The Immorality of Publishing DAWN OF AMBER
Pattern Ghost
In this essay I am going to discuss why it was morally wrong for Dawn of
Amber (DOA) to be written and published, why it is necessary for Zelazny and
SF fans to do something about this, and what they can do.
LEGAL BUT NOT MORAL
It is common knowledge that Zelazny did not want anyone writing in his Amber
universe. Apparently, though, he did not set up any legal structure to
prevent this from happening. Now, seven years after his untimely death, his
estate has hired a TV novelization writer to compose new books in Roger's
Amber universe.
The obvious motivation is money. The Amber books were and are tremendously
popular. One could slap "Amber" on a telephone book and it would sell.
I do not dispute the legal right of the estate to commission derivative
works in the Amber universe. They own the copyrights and they could have
Amber printed on a roll of toilet paper if they wished.
There is a difference between what is legal and what is moral and I could
easily engage in hyperbole. Here's a tame example: In the State of Nevada,
prostitution is legal. It's legal to engage in prostitution or patronize a
prostitute. Is it moral? Most people would say not.
In Europe, the moral rights of artists are more clearly recognized than in
the United States. In visual media, there has been some progress in some
states, such as California, in protecting those rights.
Roger created Amber. It was the product of his mind and his legacy to the
world. While he created other and possibly better work, Amber will always be
associated with him, just as Horatio Hornblower is with C.S. Forester and
Sherlock Holmes is with Arthur Conan Doyle. Any debasement of Amber will
reflect on how Roger is remembered.
Ayn Rand wrote an entire novel, "The Fountainhead", discussing the moral
rights of creators and their right not to have their work re-done by
second-rate nobodies.
Roger made the mistake of trusting his estate (I assume his children) to
protect his literary legacy. They bear most of the blame for violating their
father's wishes and sullying his name.
The hired writer has shamelessly puffed his "creation". He has defended his
work on the grounds of "If I didn't do it, someone else would."
Would they?
Roger collaborated with a number of writers, he edited collections, and
created a shared universe in "Forever After". One would think the first
choice would to approach one of these original writers. I don't know if the
estate did this or not. If they did, then these writers obviously turned
them down and respected a fellow writer's wishes.
Is it necessary to spend any time discussing the moral bankruptcy of "If I
didn't do it, someone else would." Such an excuse can be used to justify
everything from mass murder to -- well, writing hack novels in a dead
author's shadow.
GRESHAM'S LAW; WILL BAD AMBER DRIVE OUT GOOD?
In economics, Gresham's Law states that "Bad money will drives good."
We've already seen this to a certain extent in SF. Go into the store of a
major book chain. Out of four shelves, at least one will be filled with Star
Trek and Star Wars novelizations, game-related books, and graphic novels.
These things may have their place but they are not good SF. However, their
place on the shelf takes up space that might have been devoted to good SF.
I found DOA shelved with Roger's books in the SF section. In my area, you
can normally find one copy of The Great Book of Amber" in any major book
chain. But that's it. I haven't seen the individual novels for years.
If the Amber derivatives are successful, we might very well find them
crowding -- or crowding out -- the real Zelazny on the shelves. What happens
when you recommend Amber to a friend and they come back with one of these
prequels or other derivative? And the next time you see them, they look at
you like you've lost your mind when you tell them how wonderful Amber is?
The current hired writer plans to do three "prequels". However, there is
nothing to keep him or the estate from doing more. A novelization writer
should be able to crank out 6+ novels per year.
And that's only one writer. The estate could easily franchise Amber and hire
more writers if the derivatives are financially successful.
Might we one day walk into a bookstore and see as many Amber derivatives as
you now find Star Trek novelizations? I shudder to think of that.
WHAT SHOULD A READER DO?
Whether DOA is good or bad, it was morally wrong to publish it. Since the
motivation for Amber derivatives is clearly money, the way to fight them is
not to buy them and to encourage others not to buy them.
Fortunately, this is easy to do. DOA is a bad book.
I reviewed it in detail elsewhere but, in brief, as a book in its own right,
the dialog is trite and the first-person narration is embarrassingly
amateurish. It would make a 1930's pulp writer blush.
