Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Selected Mike Moorcock quotes concerning his books

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • thingfish
    replied
    Nice one Lemec.
    I especially enjoyed the quotes of mikes you found on the Pyat novels,in fact i am getting ready to start on "Byzantium" tonight.
    I am always amazed at the ease in which he finds the right words to explain his opinions.I wish i could do that.
    All the best!!

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Originally posted by thingfish View Post
    Thanks Lemec,excellent quotes well put together.I have gained a lot of insight from them and they make me want to go back and read certain books again.Well done.
    Hi thingfish,

    You are most welcome.

    (I did not actually add anything new,though,just deleted some and moved that one post to the back,I was trying to narrow them down to ones that are the most helpful.)

    I am very happy that you found them useful and glad the posts have encouraged you to explore the books again!

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • thingfish
    replied
    Thanks Lemec,excellent quotes well put together.I have gained a lot of insight from them and they make me want to go back and read certain books again.Well done.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    (What drives Mike in his creative process?)


    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    My professional background involved trying to get as much over in as few words as possible, so that's why I wrote as laconically as possible. I've never had much taste for jigsaws, crosswords and so on, and that also goes for complicated detective stories. However, many do and people who like to enter and maybe help create existing worlds are probably more numerous than those who don't... My idea is to help the imaginative reader do at least some of the work themselves. It seems to me that that's how I approached books like the E.Nesbit stories and so on when I was a kid. I've always loved Ballard's reviews, for instance. He always seems to bring his own imagination to bear on the book he's reading. Often makes the book seem a lot better, too.
    Character creation?

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    The characters are usually 'there' in my head. All I do is describe them. Sometimes a major character, like Colonel Pyat, will develop from a minor one. But I don't make notes about them, as such. I suppose I have them fully imagined and so they'll talk and act as the individuals which present themselves to me. As I've said elsewhere, one of the reasons I don't need notes for the EC series is that the stories are essentially character based and all I do is remember the characters and the rest comes naturally. Lucky me, eh ?11-14-2005, 11:35 PM
    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    As I've said -- by having the characters very firmly in my head, I tend to have their memories. Not perfect, of course, like anyone's memories, so there are probably a few discrepencies, but for the collected (omnibus) edition I did have John helping me by pointing out what were pretty much minor discrepencies. I rewrote a lot of the last chapters of The Steel Tsar, which seriously needed the work in my view. I cut City at the request of the US editor who claimed, fairly, that he wanted a genre book not a discourse! So I was never at odds with David Hartwell (the editor). His argument was that if I'd wanted to write a discursive 'philosophical' text I shouldn't have sold him the book as a fantasy novel.
    I have a fair bit of the old manuscript in my hands now, but the rest is still with the friend I gave it to shortly after I'd written it. It would be worth publishing that version some day, to see what readers thought about it.
    Technique?

    The usual time for writing a novel was three days. I grew up in a school of journalism where nothing took longer than a week, and a week was a very long time for anything. A day for a short story and three days for a novel. I was just used to writing at that speed. I was used to getting things in on deadlines - daily deadlines. So there is a whole sort of natural expectation. I didn’t know any better. I actually didn’t know you were supposed to take longer than a week.
    From MICHAEL MOORCOCK In Conversation with Colin Greenland and the Preston SF Group

    I know this is horrible -- but I did most of those books in three days. I didn't read them the first time (Jim Cawthorn, Mike Harrison mostly used to read them for me, and then I'd send them to the publisher). Many of them, that I haven't had a reason to revise extensively, remain a mystery to me to this day! Somehow I seem to keep the salient stuff in my head. The characters are all alive for me, so that's probably a help. I do like computers and WP is useful, but in some ways I suspect I produced more and faster on the old Selectric II, which was the finest IBM made. I still have one. In fact I still have the Imperial 50-60 on which I typed all the early Elric stories and most of the Hawkmoon stories. I think I went to an electric typewriter with Hawkmoon 4 because I was in bed with three different sets of spots and a severe deadline. It's not fair to ask. I can't help it. But it pisses other people off. It takes me much longer to write now. That's partly because I keep setting myself harder jobs, mostly to stop myself from getting bored.
    From Q&A Archive Article #1304

    (Does Mike put his self into his characters?

