Robert Jordan pastiche

[Trodax]

I have a bunch of Conan pastiches by Robert Jordan lying around which I haven't read in like 15 years. Can't remember much of them, except that I recall them containing a lot of lightly-clad women falling into Conans arms (granted, that could very well be a selective memory since I was in my mid-teens when reading them... :wink: ).

I've been thinking about maybe rereading one or two of them.
What are your opinions on Robert Jordans Conan tales? Worthless crap, decent enough to be worth the read, or "OMG, its better than Howard!" ( )?
Any particular ones you recommend (or loathe particularly)?

 

[VincentDarlage]

Most of Robert Jordan's Conan stories are readable. R. Jordan did better than R. Green, S. Perry, Turtledove & L. Carpenter, but possibly not as good as JM Roberts or S. Moore, definitely not as good as Hocking (Conan and the Emerald Lotus) or Andrew Offut.

I liked his Conan work better than his Wheel of Time novels (of which I only read two before I got bored). I recommend Conan the Unconquered and Conan the Magnificent.

 

[slaughterj]

I liked the 6 (not including the movie adaptation) books by Jordan. IIRC, they are effectively 3 sets of 2 back-to-back novels, and you should try to read them in order for more enjoyment.

 

[Dave45]

I just reread Jordan's Conan pastiches several months ago, having originally read them when I was in 8-9 grade. You're right, Conan does VERY well with the ladies in the books! (It's funny, that was the only thing that I had remembered about them also!) I found them to be pretty good, better than most of the other Conan pastiches that I've read - Nothing aproaching Howard's orginal stories, of course, but definately entertaining and enjoyable reads.

 

[Trodax]

Thanks for your replies guys!

...definitely not as good as Hocking (Conan and the Emerald Lotus) or Andrew Offut.

I haven't read anything by either of those two, I'll try to get ahold of something. Thanks for the tip.

I liked his Conan work better than his Wheel of Time novels (of which I only read two before I got bored).

You got twice as far as I did then...

I liked the 6 (not including the movie adaptation) books by Jordan.

So there are only 6 books by Jordan (7 with the movie adaptation)?
I have Conan the Magnificent, the Invincible, the Triumphant, the Victorious, the Unconquered, the Defender and the Destroyer (which is the movie adaptation). Is that all of them then?

As an aside, aren't those titles a little cheesy? At least they aren't as near as cool as titles such as The Hour of the Dragon or Beyond the Black River.

IIRC, they are effectively 3 sets of 2 back-to-back novels, and you should try to read them in order for more enjoyment.

Do you happen to know which ones go together (and in what order)? The covers of the books didn't say anything about them being connected. Maybe its as simple as order of publication?

You're right, Conan does VERY well with the ladies in the books! (It's funny, that was the only thing that I had remembered about them also!)

:lol: That is funny! I guess Conan has always done well with the ladies (in Howard's tales too, I mean), but I remember Jordan's books as being a little extra saucy.

 

[Strom]

definitely not as good as Hocking (Conan and the Emerald Lotus)

SPOILERS*****************************************************

I enjoyed the Jordan Conan pastiche way more than John's one book. Really, it's not the greatest portrayal of Conan since Howard that everyone makes it out to be. In Jordan's Conan you get what you expect and in John's story Conan is knocked out twice in the first 20 pages and is then forced to accept a employment or die plot. Man, the Cimmerian was having a bad day that day.

On top of that, the only book with more magic in this book is The Scrolls of Skelos which some people will really like - not me. I mean Conan even uses magic - in fact it should be his best friend after this book. Why fear it? He should've learned that it is a valuable ally. Yet that is against the cannon setup by Howard and yet no one notices that mistake and instead just praises it as the greatest Conan pastiche ever.

