What are the hallmarks of "pulp fantasy"?

[Rhoderic]

I thought I'd start a new thread on this matter instead of making the Broadsword Adventures one veer off course. I'm as excited about this game (and Chainmail Bikini, though I know less about it) as the rest of you, but I'm somewhat unsure about how best to keep the pulpy swords-and-sorcery feel undiluted and not straying too far into "generic" fantasy.

There's obviously the exclusion of elves, dwarves, etc., but I'd rather have the genre defined by the inclusion of some things, as opposed to the exclusion of others. So what, then? The portrayal of barbarity as noble and civilization as decadent? Wizards as predominantly evil? Non-human creatures as almost invariably monstrous and wicked?

I like the aesthetics from the Conan movies and similar fantasy flicks from the 80s, but I also want to reconcile it with the original vision of Howard et. al. which I always imagined as more down-to-earth and less "well-defined", sort of.

[Operator5]

I think one of the key elements is the noble savage. He can be brutal, selfish, and out to further his own ends, but when it comes down to it, when faced with the hard choice, he always does what is right.

The hero usually battles sorcery. There may be certain magical elements that he uses to aid himself, but he always relies more on his own cunning and strength. When a character uses magic only, they are seen as having fallen and joined the forces of darkness.

The battles are not necessarily between good and evil, but right and wrong. It's a subtle distinction, but it allows the hero to do things that may not seem good in order to do what is eventually right.

Being that most were written by men and are very sexist, there is the element of the damsel in distress. Even the strong females in pulp fantasy need to eventually be rescued by the male hero. To make it more equitable for modern audiences, you could simply say that there is someone, male or female, in need of rescuing always. Even if the hero's orignal goal was something else, when presented with a person in trouble, they step in and help, even if it is reluctantly.

I think these points, along with what you have already written, define a lot of what pulp fantasy is like. I'd like to hear what others' thoughts are as well.

[Poliorketes]

This is getting hard for me, as I'm reaching my limits in expressing my thoughts in english, but I'll give it a try.

For me, there are two authors that defined the genre: R.E. Howard and Michael Moorcock. The heroes and villains of Howard and his successors like L.Sprague de Camp or Karl E. Wagner are acting IMHO more realistic. They care for their own interests, not for 'good' or 'evil'. One of my favourite stories in this genre, Cold Light by Wagner, shows the dilemma. There is Kane, a cold heartet killer and destroyer of whole realms, and there are the monster hunters who want his head. But during the story the sides change, at the end the monster hunters run amok amongst the bystanders to get at Kane, who is suddenly if unwanted the saviour of the innocent. Neither Conan, Kull, Cormac or Kane are 'noble barbarians'.They are just adventurers intend on fighting, feasting, plunder and women. They don't care about who's right or wrong, they just can't stand anyone with an equal standing amongst the women

Moorcocks Heroes are quite the opposite. They are driven by fate and most of the time they stumble into their adventures and love affairs. Of course, these are great stories, too!

[Hammers]

Fantasy without dwarves? I feel I have no familiarity of this jangre at all, never having played D&D, never having read Conan and being thoroughly steeped in Tolkien.

I am intrigued.

[KeyanSark]

Neither Conan, Kull, Cormac or Kane are 'noble barbarians'.They are just adventurers intend on fighting, feasting, plunder and women. They don't care about who's right or wrong, they just can't stand anyone with an equal standing amongst the women

I don't agree totally with this... Conan, at least, has its own code of honor, way too far of that of the so-called "civilized men". Of course that Conan kills without a think, but normally he kills "those who deserve it". The whole Conan character is based in the REH idea about the savage being more noble than the corrupt, weak, civilized man.

Sure, Conan takes care of himself, and he is a thief, killer, pirate, corsair... But in his stories a greater evil appears and he is there to save the day with his steel, taking the gorgeous girl all the way...

Conan was a mirror of what REH wanted to be... (and many of us, indeed)  :mrgreen:

[pnweerar]

I think one of the key elements is the noble savage...
I think these points, along with what you have already written, define a lot of what pulp fantasy is like. I'd like to hear what others' thoughts are as well.

Very incisive. That's the Scorpion King, through and through.

[revford]

Conan and The Scorpion King are great examples for this one, both fully embody the ideals described by everyone here.

What about the pantomime-tastic Legendry Journeys of Hercules and Xena Warrior Princess?

Traveling the land in revealing costumes with a trusty sidekick to foil the schemes of the cruel Olympians and save a few villages from monsters using cunning, strength and skill to overcome magic.

[Operator5]

Xena would be a good example. Hercules would probably be more of an epic tale since he seeks only to do good. But if you were to make the Hercules character more like the actual mythological character who had his own flaws, then I think he would work as well.

