the first example that I brought up, whatever we're disagreeing on in this story is most certainly going to be an issue in any other story by Howard.

I think someone could make a reasonable argument that "The Last White Man" does have overt racism, but that Howard's stories in general don't have enough overt racism to be worth noting. (yosemitemike - you use the term "full of" but that isn't the language that Daniel Justice used.) Thus far, no one has taken up that banner, though.

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 06:19:14 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PMI cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part.

So 10 pages further into the discussion, and my statement still stands: I've yet to see any evidence of Howard's work being overtly racist. If such quotes existed, I strongly suspect we'd have seen them in this thread by now.

My apologies about leaving out the "overt" regarding your position. I do still believe that "The Last White Man" contains overt racism that I've already pointed to, but I understand that you don't agree.

Since you thought this correction was important, do you think there is evidence of non-overt racism in Howard's works? i.e. If the comment said "racism" instead of "overt racism", would that change things?

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 11:59:00 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on May 31, 2024, 02:20:23 AMAn actual, fair examination of Howard's work would show that it is not full of overt racism as claimed.  That's why you are doing everything you can to talk about this one story and only this one story and avoid talking about the actual topic under discussion.

The problem is how to identify overt racism in a story. I believe that "The Last White Man" has overt racism that is blatant and obvious. There were at least a few posters who agreed with me on this point (Venka, KindaMeh, anon).

But a bunch of other posters have shot back that there is no evidence of overt racism in "The Last White Man".

According to them, I haven't shown anything and the story isn't overtly racist. I still think that the stuff that I've pointed to in the story *is* overtly racist -- we are just disagreeing over this point.

Since we're continuing to disagree over the first example that I brought up, whatever we're disagreeing on in this story is most certainly going to be an issue in any other story by Howard.

I think someone could make a reasonable argument that "The Last White Man" does have overt racism, but that Howard's stories in general don't have enough overt racism to be worth noting. (yosemitemike - you use the term "full of" but that isn't the language that Daniel Justice used.) Thus far, no one has taken up that banner, though.

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 06:19:14 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 30, 2024, 08:17:23 PMI cited it because Krazz claimed that there was no evidence of racism on Howard's part.

So 10 pages further into the discussion, and my statement still stands: I've yet to see any evidence of Howard's work being overtly racist. If such quotes existed, I strongly suspect we'd have seen them in this thread by now.

My apologies about leaving out the "overt" regarding your position. I do still believe that "The Last White Man" contains overt racism that I've already pointed to, but I understand that you don't agree.

Since you thought this correction was important, do you think there is evidence of non-overt racism in Howard's works? i.e. If the comment said "racism" instead of "overt racism", would that change things?

So now that you are starting to use the term overt racism, you must believe that there is covert racism. You know covert racism, the belief that certain nebulous indicators demonstrate racism. Like how you keep claiming that REH was a racist to hide the fact that it is actually jhkim who is racist!

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 11:59:00 AM

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 06:19:14 AMSo 10 pages further into the discussion, and my statement still stands: I've yet to see any evidence of Howard's work being overtly racist. If such quotes existed, I strongly suspect we'd have seen them in this thread by now.

My apologies about leaving out the "overt" regarding your position. I do still believe that "The Last White Man" contains overt racism that I've already pointed to, but I understand that you don't agree.

Since you thought this correction was important, do you think there is evidence of non-overt racism in Howard's works? i.e. If the comment said "racism" instead of "overt racism", would that change things?

So, to give the first definition of overt that I found online:

Quotedone or shown openly; plainly apparent:

That's a very important modifier in the original Justice quote, and one I've been at pains to keep in all my reactions to it. So this is racism that's shown openly. And I maintain that there's nothing of that in The Last White Man; if there were, we'd all reasonably agree. I didn't read it and see anywhere that Howard openly showed that blacks were mentally or morally inferior to whites.

As to whether there's covert racism - that's an entirely different question, and off-topic for this thread about Justice's claim of overt racism. The nature of it being covert means that people will disagree as to whether its existence can be inferred. Add to that that we live in a time when claims of covert racism are very high, and I don't want to touch that question with a bargepole.

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 01:38:43 PMAs to whether there's covert racism - that's an entirely different question, and off-topic for this thread about Justice's claim of overt racism. The nature of it being covert means that people will disagree as to whether its existence can be inferred. Add to that that we live in a time when claims of covert racism are very high, and I don't want to touch that question with a bargepole.

Thanks for the answer, and I can understand that.

I also dislike talking about racism in modern works for this reason. But for works from a hundred years ago (a) when Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation were laws of the land; and (b) the story is about a race war where blacks kill all the other races; then I believe it's well past subtle and covert.

Beyond any nuances of wording,

• That the black race goes out and murders all other races is directly a negative portrayal of black people. It portrays them as dangerous and genocidal.
• That black people can't even make guns and revert to spears in slaughtering the other races portrays them negatively mentally.

It is going past too far if we have to tiptoe around whether someone can call "The Birth of a Nation" or "Amos & Andy" racist.

I also don't think this is a radical left position. i.e. I think that most Americans - both Democrat and Republicans - would consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PM

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 01:38:43 PMAs to whether there's covert racism - that's an entirely different question, and off-topic for this thread about Justice's claim of overt racism. The nature of it being covert means that people will disagree as to whether its existence can be inferred. Add to that that we live in a time when claims of covert racism are very high, and I don't want to touch that question with a bargepole.