    I'm mentioning this, to give a picture of my mood at the time of Elric's creation. If you've read the early Elric stories in particular, you'll see that Elric's outlook was rather similar to mine. My point is, that Elric was me (the me of 1960-1,anyway) and mingled qualities of betrayer and betrayed, the bewilderment about life in general, the search for some solution to it all, the expression of this bewilderment in terms of violence, cynicism and the need for revenge, were all characteristics of mine. So when I got the chance to write The Dreaming City, I was identifying very closely with my hero-villain. I thought myself something of an outcast (another romantic notion largely unsubstained now I look back) and emphasised Elric's physical differences accordingly:


    His bizarre dress was tasteless and gaudy, and did not match his sensitive face and long-fingered, almost delicate hands, yet he flaunted it since it emphasised that he did not belong to any company - that he was an outsider an outcast. But, in reality, he had little need to wear such outlandish gear - for ... (he) was a pure albino who drew his power from a secret and terrible source.

    (Stealer of Souls, page 13)

    Leave a comment:


  • Tales from Tanelorn
    replied
    Thanks Lemec for bringing these quotes together.
    It is good to be able to understand what Mike thinks and I must say I sympathise with and agree with his views.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Comments on the theory for a real multiverse:

    Michael Moorcock wrote :

    To be honest, while I'm interested in theories of the multiverse of course, I've rather deliberately avoided reading about other theories so that I don't get confused when developing my own which, of course, is a literary construct, not a scientific one -- and only incidentally a philosophical one.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    What replica is closest to what Stormbringer would look like:

    Michael Moorcock wrote :

    The Raven Armoury sword is the closest to my own idea of Stormbringer. It is a broadsword, two-handed, which handles like a foil. It is beautifully balanced, so can almost be used to fence with, one-handed, or swung two-handed to do serious chopping. Having no scabbard, I'm forced to keep it deep in the broomcupboard for fear of it attacking the cats...

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    What Research has Mike done for the Pyat books?


    Michael Moorcock wrote :

    It was a long, intense period of research. I also talked to people who were actually present in Ukraine during the 'Civil War' period. I had to learn Cyrillic and some Russian and I read an enormous amount of 20th century Russian writers of all kinds. I also read traveller's reminiscences, guide books and so on. I had to learn to distinguish between propaganda from all sides, but I read a great deal from the Soviet side as well as the White Russian side, both fiction and non-fiction. The world around me (I wrote the book itself in about five months in Notting Hill) tended to disappear and the world I was writing about became real. I reached the point where I knew which tram went where in Kiev, felt I could find my way through the backstreets of Odessa and so on. I read an enormous number of accounts, mostly by ordinary people, and while I had to read some academic histories I mostly ignored those in favour of anecdotal memoirs. I was very flattered when Ukrainians wrote to me wondering when I had lived there and how I knew so much. I've done similar research for the other three, but probably not at the same almost lunatic level of intensity! My feeling was that unless I got every detail of the background right I couldn't have Pyat lying about anything else. So it's a weird combination of history and background as accurate as it's possible to get and outrageous lies by the narrator! The engineering claims, of course, are his boastful self-delusions, but I had to have him know at least something about what he was saying. In The Laughter of Carthage I did a lot of deep research on the Ku Klux Klan, too. I couldn't do that at home but had to travel to California where UCLA had an enormous collection of material I could use. I also travelled to all the places Pyat
    went to and again read many 'naive' accounts of the places and period.
    The same was true of Jerusalem Commands. Perhaps the most gruelling research, however, was for the last book, The Vengeance of Rome, which involved me immersing myself in Nazi material and realising that most academic or journalistic accounts of the Nazi period are almost incapable of studying the period outside the context of the Second world War. Most people who come to that study are either there to study the run up to the War. The Holocaust studies are more useful, but their focus is obviously on certain elements of the Nazi rise. I began to realise that very few people have studied the daily and emotional lives of the Nazis and for me much of the secret of their hideous careers is to be found there. I've used, for instance, details of the relationship between Hitler and Geli Raubal in other fiction, though I didn't give details of that relationship (merely used the results of my research) in Vengeance. I must admit I am very glad that long period of study is over. I have studied books, films and photographs for the past twenty seven odd years and while you can never rid yourself of those images, I hope never again to have to work at that level of familiarity with the Holocaust. I began the books in the hope of finding some of the answers to how such a terrible crime could have been allowed to happen,
    in the hope that it would teach us how to stop it happening again. I am particularly concerned that many of us have not learned that lesson. Those of us who have learned it have a duty, I believe, to educate or resist those who haven't... Prince Harry should know, for instance, that the sight of that swastika still makes some of us feel physically sick. I've lived with it for a long time and I still feel the outrage and horror.

