The past few days have been a hell of a ride, folks.

There are two incidents in recent memory which I’d like to compare to the Van Ostrand debacle: Artie Fenner’s now-legendary introduction to … And Their Memory Was A Bitter Tree, and John Clute’s infamous “We Cannot Shake Him Loose” review of Gollancz’ The Conan Chronicles. Both controversies are marked by inaccuracies & opinion dressed as fact, and at odds with the general state of modern Howard scholarship. Fenner remains indignant and defensive of his stance, while Clute appears to have recanted, and his work on Heroes in the Wind could well redeem him in spades.

I was first alerted to Maggie Van Ostrand’s piece and the accompanying Texas Escapes article by Deuce Richardson, who himself was informed by Damon Sasser. I could barely make it through the piece: so many sensationalist, crazy things it didn’t seem real. It was like a Mad Magazine version of Dark Valley Destiny. Nonetheless, this could not stand. I steeled myself, prepared for a drawn-out Fenner-esque exchange with Ms. Van Ostrand over the merits of Dark Valley Destiny, Blood & Thunder and the current state of Howard scholarship, the chants of Mark Finn’s guerrilla mantra ringing in my ears. Crom almighty, I was ready to go to war. I’m a peaceful man, and very rarely get worked into a state of anger, but by Valka, sir, this article tempted me.

I posted my own comments below the article, and also started a thread over at the official Conan forums. It’s up to us Howard fans to defend him when the Bad Old Days rear their monstrous visages, and I’d be damned if I didn’t play a part. Damon Sasser already fired the first warning shots, which were not heeded by Van Ostrand: little did she know that Sasser was not some rogue loon on the fringes of Howard scholarship, but a veteran huskarl of Robert E. Howard’s shield wall. Even before I could rattle my proverbial sword, luminaries of Howardom Scott Oden, David Gentzel, and Dennis McHaney leaped berserker-like into the fray, with the characteristic courtesy that marks true barbarians.

So the first broadside was fired from the U.S.S. Robert E. Howard. What followed, I did not expect.

To my surprise, and delight, Ms. Van Ostrand & Fandomania editor Jason Dorough reacted swiftly and politely. The original, offending article was prefaced with an editor’s note from Mr Dorough, and the biography on Texas Escapes taken down. All within two days! And here, I was fearing for a second round of the Fenner Flap.

This article by Maggie Van Ostrand has become quite controversial, as evidenced by the long and passionate collection of comments below. After receiving numerous e-mails from Robert E. Howard supporters and academics, I have spoken with Maggie and also did some research of my own. I am no REH scholar, and I don’t think Maggie would profess to be either. I know her to be a reputable, friendly, and talented writer who is a valued member of the Fandomania family. She expressed to me her admiration of REH even during and after writing this article. Her admiration of his work is what led her to read about him and research this piece. After the post’s publication, it came to her and my attention that the resources she used are controversial in their own rights, and many readers have attacked her for going to the sources she used. As Maggie’s editor, I can assure you that it was neither Maggie’s nor my intention to lambast REH. She took her sources to be credible reflections of the man’s life, and I trusted her sources based on my confidence in Maggie. Factual errors and misrepresentations never were intended in this article, and I try to make sure that Fandomania as a whole keeps a high standard of credibility and accuracy. If I have failed in this, I most definitely apologize for my negligence.

It’s admirable of Mr Dorough & Ms Van Ostrond herself to react in such a manner, and what I feared to be a new S. T. Joshi turned out to be a possible new John Clute. I don’t know how much of this was genuine, or simply covering their tracks, but the fact remains that they’ve apologized for this vicious, disgusting article, and admitted they were in the wrong.

I’m going to take a moment to express my profound & deep appreciation for the Howard scholars and fans who swarmed over the Walls of Fandomanium. Like Howard’s eternal barbarians, we Howard fans often argue and fight over matters of Howard’s life and fiction, with tribes and divisions as disparate as any Cimmerian clan. Yet when the specter of a mutual foe appears on the horizon, we set aside our differences to assault the enemy as one. Sure enough, I saw comments from dozens of Howardom’s finest, as well as a few I don’t know but would love to become acquainted with, all in unanimous support in their passion for Howard. And Gary, who heroically continues to bear the standard of the De Campistas, even unto the overwhelming odds of the Howard shield wall: even he joined the side of those protesting Howard’s character defilement despite Dark Valley Destiny’s part in the proceedings! Yes, he dug his heels into the ground in defense of De Camp and his tome, and yes, he still managed to be the One Voice of Dissent making life for the rest of us tremendously difficult, but when it came to the article itself, he sided with us. I felt a great pride at seeing all the Howard scholars & fans (and Gary) proclaim their support. It was like watching Spartacus’ slave army, refusing to see their hero crucified and condemned, defying the Romans as they shouted “I’m Spartacus!” I’ve never been more proud to be a fan of Robert E. Howard. “I’m maladjusted to the point of psychosis!”

It isn’t just the enthusiasm, but the politeness of the posts that swell my heart with pride. It would’ve been so easy to fling meaningless insults and ad hominems towards Ms Van Ostrond, and harass her other works for the sins of one article, however egregious it may be. I’m reminded of one author who wrote a scathing editorial on a computer game–which was similarly ill-informed and based on incorrect sources–and paid dearly for it, as the Amazon.com pages for her books were bombarded with hundreds of 1-star “reviews” from disgruntled gamers. The logic went, “since she has judged a game she clearly hasn’t played, I can condemn her books that I haven’t read either.” Poetic justice? Perhaps, but it just makes the gamers look like immature, anarchic pranksters, with the game’s reputation as a philosophical and intellectual science fiction adventure smeared with the taint of rabid fanoys. I’m impressed that not only have we courteous barbarians been measured in our approach, but that it has borne fruit so swiftly and relatively amicably, with no skulls split in the process, though perhaps a few bruised egos.

