Brust vs. Zelazny (was a part of RE: other authors?)

Fri Jan 24 11:23:12 PST 2003

>I think that Brust and Zelazny are so comparable, in most of these 
>catagories, that it really is a matter of personal preference.
>Where I think Zelazny does outshine Brust is in terms of sheer 
>imaginativeness and creativity of concept.  I say that with the 
>understanding that I think that Brust is one of the most creative and 
>imaginative authors that I have ever encountered.  I just think that, when 
>you take a look at the full bredth of his work, Zelazny was simply 
>incomparable when it came to dreaming up startlingly new and interesting 
>concepts again and again and again.  Even in his works that were nominally 
>similar to each other (Creatures of Light and Darkness vs. Lord of Light), 
>the execution and ideas that he implemented were brilliantly divergent and 

Ahh, this is true. His works were/are very original, and I think he was a 
master at creation and thus, originality and imagination. However, I still 
think Brust is better at plot, etc., and to me, his stories are more 
engaging. I love to read Zelazny when I want to read something carefully, 
take time to truly understand what I am reading and be fascinated by it, by 
ideas and concepts and word usage; also when I want to "see something 
new"...I love to read Brust when I want to be engulfed into story and style, 
"notice something different" (a slight distinction from the above, but still 
a distinction), and everything around me disappears except words on a page 
and pictures and thoughts in my mind. Pending my moods on a particular day, 
(I am a very moody person), I might be interested in one or the other or 
both. Obviously, I think both are fascinating.


STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*