    Michael Moorcock wrote :

    I'm inclined, in spite of all, to believe that human beings have both good and evil in them, that neither state is 'natural' and that how we structure society has a great deal to do with whether we live civilised, decent lives or lives of cruel barbarism. We have to keep our faith in the good but we have to have to be on permanent guard against the evil and the many forms in which it masquerades and insinuates itself into our daily lives, our political rhetoric, our actions. Maybe this is no more than a kind of muscular Christianity without the supernatural elements, but I don't believe that people have a will to sin, for instance. You can witness the human tendency to co-operation and empathy in the response to the tsunami. Somehow you have to marshall that tendency and not, as I believe people like Bush do, work on the worst competitive and fearful aspects of people. Some would argue that Bush marshalls idealism and that's what I mean about vigilance and masquerade. I know people who believe he is the Antichrist and I wouldn't go that far because I think he is probably honest in his self-deception, if that makes sense. It makes it much harder to continue guarding against the worst and promoting the best when one's language is requisitioned by the forces you hope you are standing against and those who you would resist believe themselves to be champions of Law. That's partly what Pyat is about. In one part of the last book he refers to 'Nazi chivalry', which has given pause to more than one person who has been kind enough to read it for me, but that is how many of them saw themselves. Himmler's 'secret' speeches to the SS about the death camps, for instance, say what a horrible job it is they are going to have to do and they don't have to do it if they don't feel up to it, but those who do take part in the Final Solution will be remembered with honour... It might even be fair to say that when you hear rhetoric like that, you have to be prepared for the worst sort of human infamy.
    Michael Moorcock wrote :

    I'd lived in some of those places. I also travelled a lot on Russian ships and got to know Ukrainians as well as Russians both at home and abroad. I talked to Leah Feldmann, who had actually been on Makhno's 'education train' and read dozens of 'naive' accounts of people who had lived through the periods I described. It was somewhat easier to research in America and Turkey, of course, since the books were written during the Soviet period when all you got, really, was propaganda (often from both sides -- government and exiles). There seems, incidentally, to be a new wave of anti-semitism running through Russia at the moment. The actions of the current Israeli administration have allowed latent anti-Jewish feeling to come to the surface again -- though it's fair to argue that such feelings were what inspired Jewish paranoia in the first place. An appalling vicious circle, I must say, which might indeed end only with Armageddon, as fundamentalist Christians believe!
    America in recent years simply has not done enough diplomatically to improve conditions in that region which is a great shame since at one point America was seen as a reasonable arbiter.
    There was a person who was the inspiration for Pyat. I forget his name, but he was a neighbour of mine often referred to as 'the old Pole', a Polish emigre who had a house stuffed with machine-parts and so on.
    I also based Pyat partly on an old loony who used to live around Camden Town and stuff long rambling 'letters' through John Clute's letter box.
    Pyat was essentially, however, an amalgam who came into existence slowly via small parts, originally, in the Jerry Cornelius books. As with books like Warlord of the Air I blended both realistic fiction with fantasy in order to form a kind of 'bridge' between the two, using characters who had originally appeared in my realistic fiction or vice versa. Pyat was one such who grew more and more substantial as I wrote about him.
    The first picture is of Russian irregulars taken during the Civil War, but I know little else about the picture. The second appears to be a meeting of French and Turkish officers perhaps during armistice negotiations. The publisher never told me the provenance of the pictures which were selected from the Radio Times Hulton Picture Library, as I recall. The second set of Cape covers were mostly images taken from my own collection, including some toy soldiers!

