It should have been Mickey Rourke.
[quote]O.G. Readmore wrote:
Let’s be clear that Robert E. Howard was what we would today call a racist. Race was important to R.E. Howard and was an important part of his stories. He was as fixated on it as he was on strength and the downfall of civilizations. (I was a little concerned that people might be offended by the following quotes, but there is a lot of complaint on board about how men in America are easily offended sissies, so I figure tough T-Man can take it.)
In regard to the Cimmerians, and the issue of Conan’s race, this quote form his Hyborian Age essay makes it clear: "This drift {of Cimmerians and Aesir/Vanir} resulted from a growing population which thronged the steppes West of the inland sea, now known as the Caspian and much reduced in size – to such an extent that migration became an economic necessity. Known now as Aryans, these tribes moved into the areas now occupied by India, Asia Minor and much of Europe.
Some variations of these primitive sons of Aryas are still recognized today; others have been long forgotten since. The Nemedians of Irish legendry were the Nemedian Aesir, while the later sea-roving Danes were the descendants of the Vanir. The blond Achaians, Gauls and Britons were decended from the pure-blooded Aesir. The Gaels, ancestors of Irish and Highland Scotch came of pure-blooded Cimmerian clans. "
That’s right. The Irish and Scottish are descendants of pure Cimmerians. More interestingly, The “sons of Aryas” mentioned in the beginning of the Arnold Conan movie were Aryans. In his story Wings In The Night, Howard also wrote: “The ancient empires fall, the dark-skinned peoples fade and even the demons of antiquity gasp their last, but over all stands the Aryan barbarian, white-skinned, cold-eyed, dominant, the supreme fighting man of the earth.”
Howard himself was basically a white supremacist. One of his characters said, “Born and raised in Arizona of good Virginia fighting stock, I held niggers n contempt and was a strong believer in Nordic and especially Celtic superiority.” Though this was a character, and not Howard speaking, the speaker is a proxy for the author’s own views. In reference to a trial in Honolulu where native Hawaiians were accused of rape, Howard wrote, “I know what would have happened to them in Texas. I don’t know whether an Oriental smells any different than a nigger when he’s roasting, but I’m willing to bet the aroma of scorching hide would have the same chastening effect on his surviving tribesman.”
Much of the horror in his stories was based on his disgust with mixed races. In “Shadows in Zamboula” Howard has Conan persuaded by the argument, “in this accursed city …where white, brown, and black folk mingle together to produce hybrids of all unholy hues and breeds … who can tell who is a man, and who is a demon in disguise?” This is based on his experience in New Orleans where he encountered a man of Chinese and African heritage. Howard, in a letter, describes the man as an “it”.
Conan the Cimmerian risks his life and standing among a black tribe in "Vale of the Lost Women"to rescue a white woman “simply because of [her] race.” If you go over the descriptions of Black characters in his stories, they are not very flattering. “His features reflected titanic vitality no less than his huge body. But he was all Negro- flaring nostrils, thick lips, ebony skin” The But implies the nostrils, lips, and skin somehow contradict titanic vitality.
Conan was not just white, he was white be design and purpose. Howard had a political axe to grind with his stories: he wanted to give expression to his racist beliefs. Race is not peripheral to the Conan stories, it is central to them.
Any discussion of keeping Conan true to his origins must take this into account. His race is as much a part of the character as his muscles.
(Note: I don’t endorse Howard’s views. Also, even if the actor playing Conan were white and ripped as hell, the movie would still suck because they would do other things contrary to Howard’s vision such as give him a tragic origin story, a true-love, or any motive other than whim, lust, and greed.)
[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. Some of this was news to me and I found it insightful.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
BYAH[/quote]
This would be acceptable.
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]O.G. Readmore wrote:
Let’s be clear that Robert E. Howard was what we would today call a racist…
[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. Some of this was news to me and I found it insightful.
[/quote]
LOL. Yes, it seems like they did pick the right person for the role then.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
I thought Conan was “Cimmerian”, which is supposed to be a mix of Teutonic/Celtic-ish. When did Conan get dreads and go Caribbean/Mediterranean?[/quote]
I’m pretty sure that’s “Sumerian,” as in Sumerians living in the region between the Tigres and Euphrates rivers called Mesopotamia. This region is in modern day Iraq.
And unless Celts looked dark, I Conan would look more “Mediterranean/Caribbean” than Celtish.
Not trying to be a smart ass, just a correction.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]O.G. Readmore wrote:
Let’s be clear that Robert E. Howard was what we would today call a racist…
[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. Some of this was news to me and I found it insightful.
[/quote]
LOL. Yes, it seems like they did pick the right person for the role then.[/quote]
x,
What are you implying? I assumed that when you replied to the thread, you knew that the actor who they picked was Jason Momoa. I mentioned his name several times. I then posted a picture of him that showed his potential for Conan, far better than the one picked on the first page. You did not even recognize him.
So, I see that you picked apart what was said and only quoted the part that mentioned REH was racist.