As an Amber book, it mischaracterizes two major characters from the series
and constantly violates the Amber canon. The hired writer is ignorant of his
subject matter. You won't get your Amber fix here.
Why don't we simply ignore the book? Again, the danger is that there so many
Amber fans that even a certain percentage buying out of curiosity might make
the book a financial success and encourage more such travesties.
No, the publication of the book needs to be criticized for violating the
moral rights of SF great Roger Zelazny.
The book needs to be criticized for being a badly written book and a
non-Amber book.
The book is a parody of Amber and it itself should be parodied.
Tyrants can not withstand laughter and neither can bad books.
© 2002 Pattern Ghost
Carl Henderson
news:_g9c9.13090$u7.8...@news.direcpc.com:
> THE IMMORALITY OF PUBLISHING DAWN OF AMBER
[much snipped]
Okay. I'm getting DAWN OF AMBER now.
--
Carl Henderson carl.he...@airmail.net
RAC/RACM FAQ http://www.enteract.com/~katew/faqs/miscfaq.htm
Blaid
Roger's from 1991 (when I contacted him on behalf of the Baltimore
Science Fiction Society for the annual Balticon Convention) until his
death in 1995. We corresponded frequently via mail and telephone, and
I was lucky enough to have him edit some of my earlier work and
provide invaluable insight into the writing business. Sadly, I was to
fly to GenCon in 1995 to meet him in person, when he died 2 months
prior on the day before my son's 2nd birthday. Even back in the early
to middle 1990's, he was against the notion of allowing other author's
to play in his Amber.
Now, I have nothing against the author of Dawn of Amber. I can't,
as of yet, because I have not read the book and don't really plan to
do so. What perplexes me is that elsewhere in these threads someone
mentioned the book was written using notes left behind from Roger.
Yet, in an interview Jane Lindskold did some years back, she stated
that Roger rarely ever kept notes and hardly ever outlinned, neither
of which he did when it came to Amber. Roger, himself, stated this in
various interviews as well. It was one of the reasons collaborating
with Fred Saberhagen (sp?) was such a learning experiences. Fred
would outline his work in great detail, yet Roger did not. I also
have letters where Roger made mention that Amber is in his mind, and
he just lets the characters tell their story.
I am confused as to why some other author, more known for their
original works, didn't write the novel. The only thing I can do,
without real knowledge of the process that went into hiring the
writer, is to side with Pattern Ghost and suspect they turned the
project down.
What I cannot do, however, is tear down John's narrative style just
because he is a "franchise writer". Again, I am not defending his
style as I have not read it, but Michael Stackpole is also a franchise
writer. I am not too happy with his Star Wars, Battletech, or
Shadowrun novels; but his original work, like "Revenant: Talion", is a
joy to read.
But the bottom line is simply thus: it "was" morally wrong for the
estate to authorize the book and for a fellow writer to compose it.
Without bashing either party (there is no point, welcome to American
Capitalism), I simply prefer to honor Roger's wishes and cannot read
the book.
Blaid.
Brandon Shaw
of his books, "Doorways in the Sand," several decades ago. Therefore, I
feel qualified to partipate in this discussion, and I would like to say
that, speaking of morality, for you to refer to Mr. Betancourt as a
"second-rate nobody," when you know very well that he reads this board, is
mean-spirited, as is, in fact, the entire thrust of your message. No one
can ever duplicate what Zelazny did, but I think DOA is a well-written
tribute to the Amber series, and I'm glad I bought it. If you don't like
the idea of the Zelazny estate authorizing other writers to create stories
in the Amber universe, then I would advise you not to buy it.
"Pattern Ghost" <sl...@lkdfjs.com> wrote in message
news:_g9c9.13090$u7.8...@news.direcpc.com...
Richard Shewmaker
> THE IMMORALITY OF PUBLISHING DAWN OF AMBER
>
> In this essay I am going to discuss why it was morally wrong for Dawn of
> Amber (DOA) to be written and published, why it is necessary for Zelazny and
> SF fans to do something about this, and what they can do.
Hm. This is an interesting one. I'm not angry, so please don't read any
angry intent into what I write.
