Talk:Roger Zelazny

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)

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)

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)

It's pronounced Ze-lay-ny. The second "z" is silent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.200.13 (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Nope, it's not silent. I'm trying to find a video or something of him pronouncing his own name and no luck, but I know one of his relatives, and he pronounces it as three syllables, approximately "zu-LAHZ-ni" with the first syllable being in the schwa range. Or at least, I've never known him to correct anyone else who pronounced it that way. Take that with a grain of salt, but it's better than nothing. Grayfell (talk) 20:28, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

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.

{{spoiler}}That'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.

Merlin is also centuries younger than Corwin (even with the disparity of Chaos versus Amber time - he seems a student on Earth). Corwin and his siblings have the ability to call through shadow objects, which Merlin does through Chaos. With their abilities to find anything through shadows, they are very equal, but Corwin has much more experience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:F08C:5300:152C:3F:A982:9E94 (talk) 06:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Jane Lindskold

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

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.

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)

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)

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

Five years have passed, so let me restart "Awards" below. --P64 (talk) 19:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

I remember reading this (a long time ago) and hated it so much that the name stuck in my mind - I could have sworn that the title was "To live and die in Italbar". Searching the Internet I found that somebody else thought the same "To live and die in Italbar"... I know that the recent references are all to the above title. Can anyone comment? Purple Aubergine (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

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)

Short Story Missing?

I notice RZ's short story "Kalifriki of the Thread" is missing as well... It was in a collection of stories labeled Hidden Turnings, and was my first introduction to his works. If I get a chance I will dig up the book and look up the ISBN number. Anyone else know of the story and think it should be included? (Moved to bottom of page, bdur -AM) Akoi Meexx (talk) 17:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Update: ISBN 0416112722. Can't believe I remembered how to spell that story right. Akoi Meexx (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

--24.129.117.0 (talk) 02:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Overall Assessment of the Zelazny Entries

Prince of Chaos's synopsis is inadequate. However, to 'fix' it would require a complete revision of the previous ones. None of them mention Dalt, Coral, Rinaldo (Luke's real name), Nayda, the ty'iga. None of them mention how picked upon & manipulated Merlin feels. Both the synopsis of Knight of Shadows" & "Prince of Chaos" fail to mention Ghostwheels role in saving Merlin's ass...even against both the Logrus & the Pattern. Both fail to mention the 'spikard' that he aquired in the 'Hall of Mirrors' in Amber. All synopses fail to mention that Tir-Na-Nog'th [City of Night...or more at City of the Moon] is only one of 3 reflections of the true Amber (the other 2 being rebmA (figure it out) & Castle Amber itself (upon Mt. Kolvir). A sentence in the Corwin Cycle mentions that after Corwin realizes that he has found the Primal Pattern has been damaged [no mention is given to what or where the Primal Pattern is], he, & I quote, "returns to the dungeons of Amber." WRONG. He discovers some caves to the side of the Primal Pattern, wherin Dworkin dwells. Dworkin is mad & thinks that Corwin is Oberon in shape-shifted form. He proceeds to drop hints like confetti; telling Corwin among other things that he is descended from, "the Unicorn thy Mother." He tells Corwin of the journey out from Chaos to the 'Void' where Dworkin drew the original Pattern...against all of Chaos's fury. This parallels Corwin's later creation of the Second Pattern. None of the synopses mention Kolvir, the mountain upon which the Primal Pattern's reflection causes 'Amber' to be [land/sea/sky]. None mentions that the Primal Pattern looks like Mt Kolvir cut off to the roots. As to the critism that some consider the 'Merlin' cycle to be less than the 'Corwin' cycle because the 'Merlin' cycle contains the idea of aquirring greater & greater powers against the two powers...that is part of the POINT. As the story is written, Merlin does not feel comfortable using either the Logrus or the Pattern. The spikard provides respite from both...espescially because they are trying to make him choose between them. Ghostwheel also helps.

Also; the influences of Roger Zelazny should include Robert A. Heinlein. Read Mr. Heinlein's 'Glory Road' & you'll see where some of his influence comes from - a mixture of magic & swordsmanship that is unmistakable.

Having said that; I think Mr. Zelazny's writing is among the best. The Amber Novels amount to some of the best & greatest inventions I have ever seen; as well as some of the deepest charachterization I could fathom. I couldn't make up something nearly as good!Insert non-formatted text here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.117.0 (talk) 02:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Richard of the Dee Clan...10:29PM Tue Feb 8, 2008...let me know what you other fans of Roger Zelazny think...& give me a Claymoore to fight you with!!! Just Kidding.

Why no photo?

