Huh. Sounds pleasant.
I was trying to start a discussion about Lovecraft's ideas vs. Howard's ideas.
Howard argued that barbarians were the natural way of mankind. That society was artificial, and that men and women were only truly themselves when they were in a barbaric state.
His stories (Conan) reflect this; Conan is honorable and proud, and only kills non-combatants when they betray him, which they do pretty much constantly. So Howard was arguing that with society comes depravity. This is also reflected in the writings of political philosopher John Locke, who argued that man is naturally imbued with the law of Nature, and societies are only temporary constructions that are made for common defense and interests.
Lovecraft argued that man naturally became civilized, and once they became civilized, they were unwilling or unable to deal with the barbaric world.
His stories reflect this, as mankind goes mad and is devoured (over and over) by nameless horrible (barbaric) evils. The historical citation in support of Lovecraft is the Gauls vs. The Romans, who were unable to deal with them, and eventually had to just conquer them, but in doing so, weakened the Roman empire.
That's what I was trying to discuss.
-kv