Thanks for the answer, and I can understand that.

I also dislike talking about racism in modern works for this reason. But for works from a hundred years ago (a) when Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation were laws of the land; and (b) the story is about a race war where blacks kill all the other races; then I believe it's well past subtle and covert.

Beyond any nuances of wording,

• That the black race goes out and murders all other races is directly a negative portrayal of black people. It portrays them as dangerous and genocidal.

Humans are dangerous and genocidal. There are black people in Africa right now calling for the genocide of white people. There are arabs in the middle east calling for the genocide of Jews right now.
There are activists in America accusing white people of commiting genocide against black and brown people right now.
The OT Star Trek story "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield." has come to my mind several times while reading this thread. The story depicts the mutual genocide of two people along racial lines. Do you think the depiction of racial genocide is in itself racist?

[/list]

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMI also dislike talking about racism in modern works for this reason. But for works from a hundred years ago (a) when Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation were laws of the land; and (b) the story is about a race war where blacks kill all the other races; then I believe it's well past subtle and covert.

The nature of the claim being that it's overt means that we don't have to take into account when it was written (apart from when we consider the words used to describe the races - what's considered racist there changes over time). If it were written today, the overt racism should be as clear as it was when Howard wrote it.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMBeyond any nuances of wording,

• That the black race goes out and murders all other races is directly a negative portrayal of black people. It portrays them as dangerous and genocidal.
• That black people can't even make guns and revert to spears in slaughtering the other races portrays them negatively mentally.

And in return, we learn that:

• The whites literally enslave the entire black race (or maybe that's a mixture of whites and Asians).
• The whites cause their own downfall by selling the blacks the weapons that are used against them, and would have sold their own sisters' souls.

Is it overtly racist against whites too? And Asians, for that matter? Or does it show a fairly even-handed mixture of good and bad aspects of each race? And as discussed, it's not made overt that the failure of the blacks to make new weapons is caused by a mental failing on their part. If you want to infer that and declare the story racist, knock yourself out. But the bar for overt racism is higher. And why doesn't the last white man have a gatling gun or a tank? That sounds like a better choice of weapon for the batter that he faces. It seems that all races have seen a fall in technology.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMIt is going past too far if we have to tiptoe around whether someone can call "The Birth of a Nation" or "Amos & Andy" racist.

But nobody here has done that (unless I missed a post). The agreement on Birth of a Nation has been that it is overtly racist. I've never even heard of Amos & Andy.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMI also don't think this is a radical left position. i.e. I think that most Americans - both Democrat and Republicans - would consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

Americans make up less than 5% of the world's population, so even if true, it would be far from conclusive. And I'm not sure that you would get that agreement - it seems in this thread we've had a split primarily on political leaning.[/list]

Quote from: Krazz on May 31, 2024, 03:40:52 PMThe nature of the claim being that it's overt means that we don't have to take into account when it was written (apart from when we consider the words used to describe the races - what's considered racist there changes over time). If it were written today, the overt racism should be as clear as it was when Howard wrote it.

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply that there should be different standards.

I meant that in the 1920s America, overt racism was very common in life. Jim Crow, segregation and anti-miscegenation laws were in place in many states by majority vote, and KKK membership was booming into the millions. Would you agree about that?

If so, then we should expect that overt racism would be common in stories and films from that era, right? I feel like that shouldn't be controversial. Even if we disagree on a particular instance, it should be possible to point out a bunch of other overtly racist works from the era.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMBeyond any nuances of wording,

• That the black race goes out and murders all other races is directly a negative portrayal of black people. It portrays them as dangerous and genocidal.
• That black people can't even make guns and revert to spears in slaughtering the other races portrays them negatively mentally.

And in return, we learn that:

• The whites literally enslave the entire black race (or maybe that's a mixture of whites and Asians).
• The whites cause their own downfall by selling the blacks the weapons that are used against them, and would have sold their own sisters' souls.

[/quote]

For your first point, the only mention of slavery is here:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

They were a mighty, a prolific race. First they overran their own continent. Rebellions swept Africa. The negroes pushed the Arab races to the north and the Arabs and Europeans slew each other, until from Cape Town to Tangiers, and from Kimberly to Suez only black men ruled.

This mention is clearly a reference to the real historical African slave trade. The future of the world from the present of 1925 is being described, starting with rebellions in Africa, most of which was under colonial rule in real-world 1925 history.

Are you positing that Europe went and enslaved all of Africa some time after 1925 - even though that part of the future wasn't mentioned in the list of events? I don't think that's supported by the text. What is said about white people's future is:

Quote from: R.E. HowardThen the decadence set in. It had been first noticeable in the sports and athletics. Fewer and fewer of the race had gained fame in the great games. More and more men of other races seized the prizes.

The ruling race forgot the art of war, forgot all except the search for newer pleasures, and in so doing, they descended to the depths of degeneracy.

These are certainly faults, but that doesn't compare with slaughtering all other races.

If someone today were to write a story about how the white race went in and slaughtered all of the black devils in Africa by using their superior arms, then I'm sure here it would be considered anti-white racism - even if Africans were also showed to also have faults.