Why can't we have a decent photo of the man, at least in the infobox? I mean, not only would it be beyond cool, it would also add more "quality" to the article, if you guys understand me correctly. A photo would make it look more official. I've noticed that photos somehow add dimension to a Wikipedia article. So: any good free pics out there?88.196.231.206 (talk) 12:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Awards

Five years have passed, so let me restart "Awards".

Eighteen so-called Awards include 16 for particular works of fiction, one SFHOF induction, and this:

• Of note: His books were a major inspiration for the classic computer game Planescape: Torment developed by Black Isle Studios.

That doesn't belong here, so I have removed it. If it is so notable to be in the article at all, it belongs in the lead section or as an aside in the list of publications, regarding one or a few inspiring books.

Otherwise I have moved the SFHOF induction to the top, which fits its greater notability, and I have called the others "for particular works of fiction". By the way, if Z has won no other career awards, that is a surprise to me. --P64 (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

References

Nested References

If there is any way to give refs within refs, in effect,

interjection: This must depend on the particular "effect" desired ...

then it may be reasonable to do that with both the 6-volume Collected Stories and the 6-part biography ... And Call Me Roger, using only those short forms with nested refs to their full bibliographic data. Examples:

• ^ ... And Call Me Roger, part 2.
• ^ Collected Stories, vol 6, pp 20-31.

Perhaps the links to full bibliographic data can be executed with anchors. If Collected Stories is the complete works, for example, put full bibliographic data for all six volumes in a section called ==Complete works== and use #Complete works|Collected Stories. --P64 (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

... User:Mirokado has recently begun work on Anne McCaffrey#References, implementing a system that gives a few full "Citations" and uses them repeatedly in "References". (As I write, that's implemented only for David Pringle's books, inline references #59 #60, which use "Surname, Year" rather than a short version of the title.)

This gives the one effect described above. It does not provide References nested within Notes, for instance. --P64 (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Biography

In the entry under Zelazny's death the reference quoted is the Internet Motion Picture Database base. IMDB is unreliable as the information is supplied by the corporation which wrote the entry. Because of self interest, nothing on IMDB can be trusted. Unless a second source can be found to substantiate the cause of death I would suggest putting it down as rumored. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 03:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No, you've misread it. The citation refers to the fact that the IMDB and other sources had mistakenly claimed he died of lung cancer. In the elapsed time since I originally corrected WIkipedia to say that Zelazny died of bowel cancer, other sources have in turn corrected their error, including IMDB. Ckovacs (talk) 12:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Legal Status of works

A section on the legal status of RZ copywrights would be nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.0.197.91 (talk) 17:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Roger Zelazny. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016201634/http://locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit157.html to http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit157.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016201634/http://locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit157.html to http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit157.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:28, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Questions about commas and sentence structure

In the section "[c]haracteristic themes", I'm not sure if the list of mythological traditions should have commas after the word "mythology" (or "Mythos", in one instance). Could anyone please tell me which is the better idea? (Edit: I added the commas after "Egyptian mythology", "Greek mythology", "Cthulhu Mythos", and "Kabbalah".) Also, could anyone please tell me if the preceding sentence's use of the phrase "mythological traditions" is appropriate, given that one of the examples is the Cthulhu Mythos, which isn't exactly a "mythological tradition" in the same way that Egyptian and Greek mythology are?

Also, the following sentence seems awkward to me in its listing:

Additionally, elements from Norse, Japanese and Irish mythology, Arthurian legend as well as several references to real history appear in The Chronicles of Amber.

Could anyone please tell me if there should be an "and" before "Arthurian legend", if there should be a comma after it, or if the the comma between it and "Irish mythology" should be removed?--Thylacine24 (talk) 03:34, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

​I think it's slightly better with the commas after "mythology".

It probably makes sense to remove the Cthulhu item, since as you say it's not mythology. It could be put in the immediately following Amber paragraph if you want to keep it.

I rewrote the awkward sentence because it was easier than describing changes. Feel free to change it further if you don't like it. Cheers, Dan Bloch (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Danbloch: Thanks. I like how you rewrote the sentence. I also took your advice about making the Cthulhu Mythos example a separate sentence, though I was indecisive about how to phrase the sentence, as you can see from the edit history. Sorry if starting the sentence with a link to a work of Zelazny's after another sentence ended with a similar link was a bad idea. Could you please tell me if it was?--Thylacine24 (talk) 12:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Date of Death?

Our article currently lists DoD as June 14, 1995 . However, an obit in the Wash Post lists DoD as June 16. Odd. I don't have the time at present to track down the discrep. There are likely other details for our article, as this is the first obit linked, surprisingly. --Pete Tillman (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)