I was an Amber fan right from the start, with the first novel. I grew up
with the wait for the next book being something which I can still
remember vividly. I was crushed when I read the fifth book and it seemed
the series was over. I felt there were so many secrets still to reveal,
so many things I wanted to know, and I liked the characters, all of
them, and wanted to see more of them.
I was thrilled when, at least 10 years later (I believe) "Trumps of
Doom" appeared. Unlike many, I loved the second set of books. It did
exactly what I had been hoping for: more adventures in the Amber world,
question answered, new questions raised, and, for me, most excitingly,
an examination of the Courts of Chaos. I was, again, crushed when the
series ended, and until Zelazny died, I kept alive a hope that he would
start writing a third series.
OK, so that's my Amber series background.
With regard to Betancourt's new Amber books, I don't think it's worth
making a fuss one way or the other. Here's why.
I doubt anyone will become confused w/regard to a book by Betancourt
being a Zelazny book. They will be books based on Zelazny's Amber
concept. Whether he did it purely for monetary reasons or as a tribute
to a tremendous writer, a combination thereof, or for other reasons, I
doubt even he knows for certain. That people like me are interested in
reading the first one, in hopes that he will have done a good job of
working with and furthering Zelazny's creation, shows a love for the
original books and a hope that something new and wonderful can come from
Betancourt's work. If I read the first one and it strikes me as a false
or bad interpretation of Zelazny's work, or if it's wretched written,
that will be the end of my interst. If he does a great job, then I'll
appreciate the books as a furtherance of my favorite of Zelazy's works,
and will be very glad that Betancourt decided to make this attempt.
Just a side note: it seems funny to me now to see the fuss about
Betancourt. At the time the first book of the second series came out,
there were all sorts of die-hard fans who blistered Zelazny himself for
picking up the Amber pen again, and they accused him of all the things
with which the initial poster of this thread accuses Betancourt. People
are pretty silly, often.
Will Betancourt's books supplant Zelazny's? I can't imagine so. At best,
they will stand next to them as a great series of Betancourt books
written in Zelazny's Amber concept. At worst, they'll quickly be
forgotten. If they prove popular they can only help get the 10 Zelazny
Amber novels back on the shelves, which we most likely all would agree
would be a great thing.
Morally? Hm. Each of us needs to determine on his own if we want to read
"Dawn of Amber." This isn't prostituion in Vegas, and I was actually
laughing at the image of two bookshelves of Amber à la Star Trek in a
bookstore. Right.
I hope to get the book soon, and if it is poorly written, or it appears
that Betancourt interpreted the Amber books in a way which feels wrong
to me, or if it's clear he did not read them carefully and is making
errors which a careful reader would not have made, then I'll come back
here and let the NG know.
To date I've only seen melodramatic statements on both sides, but
nothing concrete. For someone like me, the only way to dissuade me from
reading a book like "Dawn of Amber" would be to show me, with examples,
any one of the three items I mentioned in the paragraph above. In this
case, since that has not happened, I'm going to find out for myself. If
Betancourt really blew it, I'll be right back in here with a grenade;
and if he did a great job, I'll say that also. In either case, I'll say
why I feel the way I do.
Have a better one, all.
Pattern Ghost
> disappeared from the shelves of most bookstores, including the major
> national chains. He is a forgotten man and only a few specialist
> stores stock a few of his books. Hopefully DOA will be read by a new
> generation of readers who will seek out the originals.
>
This is basically the situation in the U.S. also. Until recently the only
Zelazny books you saw in the bookstores were Donnerjack and Lord Demon.
Ibooks has recently re-issued some of Zelazny's novels and short stories in
trade paperback editions. I will give them credit for that but they also
need to take their share of the blame for DOA (they are the US publisher).
Pattern Ghost
> What perplexes me is that elsewhere in these threads someone
> mentioned the book was written using notes left behind from Roger.
I think this poster was mistaken.
I seem to recall that Mr. Betancourt stated in the group a while back that
there were no notes.
> I am confused as to why some other author, more known for their
> original works, didn't write the novel. The only thing I can do,
> without real knowledge of the process that went into hiring the
> writer, is to side with Pattern Ghost and suspect they turned the
> project down.