What is going on in your head now?
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]O.G. Readmore wrote:
Let’s be clear that Robert E. Howard was what we would today call a racist…
[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. Some of this was news to me and I found it insightful.
[/quote]
LOL. Yes, it seems like they did pick the right person for the role then.[/quote]
x,
What are you implying? I assumed that when you replied to the thread, you knew that the actor who they picked was Jason Momoa. I mentioned his name several times. I then posted a picture of him that showed his potential for Conan, far better than the one picked on the first page. You did not even recognize him.
So, I see that you picked apart what was said and only quoted the part that mentioned REH was racist.
What is going on in your head now?
[/quote]
What? Do you know what irony is? If so, then you should need no further explanation. If not, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]deadlift655 wrote:
[quote]O.G. Readmore wrote:
Let’s be clear that Robert E. Howard was what we would today call a racist…
[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. Some of this was news to me and I found it insightful.
[/quote]
LOL. Yes, it seems like they did pick the right person for the role then.[/quote]
x,
What are you implying? I assumed that when you replied to the thread, you knew that the actor who they picked was Jason Momoa. I mentioned his name several times. I then posted a picture of him that showed his potential for Conan, far better than the one picked on the first page. You did not even recognize him.
So, I see that you picked apart what was said and only quoted the part that mentioned REH was racist.
What is going on in your head now?
[/quote]
What? Do you know what irony is? If so, then you should need no further explanation. If not, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.[/quote]
OHHH, I see what you did there. How clever of you.
Care to explain why you only quoted the part about REH being racist. If you can’t explain that, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
I mean the original argument was very simple. I’ll try to break it down even further for you. BASED ON ALL AVAILABLE WRITTEN MATERIAL, from REH, CONAN would be best played by a Caucasian actor, and that Conan basically looks white.
That is it. Why you choose to skip through all that information given by O.G. Readmore, which was accurate, is beyond me. I was gracious enough to thank the poster for useful info.
You quoted the one part about racism.
[quote]Bungalow wrote:
It should have been Mickey Rourke.[/quote]
FUCK.
It should always be Mickey Rourke. I’m starting a separate thread entitled “big actors who can act” right now.
I thought Conans Cimeria (or whatever) was fictional?
[quote]Gabe299 wrote:
I thought Conans Cimeria (or whatever) was fictional? [/quote]
It is. They are now arguing that since the author was racist, that this means no one but someone white should play the character. I am assuming that is the argument because I am not sure what other reason there is to debate the issue. Personally, if the fucker was racist, I find it funny as hell that someone un-white ends up playing the part.
If the guy they chose can add a good 20-30lbs, I am sure the cameras will do the rest.
I am only concerned if they choose to not have him add much more muscle mass.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Gabe299 wrote:
I thought Conans Cimeria (or whatever) was fictional? [/quote]
It is. They are now arguing that since the author was racist, that this means no one but someone white should play the character. I am assuming that is the argument because I am not sure what other reason there is to debate the issue. Personally, if the fucker was racist, I find it funny as hell that someone un-white ends up playing the part.
If the guy they chose can add a good 20-30lbs, I am sure the cameras will do the rest.
I am only concerned if they choose to not have him add much more muscle mass.[/quote]
Do we have a black Conan? Or are we stuck with the Scorpion King?
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Gabe299 wrote:
I thought Conans Cimeria (or whatever) was fictional? [/quote]
It is. They are now arguing that since the author was racist, that this means no one but someone white should play the character. I am assuming that is the argument because I am not sure what other reason there is to debate the issue. Personally, if the fucker was racist, I find it funny as hell that someone un-white ends up playing the part.
If the guy they chose can add a good 20-30lbs, I am sure the cameras will do the rest.
I am only concerned if they choose to not have him add much more muscle mass.[/quote]
Do we have a black Conan? Or are we stuck with the Scorpion King?
[/quote]
I think we’re stuck. From what I can tell, black barbarians didn’t exist back then…just strange black women with flat tops.
In fact, apparently no black people did anything worth mentioning until the Underground Rail Road and peanut butter.
^ were stuck with scorpion king.
Oh and “X” big ups for not reposting a half page of I don’t give a fuck.
It’s funny how people harp on the racist nature of the Author as if it would make the movie better.
If the Actor an director can pull it off then Good for them. And a plus for us who enjoy action movies.
[quote]Bungalow wrote:
It should have been Mickey Rourke.[/quote]
I endorse this idea.
As for the film, from what I know so far I think I’ll be boycotting it. Hollywood has raped my soul enough already.
Somehow, in this day and age, I’m not sure a good Conan movie is even possible.
[quote]Cimmerian wrote:
[quote]Bungalow wrote:
It should have been Mickey Rourke.[/quote]
I endorse this idea.
As for the film, from what I know so far I think I’ll be boycotting it. Hollywood has raped my soul enough already.
Somehow, in this day and age, I’m not sure a good Conan movie is even possible.