Quote from: jhkim on June 01, 2024, 02:06:20 PMI meant that in the 1920s America, overt racism was very common in life. Jim Crow, segregation and anti-miscegenation laws were in place in many states by majority vote, and KKK membership was booming into the millions. Would you agree about that?

Yes, though I don't see the relevance. The story either is overtly racist or it doesn't. Whether Howard was racist, whether much of society was, does not affect that.

Quote from: jhkim on June 01, 2024, 02:06:20 PMIf so, then we should expect that overt racism would be common in stories and films from that era, right? I feel like that shouldn't be controversial. Even if we disagree on a particular instance, it should be possible to point out a bunch of other overtly racist works from the era.

Sure. I guess in principle, you could have a very racist society where few of the stories are racist, but I doubt the 1920s were like that.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMBeyond any nuances of wording,

• That the black race goes out and murders all other races is directly a negative portrayal of black people. It portrays them as dangerous and genocidal.
• That black people can't even make guns and revert to spears in slaughtering the other races portrays them negatively mentally.

And in return, we learn that:

• The whites literally enslave the entire black race (or maybe that's a mixture of whites and Asians).
• The whites cause their own downfall by selling the blacks the weapons that are used against them, and would have sold their own sisters' souls.

[/quote]

For your first point, the only mention of slavery is here:

Quote from: R.E. HowardAnd a new, strong race had risen. A race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

...

This mention is clearly a reference to the real historical African slave trade. The future of the world from the present of 1925 is being described, starting with rebellions in Africa, most of which was under colonial rule in real-world 1925 history.

Are you positing that Europe went and enslaved all of Africa some time after 1925 - even though that part of the future wasn't mentioned in the list of events? I don't think that's supported by the text.

I'm saying that it says

QuoteA race whose people had been enslaved for ages.

It gives a reason for what the blacks do, and doesn't paint the slavers in a good light. Howard could have mentioned that slavery had been endemic worldwide, every race had carried it out and been victim of it, and that white nations had led the efforts to end it. He chose not to write that. I don't think he was trying to make the blacks seem as bad as he could.

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMIf someone today were to write a story about how the white race went in and slaughtered all of the black devils in Africa by using their superior arms, then I'm sure here it would be considered anti-white racism - even if Africans were also showed to also have faults.

Whether it was considered anti-white or anti-black racism would depend on the race and/or politics of the writer, and what the story contained, and the politics of the people making the claim. If the writer was the Grand Wizard of the KKK, and used your choice of words outside of a character's POV - "black devils" - I suspect most people would consider it anti-black wish fulfilment.

The fairest way to judge the book would be to read it without knowing who had written it. If you read The Last White Man without knowing who wrote it, might you think it was anti-white wish fulfilment? Would you be so sure that it was anti-black? Where's the claimed overt racism that makes it clear which side it comes down on?

Robert E Howard died at 30 in 1936.  That means almost everything he wrote, he wrote in his twenties and in the 1920s and 30s.

The way I understand The Last White Man is a young man troubled and exploring a very relevant issue of his time and place through fiction.  He literally took the talking points he was hearing discussed around him and novelized them so he could examine them. 

Taking any written work and stating that it is an absolute true showing of a person is just dumb. Are we now going to start a criminal investigation for suspicion of serial murder on Thomas Harris?  Is C.S. Lewis a Satanist for having written The Screwtape Letters?

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMI also don't think this is a radical left position. i.e. I think that most Americans - both Democrat and Republicans - would consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

In my decades of living, I've voted for both Democrats and Republicans and I still do not consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

Then again, I have Common Sense. Which might as well be a superpower to the woke.

Quote from: jeff37923 on June 02, 2024, 09:49:08 AM

Quote from: jhkim on May 31, 2024, 03:10:45 PMI also don't think this is a radical left position. i.e. I think that most Americans - both Democrat and Republicans - would consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

In my decades of living, I've voted for both Democrats and Republicans and I still do not consider the story overtly and obviously racist.

Then again, I have Common Sense. Which might as well be a superpower to the woke.

Greetings!

Yeah, Jeff! As usual, we also agree on this. I have, once upon a time, voted Democrat, though the vast majority of the time I have voted Republican.

And, right. I don't see the story, "The Last White Man" by REH as being overtly or obviously racist. It just seems like a kind of dystopian, fantastic story like other stories REH has written. It is a fictional, "Futuristic" kind of fantasy story.

*Laughing* Yes, "Common Sense" is a superpower to the Woke. The Woke don't have "Common Sense", as their minds have been corrupted by Marxism and insanity of post-modernism. Everything is political, everything is corrupt, everything is misogynistic in their minds. When a person has been brainwashed like this, it also means that their family and social relationships will rapidly become corrupted and deteriorate. Hence, why it also seems like Woke people are socially isolated and estranged from their family and normal friends. They are only left to really associating with fellow Leftists that have been corrupted with Wokism just like themselves. This, then, also creates a self-reinforcing "Echo Chamber" where the evil brainwashing is hammered into them even deeper.

This process, this deep brainwashing, and mental and moral corruption, eats away at and constantly corrodes any sense of normalcy and "Common Sense" they may have had once upon a time.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: BadApple on June 01, 2024, 11:45:22 PMRobert E Howard died at 30 in 1936.  That means almost everything he wrote, he wrote in his twenties and in the 1920s and 30s.