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    What awards did Mike recieve?

    (I found these, they seem to be accurate.)

    Awards:
    British Fantasy: [1972] [1973] [1974] [1975] [1976] [1993]
    John W. Campbell: [1979]
    Hugo: [1957]
    Nebula: [1967]
    World Fantasy: [1979] [2000]

    1967 Nebula Award (Novella): Behold the Man
    1972 August Derleth Fantasy Award (Best Novel): The Knight of the Swords
    1973 August Derleth Fantasy Award (Best Novel): The King of the Swords
    1974 British Fantasy Award (Best Short Story): The Jade Man's Eyes
    1975 August Derleth Fantasy Award (Best Novel): The Sword and the Stallion
    1976 August Derleth Fantasy Award (Best Novel): The Hollow Lands
    1977 Guardian Fiction Award: The Condition of Muzak
    1978 John W. Campbell Memorial Award: Gloriana
    1979 World Fantasy Award (Best Novel): Gloriana
    1993 British Fantasy Award (Committee Award)
    2000 World Fantasy Award (Lifetime Achievement)
    2002 Science Fiction Writers Hall of Fame
    2004 Prix Utopiales Lifetime Achievement Award
    2004 Bram Stoker Lifetime Achievement Award
    Last edited by lemec; 07-11-2006, 12:07 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Mosley
    replied
    Archive thread where Mike discusses The Retreat from Liberty & making books available for free online here > http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showthread.php?t=34

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    these are random, but interesting quotes.

    comments on the creative process:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    I think I've pretty much always come up with story (song) first. Usually more than one title. Currently I'm wavering between Pete's Rules and The Conditions of the Island for my novel in progress. I also tend to have a liking for Victorian type titles which merely give the name of the protagonist or central event. The Ice Schooner and several other titles were done according to this idea. For me the title has to add a bit to the story, just as sub/headings and chapter titles should do, as in Mother London, where each sub-section makes a narrative reference as well as offering an image. It's the old NW training, trying to pack as much narrative into the page as possible... 07-12-2005, 03:00 AM

    Comments about naming children after characters:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    In the seventies there were dozens of poor little buggers in Notting Hill called things like Frodo and Bilbo and Gandalf. I'm sure they're these days hiding behind 'Fred' and 'Bill' and 'Alf', but their mums and dads know their dark secret.
    I was tempted to call my son Golom or Sauron, just to even things up a bit, but I caught myself in time and called him Max. Wonder if there are any retirement houses in the suburbs these days called Chez Mordor or
    Dun Questin. I wonder if there are any Harries out there who were born Arioch. Can you get christened with the name of a Lord of Hell ?
    There are Elrics going back several generations now. The Worst Boy in the School where Jim Cawthorn's sister worked in the 70s was called Elric and there was another Elric heavily into weapons, fatigues and such who was looking for me about twenty years ago -- I'm not sure whether he wanted to shoot me or make me his leader... In fact, I signed a book for an Elric in Austin at the last signing I did in Book People! I agree it's an awful burden. Happily, however, I haven't met that many Yyrkoons...
    It could be worse, see. Yyrkoon Zand ?
    Yeah, it's a bit brutal, naming your kid Brooklyn or whatever. I must say the fashion for calling girls Meredith ('Lord' in Welsh) is a bit weird, too.
    I made sure my kids all had middle names they could use if they preferred them, or names which could be diminished to something they fancied -- Sophie was a rare name when we called her that, so we gave her Elizabeth so she could be Bess, Betty, Liz, Lizzie, Liza and so on, if she preferred. Same with my daughter Katharine. Max's middle name was Edward. Of course everyone of my generation is either called Mike or Dave, which can become a bit confusing. There are an awful lot of Michael Johns (thus M.John Harrison being about Harrison's only option to distinguish himself from all the others) and not a few John Michaels or
    David Michaels and Michael Davids. I must admit I still prefer traditional names to made up ones and it irks me when people misspell ordinary names (as with Hillary Clinton, given that the root is Latin and should be pretty easy to spell right) but then that's an Old Fart grumble I allow myself from time to time. After all, I'm more likely to vote for someone called Hillary than I am for someone called George...


