Three thousand words in praise of RZ - all SKZB has to do is write the truth for 10 pages (I assume the editor isn't looking for, Here's the first ten pages of A Rose For Ecclesiastes: I was busy translating one of my _Madrigals Macabre_ into Martian on the morning I was found acceptable. The intercom had buzzed briefly, and I dropped my pencil and flipped on the toggle in a single motion. "Mister G," piped Morton's youthful contralto, "the old man says I should `get hold of that damned conceited rhymer` right away, and send him to his cabin. Since there's only one damned conceited rhymer..." "Let not ambition mock thy useful toil." I cut him off. etc. - taken from a Russian site on the web that's probably violating copyright - but presumably just this much is fair use...) In SKZB's boots, I think I'd say: RZ gave me a huge push at the beginning of my career and I'm saddened but honored to assist in a small way in the completion of his career, the more so because he was interested in closure (citing _Isle Of The Dead_, _Eye Of Cat_, "24 Views of Mt. Fuji, by Hokusai"). I'd find a better word than "closure" because I'm SKZB. I'd riff on his views of fate and destiny and recurrence. I'd write about the influence of Dumas in his work - how well he could describe a duel and how colorful his worlds are - how entertaining his work is. I'd then turn to how interested he was in religion and philosophy. I'd assert that the above two points make him one of the most important SF writers of last century. Then I'd try to put his short stories into some context in terms of his novels, because the random reader is more likely to know the latter, and maybe I'd write briefly about the concerns of the stories in this collection. I'd quote him a lot, because it's scholarly, because it takes up space, and because it's RZ. I certainly wouldn't pay attention to what random fans of RZ think I should write, because my insight's deeper, as shown by my successful integration of RZ's influence into my work. Anyway, aside from maybe Tom Disch (whose book of criticism, _The Castle of Indolence_, I heartily recommend to anyone who reads contemporary poetry), or possibly the Dean of Pamlar University, if gya reads English, I can't conceive of anyone better to write about RZ than SKZB, and it suits my sense of justice. On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, David Silberstein wrote: > Steve Brust, in his weblog for 2003-07-17, says: > > ] I've been asked to do an introduction to a collection > ] of short stories by Roger Zelazny. I'm more than a little > ] flattered and honored. But I have no bloody clue what to > ] say. No one wants to read three thousand words of, "But. like, > ] he's really good!" I have this terrible urge to call Neil > ] Gaiman and say, "Here. You write it." > > Well, you could, perhaps, describe some of the tropes that run > through his works, like his heros possessing near-supernatural > strength, in many of the stories. Or you could point out that > there will be all of this action-adventure stuff going on, but > suddenly there will be transitions to these paragraphs of near > lyric beauty. Or you could talk about the playfulness that is > in even his serious stories, or his way of taking a silly idea > and just *running* with it, spinning out a story like a stage > magician who will just keep pulling scarves from nowhere. Or, > you could channel Zelazny, and write what *he* might have said > about his own works. > > Hmm. Who is the publisher? What stories are in this collection? > I am curious to know if there is something I haven't read. > >