The way I understand The Last White Man is a young man troubled and exploring a very relevant issue of his time and place through fiction.  He literally took the talking points he was hearing discussed around him and novelized them so he could examine them. 

Taking any written work and stating that it is an absolute true showing of a person is just dumb. Are we now going to start a criminal investigation for suspicion of serial murder on Thomas Harris?  Is C.S. Lewis a Satanist for having written The Screwtape Letters?

I'm not sure what you mean by "an absolute true showing" of Howard.

Obviously, if one wants to get a sense of the author as a person, one should look more about what he said outside of his stories -- and one should read up on the time and place in which he's writing -- to get a better picture about him as a whole.

One story doesn't define someone, but it is an expression of them. Literary interpretation isn't a perfect science, but some things are still obviously wrong. Anyone reading The Screwtape Letters can instantly read the difference from, say, Anthony LeVay's writing.

To that point:

Quote from: Krazz on June 01, 2024, 03:56:13 PMThe fairest way to judge the book would be to read it without knowing who had written it. If you read The Last White Man without knowing who wrote it, might you think it was anti-white wish fulfilment? Would you be so sure that it was anti-black? Where's the claimed overt racism that makes it clear which side it comes down on?

I think any reasonable person reading "The Last White Man" would not read it as anti-white wish fulfillment, even if they knew nothing about the author. Within the first few lines are the glowing terms that the white man is described in, "a splendid example of a wonderful race". The descriptions of the black race are things like "animal-like rate of birth" which are not phrased positively. "Fertile" and "abundant" would be more positive descriptors, for example.

(As a side note, I am slower to respond right now as I'm taking a cross-country trip, but I'll try to keep an eye on things.)

Quote from: BadApple on June 01, 2024, 11:45:22 PMTaking any written work and stating that it is an absolute true showing of a person is just dumb. Are we now going to start a criminal investigation for suspicion of serial murder on Thomas Harris?  Is C.S. Lewis a Satanist for having written The Screwtape Letters?

We already have imbeciles calling for anyone who likes 'problematic' fiction to be investigated and/or imprisoned. Not so ironically, a lot of these same schizoaffective morons think movies like Pretty Baby or Cuties are perfectly fine. They will absolutely 100% project their porn-brain onto others while screeching like a fucking banshee that 'if you like anime tiddies you're going to harm children!'

There is biopic of R E Howard called  The Whole Wide World (https://www.thearchive.tv/search?key=the%20whole%20wide%20world) which is based on Novalyne Price's book, 'One Who Walked Alone'.
You can watch it at the above link at The Film Archive.

Quote from: DocJones on June 05, 2024, 09:31:32 PMThere is biopic of R E Howard called  The Whole Wide World (https://www.thearchive.tv/search?key=the%20whole%20wide%20world) which is based on Novalyne Price's book, 'One Who Walked Alone'.
You can watch it at the above link at The Film Archive.

Really good movie. Excellent account of his life in Texas

...and Renee Zellweger. ( heartfelt sigh)

While discussing what is and is not racist, are we going to bring up the fact that the idea that racism is a moral sin appears very recently in human history, still hasn't been adopted across the globe, and may actually be a minority viewpoint among humanity?

To Corolinth -- I made it clear at several points that overt racism was common in R.E. Howard's society - specifically that Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws were popularly supported in many states at that time. That same overt racism also expressed itself in art and stories.

My contention is that even if they are common, one can still refer to anti-miscegenation laws as overtly racist. That's what the word "racist" means. I think it doesn't make sense to say that anti-miscegenation laws weren't racist just because they weren't viewed as moral sin.

As far as how common racism is today, I think that usually runs into problems of definition. I generally avoid using the term "racism" in modern-day debate, but I am ok with using "overt racism" for stuff from long ago if it is clearly in line with other overt racism of that time. I think that the majority of the world today wouldn't say "I am racist", if they were fluent in English.

In any case, the questions:

1) What is racist?
2) How common is a racist viewpoint?
3) Is racism moral?

are all separate.

Still waiting for those examples of overt racism in works that were published in Howard's lifetime and that survive in complete form especially his Conan stories.  Are we going to get some of that any time soon?  At all?  Failure to produce them will be an admission that you can't and that the premise that his works are full of overt racism is false.

Quote from: yosemitemike on June 08, 2024, 03:31:15 AMStill waiting for those examples of overt racism in works that were published in Howard's lifetime and that survive in complete form especially his Conan stories.  Are we going to get some of that any time soon?  At all?  Failure to produce them will be an admission that you can't and that the premise that his works are full of overt racism is false.

I gave the example of "Shadows in Zamboula" back in Reply #29, with selective quotes, but I haven't gone back to it, it's true. GeekyBugle had comments in Reply #112 that I still should get back to.

In general, the theme of this story is that the city is cursed. The black men of the city are devoted cannibals who prey on any strangers in the city to eat them, while the citizens turn a blind eye to the practice in their decadent corruption.

This is expressed in the first quote I gave:

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Aram Baksh is a demon! Nay, in this accursed city which Stygians built and which Hyrkanians rule—where white, brown and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds—who can tell who is a man, and who a demon in disguise? Aram Baksh is a demon in the form of a man! At night he assumes his true guise and carries his guests off into the desert where his fellow demons from the waste meet in conclave.'