    Picking pseudonyms:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    Ted Carnell, editor of New Worlds, Science Fantasy etc., if he wanted to give you a pseudonym (because usually you had too many stories in his inventory) would go to the ABC Railway Guide. This is a very good way of picking English names, since so many are identified originally with a place. You can do the same for French names or, indeed, most names for people of European, Asian and African origin, by checking out suitable names in a gazeteer or map. That's how James Colvin was created. I'd originally suggested James Mendoza, after a famous boxing ancestor. Ted thought that sounded too 'foreign' so I became Colvin. So presumably Welwyn Garden City isn't too far from the truth... Fred Bridge of Orchy ? Angus Colwyn Bay ? Maria Mallorca ?

    Book stock signing:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    I'd never sign stock without being asked because signing the books actually makes it difficult for the bookstore to return them to the publisher. It's a trick some authors use to ensure that their books don't go back to source! There used to be a joke that Margaret Thatcher unsigned copies were becoming rarities, fetching much higher prices on the used book market, because she was inclined to do the same thing -- drop in unannounced and sign all the stock. The Queen of Capitalism never missed a trick!
    Knightings:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    Thanks, pards.
    As for a knighting, it wouldn't be very seemly for one who has been such a staunch republican anti-monarchist for so many years to go around taking honours. I prefer to be on the same side of the road as J.G.Ballard and Benjamin Zephaniah, who eloquently turned down their honours. My uncle did the same. He saw no point in it unless it came with a cash accompaniment, he said.

    Native Americans in books:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    That's a book I wrote some forty years ago, but I don't remember basing the Legion of the Dawn on any particular culture. In fact, apart from Corum's basis in Celtic culture, I've very rarely used a specific culture as a model. In The Skrayling Tree I did use Amerind cultures, of course, and decided to use that model for Elric's people when Walter and I were doing Making of a Sorcerer because I felt Amerind cultures had not been used much as models and I wanted to get away from the standard pseudo-mediaeval models which have been used in graphic fiction up to now.
    It wasn't too bad a model when I first started, but it's been overdone beyond sanity, in my view, since I began.


    Other Thoughts:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    It's a fine point, I know, but if we are going to kill animals (or people) the method and the context require discussion. I am temperamentally of a Buddhist persuasion and would love to live in an ideal world where we don't kill to live, but the chances of achieving such a world are pretty slim, whereas it IS possible to rally public sentiment around such issues as the trade in the fur of domestic pets. It might not deal with the whole problem, but it at least deals with part of it. I've never been an absolutist, because that CAN be a way of avoiding doing the things we ARE capable of doing. We might not be able to stop people eating meat and wearing leather, but we can ensure that old donkeys live out their lives in some kind of happiness. We even subscribe to that elephant sanctuary in Tennessee. You're talking to the guy who believes that every time we eat squid, we're essentially consuming a creature which is the Einstein of the ocean. I've even be known to take a cockroach and carefully release it into the wild... When I do have to kill one, I tell myself the cockroach contains the soul of a cat-killer. Might not do much for the roach, but it relieves my conscience a little. It's how we keep
    going, after all, in this existential world...