Miguel notes that us Howard fans still have a long way to go, and must remain ever proactive, citing Wikipedia’s egregious elements and the fact that Gary Romeo’s is the most useful critical review of Dark Valley Destiny on Amazon.com–what a crazy state of affairs! One website I frequent, a database much like Wikipedia (though “a buttload less formal” in its own words), was full of fallacies, inaccuracies and outright inventions on Howard’s life and fiction before I and others gutted it. There are still some problems, but at least they’ve stopped calling Howard a Nazi sympathizer. As I said in the wake of Conan the Rehash, for the sake of new and future Howard fans, we much be ever vigilant against those who perpetuate flawed information and those who would seek to demean and dismiss Howard.

Yet astonishingly, Ms Van Ostrand is not truly the enemy here. In fact, she professes to be a Robert E. Howard fan in the comments section:

I love to find out what writers are like, and REH was certainly the most weird. Researching him was like being on a merry-go-round, spinning out with strange and fascinating information.

Now that I’ve finished, my head’s still whirling.

It was pretty damn hard to tell from her article, with uncomplimentary (to say the least) phrases such as “Robert’s tortured mind,” “the unsettled, repressed, and chaotic mind that burst forth in the character of Conan” and”He had no chance to develop a life of his own.” It’s filled with bizarre assertions like “Neither Novalyne nor Bob’s literary friends admired his writing and considered it trash,” “During Robert’s adolescence, his father joined in to play variations of his son’s distorted reality,” and the stunning “Isaac later told people he thought his son was acting strangely and was planning to kill him.” I guess her career as a political satirist resulted in some residual savagery, even for an author she’s ostensibly a fan of. Even so, the outright vitriol and bitchiness of the article is breathtaking. If it was meant to be comedy, even if everything she stated was absolutely true, it was bad taste to lampoon a family struggling with mental health issues, especially with the tragic circumstances of Robert and Hester Howard’s death, and the outright demonisation of the entire Howard clan as lunatics. If Van Ostrand truly is a Robert E. Howard fan, then this shows the insidious power of Dark Valley Destiny to corrupt even admirers of Howard into accepting the outrageous myths and misconceptions of the past.

It seems to me that Ms Von Ostrond is of a certain generation for whom Dark Valley Destiny is the be-all, end-all of Howard biographic exploration. Without being uncouth, I’d say she’s of a similar generation to famous Tolkien artist John Howe, who also appears to be a Conan and Howard fan who’s been taken in by the false truths of Dark Valley Destiny. Here’s what Howe had to say on Dark Valley Destiny, and Mark Finn’s Blood & Thunder:

Solid biography, with the essetntials of howard’s life and writing. Do NOT buy “Blood and Thunder” by Mark Finn, also about Howard – pretentious, inaccurate and otherwise painful to read, it’s not worth it unless you are collecting absolutely everything about the creator of Conan.

I suppose Blood & Thunder would be painful to read when one has accepted De Camp’s version of events for decades, only to be shown that they were wrong. Indeed, considering how Howard scholarship is still something of a niche, I can imagine many ’70s Conan and Howard fans reacting to Finn’s biography the way other Howard scholars react to Two-Gun Bob: A Centennial Study of Robert E. Howard, oblivious to the fact that Howard scholarship has moved on in the 25 years since De Camp’s tome. It’s an uncomfortable feeling, for something you’d always held as fact to be proven otherwise, but a mature person should be able to swallow their pride and accept that they were misinformed. All the more reason that Dark Valley Destiny‘s supporters must accept that shoddy research, bad information and wild speculation must be surgically removed from any discussion of Robert E. Howard’s life, before they start to fester and grow into cankerous tumors of inaccuracy and distortion.

Yet Maggie, by responding to criticism and admitting her mistakes, has shown that she’s not beyond redemption. Howard fans may love a good enemy, but I prefer a new friend. Maggie’s rehabilitation from years of indoctrination at the Church of De Camp begins now. I hope this incident does not sour her on Howard fandom, and that she takes this opportunity to explore the real Robert E. Howard, who–while not “maladjusted to the point of psychosis”–is still a fascinating and enthralling person worthy of the tales he spun. Reading her other articles at Fandomania and elsewhere, she has a good head on her shoulders: hence my double entendre title.

Bring me the head of Maggie Van Ostrand, that we Howard scholars may empty it of half-truths, supposition and lies, and fill it anew with enlightenment, inspiration and the truth of Robert E. Howard’s life and work. She has a lot of work to do to repair the damage her piece has done, not least to Howard fandom’s goodwill towards her. If she’s willing to rectify that, I for one will welcome her into the fold, and forgive her past sins. Who knows, perhaps she’ll be a true member of the shield wall herself someday. She has a hell of a job ahead of her, though. “Was Conan the Barbarian Really a Fictional Character” is without a doubt the most poisonous, salacious, monstrous pseudo-biographies of Howard I’ve read. “Superman on a Psychotic Bender,” The Miscast Barbarian, Dark Valley Destiny, ...And Their Memory Was A Bitter Tree, “We Cannot Shake Him Loose,” The Supreme Moment, Two Gun Bob: A Centennial Study of Robert E. Howard–In a single 2,700 word article, Maggie Van Ostrand’s monsterpiece has them all beat. It’s just fortunate that Howard has fans he can be proud of, which united to crush this horror before it could do any more damage.