Conan By Frazetta $1.5 million bucks!

[MA-Caver]

'Conan' painting by late Pa. artist goes for $1.5M
Associated Press · July 23, 2010

PHILADELPHIA - A 1971 painting by fantasy artist Frank Frazetta has sold for $1.5 million, two months after the Pennsylvania artist's death.
Frazetta's managers said this week that a private collector bought "Conan the Destroyer" from a family trust. Managers Robert Pistella and Stephen Ferzoco call it the price the highest ever for a work by Frazetta.

I've always loved Frazetta's depiction of the Barbarian as he doesn't cut corners and shows the hero as Howard intended.
1.5 mil... to me ... it'd been worth it.

 

[Ken Morgan]

He did many amazing pieces. I found his art work when i was in HS, and I've loved them ever since. My fav was his painting Silver Warrior.
1.5 million? Yeah, good deal.

 

[Omar B]

Ii saw th saw that earlier and as much as I love Frank's work it is not as you say Howard intended. I already addressed this in the thead about Conan novels and short stories and included paintings of Conan from when REH was alive.

Love FrankMs work, but I hate the falacy that this is how Conan was intended to look.

 

[Omar B]

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1306847&postcount=5

 

[Guro Harold]

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1306847&postcount=5

Interesting! I never saw those images before.

Conan to me was indeed defined by Frazetta!

 

[Omar B]

Conan was defined by Robert Howard, Frank's work, though iconic drifts a far way from what Howard intended. Sadly, after Frank, Boris and then the Marvel comics run people tend to forget what REH himself intended for his own creation (much like how Ian Flemming considered the Bond movies parodies rather than adaptations).

Notice the distinct Roman theme to the dress and setting of those pieces of art commissioned by REH. Also remember that Conan became king of Aquilonia which is his own corruption of the Italian word Aquilo which means eagle signifying Rome. Conan may have been a proto-celt, but he ended up a king in "Rome" and his look and dress reflected that.

Nothing against all the other artists or anything. But Conan (right after Bond, Tarzan and Sherlock Holmes) is one of those characters that people think they know because of some movies that are wildly divergent from the source.

 

[MA-Caver]

Well be that as it may... I didn't like Ahnold's version of Conan or I should say the John Milius version. I've read Howard's description of Conan's quasi-Roman garb and etc. But still reflected upon his barbaric past and upbringing and usually see him as Marvel, Frazetta and Vallejo saw him. On somethings I tend to be a purist but only if it really fits. The Romanesque vision of Conan :idunno: just can't see it ... considering everything that he went through. However, people are free to choose how they want to see a favorite character. :asian: