Talk:Roger Zelazny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Roger Zelazny article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Re: Changeling

but changeling (book) is about a changeling?

--Yak 20:45, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)

I recall that the plot involved an exchange of people between two worlds, so the title is in the sense of Changeling (legend). UninvitedCompany 22:27, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The title is just Changeling, which might be what Yak meant. --JerryFriedman 21:02, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial plugs?

The part about the RPG and the link to Phage Press look like commercial plugs. Anyone know? --JerryFriedman 21:02, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sure, it's a commercial product but it's notable enough within its sphere to be worthy of mention here. -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:06, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] How the heck do you pronounce "Zelazny", anyway?

Well? How does one?216.27.184.98

The middle name of the character of Seamus Harper in the tv series "Andromeda" is "Zelazny" (most likely he was given this name as a tribute to Roger Zelazny). Listen to how he pronounces it in the show--that is the correct pronunciation.

I vaguely remember reading a short story that was dedicated to RZ written by... Poul Anderson? Anyway, the protagonist meets with the planetary conservator or forest manager or something, who introduces himself with a last name "something like a sneeze." --AllanBz 17:00, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I've always pronounced it 'zel-ah-zin-e'. 70.128.87.110 00:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Zelazny ancestors are originally from Poland so Zelazny is a Slavic surname. It means something like “Iron”. It should be pronounced like ʒe–lya-z-ny… Dreambringer 14:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merlin vs Corwin: fight! fight!

I disagree vehemently with the assertion in the entry on Zelazny that the Merlin series of the Amber Chronicles "is widely perceived as being of markedly lesser quality than the first". It may not hold the same place in the heart that the Corwin series does, with fans of the books, but it is hardly "markedly lesser." Both reflect the times they were written, and both have their virtues. In fact, I can point to many inconsistencies in the first series, which weren't as prevalent in the second.

Template:SpoilerThat's probably because the first five novels are Corwin telling the story to Merlin. He has things to hide, it's possible that his memories still aren't completely clear, he's just been through a number of battles through Chaos which at the best of times isn't the most stable of places, and he's just lost the love of his life. Merlin's story is told from a much more... stable point of view.
While I agree with your main point—that the second series is not markedly lesser—I do agree that it possesses fewer of the Aristotelian unities. Merlin seems to be wandering around the shadows, investigating one blasted thing after another, being pushed around by other forces until he makes his final choice. Corwin is a more energetic, driving character, even if often wrong.

[edit] Jane Lindskold

I don't think they were ever married -- that is, to each other. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:38, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Roger Zelazy and the New Wave

Not that the Amber novels and the others were not highly imaginative, etc. I thought that what really set Zelazny's writing apart was that we were in the character's heads, and the realism of the thought in those heads that actually reflects the reality within out own heads. This introspection was what was 'novel' about his writing. The incorporation of concepts such as denial, or tranference into character motivations. As we read Corwin's or Merlin's narration, we are taken along with their pysche, and forced to interpret things as the characters do. But, if we step back a bit, we can sometimes see where the charater is making a mistake. Combining this stuff with fantasy, regardless of the nuts and bolts, that was genius.

[edit] 24 Views of Mount Fuji

The article says:

numerous other traditions appear in works such as The Chronicles of Amber and 24 Views of Mount Fuji.

What's this about 24 Views of Mount Fuji? Vandalism? -- Dominus 14:50, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

"24 Views of Mt. Fuji, by Hokusai" is a Zelazny novella that won a Hugo and a Nebula award. - EurekaLott 22:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

And if you read it in Asimov's, way back, the illustrator created a marvelous version of Hokusai's "The Wave" to go with the story. If memory serves, "24 Views of Mt. Fuji, by Hokusai" was the headliner story that month. Too bad that picture didn't get to travel with the story when it reprinted! =Chica= 10:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Experimental novels and unpublished sketches

I think that the sub-section of Blibiography titled Experimental novels and unpublished sketches doesn't really fit in with the rest of the bibliography. If nobody objects, I'll move it to another part of the page and promote it to its own section. Jude(talk,contribs) 11:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It could be moved. It could also stand to be trimmed down--the discussion of Roadmarks, for example, would make sense in a Roadmarks article, but is too much detail for an author's article. You don't want more detail than is necessary to establish that the book has an unconventional narrative. Nareek 14:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Per the discussion, I have moved most of the material. BPK 15:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Still, as quite a lot of the material under this subheading isn't biographical, I'll move it to its own section. Jude(talk,contribs) 02:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Mildly object - it's about his works, it belongs under bibliography (or better yet, it and bibliography belong under "works"). Percy Snoodle 12:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Better yet, Bibliography should be retitled "Published works", as references used in the article should come under the heading of "Bibliography". I think it's much less confusing to have something about his works in the actual article, rather than lumped together under the heading of a bibliography when they're clearly not a list of his works. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 12:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Jude about "Published works". Straight bibs are confusing with explication. =Chica= 10:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awards

Wouldn't it make sense to details which stories won Hugo or Nebula awards ? -- Beardo 07:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I meant to use Jane's biography for the awards. I used Locus instead. If you go there, be warned that Locus likes to list award nominations AND rankings too; at first it looks overwhelming. =Chica= 19 August 2006

Removed A Night in the Lonesome October from the awards list. It was nominated for the 1995 Nebula Award but did not win (Moving Mars by Greg bear did). =Mr Dalliard= 31 October 2006

[edit] More categories

Um. Sorry, folks. I went and added more books and categories... and didn't think to look in Discussion 'til after. (I did confirm details in multiple places, though.) I made two collaborative sections and added the anthology section. Left out the poetry. I've seen one of his poetry collections...

Suggestion: Add a Meta-section for his poetry and short stories?

Although I do like the way his collections link you to the short stories inside. That's pretty handy. Also, I don't know how to do Meta-stuff.

I love this. I hadn't looked up Roger before. Thanks for being other devotees. Makes this a lovely place to visit. =Chica= 10:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writer infobox

I put in a Template:Infobox Writer at the beginning of the article. Feel free to add/correct info. Gaheris 00:48, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Die In Italbar?

Are we sure that's really a sequel to Isle of the Dead? I just looked at my copy and they don't seem to have anything in common. Am I totally wrong? 68.34.170.220 21:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Frank 9/14/2007

I don't think it's really a sequel, as in, there's no continuation of the story, but there are some common characters in both stories, if I remember it right. - TwoOars (Rev) 13:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't think a sequel is necessarily a continuation of a story, in the sense of the Lord of the Rings for example. Same characters in the in the same world: that's a sequel too. For instance, Bourne Supremacy is the sequel to Bourne Identity. The first Pirates of the Caribean has a sequel, yet is a standalone movie in itself....Life.temp (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright vio?

http://www.scifi-fantasy-info.com/roger-zelazny.html claims the copyright for text that seems to be exactly same as this article. But at a glance, it appears that the material was copied from wikipedia. But someone else can check again. - TwoOars (Rev) 13:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

No copy-vio here. That page ends with "This article uses some information from biblio.com, kirjasto.sci.fi, and wikipedia.org". It was based on this article, not the other way around. RossPatterson (talk) 04:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Ah ok. I don't know how I missed that sentence at the end. I must have a big blind spot. :P - TwoOars (Rev) 05:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)