(urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

[Craig Brewer]

Lee wrote:
>Great observation and recognition Antonio. Perhaps I am not alone in having assumed that LotR was

>more of a prototype or archetype of S & S while Conan is more of a cheap comic book derivative.
>A cultural bias? Conan (like Tarzan) is a European character created by an American, while LotR seems
>somehow more authentic and refined- high brow British characters created by an Englishman.

To me, the generic markers of "s&s" vs. "Tolkienesque" usually break down like this:

s&s - adventure tales where action and "marvels" are what drives the story. (The magazine _The Black Gate_ is trying to revive this right now.)
Tolkienesque - fantasy that tries to inspire a sense of scope and "history" and is infused with moralisms ("good vs. evil," maturation and "coming of age" stories, religious/mythic allegory, etc.)

Some people certainly try to imply markers of quality in the definitions, but I've heard both terms used as praise and derision. I don't think it's integral to the terms.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111216/5d85e55e/attachment-0004.htm>