Swords Against Tomorrow
Swords Against Tomorrow is an anthology of fantasy stories, edited by Robert Hoskins. It was first published in paperback by Signet Books in August 1970.[1]
 Cover art from the first edition | |
| Author | Robert Hoskins (editor) |
|---|---|
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Genre | Fantasy |
| Publisher | Signet Books |
Publication date | 1970 |
| Media type | Print (Hardcover) |
| Pages | 176 pp |
The book collects five sword and sorcery or sword and planet short stories and novelettes by various authors, together with an introduction and introductory notes to the individual stories by the editor.
All of the authors represented except Leigh Brackett were members of the Swordsmen and Sorcerers' Guild of America (SAGA), a somewhat informal literary group of fantasy authors active from the 1960s to the 1980s, making the book a precursor of the five Flashing Swords! anthologies of SAGA-member works edited by Lin Carter from 1973 to 1981.
Contents
- "Introduction" (Robert Hoskins)
- "Demon Journey" (Poul Anderson)
- "Bazaar of the Bizarre" (Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser) (Fritz Leiber)
- "Vault of Silence" (Kellory the Warlock) (Lin Carter)
- "Devils in the Walls" (Brak the Barbarian) (John Jakes)
- "Citadel of Lost Ships" (Leigh Brackett)
Notes
- Swords Against Tomorrow title listing at the Internet Speculative Fiction Database
gollark: Why does Wikipedia not just have an option to intersect arbitrary lists?
gollark: > Some may argue that the CDC originally claimed that masks were ineffective as a way to retain the already-small supply of masks for healthcare providers and medical officials. Others may argue that the CDC made this claim due to ever-developing research around the virus. I am arguing, however, that the CDC made the claim that masks are ineffective because the CDC’s sole purpose is to provide scientific legitimation of the U.S. as a eugenicist project through medical genocide. As outlined in this essay, the CDC has a history of releasing deadly information and later backtracking on it when the damage has already been done.
gollark: > Choosing to tell the public that supplies that could benefit everyone is ineffective, rather than calling for more supplies to be created—in the midst of a global pandemic, no less—is eugenics. Making the conscious decision to tell the general public that something is ineffective when you have not done all of the necessary research, especially when medical officials are using the very same equipment, is medical and scientific genocide.
gollark: It seems like they seem to claim they're genociding *everyone*, actually?
gollark: Are you familiar with relativistic magnetoapiodynamics?
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.