'Why does he always carry off strangers?' asked Conan skeptically.

'The people of the city would not suffer him to slay their people, but they care naught for the strangers who fall into his hands. Conan, you are of the West, and know not the secrets of this ancient land. But, since the beginning of happenings, the demons of the desert have worshipped Yog, the Lord of the Empty Abodes, with fire—fire that devours human victims.

These are the words of a character, so one could say that this character is racist, but the story is not. However, in this case, the character is foreshadowing and expressing the truth that is later borne out. The story bears out his warning exactly.

Throughout the story, the race of characters are all clearly emphasized. I'll point to my last quote, for example:

Quote from: R.E. HowardDrawing his foot from the stirrup he stole to the angle and peered around it. Three men were moving down the road toward the palm groves, and from their slouching gait he knew they were negroes. They halted at his low call, bunching themselves as he strode toward them, his sword in his hand. Their eyes gleamed whitely in the starlight. Their brutish lust shone in their ebony faces, but they knew their three cudgels could not prevail against his sword, just as he knew it.

GeekyBugle suggested that the racism here was in the use of "negro", but my intended point has nothing to do with that. The story says that black people are instantly recognizable by their "slouching gait", even if the color of their skin isn't visible. Black people don't all walk slouching, though, that's a stereotype of racist stories.

More generally, GeekyBugle suggested that the negative traits associated with the blacks in the story are specific only to the blacks of Darfar, but nothing in the story suggests a contrast between the people of Darfar and blacks in general. The specific cannibal slaves of this city are from Darfar, but much of the comments don't distinguish Darfarians. For example,

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Yes, let us hasten!' begged the girl, almost hysterical again. 'My lover is wandering somewhere in the streets alone. The negroes may take him.'

'A devil of a custom this is!' growled Conan, as he led the way toward the city, paralleling the road but keeping behind the huts and straggling trees. 'Why don't the citizens clean out these black dogs?'

I'd add how he describes the brown-skinned strangler Baal-pteor. Their contest is described explicitly as a contest of their races, but the brown-skinned Kosalan is called "inhuman".

Quote from: R.E. Howard'I think you never saw a man from the West before. Did you deem yourself strong, because you were able to twist the heads off civilized folk, poor weaklings with muscles like rotten string? Hell! Break the neck of a wild Cimmerian bull before you call yourself strong. I did that, before I was a full-grown man—like this!'

Quote from: R.E. HowardHis black hair was damp, sweat ran down his face, and his chest heaved. For all his vocal scorn of Baal-pteor's strength, he had almost met his match in the inhuman Kosalan.

The emphasis on race as the defining trait - and Kosalan as inhuman and inferior - stands out.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThis is expressed in the first quote I gave:

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Aram Baksh is a demon! Nay, in this accursed city which Stygians built and which Hyrkanians rule—where white, brown and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds—who can tell who is a man, and who a demon in disguise? Aram Baksh is a demon in the form of a man! At night he assumes his true guise and carries his guests off into the desert where his fellow demons from the waste meet in conclave.'

'Why does he always carry off strangers?' asked Conan skeptically.

'The people of the city would not suffer him to slay their people, but they care naught for the strangers who fall into his hands. Conan, you are of the West, and know not the secrets of this ancient land. But, since the beginning of happenings, the demons of the desert have worshipped Yog, the Lord of the Empty Abodes, with fire—fire that devours human victims.

These are the words of a character, so one could say that this character is racist, but the story is not. However, in this case, the character is foreshadowing and expressing the truth that is later borne out. The story bears out his warning exactly.

Those are the words of a character trying to pass herself off as something she's not, I wouldn't even judge her as racist. And the blacks aren't the only ones to come off badly in this story - let's not forget that the city as a whole lets strangers be killed and eaten.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThroughout the story, the race of characters are all clearly emphasized. I'll point to my last quote, for example:

Quote from: R.E. HowardDrawing his foot from the stirrup he stole to the angle and peered around it. Three men were moving down the road toward the palm groves, and from their slouching gait he knew they were negroes. They halted at his low call, bunching themselves as he strode toward them, his sword in his hand. Their eyes gleamed whitely in the starlight. Their brutish lust shone in their ebony faces, but they knew their three cudgels could not prevail against his sword, just as he knew it.

GeekyBugle suggested that the racism here was in the use of "negro", but my intended point has nothing to do with that. The story says that black people are instantly recognizable by their "slouching gait", even if the color of their skin isn't visible. Black people don't all walk slouching, though, that's a stereotype of racist stories.

So the overt racism is suggesting that black people walk a little differently to other races? That's the best you can do to back up a claim that Howard's work is filled with overt racism?

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMMore generally, GeekyBugle suggested that the negative traits associated with the blacks in the story are specific only to the blacks of Darfar, but nothing in the story suggests a contrast between the people of Darfar and blacks in general...

Really? Then what do these quotes from the very same story tell us?

Quote from: R.E. HowardConan ... stared down at teeth filed to points.

He understood now the mystery of the strangers who had disappeared from the house of Aram Baksh; the riddle of the black drum thrumming out there beyond the palm groves, and of that pit of charred bones—that pit where strange meat might be roasted under the stars, while black beasts squatted about to glut a hideous hunger. The man on the floor was a cannibal slave from Darfar..

