Assassinations at Valabar's

Thu May 22 14:28:02 PDT 2003

--- Philip Hart <philiph at SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
> I'm glad there's no such thing as a last book (in the 
> author's lifetime).  I was counting on 17 Vlad novels, but
> even if Vlad dies or becomes a god after #10, there's always
> the past to mine (a demon takes over Blackwand, the fight for
> the Necromancer's soul, ...)

You know, this made me think of a question for the author, which
he may or may not want to answer:

Mr. Brust, you've said in the past that you felt it was
important in _Teckla_ and subsequent books to move Vlad away
>from being an assassin because you felt that the first two Vlad
books came too close to glorifying, or endorsing, or failing to
condemn, his conduct.  _Taltos_ and _Dragon_, written after
Teckla, tell stories from earlier in Vlad's career, when he was
still an assassin.

When you wrote those books, having dealt with the issues in
_Teckla_ that you had, did you then feel a continuing obligation
to infuse them with some degree of moral judgment about what
Vlad was doing?  Or did you feel that the presence of the
chronologically-later, earlier-published _Teckla_ (and, in the
case of _Dragon_, the other intervening books as well) was
enough?  Did you think about it consciously, or did you feel
that the conclusions you had drawn about the responsibilities of
an author naturally informed your later work?

I'm asking because I think the creative process is interesting,
and the relationship of art to morality is interesting, and both
together are really interesting.  If I've misunderstood your
earlier comments on the subject, or if I've drawn unwarranted
inferences, I of course apologize.

-- Greg