Hey, it's just my opinion but I have to side with Sprague DeCamp on this one - 'No one writes better Conan than Robert Jordan". Emerald lotus is a good pastiche but a water-downed portrayal of Conan, IMHO.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

Jordan was a little rough on the ladies. There were some pretty lurid S&M style Tormented Sacrifice scenes in at least two of his pastiches involving bondage, torture and even a pretty graphic throat slitting in one. This sort of kills the appeal of the otherwise good writing for me.

And yes The Wheel of Time is coma inducing. Stephen King once wrote that the less words you can tell a story in the better a writer you are. [And this is the man who wrote 7 volume The Dark Tower series remember. 8)] Thus Jordan's as ongoing series of bible length novels goes into double digits in the number of volumes all I can say is that are we sure the trees dying for this are giving their lives for a good cause?

 

[The King]

Robert Jordan pastiches are good because the guy is a professional writer and can create excellent plots, better than any other of the pastiche authors.
I really love his Conan the Triumphant which has everything Howard usually included: court intrigue, secret cult, a war between many factions for the kingdom of Ophir and Conan inbetween as the commander of a free company for said kingdom).

Conan the destroyer and Conan the magnificient are also good novels. Unfortunately I didn't have the time to read the other 4.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

Jordan was a little rough on the ladies. There were some pretty lurid S&M style Tormented Sacrifice scenes in at least two of his pastiches

Well from an english point of view when Howard wrote his stories he too was outragous, at that time Women were portrayed as weak, dependant on men and as having no libido to speak of (I am unsure how things stood in the u.s. at the same time). Thinking of the film industry portrails initialy women's role was to scream, run away and get rescued it wasn't until much later in the 50's before women were given less stereotypical roles. I would have to do some digging but the role of women in leading roles as 'strong' characters is still, in england at least, a newish development of the last thirty years.

The Beating Valaria gets in 'Red nails' is fairly graphic and has some S&M tones (Manicaled, stripped and whipped) and I for one liked that bit.

Humans are cruel beasts and there is no harm in portraying that cruelty in fiction and in games. It makes a villian a real cruel villain. Perhaps it even makes some people think about their own actions, sometimes.

 

[slaughterj]

I liked the 6 (not including the movie adaptation) books by Jordan.

So there are only 6 books by Jordan (7 with the movie adaptation)?
I have Conan the Magnificent, the Invincible, the Triumphant, the Victorious, the Unconquered, the Defender and the Destroyer (which is the movie adaptation). Is that all of them then?

As an aside, aren't those titles a little cheesy? At least they aren't as near as cool as titles such as The Hour of the Dragon or Beyond the Black River.

IIRC, they are effectively 3 sets of 2 back-to-back novels, and you should try to read them in order for more enjoyment.

Do you happen to know which ones go together (and in what order)? The covers of the books didn't say anything about them being connected. Maybe its as simple as order of publication?

Sounds like you have them all - the titles seemed fine, as an extension of the general titling that had come before. As for the timeline, refer to http://www.dodgenet.com/~moonblossom/timeline.htm and you can look them up there and figure it out easy enough - looks to me like (with some others' stories in-between the 3 groups):

Age 16-17:
Conan The Magnificent
Conan The Invincible

Age 19-20:
Conan The Victorious
Conan The Unconquered

Age 23:
Conan The Defender
Conan The Triumphant

 

[Raven Blackwell]

The Beating Valaria gets in 'Red nails' is fairly graphic and has some S&M tones (Manicaled, stripped and whipped) and I for one liked that bit.

Let's not forget that beating Valeria gives that handmaiden after the failed attempt to drug Valeria earlier in the story. Or the nearly identical scene with Thalis in Xuthal of the Dusk. Or in...you get the point. Yes S&M torture is Howard I suppose but having been on the receiving end of pretty horrific sexual violence in my lifetime this sort of thing doesn't appeal to me in literature. I certainly didn't enjoy it at the time and it sort of poisons the story for me. Now mind you I like Conan for the most part- the world, the adventure, the skullduggery, the action, the forbidding secrets, sorceries and monsters are my style. It's the S&M flavour on top [no pun intended] of it I dislike. I really think the stories would be better without it but that's me.