Quote from: R.E. HowardA giant black man stood framed against the soft glow of a copper lamp. A quick glance showed Conan the man was not from Darfar. His teeth were unfiled and his kinky hair was cropped close to his skull. He was from the Wadai.

The pointed teeth mark the Darfaris as cannibals. The Wadai doesn't have pointed teeth. So it's just one group of blacks in the story who are cannibals.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMI'd add how he describes the brown-skinned strangler Baal-pteor. Their contest is described explicitly as a contest of their races, but the brown-skinned Kosalan is called "inhuman".

Quote from: R.E. Howard'I think you never saw a man from the West before. Did you deem yourself strong, because you were able to twist the heads off civilized folk, poor weaklings with muscles like rotten string? Hell! Break the neck of a wild Cimmerian bull before you call yourself strong. I did that, before I was a full-grown man—like this!'

Quote from: R.E. HowardHis black hair was damp, sweat ran down his face, and his chest heaved. For all his vocal scorn of Baal-pteor's strength, he had almost met his match in the inhuman Kosalan.

The emphasis on race as the defining trait - and Kosalan as inhuman and inferior - stands out.

Firstly, Baal-pteor isn't described as inferior. Sure, Conan beats him, but Conan beats everyone. "Almost met his match" makes it clear that he was almost as amazing as the Cimmerian. As to "inhuman", Howard doesn't always literally mean "not human" when he uses it. Earlier in the story, he makes note of Baal-pteor's "inhuman" strength. It just means far beyond what normal human's have. Here are some examples of white, human, non-magical characters with the word "inhuman" attached to them:

Quote from: R.E. Howard - A Witch Shall be BornFrom the lips of Constantius came an inhuman cry of despair and horror.

Quote from: R.E. Howard - Black ClossusWith an inhuman cry Conan caught up his fallen sword...

Quote from: R.E. Howard - The Frost Giant's DaughterWith an inhuman roar [Conan] closed in on her...

Quote from: Krazz on June 08, 2024, 03:41:35 PM

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThis is expressed in the first quote I gave:

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Aram Baksh is a demon! Nay, in this accursed city which Stygians built and which Hyrkanians rule—where white, brown and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds—who can tell who is a man, and who a demon in disguise? Aram Baksh is a demon in the form of a man! At night he assumes his true guise and carries his guests off into the desert where his fellow demons from the waste meet in conclave.'

'Why does he always carry off strangers?' asked Conan skeptically.

'The people of the city would not suffer him to slay their people, but they care naught for the strangers who fall into his hands. Conan, you are of the West, and know not the secrets of this ancient land. But, since the beginning of happenings, the demons of the desert have worshipped Yog, the Lord of the Empty Abodes, with fire—fire that devours human victims.

These are the words of a character, so one could say that this character is racist, but the story is not. However, in this case, the character is foreshadowing and expressing the truth that is later borne out. The story bears out his warning exactly.

Those are the words of a character trying to pass herself off as something she's not, I wouldn't even judge her as racist. And the blacks aren't the only ones to come off badly in this story - let's not forget that the city as a whole lets strangers be killed and eaten.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThroughout the story, the race of characters are all clearly emphasized. I'll point to my last quote, for example:

Quote from: R.E. HowardDrawing his foot from the stirrup he stole to the angle and peered around it. Three men were moving down the road toward the palm groves, and from their slouching gait he knew they were negroes. They halted at his low call, bunching themselves as he strode toward them, his sword in his hand. Their eyes gleamed whitely in the starlight. Their brutish lust shone in their ebony faces, but they knew their three cudgels could not prevail against his sword, just as he knew it.

GeekyBugle suggested that the racism here was in the use of "negro", but my intended point has nothing to do with that. The story says that black people are instantly recognizable by their "slouching gait", even if the color of their skin isn't visible. Black people don't all walk slouching, though, that's a stereotype of racist stories.

So the overt racism is suggesting that black people walk a little differently to other races? That's the best you can do to back up a claim that Howard's work is filled with overt racism?

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMMore generally, GeekyBugle suggested that the negative traits associated with the blacks in the story are specific only to the blacks of Darfar, but nothing in the story suggests a contrast between the people of Darfar and blacks in general...

Really? Then what do these quotes from the very same story tell us?

Quote from: R.E. HowardConan ... stared down at teeth filed to points.

He understood now the mystery of the strangers who had disappeared from the house of Aram Baksh; the riddle of the black drum thrumming out there beyond the palm groves, and of that pit of charred bones—that pit where strange meat might be roasted under the stars, while black beasts squatted about to glut a hideous hunger. The man on the floor was a cannibal slave from Darfar..

Quote from: R.E. HowardA giant black man stood framed against the soft glow of a copper lamp. A quick glance showed Conan the man was not from Darfar. His teeth were unfiled and his kinky hair was cropped close to his skull. He was from the Wadai.

The pointed teeth mark the Darfaris as cannibals. The Wadai doesn't have pointed teeth. So it's just one group of blacks in the story who are cannibals.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMI'd add how he describes the brown-skinned strangler Baal-pteor. Their contest is described explicitly as a contest of their races, but the brown-skinned Kosalan is called "inhuman".

