Negative Positive
Title: Pulp Conan, not the Conan of old
Review: While I agree with a prior reviewer (who posted 5 stars) that, while THE CONAN CHRONICLES is better than THE WHEEL OF TIME, THE CONAN CHRONICLES does not faithfully reflect nor reproduce the Howard's universe or characters. The negative reviews this book has received are indicative of the latter comparison and most likely, some comparison against all other books in the genre. Some reviewers almost seem to be implying that THE CONAN CHRONICLES is a 5-star book "for Robert Jordan," while some are saying, "this book is terrible." I'm in the latter camp; while readable, THE CONAN CHRONICLES is pulp--predictable and repetitious beach-reading not worth re-reading or even continuing to own. My copy will end up at a used-book store.(Oh, and what IS it with Jordan and the "round breasts" bit? Jordan's women seem merely the two-dimensional product of puerile fantasy. Has he ever really KNOWN a woman? This becomes almost embarrassing after a few hundred pages.)
Is the review positive or negative? 