That being said Jordan really got into that part a little too much for my taste. Now the man can write I'll admit, but his focus has always seemed a bit off to me. In Trumphant he's got all the Conan story elements true but he opens with a scene from a snuff flick. I never understood the main villian's motivation either. In order to gain the power to destroy a royalty that won't let her be queen because she a woman she tries to ressurect a demon lord who attitude towards women is to torture them for near eternity until their souls give out and restart his cult? Bit of a logic error there for me.

Now he has some of the best scenes I've liked in his other works but how he approaches them always throws me a bit off. Can't pin my finger on it but for lack of a better word the 'camera angle' is off- focusing on the wrong part of the story at the wrong time perhaps....

Humans are cruel beasts and there is no harm in portraying that cruelty in fiction and in games. It makes a villian a real cruel villain. Perhaps it even makes some people think about their own actions, sometimes.

Or perhaps in the words of Scary Movie "it gives psychos ideas". After all monkey see, monkey do. Cruelty isn't inheritant- it's learned behavior. Beasts for the most part aren't crueler than they have to be. It would take a lot of work for a human being to reach that level.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

I mean Conan even uses magic - in fact it should be his best friend after this book. Why fear it? He should've learned that it is a valuable ally. Yet that is against the cannon setup by Howard and yet no one notices that mistake and instead just praises it as the greatest Conan pastiche ever.

Actually you're incorrect. Conan cast Sign of Jhebbal Sag in the Howard story Beyond the Black River to prevent summoned animals from tracking he and his companion down. In any of Mongoose's version of the high level Conan he is listed as Dabbler for the Countermagic school of magic. Of course as a result of using the above spell Jhebbal Sag sent a Swamp Demon to kill him for the blasphemy- which is likely the reason Conan doesn't rely on more than a Broadsword most of the time.

 

[Strom]

How am I incorrect? I never said he never used magic, I just said he uses magic in Lotus and that REH had established a superstitious fear of magic in the character based on his barbarian origins and that was ignored for the most part in this book. I would also argue that Beyond the Black River would fall chronologically after Conan and the Emerald lotus so Conan should technically have a very favorable view of magic after his experience in Lotus and should of used it as an ally.

You are incorrect Ms. Blackwell.

 

[Oly]

Let's not forget that beating Valeria gives that handmaiden after the failed attempt to drug Valeria earlier in the story. Or the nearly identical scene with Thalis in Xuthal of the Dusk. Or in...you get the point...(snip)...That being said Jordan really got into that part a little too much for my taste.

So that said your earlier criticism that "Jordan was a little rough on the ladies" isn't really him putting his own spin on Conan but just copying the style of Howard.

The only Conan that I've actually read is Howard's own (the only Jordan that I've read were some of the WoT books, I gave up halfway through the 4th or thereabouts) so I do have a question. Sometimes certain aspects of the stories such as the treatment of blacks or women sticks in my throat somewhat. Jordan seems to take the somewhat sexist aspects of the stories into his own but what about the racist overtones?

Disclaimer: When I use the words "sexist" and "racist" I mean our modern viewpoint on the subject, I don't know enough about Howard to label him as such and know full well that his time was a different world and as has already been said in many ways he pushed the boundaries for female characters.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

Conan should technically have a very favorable view of magic after his experience in Lotus and should of used it as an ally.

This refers to one of the books I havn't read (yet) But the idea that Conan should have a 'favourable' view of magic does not fit with my understanding of him at all. He comes from a culture that teaches that magic is bad and weak. His belef system (in Crom) teaches that he must make his way through the world using his own strength which makes him despise those who use magic and his adventures teach him by experiance that his strength and a good length of steel can overcome magicians and demons. I doubt one experience would change the life-long opinions and beliefs.