I agree. If it had to be done (and I still don't think it should have
been), I would've preferred George R.R. Martin.
Or David Drake. In his story in "Forever After" he captured Roger's style
and whimsy.
Pattern Ghost
> nothing concrete. For someone like me, the only way to dissuade me from
> reading a book like "Dawn of Amber" would be to show me, with examples,
In the thread that I started "DOA OK but not Amber (spoilers)" I gave some
examples. That review was cool-tempered.
There is a "professional" review on SFsite.com.
http://www.sfsite.com/09a/am135.htm
It is more negative than mine.
I preferred the Corwin books to the Merlin ones but I think Roger hit his
stride again with Knight of Shadows and Prince of Chaos.
The post-Prince of Chaos stories are fascinating. I think the spikards
would've peeled back another layer of reality in the Amber universe.
Pattern Ghost
of the world's Amber experts has corrected my assumption about the children
and the estate. I am happy to make the correction.
>Roger made the mistake of trusting his estate (I assume his children) to
>protect his literary legacy. They bear most of the blame for violating
>their father's wishes and sullying his name
"Roger Zelazny's estate is in the hands of his estranged wife (they were
separated and the in process of divorce at the time of his death). Roger's
three
children have been completely cut out."
DworkinBarimen
being the only one writing Amber stories were BOTH explcitly in the context of
someone approaching him and asking him if they could set a story in the
Amberverse.....
DB
JD Lail
> I am confused as to why some other author, more known for their
> original works, didn't write the novel. The only thing I can do,
> without real knowledge of the process that went into hiring the
> writer, is to side with Pattern Ghost and suspect they turned the
> project down.
1)Many Authors don't want to work with anothers IP. Period.
2)The money is going to be less.
3)Prior Committments. Well known authors might squeeze in a novella
out of order but not much more than that and this was a multi book
series. In someone else'd universe. And no "crib notes" to make
things easier.
> Blaid sayed.
> But the bottom line is simply thus: it "was" morally wrong for the
> estate to authorize the book and for a fellow writer to compose it.
> Without bashing either party (there is no point, welcome to American
> Capitalism), I simply prefer to honor Roger's wishes and cannot read
> the book.
You all have failed to establish that morally wrong item to my
satisfaction. I can think of an infinitely more logical reason for why
Roger did not want other people messing in his IP and that's fear of
that happened to Marion Zimmer Bradley.
In any case Roger could have made all this moot in his will. He chose
not to do so. End of story.
One Final Point concerning Shelf Space in bookstores. Evidentally your
B&N's are waaaay different from mine. In my part of the Galaxy, when
authors die usually interest in their books begins to wane* after a
few months. Yes there the are exceptions, but they are the exception
and not the rule. And even that will decline as time passes and the
writing style becomes dated.
What keeps backlist in print is new product. DoA will get more shelf
space for the original 10 books because it will generate demand for
them. New product brings new readers, its that simple.
*This is more applicable to the Sci-Fi side than the Fantasy and I
class most of RZ's work as the latter.
Matthew Manley
"JD Lail" <jl...@foothills.net> wrote in message
news:ikau6sot421vmc6t2...@4ax.com...
> > Blaid sayed.
> > I am confused as to why some other author, more known for their
> > original works, didn't write the novel. The only thing I can do,
> > without real knowledge of the process that went into hiring the
> > writer, is to side with Pattern Ghost and suspect they turned the
> > project down.
>
> 1)Many Authors don't want to work with anothers IP. Period.
> 2)The money is going to be less.
> 3)Prior Committments. Well known authors might squeeze in a novella
> out of order but not much more than that and this was a multi book
> series. In someone else'd universe. And no "crib notes" to make
> things easier.
>
> > Blaid sayed.
> > But the bottom line is simply thus: it "was" morally wrong for the
> > estate to authorize the book and for a fellow writer to compose it.
> > Without bashing either party (there is no point, welcome to American
> > Capitalism), I simply prefer to honor Roger's wishes and cannot read
> > the book.
