(urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

[Daniel Petersen]

Good points again, Craig.  But I wonder if Tolkien is to some degree High
Brow Sword & Sorcery, and Conan and the like are Low Brow Heroic Fantasy?
 Wolfe, would again perhaps fall between these.

-DOJP

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Craig Brewer <cnbrewer at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111216/6e3f8c5a/attachment-0004.htm>