Set Harth wrote:
Greg Cox wrote:
(And this was at a point when I was devouring every Michael Moorcock book I could get my hands on.)
Over the last few weeks I've been rereading a lot of my old Moorcock, which is pretty much just stuff written prior to 1976 or so, and trying to digest it in such a way that it all can be seen as logically coherent and water-tight, for lack of a better word. I'm not finding it especially easy. As someone once said, "timey wimey".
I'll take your word for it. Like I said, I devoured that stuff in my teen years, which was a long
And, truth be told, I was always more into sword-and-sorcery than epic high fantasy. I preferred Howard and Leiber and Moorcock to Tolkien and his various imitators.