>
> You all have failed to establish that morally wrong item to my
> satisfaction. I can think of an infinitely more logical reason for why
> Roger did not want other people messing in his IP and that's fear of
> that happened to Marion Zimmer Bradley.
>
> In any case Roger could have made all this moot in his will. He chose
> not to do so. End of story.
But it was pretty well known that he had said as much.
>
> One Final Point concerning Shelf Space in bookstores. Evidentally your
> B&N's are waaaay different from mine. In my part of the Galaxy, when
> authors die usually interest in their books begins to wane* after a
> few months. Yes there the are exceptions, but they are the exception
> and not the rule. And even that will decline as time passes and the
> writing style becomes dated.
Unless there is a children's movie made about it, or a number of really good
movies.
>
> What keeps backlist in print is new product. DoA will get more shelf
> space for the original 10 books because it will generate demand for
> them. New product brings new readers, its that simple.
Not necessarily new books, but new product I will agree. Kids, teenagers
and even adults need a reason to pick up a new book, and unfortunately
Zelazny is not a household word, nor is Amber. Note that three fairly well
received movies were based on Philip K. Dick novels/short stories and he
still isn't a best seller (although you can find Minority Report and other
stories at the local Wal-Mart).
>
> *This is more applicable to the Sci-Fi side than the Fantasy and I
> class most of RZ's work as the latter.
JGB pointed out, if they are going to be written regardless, we're better
off with someone who had a lot of respect for the author. Like Martin Sheen
playing JFK so that someone who didn't have as much respect for him wouldn't
get the part (he once said that he felt that no one should play JFK).
JGB has certainly voiced a lot of respect for RZ, and has shown us all a lot
of respect by posting and reading our comments. That is time that might be
more productively spent writing a new novel, with family, or if he's single,
looking for a date. That should count for something.
Matthew Manley
"DworkinBarimen" <dworkin...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020902022213...@mb-fb.aol.com...
Who were these people? Could it have been that RZ didn't want these people
in particular to ever write Amber stories? Telling them that he didn't want
anyone to write these stories would be a quick and tactful way to put it to
rest. If he had given an invitation there would have been a number of
people clammoring to write them, and is that really what he or anyone would
have wanted? Anthology books set in the Amber Universe?
A prequel is different, and though DOA will never be the definitive Amber,
though I'll never think of it as a Zelazny novel (not even as close as the
Alien Speedway novels), it doesn't offend me much. As long as they don't
turn it into a huge franchise with multiple authors churning out several
novels a year at least.
>
>
Chris Camfield
I think it's a little trickier than that. You might remember that when we were
discussing the pending writing & publication of Betancourt's book, that some
authors who knew Roger chimed in saying they weren't happy to hear of this turn
of events.
For instance, George R. R. Martin wrote, last December 10th:
"I was sickened and dismayed to hear about these books, rather than simply
surprised.
Roger did not mind creating worlds and characters for other writers to play
in; witness his ALIEN SPEEDWAY franchise and his contribution to WILD CARDS.
However, Amber and Corwin were special to him. He regarded Amber as his and
his alone, and said several times, in no uncertain terms, that he did not want
any other writers writings about Amber. Ever.
Of course, he's dead now, and there's a buck to be made.
Those of us who were lucky enough to be Roger's friends in life will not be
reading these books, out of respect to the man, his memory, and his clearly
expressed wishes."
Blaid
> satisfaction. I can think of an infinitely more logical reason for why
> Roger did not want other people messing in his IP and that's fear of
> that happened to Marion Zimmer Bradley.
>
> In any case Roger could have made all this moot in his will. He chose
> not to do so. End of story.
>
case, as a friend and correspondent of the late Roger Zelazny, whether
he put his wishes concerning Amber in his will or not is a moot point.
Like Neil Gaiman, Steven Brust, and a quite a few others that knew
him during his life I have chosen not to purchase, read, or endourse
the book. On the flip side, I have also chosen not to attack the
estate, writer, or the work itself. Regardless of his will, at no
point did myself or many of the others writers that knew him ever hear
him change his wishes towards Amber. Having heard nothing to the
contrary, my own morals suggest I stay away from the book. For those
that prefer to read it, go right ahead, enjoy. I have nothing against
it outside of myself.