 

[Trodax]

Sounds like you have them all - the titles seemed fine, as an extension of the general titling that had come before. As for the timeline, refer to http://www.dodgenet.com/~moonblossom/timeline.htm

Thanks!

 

[Raven Blackwell]

How am I incorrect? I never said he never used magic, I just said he uses magic in Lotus and that REH had established a superstitious fear of magic in the character based on his barbarian origins and that was ignored for the most part in this book. I would also argue that Beyond the Black River would fall chronologically after Conan and the Emerald lotus so Conan should technically have a very favorable view of magic after his experience in Lotus and should of used it as an ally.

I don't know. One good experience with sorcery- and mind you I haven't read that story for so long I can't remeber most of it- wouldn't counteract all the times he watched Thoth Amon wanna bes be consumed by forces beyond their control. I think afer Lotus his attitude would be- "Okay, I got lucky this time- but never again." A promise which he breaks in Beyond the Black River and nearly promptly gets destroyed by the consquences of doing so thus reinforcing his idea that sorcery is bad.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

Let's not forget that beating Valeria gives that handmaiden after the failed attempt to drug Valeria earlier in the story. Or the nearly identical scene with Thalis in Xuthal of the Dusk. Or in...you get the point...(snip)...That being said Jordan really got into that part a little too much for my taste.

So that said your earlier criticism that "Jordan was a little rough on the ladies" isn't really him putting his own spin on Conan but just copying the style of Howard.

The only Conan that I've actually read is Howard's own (the only Jordan that I've read were some of the WoT books, I gave up halfway through the 4th or thereabouts) so I do have a question. Sometimes certain aspects of the stories such as the treatment of blacks or women sticks in my throat somewhat. Jordan seems to take the somewhat sexist aspects of the stories into his own but what about the racist overtones?

Disclaimer: When I use the words "sexist" and "racist" I mean our modern viewpoint on the subject, I don't know enough about Howard to label him as such and know full well that his time was a different world and as has already been said in many ways he pushed the boundaries for female characters.

Not entirly sure here if you're following the plot, for his time Howard was very, very, non-sexist and non-racist much more so than almost all of his contempories. I don't even think Raven is objecting to the fact that Women are portrayed as being on the recieving end of violence, that is part and parcel of bieng an adventurer. The issue is the overuse of sado-masachistic imagery and sexual violence.

In a rpg you portray a character, there is no good reason not to portray a racist or sexist character it doesn't mean that you are a racist or sexist. The same holds for fiction as long as you don't have sexist or rascist narratives.

The covering text for Wraith: Charnel Houses of Europe by black-Dog said it best with---

Because some stories must be told

Trevor

 

[Oly]

for his time Howard was very, very, non-sexist and non-racist much more so than almost all of his contempories. I don't even think Raven is objecting to the fact that Women are portrayed as being on the recieving end of violence, that is part and parcel of bieng an adventurer. The issue is the overuse of sado-masachistic imagery and sexual violence.

In a rpg you portray a character, there is no good reason not to portray a racist or sexist character it doesn't mean that you are a racist or sexist. The same holds for fiction as long as you don't have sexist or rascist narratives.

The whole playing of a racist/sexist character is another can of worms and, while I seem to agree with you, isn't really something I want to get into.

For his time Howard might have been very forward thinking but from our, well certainly from mine, there are sections which are quite shocking. One memorable piece was "But I am not such a dog as to leave a white woman in the clutches of a black man." I find that kinda strong when seen through my modern eyes.

What I was wondering was while the sexual violence does seem to have been carried on with RJ's books do authors carry on with what we might well consider "racist" attitudes from the hero?

The same disclaimer applies, I'm not trying to label REH as anything negative at all.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

One memorable piece was "But I am not such a dog as to leave a white woman in the clutches of a black man." I find that kinda strong when seen through my modern eyes.

I have no difficulty with the above quote which reads to me as if it is being spoken or thought by a character.