It occurred to me that I should clarify my views on 'pastiches', now that there appear to be new Conan pastiches on the horizon courtesy of Funcom.

The old, long-accepted definition of "pastiche" went something like this:

A literary, artistic, musical, or architectural work that imitates the style of previous work.

That definition, thanks largely to the efforts of one L. Sprague de Camp, is mostly defunct in conversations among SFF fans and has been for a very long time. What that definition refers to is usually called 'an homage' or 'a tribute' or 'a rip-off' nowadays. A de Campian 'pastiche' is a different beast.

What Spraguey called his 'pastiches' of Robert E. Howard's Conan were not in "the style of" the previous REH Conans. The "style" of those tales was often quite different regarding the tone and actual literary 'style' of the originals. What we now understand as 'pastiches' could be more accurately described as this:

A literary work that continues the adventures of another author's character, regardless of whether it is written in the style of the original author or whether it adheres accurately to the lore previously established by the original author.

This sort of thing predates de Camp, of course. Jules Verne wrote a sequel to Poe's The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym. H. Bedford-Jones wrote further tales of the Three Musketeers for the pulps. With Jack Vance's permission, Michael Shea wrote a sequel to The Eyes of the Overworld called The Quest for Simbilis.

I don't have a problem, categorically, with such 'pastiches'. However, I definitely think there are certain parameters that must be met before I designate such a pastiche as 'good', let alone 'great' or worthy of the originals. I should also state that I never, ever consider such derivative works canonical in any way, shape or form when it comes to discussing the original authors' characters and lore.

When an author writes such a pastiche, there are three core parameters that must be met. Otherwise, the pasticheur openly betrays the fact that he's just doing the pastiche for cash...or for even less laudable reasons. Also, let me note that it should be an ironclad ‘given’ that a story be of high-quality, with inherent worth, whether an established character--like Conan--is the protagonist or not. No author with any integrity should ever allow a story to be published that just isn't worth reading. In my opinion, publishing a crap story using another author's character compounds the literary crime.

Nailing the main character: If the pasticheur has the main character--Conan, Cugel the Clever, whoever--act in a way that the original author clearly demonstrated that such character would not act, then the story fails, period. Either the pasticheur has not done his homework, is incompetent or he has another agenda in play. Whatever it is, Epic Fail.

Nailing the original author's literary style/'voice': I see some bitching on this point, but it is absolutely valid, nonetheless. If the story does not feel, fairly closely, like how the original stories were written, then what was the point? The problem I see here is that many readers are tone-deaf and pig-ignorant when it comes to style. To them, as long as there are swords and tits in the story, that story has served its purpose. I've been reading REH since I was eight years old. I know the difference. Some author throwing in wildly un-Howardian prose immediately yanks me out of the story. Epic Fail. 

If some author wants to do an 'experiment' where a Conan story is written in the style of, say, James Joyce, he should have some integrity and do a story where the protagonist is named 'Domaam' and go nuts. Cromspeed to ya, dude.

Getting the lore and setting right: This isn't fanboy wankery. When it comes to SFF settings, the world is a major character, beyond any doubt. A well-developed setting drives stories. Ancient battles, animosities and prejudices make things happen—just as they do in our world and time. Ignoring or changing such things will immediately derail a story to someone who already knows about them. The same goes for basic geopolitical facts within that setting. In fact, just about any story about a literary character would obviously grow out of the previously-established setting. Getting those details wrong would wildly throw off whatever narrative is cooked up by the pasticheur.

Much of the silliness we find in lore violations seems to come down to the attitude of, "Well, it's all fantasy, isn't it? What does it matter?" Right off the bat, such an attitude reveals a contempt for the original creator that should forevermore bar said pasticheur from ever writing another word in the original author's universe. 'Nuff said. They aren't fit to shine the shoes of the author they're exploiting.

Just imagine if you were watching a movie set in New York City and saw the Eiffel Tower standing majestically in the background. The same goes for seeing the Empire State Building in a 'Fast and Furious' movie set in L.A. or having all the cowboys attired as samurai in a Western. And yet...we're supposed to put up with the exact same thing within fantasy pastiches. More epic fails.

Know the lore or go home. The resources are out there.

So, what do I consider Grade-A pastiches? Pastiches that fulfill the three parameters I delineated above? There are a few.

Possibly the greatest SFF pasticheur working today is Christopher Paul Carey. He collaborated with Philip Jose Farmer on The Song of Kwasin, which was published after PJF's death. Carey went on to author "Exiles of Kho", Hadon, King of Opar, and Blood of Ancient Opar, all of which take place in Farmer's Khokarsa/Opar setting, itself derived from Edgar Rice Burroughs.

Carey nails the character of Hadon of Opar. Farmer wrote the first two Opar novels with an ERBian slant, prose-wise, and CPC carries that on. Honestly, all of the novels could be read from Hadon of Ancient Opar through Blood of Ancient Opar and it would be hard to pin down just where the transition occurred. Finally, Carey has the Khokarsan lore down cold. Not one time could I ever detect where he got something wrong. In fact, CPC seamlessly expanded on PJF's lore.

As much as I'm a fan of Farmer's Khokarsan novels, it pales beside my love of Edgar Rice Burroughs' 'Moon Trilogy'. Carey discovered a 'hole'--or narrative opportunity--within the text of The Moon Maid. Running with that, CPC wrote Swords Against the Moon Men. The novel is a case study in how to do an SFF pastiche.

The protagonist, Julian 7th, is only implied in the original ERB text. Carey makes him a true ERBian hero. CPC then sends him to Va-nah--the Burroughsian interior of the Moon. Not only did Carey nail that setting as far as the basic lore is concerned, he also managed to evoke the original sense of wonder and grandeur found in The Moon Maid. On top of that, his ear for Burroughs' prose voice is damned near impeccable. 

I'm not the only one to be thoroughly impressed by Swords Against the Moon Men. The novel has over fifty ratings at Amazon and the average is 4.5 stars. Carey did it right. 

Another pasticheur who has truly nailed it is William Patrick Maynard. His two novels of Sax Rohmer's Fu Manchu--The Terror of Fu Manchu and The Destiny of Fu Manchu--are textbook examples of how to do a modern pastiche. Maynard knows the Manchu/Rohmer lore so well that he was able to spot two 'blank spots' in the crowded Fu Manchu chronology. WPM also has Rohmer's style down cold. 

The result is two novels I personally think can stand alongside the originals. Maynard nails it right down the line. He also brings in a few other characters from Rohmer's extended universe as cool easter eggs. Both novels have the same Rohmerian breakneck pace and inventive dangers right along with a more deft hand regarding characterization. It could be blasphemy to Rohmer purists, but I might even recommend Fu Manchu newbies start with these two novels. If said newbies like them, go on to the Rohmer canon. 

There are no Howardian pastiches I consider 'first-rate' or 'great'. There are several good ones out there, but they deserve their own post.

Feel free to comment below.