[Rhoderic]

Let me elaborate on what I mean by "barbarity as noble and civilization as decadent" for a moment. The underdlying mentality in REH's stories, as I see it, is that the only way to "truly" live is to be the king of oneself; that is, to be a barbarian (or some form of renegade, I suppose). Someone who takes what he wants, kills those who'd stand in his way, and absolutely never succumbs to anyone else's will. He's not a materialist, however he is justified in chasing fleeting pleasures like women and good drink (which can sometimes mean stealing wealth to achieve that end). Civilized people are in essence slaves, and are thus to be regarded with contempt. Civilized people are also wicked, in that they wish to see harm done unto others merely for the personal satisfaction of it (whereas a barbarian kills for justified reasons, like staying alive or taking something he finds pleasurable).

I think "nobility" in Conan's mind is not so much about protecting the weak as about abiding by the laws of nature (it follows that being part of a civilization is unnatural and thus ignoble). Still, the goodness in him does let him step in and save others in distress, especially when they are threatened by something wicked and contemptible.

But all this is really just based on what I've read of REH. There's more to pulp fantasy than just REH, and I'm not so well-versed in that, which is partly why I started this thread.

[Howard Whitehouse]

Here's a bit I cribbed, which I think may help:

Sword and sorcery, or S&S, as defined by Lin Carter, a bad writer and great  editor.

… an action tale, derived from the traditions of the pulp magazine adventure story, set in a land or age or world of the author’s invention – a milieu in which magic actually works and the gods are real – and a story, moreover, which pits a stalwart warrior in direct conflict with the forces of supernatural evil.

                              ― Flashing Swords! #1 (1973



THE WORLDS OF SWORD AND SORCERY:


What makes sword-and-sorcery different from other fantasy?
 
•   The Environment: Sword-and-sorcery fiction takes place in lands different from our own, where technology is relatively primitive, allowing the protagonists to overcome their martial obstacles face-to-face. Magic works, but seldom at the behest of the heroes. More often sorcery is just one more obstacle used against them and is usually wielded by villains or monsters. The landscape is exotic; either a different world, or far corners of our own.

•   The Protagonists: The heroes live by their cunning or MUSCLES, frequently both. They are usually strangers or outcasts, rebels imposing their own justice on the wilds or the strange and decadent civilizations which they encounter. They are usually commoners or barbarians; should they hail from the higher ranks of society then they are discredited, disinherited, or come from the lower ranks of nobility (the lowest of the high).

•   Obstacles: Sword-and-sorcery’s protagonists must best fantastic dangers, monstrous horrors, and dark sorcery to earn riches, astonishing treasure, the love of dazzling members of the opposite sex, or the right to live another day.

•   Structure: Sword-and-sorcery is usually crafted with traditional structure, meaning that it isn't stream-of-consciousness, slice-of-life, or any sort of experimental narrative—it has a beginning, middle, and end; a problem and solution; a climax and resolution. Most important of all, sword-and-sorcery moves at a headlong pace and overflows with action and thrilling adventure.

[Prof.Witchheimer]

"the right to live another day"... nice formulation

btw, Toliken's Aragorn is a far-related sort of Conan of Middle-Earth, though of noble descent

[Fortescue-Smythe]

The 'anti-hero', mebbe?
I can't say if that's a consistent theme throughout pulp fantasy (haven't read enough of it), but my impression of both REH and Moorcock are dominated by the fact that protagonists are reluctant or accidental heroes at best, often fighting nail and tooth so as not to be involved in saving the world and general do-goodishness. Both the eternal champions and Conan seem to abide by their own code, which sets their welfare before their fellow men, and do good only by default.

Aragorn and all the other high fantasy heroes purposefully set out on a quest which they know will fundamentally affect the world in general, and do so 'for the cause'.

[Operator5]

Two more heroes that fall into this category are Fafahrd and the Grey Mouser from Fritz Leiber. They are thieves and mercenaries but still end up finding themselves battling evil.

[Howard Whitehouse]

I don't think you can underestimate the importance of Leiber's 'Lankhmar' series in pulp fantasy. These are wryly humorous (sometimes a little annoyingly so), but are an extension of pulp fantasy beyond REH's powerful (but narrow) vision seen in Conan (and Kull, and Cormacm and --)

Pulp fantasy was also influenced by the wider realm of pulp magazines - I've just been reading the Conan tale, "People of the Black Circle", which is very clearly a North-west frontier adventure story (with barely changed names) with a bit of magic, and a huge barbarian. REH changed his stories about, depending on who I thought might buy them, and the 'Oriental Adventures' market seemed to pay more than 'Weird tales;!

[Operator5]

Here's a link to a fairly long analysis of Conan. A lot of tangents into things not part of this discussion, but some good points made that are relevant.

http://www.barbariankeep.com/darkbarb2.html