Status Updates From Flame and Crimson: A Histor...

Focused on the 50s and 60s starting with the Arkham House and Gnome Press editions. Murphy explains the importance of Fritz Leiber and Michael Moorcock’s contributions to the genre. The chapter ends with a description and discussion of the Lancer Conan Saga.

Chapter 4, on WEIRD TALES, is excellent, both in examining the pulp periodical and a series of authors found within it: Howard, Lovecraft, Smith, Moore, Kuttner. It closes with an interesting discussion on heroic vs. 'anti-'heroic Sword n Sorcery.

The chapter is focused primarily on Clark Ashton Smith, C. L. Moore, and Henry Kuttner, although Clifford Ball is mentioned briefly. The sidebar at the end of the chapter on heroic versus anti-heroic sword-and-sorcery was interesting. The quibble over genre definitions is a familiar battlefield. The terms can be both helpful and confusing.

This chapter focuses on REH’s interest in adventure and historical fiction as well as his letters with H.P. Lovecraft debating barbarism versus civilization. I was hoping for more discussion of Weird Tales and how the market of Weird Tales influenced REH’s writing to a greater extent. There is an interesting sidebar on Jack London’s influence on REH.

Ch. 2. Origins

Good chapter on inspirations/influences on Sword & Sorcery and proto-S&S writers. I still think not enough importance is given to the context in which S&S originated, which was Weird Tales. There is a sidebar on what is the first S&S story: “Sacnoth” vs. “Shadow”. I haven’t read “Sacnoth” but Dunsany lacks the horror influence that REH weaved into his S&S stories.

Ch 1. What is sword-and-sorcery?

Definitions. I think all of the elements Murphy highlights are good ones (I emphasize horror, of course). I liked the sidebar at the end asking whether labels are useful. I think the S&S label is useful in contrasting or distinguishing S&S from epic fantasy. But I think it becomes a pointless exercise when arguing over whether certain stories fit the bill.