Conan the Barbarian-L. Sprague de Camp: Is he any good?

A question that I am often asked concerning Conan the Cimmerian is that of the quality of L. Sprague de Camp's expertise in penmanship. Don Herron's article of Conan vs. Conantics brings to view superb points in how de Camp changed Howard's Conan into a thinking man, not an instinctive man of action. L. Sprague de Camp and Lin Carter changed Conan's basic character. But, to be fair, we need to take a look at the role that de Camp & Co. played in keeping Conan alive. I am an avid Howard fan, and here is my attempt to address the question of whether de Camp is "any good" or not.

A few quotes from Don Herron: Conan vs. Conantics.

"One of the major points of difference between Conan and Conantics is that REH's creation reacts to dangerous situations instinctively, whereas the de Camp-Carter imitation reacts logically. "

"In "The Devil in Iron", Howard writes: "'Conan. .. is as crafty as a mountain lion. 'It is more through wild animal instinct than through intelligence,' answered Ghaznavi (Conan the Wanderer, Lancer, 1968. p90). " It's evident that Howard's Conan was by and large a man of action. But from the first tale in their chronological sequence that de Camp and Carter write, they make Conan a thinking man's barbarian."

"One sequence in particular completely violates the character of Conan. The Conantics barbarian is cuffed by the overseer on the slave-galley he is a prisoner on. Like the genuine Conan he explodes into action, but unlike Conan he "… belatedly controlled his rage (Conan, p206)." Then the overseer whips him. "But Conan did not scream or move a muscle. It was as if he felt nothing, so strong was the iron of his will (Conan, p207)." If anyone thinks REH's Conan would sit still under a beating… well, they'd better stick to reading Carter's Thongor of Lemuria. It is incredible to me that de Camp and Carter have no more grasp of Conan's character - or of his type of character - than to pass such a scene off on readers."

L. Sprague de Camp was the fifth winner of the Grand Master award for Science Fiction. This award was given to the likes of Isaac Asimov, Robert A. Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, Clifford D. Simak, Fritz Leiber, Andre Norton, and Jack Williamson. Part of the rules for this prestigious award were that the winner could be chosen only by the members of the SFWA, not the fans. L. Sprague de Camp, chosen by his peers, was awarded the Grand Master award for Science Fiction before Fritz Leiber, Andre Norton, Arthur C. Clarke, and Isaac Asimov. To have a list of professional writers of with that status voting for you, well, it speaks for itself.

Now, L. Sprague de Camp was not Robert E. Howard. I have stated before that L. Sprague de Camp could not keep Howard's Conan alive, no one but Howard could. But L. Sprague de Camp helped keep Conan in print, streamlining and editing and rewriting the stories, and in some cases, expounded on mere fragments of Howard's notes. Again, he kept Conan in print. Just not Howard's Conan. To say that L. Sprague de Camp was a sub-par or below average writer, well, to each his own. But, to be fair, read the Harold Shea adventures, The Incorporated Knight or Land of Unreason. Read Genus Homo written with P. Schyler Miller and then see if your opinion is one that still truly says he is a "below average" author.

L. Sprague de Camp's editing of Howard's stories largely dealt with spelling and punctuation. In the Gnome publications of Conan the Conqueror, de Camp noted several inconsistencies. Howard gave three different names to one of Conan's helmets (the same helmet), naming it a morion, a basinet and a burgonet. Yes, these are types of helmets, but each very distinct from the other. Later de Camp notes that Conan, with sword in hand is knocked unconscious when his horse falls. As the ghouls drag him away, he awakens, the sword is in it's sheath.

L. Sprague de Camp also said that Howard perhaps failed to compare his stories to his own background of Conan, a background that he perhaps carried in written or typed notes or in his head, implying that there may have been chronological inconsistencies. Conan, written in the draft of "The Treasure of Tranicos" (The Black Stranger) set Conan on a course of piracy after his service on the Aquilonian frontier. There was an indication of a ten year gap between the original draft of "Wolves Beyond the Border" and "Beyond the Black River" and the taking of the Aquilonian crown, putting Conan into his fifties, where Howard himself wrote "Conan was about forty when he seized the crown of Aquilonia." Howard's spelling also came into light, for example he would spell Akbatana/Akbitana, Cush/Kush, Hyrcanian/Hyrkanian, Asgalun/Askelon. The capital of Aquilonia in "The Scarlet Citadel" was named "Tamar", and Tarantia in "Conan the Conqueror".

Sprague also brings to light that Howard's work had never been published in book form during his lifetime, therefore missing out on the experience of having editors at major publishing companies edit his work.

"In completing the unfinished Conan stories and in writing pastiches with my colleagues Nyberg and Carter, I have tried to adhere to the style and spirit of Howard. How well I have succeeded in putting myself into Howard's skin is not for me say. Readers may amuse themselves by guessing where, in stories like "Drums of Tombalku" and "Wolves Beyond the Border," Howard left off and I began."

The four stories by Howard that were not about Conan were rewritten as Conan tales for Gnome Press. Sprague states:

"In all cases my task was to change the hero to Conan; to rename the other people and places appropriately; to eliminate anachronisms like gunpowder; and to introduce a supernatural element. Thus the animated idol in "The Bloodstained God," the witch's spells in the "Hawks Over Shem," the vampires in "The Road of the Eagles," and the ghouls in "The Flame Knife" are my doing. The stories, however, remain something like three-quarters or four-fifths Howard."

L. Sprague de Camp then stated that he was impressed by the fact that Howard managed to leave so few openings for editorial improvements, "he was a real pro."

Now, with that said, I do feel that Howard's works are the only works of canonical status. Again, no one can, could or will keep Howard's Conan alive, it's just not possible, only Howard was capable. However, I can appreciate the sincere efforts of post Howard authors in the fight to keep Conan alive. Perhaps de Camp shouldn't have rewritten some of the stories, or elaborated on the fragments left by REH, right or wrong in doing so, it's what happened. Again, it kept Conan in print. I usually refrain from commenting on the pastiche/canonical debate, as I personally believe that Howard's writings of Conan are the only writings that have "canonical" status. All others are simply pastiche, and I am able to enjoy them for what they are.

Without them, I most likely would have never heard of Conan the Cimmerian.