[net.sf-lovers] Lord of Light

@RUTGERS.ARPA:stever@cit-vax (03/14/85)

From: stever@cit-vax (Steve Rabin    )

But can you justify the chapter numbering (4 1 2 3 5 ...) ?

brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) (03/15/85)

> From: stever@cit-vax (Steve Rabin    )
> 
> But can you justify the chapter numbering (4 1 2 3 5 ...) ?

What need justification?  This is nothing new; merely used
better than most writers use it.  The technique is called
"framing," and conveyed the point of the story quite well.
He could have made the first chapter a prologue and the last
an epilogue, but why bother?  The point is that the logical
progression of the tale does not take place temporally.  By
arranging it this way, the reader is taken through an experience
that is set up by the first chapter to give context, and
leads to the last chapter with the inevitability of a
a Beethoven symphony.

So there.

			-- SKZB

cpf@lasspvax.UUCP (Courtenay Footman) (03/17/85)

I agree that The Lord of the Rings is the best 20th century fiction that
I have read.  I also agree that Lord of Light is the best science fiction
story that I have read.  Finally, in response to the person who asked
about the order of chapters, if in medias res is good enough for Homer,
it is good enough for Zelazny.

[If they do get usenet on satelite, does that mean we will *all* be able
to make high-frequency prayers?]
-- 
Courtenay Footman			arpa:	cpf@lnsvax
Newman Lab. of Nuclear Studies		usenet:	cornell!lnsvax!cpf
Cornell University

@RUTGERS.ARPA:stever@cit-vax (03/22/85)

From: stever@cit-vax (Steve Rabin  )

I've been reading Juan Rulfo's "Pedro Paramo", and Llosa's
"Conversations in the Cathedral", extreme cases where one
wants to take out the scissors and rearange chapters, or even
sentences, chronologically.  In fact, in the movie based on
Paramo, this is precisely what the director did, using a 
rather large wall.  In those novels the technique works.
In Lord of Light it doesn't.  Try reading Lord of Light
with the chapters unscrambled, and I think you'll find
it better that way.  -Steve

brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) (03/26/85)

> From: stever@cit-vax (Steve Rabin  )
> 
> Try reading Lord of Light
> with the chapters unscrambled, and I think you'll find
> it better that way.  -Steve

Try rewriting HAMLET substituting the main character
with Romeo from ROMEO AND JULIET and I think you'll
find you get a happier ending.  I wonder why
Shakespear didn't do it that way?

shiva@duts.UUCP (10/28/85)

> Have you read LORD OF LIGHT by Roger Zelazny?
> 
> Did you like.... what didn't you like?....
> 	Stuart Cracraft

So what's it to you bub???? Why the 3rd degree?
-- 

                                          Shiva, Amdahl

jef@lbl-rtsg.arpa (10/29/85)

From: jef@lbl-rtsg.arpa

I *love* the book, but there is one thing I would change: the
annoyingly cryptic inside-out time-line.  It's like, 51 pages
of the present, 151 pages of flashback, and then back to the
present for the final 42 pages.  The first time I read it, I
didn't really understand what was going on until I had finished
the book.
___
Jef