Quote from: R.E. Howard'I think you never saw a man from the West before. Did you deem yourself strong, because you were able to twist the heads off civilized folk, poor weaklings with muscles like rotten string? Hell! Break the neck of a wild Cimmerian bull before you call yourself strong. I did that, before I was a full-grown man—like this!'

Quote from: R.E. HowardHis black hair was damp, sweat ran down his face, and his chest heaved. For all his vocal scorn of Baal-pteor's strength, he had almost met his match in the inhuman Kosalan.

The emphasis on race as the defining trait - and Kosalan as inhuman and inferior - stands out.

Firstly, Baal-pteor isn't described as inferior. Sure, Conan beats him, but Conan beats everyone. "Almost met his match" makes it clear that he was almost as amazing as the Cimmerian. As to "inhuman", Howard doesn't always literally mean "not human" when he uses it. Earlier in the story, he makes note of Baal-pteor's "inhuman" strength. It just means far beyond what normal human's have. Here are some examples of white, human, non-magical characters with the word "inhuman" attached to them:

Quote from: R.E. Howard - A Witch Shall be BornFrom the lips of Constantius came an inhuman cry of despair and horror.

Quote from: R.E. Howard - Black ClossusWith an inhuman cry Conan caught up his fallen sword...

Quote from: R.E. Howard - The Frost Giant's DaughterWith an inhuman roar [Conan] closed in on her...

You're wasting your time, he has come to an ideologically driven conclusion, now it's a matter of his faith to prove it right.

Facts, reason, logic be damned REH has to be a raicismist and he'll twist, cherry pick and otherwise misinterpret the writings of REH (and your own words) to prevent himself from facing the truth.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on June 08, 2024, 04:26:30 PM

Quote from: Krazz on June 08, 2024, 03:41:35 PM

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThis is expressed in the first quote I gave:

Quote from: R.E. Howard'Aram Baksh is a demon! Nay, in this accursed city which Stygians built and which Hyrkanians rule—where white, brown and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds—who can tell who is a man, and who a demon in disguise? Aram Baksh is a demon in the form of a man! At night he assumes his true guise and carries his guests off into the desert where his fellow demons from the waste meet in conclave.'

'Why does he always carry off strangers?' asked Conan skeptically.

'The people of the city would not suffer him to slay their people, but they care naught for the strangers who fall into his hands. Conan, you are of the West, and know not the secrets of this ancient land. But, since the beginning of happenings, the demons of the desert have worshipped Yog, the Lord of the Empty Abodes, with fire—fire that devours human victims.

These are the words of a character, so one could say that this character is racist, but the story is not. However, in this case, the character is foreshadowing and expressing the truth that is later borne out. The story bears out his warning exactly.

Those are the words of a character trying to pass herself off as something she's not, I wouldn't even judge her as racist. And the blacks aren't the only ones to come off badly in this story - let's not forget that the city as a whole lets strangers be killed and eaten.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMThroughout the story, the race of characters are all clearly emphasized. I'll point to my last quote, for example:

Quote from: R.E. HowardDrawing his foot from the stirrup he stole to the angle and peered around it. Three men were moving down the road toward the palm groves, and from their slouching gait he knew they were negroes. They halted at his low call, bunching themselves as he strode toward them, his sword in his hand. Their eyes gleamed whitely in the starlight. Their brutish lust shone in their ebony faces, but they knew their three cudgels could not prevail against his sword, just as he knew it.

GeekyBugle suggested that the racism here was in the use of "negro", but my intended point has nothing to do with that. The story says that black people are instantly recognizable by their "slouching gait", even if the color of their skin isn't visible. Black people don't all walk slouching, though, that's a stereotype of racist stories.

So the overt racism is suggesting that black people walk a little differently to other races? That's the best you can do to back up a claim that Howard's work is filled with overt racism?

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMMore generally, GeekyBugle suggested that the negative traits associated with the blacks in the story are specific only to the blacks of Darfar, but nothing in the story suggests a contrast between the people of Darfar and blacks in general...

Really? Then what do these quotes from the very same story tell us?

Quote from: R.E. HowardConan ... stared down at teeth filed to points.

He understood now the mystery of the strangers who had disappeared from the house of Aram Baksh; the riddle of the black drum thrumming out there beyond the palm groves, and of that pit of charred bones—that pit where strange meat might be roasted under the stars, while black beasts squatted about to glut a hideous hunger. The man on the floor was a cannibal slave from Darfar..

Quote from: R.E. HowardA giant black man stood framed against the soft glow of a copper lamp. A quick glance showed Conan the man was not from Darfar. His teeth were unfiled and his kinky hair was cropped close to his skull. He was from the Wadai.

The pointed teeth mark the Darfaris as cannibals. The Wadai doesn't have pointed teeth. So it's just one group of blacks in the story who are cannibals.

Quote from: jhkim on June 08, 2024, 10:19:01 AMI'd add how he describes the brown-skinned strangler Baal-pteor. Their contest is described explicitly as a contest of their races, but the brown-skinned Kosalan is called "inhuman".

Quote from: R.E. Howard'I think you never saw a man from the West before. Did you deem yourself strong, because you were able to twist the heads off civilized folk, poor weaklings with muscles like rotten string? Hell! Break the neck of a wild Cimmerian bull before you call yourself strong. I did that, before I was a full-grown man—like this!'

