Favourite Zelazny novels and short stories

[Giovanna Clairval]

Hi again, noble Axolotl,

Your post on Donnerjack has urged me to read this flamboyant novel again (and not in two days).

Thank you!

[Snorri]

You're welcome, and have fun. Let me know if you have any questions, I've read it a few times myself.

[brfrompa]

Originally Posted by Who's Wee Dug

Jack of Shadows
the Divlish the Dammed ones
Changeling
Madwand
and the trilogy he wrote with Robert Sheckly which started with Bring me the Head of Prince Charming

I'm a Jack of Shadows fan. So glad it was mentioned before I got to the end of this thread! It is a gem.

Regards,
Brent

[Beanbandit]

In addition to the stories already listed, I have to throw in both
A Night in the Lonesome October

And short story
Unicorn Variations

[zabylin]

I haven't read much Zelazny, but of the books that I have read, I loved every single one of them and have read them many times.

These are: the Amber books, though I rather like the Corwin books more, and A Night In Lonesome October. I don't hear people mention that one much (except in post above mine). It is very different from the Amber ones, but Zelazny's own brand of humor definitely comes through. In general, I think the entire book is hilarious.

I have also wanted to read Lord Demon for some time, but haven't gotten around to it.

[Grimward]

I like all RZ's stuff, but And Call Me Conrad/This Immortal blows me away every time I read it. I also haven't picked up Lord Demon yet, but it "on my list"! I've been looking, but haven't found an heir to the throne when it comes to reinventing definitions and creative use of otherwise unrelated words in his books; anyone else know of an author that comes close in this category?

[Dexter]

I love pretty much anything Roger has published. But to list just a few:

Creatures of Light and Darkness
Doorways in the Sand
Amber series
Changeling/Madwand
Changing Land/Dilvish, the Damned
Roadmarks
Damnation Alley

[Strife]

i've just finished Lord Demon. it's chinese-oriented, unlike the latest story i read (24 Views of Mt. Fuji).

i liked it, in a sort of quiet way, but i heard that he didn't finish it himself, RZ, i mean.

[yngvi]

I am a big fan of Zelanzy and I'm astounded how few of his novels are available.

Funnily enough, although 'Lord of Light' won the Hugo and stuff, I preferred 'Creatures of Light and Darkness' of the novels on that theme (advanced civilisation taking on the attributes of gods).

I remember 'This Immortal' with a lot of affection but I haven't owned it for about 20 years and haven't seen it to buy recently.

I really liked 'Coils', which he wrote with Fred Saberhagen (another favourite of mine) but I couldn't get through 'Deus Irae' which he wrote with Philip Dick (similarly a favourite author of mine). Odd!

I thought 'Damnation Alley' was a great book but that dreadful film adaptation ruined it for me.

[Snowdog]

@Strife - Lord Demon was indeed finished after his death by Jane Lindskold, she finished Donnerjack in the same way. While Lindskold did a good job with both books, I think Donnerjack hangs together better. I don't know which was the more complete manuscript but some of the elements of Lord Demon just don't seem like Zelazny, whereas I didn't get that impression with Donnerjack.

[Ian Whates]

Originally Posted by Snowdog

@Strife - Lord Demon was indeed finished after his death by Jane Lindskold, she finished Donnerjack in the same way. While Lindskold did a good job with both books, I think Donnerjack hangs together better. I don't know which was the more complete manuscript

My understanding, Snowdog, is that the first section, up to the point where a character dies (not wanting to give too much away), was pure Zelazny, the rest wasn't. Though I could be wrong.

[ckovacs]

Originally Posted by Ian Whates

My understanding, Snowdog, is that the first section, up to the point where a character dies (not wanting to give too much away), was pure Zelazny, the rest wasn't. Though I could be wrong.

I've researched this point, and others, for the annotated Zelazny story collection and biography forthcoming from NESFA. The bottom line is that you're probably wrong, and it is not possible to pinpoint a particular section of the novel where Jane Lindskold took over.

The reasons for my conclusion are:

1) Zelazny's handwritten outline of the novel goes way beyond the point that you mentioned because the beloved character of Donnerjack Sr was not the focus of the planned trilogy - the *son* was the title character, not the father.

2) Zelazny's own handwritten, complete sections of the novel span parts beyond the point that you mention.

3) William Sanders, an author well acquainted with both Zelazny and Lindskold, and who apparently saw close-up how the completion of the novel evolved, wrote in an essay "Jane boldly disassembled Roger's beginning chapters and rearranged the whole structure of the novel. This is another reason it is so hard to tell who wrote what; Roger's original text is not printed as an integral whole, but is distributed in hunks and chunks through the present book. More boldly still, she completely rewrote certain parts, and threw out bits that didn't work. She acted, that is, as a genuine collaborator, not just a posthumous amanuensis—which was exactly what Roger had asked her to do."

It is true that Zelazny's contribution is about one-third of the final novel, but that doesn't mean the first third of the novel, it means about one-third of the material. Most of that material is in the first half of the book. But all of the first third is not entirely Zelazny's work.

As part of researching the biography, I have had the privilege of asking Jane Lindskold many questions about Zelazny and his work, but with respect to the question of exactly where she "took over" the writing, she has wisely declined to answer other people who asked (some of whom were apparently quite rude in how they asked, and angered that she wouldn't), and I chose not to ask this one because I don't think it is really answerable anyway, as Sanders' essay made clear.

Chris

[Ian Whates]

Hi, Chris,

Sorry, perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't suggesting for one moment that Zelazny had no input into the bulk of the novel. I don't doubt for a minute that the main section owes something to his outline and more, but his voice certainly sounds a lot stronger and clearer in the first section, where I understand he had left something beyond an outline to build on.

I thoroughly enjoyed Donnerjack, but the opening section feels like Zelazny at his very best, the rest of the book a little less so. That's not intended as a criticism. I was delighted to find something by Zelazny posthumously available and applaud Jane Linskold for making it possible. It's simply an observation.

[Strife]

i just finished reading Donnerjack.

it's ****** good! i loved the virtual/real worlds.

the death of a programme was sad. i found it a melancholic book.

do you agree or am i way off?