Jeffrey Kiok <blackbird0 at yahoo.com> writes: [missing attrib] >> First off, the quality of writing, plotting, and >> characterization in Mr. Brust's novels are far superior. > > While I in no way mean to cheapen the quality of Brust's > work, I respectfully disagree. I mean to show you that > they are equals, in their own way. [...] > who cannot be struck by the beautiful, striking imagery of > Zelazny's work as his characters walk through shadow to a > new place? Me. I've never been impressed by "wierd shit for the sake of wierd shit". And by the second quintet that's all that was left. > Plot development again is equal. I do not wish to spoil > any of the plot for those who do not know the plot, so I > will remain silent on that account except to respectfully > disagree. Either I guessed it before it was reveiled (first half), or it was blatantly made up as he went along with no intention of making sense (second half). > The character development I think, is covered in the above > sections. Corwin was developed well, and Merlin not too badly, but everyone else seemed to have a new personality each time we meet them. That said, I just recently bought a copy of _A Night in the Lonesome October_ so I'd have my own copy to re-read next October. Now that's a book I'd put on the same level as Brust's (and damned funny too). I haven't read anything else by RZ, though _Lord of Light_ is on my to-read pile. --KG