Quote from: R.E. HowardHis black hair was damp, sweat ran down his face, and his chest heaved. For all his vocal scorn of Baal-pteor's strength, he had almost met his match in the inhuman Kosalan.

The emphasis on race as the defining trait - and Kosalan as inhuman and inferior - stands out.

Firstly, Baal-pteor isn't described as inferior. Sure, Conan beats him, but Conan beats everyone. "Almost met his match" makes it clear that he was almost as amazing as the Cimmerian. As to "inhuman", Howard doesn't always literally mean "not human" when he uses it. Earlier in the story, he makes note of Baal-pteor's "inhuman" strength. It just means far beyond what normal human's have. Here are some examples of white, human, non-magical characters with the word "inhuman" attached to them:

Quote from: R.E. Howard - A Witch Shall be BornFrom the lips of Constantius came an inhuman cry of despair and horror.

Quote from: R.E. Howard - Black ClossusWith an inhuman cry Conan caught up his fallen sword...

Quote from: R.E. Howard - The Frost Giant's DaughterWith an inhuman roar [Conan] closed in on her...

You're wasting your time, he has come to an ideologically driven conclusion, now it's a matter of his faith to prove it right.

Facts, reason, logic be damned REH has to be a raicismist and he'll twist, cherry pick and otherwise misinterpret the writings of REH (and your own words) to prevent himself from facing the truth.

Greetings!

Yeah, GeekyBugle! It is a matter of ideology for him. REH simply *must be* racimist, otherwise the main AI doesn't accept it, and goes crazy. All of his quotes simply reflect a fantastic, well-written fantasy world and fantasy characters, societies and cultures. There simply isn't any overt racism concerning REH in any of his Conan stories. However, I see parallels and reflections of the dynamic so often found with Leftists--they have a huge dysfunctional inability to parse reality from fantasy. Leftists purposely *look* for anything, no matter how remote, in popular, cherished, or historical stories to cry about and be offended by, and otherwise to villainize, smear, and destroy. Leftists do this with everything. History, fiction books, TV, Movies, and on and on.

I've read some third-rate women academics, from over there in Britain, write critiques of Tolkien, proclaiming Tolkien is racist and misogynist. Their arguments about Tolkien are rubbish. Just like the Leftists that have cried about Howard's Conan forever. Just like them, Jhkim tries to paint with the same brush, and uses similar weak arguments and interpretations.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

And here is another hit piece on older D&D. This time Keep on the Borderlands with gems of wisdom like this.

QuoteOne of the modules major failings, and something to pay attention to in our own design, is to do with diversity of his NPCs. Out of every single listed NPC in the module, there are no women that are not wives. Zero. Well, okay, there's a Medusa who betrays you, but that really drives home the point further. Every NPC is assumed to be a man. This is bad design.

https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/ (https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/)

Anyone want to explain to this fucking clown that being an unmarried woman has generally implied you were a whore?

Quote from: Omega on June 08, 2024, 07:23:14 PMAnd here is another hit piece on older D&D. This time Keep on the Borderlands with gems of wisdom like this.

QuoteOne of the modules major failings, and something to pay attention to in our own design, is to do with diversity of his NPCs. Out of every single listed NPC in the module, there are no women that are not wives. Zero. Well, okay, there's a Medusa who betrays you, but that really drives home the point further. Every NPC is assumed to be a man. This is bad design.

https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/ (https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/)

There is a serving wench at the tavern. Several of the NPCs have daughters. 
It's on the borderlands which is not a place for women not under the protection of men. ;-)

Quote from: Omega on June 08, 2024, 07:23:14 PMAnd here is another hit piece on older D&D. This time Keep on the Borderlands with gems of wisdom like this.

QuoteOne of the modules major failings, and something to pay attention to in our own design, is to do with diversity of his NPCs. Out of every single listed NPC in the module, there are no women that are not wives. Zero. Well, okay, there's a Medusa who betrays you, but that really drives home the point further. Every NPC is assumed to be a man. This is bad design.

https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/ (https://theweepingstag.wordpress.com/2024/05/29/battle-scarred-yet-still-standing-keep-on-the-borderlands-today/)

QuoteBy the end of this article, we'll address the most important question one can ask about a module: Does The Keep on the Borderlands succeed at helping the GM convey a plot at the table?

Bad question immediatley disqualifies article as garbage. I'm not even going to address the identity politics nonsense.

Quote from: Krazz on June 08, 2024, 03:41:35 PMsnip

Thanks.  That saved me the trouble of reading those stories to see how they were being misrepresented to make them seem racist.

Quote from: yosemitemike on June 08, 2024, 10:03:14 PM

Quote from: Krazz on June 08, 2024, 03:41:35 PMsnip

Thanks.  That saved me the trouble of reading those stories to see how they were being misrepresented to make them seem racist.

Dude, you make it sound like it's bad thing to read - but they're R.E. Howard stories, one of the classic authors of fantasy. And "The Last White Man" is very short - shorter than what you've read of this thread. Shadows in Zamboula is a little longer, but if you like Conan stories, it's not an imposition.

Here's the links again:

https://archive.org/details/howard-collector-05-1964-summer/page/22/mode/2up

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/42196/42196-h/42196-h.htm