    ...prefers to be called Mike:


    Yeah, but that´s only because you keep moving too fast and Dr J is getting a little old now.
    I don´t mind being called Mike, though I guess there´s always a potential context where it would SEEM over-familiar. And, as I always say, context is everything. Only Linda calls me Michael and gets away with it, however, because my mother only called me by my full name when she was mad at me. So if you call me Michael I might think you´re mad at me...
    The weather here on the island is astonishingly good (actually hotter than Texas still) but we´re off to rainy Paris next Wednesday where the food will at least make up for the weather.
    Excuse all misspellings and typos here -- it´s a funny, rather sluggish keyboard and I´m hurrying to get my money´s worth at the local internet cafe!
    Last edited by lemec; 07-03-2006, 06:28 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Thoughts on Quire?

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    Well, yes. Quire is definitely my most 'Jacobean' villain. I wrote the book as if it was being written in the late 17th century, closer to Defoe than Shakespeare, drawing on language and understanding from that far forward, as it were. Quire was intended to be what he described himself as being 'an artist' -- in murder and intrique. To say anything more here would be a definite spoiler, I think, though.

    Additional Book Talk:


    Michael Moorcock wrote:


    I meant to add that my own feeling of commitment to readers is to try to come up with as much that's original as possible. That's the sort of demanding reader I am, though I enjoy familiar characters as much as anyone (witness Zenith or, indeed, my current Balzac jag) but I like to see them in as many different aspects as possible. Mind you, if you want to keep making tons of money, the secret is to keep writing more or less the same book over and over again. As Edgar Rice Burroughs, to his own disappointment, found. Not to mention Conan Doyle. Some of us do it because that's all we CAN write; some of us because that's what readers keep demanding. Some of us are just bloody minded and are going to write as originally as possible no matter what. I think I've already mentioned that I felt a strong fellow feeling for Dylan, writing in Chronicle Vol 1, where it's clear he made a decision to remain true to himself and, as he sees it, to his audience by doing new stuff. It's what I love about Dylan, even though his later work gives me an entirely different buzz to his earlier stuff. It's also a commercial decision. You make a lot more dosh by putting yourself on Rpt. A sad irony. But given the kind of dosh you DO make, anyway, it seems more like 'giving back' to try to come up with original ways of doing what you do. I'm writing against a whistling kettle. Time to make the Darjeeling and sort out the crumpets. It's that kind of weather here in N. California at last!!

    Thoughts on Bastable:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:

    Because I was writing in the context of Fabian colonialism (as it were) I thought Bastable grown up would make an excellent hero for The Warlord of the Air. Bastable had all the idealism an early 20th century socialist could give to a 'decent English boy'. The 'Empire' was still part of that idealism, of course. So, in what's often called 'an intervention' -- a questioning of the idealism of the likes of Conrad, Wells and, of course, Kipling in respect of the British Empire.

    Censored Books:

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    It's not the current Four Walls edition of the JC Quartet, it was the first US edition in the 60s. Worse censored was Byzantium Endures in the Random House edition, which cut out much of the antisemitism and other distasteful references for fear they would give offence.
    I have not had a single Jewish person take offence at those books, because it's clear to anyone that the central character's views aren't mine, but Random decided otherwise... I suspect the book had gone to a lawyer or two...

    I'd forgotten about that abominable edition. Una Persson and Catherine Cornelius also got censored. That was mainly for sexual content!
    I think they'd hoped to sell Jerry in Wal-Mart by doing that!
    The US has a habit of self-censorship which is quite remarkable for a modern democracy. You see it in most media and it's alarming to me.
    Still, I suspect the net has a way of circumnavigating the commercial media, to a degree.