JJM1954
Pattern Ghost
knew this before").
In addition to Blaid and George R.R. Martin, we also have:
1. Neil Gaiman
2. Walter Jon Williams
3. Erick Wujcik
1. From Neil Gaiman's web page:
http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal_archives/2001_12_01_archive.asp
"Another FAQ e-mail: I just recently heard about this John Betancourt fellow
who has purchased the rights to write Amber novels, and that he plans on
releasing a prequel trilogy set in the Amber universe, and I wanted to know
if you, as a friend and fan of Mr. Zelazny, have any thoughts on the matter
you'd be willing to share.
Well, I remember Roger talking to me and Steve Brust. We'd just suggested
that if he did an anthology of other-people-write-Amber-stories that we'd be
up for it (understatement), and he puffed on his pipe, and said -- extremely
firmly -- that he didn't want anyone else to write Amber stories but him.
I don't believe he ever changed his mind on that.
(When Roger knew he was dying, though, he did nothing to rewrite his will,
which means that his literary executor is a family member from whom he was
somewhat estranged -- not someone who would have kept Roger's wishes
paramount. Which is a pity.)
Would I love to write an Amber story? God, yes. Would Steve Brust?
Absolutely. Will we? Nope, because Roger told us he explicitly didn't want
it to happen.
Am I going to read the John Betancourt Amber books? Nope. (But I probably
wouldn't have read them even if they were authorised, endorsed and ordered
by Roger.) Do I think that they are bad or evil or something? Not really --
I don't know much about them, and it's perfectly possible that his point of
view is that if it's going to happen anyway it might as well be done with
respect (a motivation that has, in the past, impelled me to get involved
with several projects)."
2. Walter Jon Williams, apparently posted here last December.
****
Message 53 in thread
From: Walter Jon Williams (wal...@thuntek.net)
Subject: New Amber Books
Newsgroups: alt.books.roger-zelazny
Date: 2001-12-18 13:03:42 PST
Put me down as another of Roger's friends dismayed, though hardly
surprised, by the announcement of the new Amber volumes.
The fact is that Roger was not as "practical and pragmatic" as some here
assume, or as his friends could have wished. Despite knowing that he
faced a potentially fatal illness, Roger died without updating his will,
which left his literary estate in the hands of a family member from whom
he had become estranged. Though he told his friends often enough that he
didn't want his work sharecropped, he failed to put his wishes in binding
legal form, and the result is the forthcoming Amber prequel.
I should like to reiterate that there is a considerable difference between
using someone's property with permission, and without such permission. I
think it's perfectly okay to play in someone else's sandbox, provided you
receive his consent. I myself wrote a sequel to one of Roger's stories,
"The Graveyard Heart," and this was done with Roger's cheerful
cooperation. The fan fiction published in AMBERZINE was done so with
Roger's bemused permission. Roger's two postumously published novels were
completed by a person Roger had approved, and with whom he had discussed
the works and his ideas for them.
But the Amber prequels are being done against his repeatedly expressed
wishes. The legal permissions are there, but the moral permissions are
sadly lacking.
3. From Erick Wujcik:
There are no 'notes' related to Amber left behind by Roger Zelazny.
Roger did leave certain 'notes' behind, all of which were left with Jane
Lindskold (and she used them to complete the novels "Donnerjack" and "Lord
Demon").
Roger made it perfectly clear, on many occasions, public and private, that
his writing of Amber was completely 'intuitive and spontaneous.'
Other works relating to Amber (including the "Guide to Castle Amber") were
based on the original source material and verbal conversations (I've
personally reviewed the audio tapes).
So. No notes. No letters. No lost manuscripts. I wish that it were
otherwise, but Roger didn't use such things unless he was specifically
planning on a colaboration. And he made it very clear that he would never
allow another writer to touch Amber.
Sorry for the intrusion,
Erick
--
Erick Wujcik
Phage Press
P.O. Box 310519
Detroit MI 48231-0519
USA
"Chris Camfield" <ccam...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3d736ca...@news1.on.sympatico.ca...