[/quote]
I agree. If Conan was made today, this is what they would do wrong:
-Dialogue will change so that the current youth will understand it better(Watch Clash of the Titans and listen to Sam Worthington speak)
-A female protagonist will put Conan in his place in some shape or form, but Conan won’t be allowed to react in Conan fashion: Which is to bang her or hit her
-The savagery and chaos of battle will be replaced by CGI and John Woo maneuvers
[quote]four60 wrote:
I’m going for more of a type than a race. To me How he was (acted reacted) was always what made Conan worth reading
CONAN[/quote]
Considering the author’s apparent racism and description of Conan, I find it odd that several artists would chose to draw Conan’s face and hairline this way…
He looks like an ape there (Planet of the apes movie anyone? Seriously, maybe the POA crew could lend the new Conan crew one of their costumes…)…
Wouldn’t a more “nordic”/viking look fit better? Or maybe the pictures four60 posted were really meant as a bit of a parody of the whole Conan = Aryan superman -theme?
On another note, the physical descriptions/stats are nothing like the pictures (height, weight etc, although the pic four60 posted in the post I quoted at least doesn’t make Conan look like he’s 5’10 270)… Back when those stories were written, people had fuck-all clue about what “big” looks like… I mean, 6’5 250? At that height, 250 is going to make you look smaller than those Jersey-shore guys when ripped, and virtually un-trained when not lean… :
http://z.about.com/d/prowrestling/1/0/S/N/-/-/edge.jpg
There’s your Aryan Conan for you (dyed his hair to lower his intelligence score to barbarian levels, of course)
Doesn’t look like much, does he? (actual fighting ability: I have no idea… Just talking about his physique)
Arnold, by comparison, is about 6’ (though he has claimed to be way taller than that, he really isn’t/wasn’t… 6’1 tops, if even) and top-heavy.
Same thing with the descriptions of his movement etc… Graceful like a panther (or whatever it was) ?
You get the exact same description for lots of modern fantasy chars (Drizzt Do’Urden being one if memory serves right, but pretty much every other figther, assassin, ranger or thief in just about every goddamn fantasy universe). It’s just what fantasy writers (who likely don’t have a whole lot of experience with the 2 things in question here: movement and muscles) like to write about their fighting characters… Cliche crap.
So to the poster who complained about Arnold not moving gracefully like some big cat (how exactly is anyone going to do that without 2 additional legs, anyway?)…
Gee dude, just about every actor is going to look awkward as hell swinging some big-ass sword in mock-fights on the screen… It’s not like you’re holding a mock-light-saber either.
Some well-trained martial artists may pull that off, or a lot of camera tricks and CG (but even then, look at the fights in Spartacus: Blood and Sand… And those guys don’t even use big swords… They usually look awkward still, despite all the editing and CG) but those usually don’t look very barbarian-like, and eastern sword fighting technique (cool as it may look) is about as out of place in a movie about a barbarian (with a bastard sword or something bigger and heavier, no less) as Brad Pitt.
Hell, can anyone imagine a big actor moving “gracefully like a cat”? What does that look like?
It looks flamboyantly gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course).
So maybe cast King Kamali… He’s got the movement down pat…
The race issue in any work of literature is an ugly one; what is important is that people realise that the meaning of the text isn’t necessarily what the author intended. As soon as that work is published, it is up to the readership to create cultural meaning out of it.
As an example, Robert E. Howard may have intended Conan to be some sort of Aryan ubermensch, but it is obvious from the majority of comments here that that isn’t what Conan embodies to most people - the opposite in fact. Once Conan was created, the basis for his appeal was no longer in Robert E. Howard’s hands.
Unfortunately that means the character is also subject to Twilight/reboot-generation “reimaginings”, even if they wholly miss the point.
[quote]RTJenforcer wrote:
The race issue in any work of literature is an ugly one; what is important is that people realise that the meaning of the text isn’t necessarily what the author intended. As soon as that work is published, it is up to the readership to create cultural meaning out of it.
As an example, Robert E. Howard may have intended Conan to be some sort of Aryan ubermensch, but it is obvious from the majority of comments here that that isn’t what Conan embodies to most people - the opposite in fact. Once Conan was created, the basis for his appeal was no longer in Robert E. Howard’s hands.
Unfortunately that means the character is also subject to Twilight/reboot-generation “reimaginings”, even if they wholly miss the point.[/quote]
It’s funny how a “CONAN” THREAD turned into this. Or maybe it’s not so uncommon.
Either way. When you put your dollars down does it matter its not a History tale trust me its not. When I’m reading/watching something like Conan I’m looking for Action and Adventure Thrills and chills.
I get the feeling that most of this is some young guys trying to goat PX into an internet battle. Because if this is really what you care about during your free time its sad.
And from what I remember as a kid reading the Conan books and trades was that he was a Barbaric-sexist-thief-mercenary-demon slayer all for self gain the guy was not trying to up lift a people ANY people. So as long as 3 of the top are portrayed in the character the movie may not be half bad.