    Warlord of the Air was 'censored' in the UK but not in the US!
    The legal department at the publisher didn't want the stuff about Reagan, Jagger and so on in, so asked for it to be changed. Knowing the US edition was there and that I could soon bring out the regular edition inthe UK I didn't worry too much. Warhound, however, was never censored!
    Just a very few, as mentioned, were.
    In some novels (such as The Steel Tsar) I've rewritten, where I wasnt happy with the original, but the omnibus sets represent the definitive editions as far as I'm concerned.
    Of course, in my retirement, and with almost all the books deliberately out of print here for a while, I could start rewriting EVERYRTHING again. Hee hee. Give the poor bibliographers something to do, eh ?


    A ludicrous glitch at Orion with the first hardback edition and trade edition, in which most of a novel was accidentally left out of the book!. All later editions are okay.
    Last edited by lemec; 07-03-2006, 06:26 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Michael Moorcock Quotes from Q&A Archives

    How many book sales over the years?

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    Somebody thought around six million a couple of years ago, but you know me and numbers... No idea. Must be a lot, of course, given the constantly reprinted titles in France, Germany, Russia and a lot of other countries. But I don't even know how many copies of White Wolf's Son were printed. I'm always afraid that if I ask they'll tell me 'more than ten'. Insecure, moi ?
    What will Mike sign at book signings?

    I never mind signing a few books. If I have time, I'll always sign as many as you bring, as long as you're prepared to wait. The rule is usually four books per signing, then back to the back of the queue. However, I'm not sure how these events will be organised, though I'm pretty sure there WILL be signings attending them and anyway if you're there just say who you are and I'll make it my business to sign what you bring.
    Thoughts on Tolkien and Lewis:

    I was always very sensitive to being preached at or 'educated' through fiction as a kid, which is probably why the William books were my favourite children's fiction. I hated BBC Children's Hour for that reason and learned only relatively recently that the CH was seen as a way of 'helping parents' keep their kids doing what they wanted them to do.
    Tolkien hated the Narnia books for that reason, of course. He thought they were a derivative jumble and far too preachy. I found the same with Lewis's 'Silent Planet' trilogy. Oddly, that never happened with one of my earlier favourites, The Pilgrim's Progress. Might have something to do with the power of the writing and originality of the imagery. Lewis was influenced by, among others, David Lindsay. Voyage to Arcturus was scarcely preachy, either. Lewis was very kind to Peake, too, after he'd read the Titus books. I liked him a lot as a bloke. I even enjoyed some of his non-fiction. I could never get on with his fiction. That said, the trailers for Narnia look great. Anyone else see some of LW&W as a TV series a few years back ? I still prefer E. Nesbit, who deserves some of HER books other than The Railway Children (which was great) being made into movies. Tolkien thought Lewis drew on Nesbit rather more than was seemly. But we read pretty uncritically as children, anyway, and I have one or two Enid Blyton books which 'stayed with me' as well as all the good stuff and to me there's almost no one worse than EB.
    Last edited by lemec; 08-30-2006, 05:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Did Mike write a story about Alexander the Great?

    Michael Moorcock wrote:
    Yeah, I was fascinated by Alexander. I did a comic strip version of his life for Look and Learn many years ago, drawn by the great Don Lawrence.
    I also did a story involving Alexander called The Greater Conqueror, which is in the Earl Aubec collection. Fascinating guy. Great convergence of different cultures.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    early influences-

    (fantasy fiction)

    sword & sorcery stories by Robert E. Howard, Clark Ashton Smith.

    Poul Anderson's The Broken Sword, Fritz Lieber's Grey Mouser stories.

    Also: Bertold Brecht's The Threepenny Opera (as mentioned in Mike's Dedication for Elric of Melnibone.) <= Added by demos99


    earlier-

    Edgar Rice Burroughs.

    about Elric-

    (paraphrased)

    around 1960 MM worked for Sexton Blake Library.


    Ted Carnell wanted something along the lines of Conan, but he did not want a Conan story for Science Fantasy.



    ----

    Sojan first appeared in Tarzan Adventures between August 1957-September 1958. (from Savoy Books Ltd. 1977 in Sojan)
    Last edited by David Mosley; 06-29-2006, 12:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X