Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Jack of Shadows chapter 6 misprint?

29 views
Skip to first unread message

John Callender

unread,
Sep 3, 2001, 1:00:23 PM9/3/01
to
I own the Signet paperback edition of Jack of Shadows (first printing,
August, 1972, per the copyright page). It is one of my favorite books,
but there is a misprint in Chapter 6 that has always bothered me. I
discuss it below, after a spoiler break.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

The misprint is in chapter 6, where Jack is having the conversation
with Morningstar atop Mount Panicus. In my edition it is toward the
bottom of page 67, where Jack and Morningstar are discussing the
daysider's satellite. My edition contains the following text:

"The ruler of that star," he [Jack] said, "has resisted all spells of
communication. It moves differently from the others and faster. It
does not twinkle. Why is this?" [spoken by Jack]

"It is not a true star, but an artificial object placed into orbit
above Twilight by the dayside scientists." [spoken by Morningstar]

"To what end?" [spoken by Jack, presumably]

"It was placed there to observe the border." [Morningstar?]

"Why?" [Jack?]

"Do they fear you?" [Morningstar?]

"We have no designs upon the lands of light." [Jack?]

"I know. But do you not also watch the border, in your own way?" asked
Jack. [spoken by Jack, obviously]

[me again]

If you follow the sequence of statements back and forth between Jack
and Morningstar, there's clearly a line missing, or a line that has
been moved to the wrong location, or something, since after the
statements without attribution, the statement attributed to Jack
should actually be Morningstar's. I've tried many times to deduce how
the passage is actually supposed to read, without success.
The problem seems to occur with the line "Do they fear you?", which
should be Morningstar's, but doesn't sound right for him. The
subsequent line ("We have no designs upon the lands of light.")
definitely sounds like Jack (since I don't think Morningstar would use
"we" in that way), but the line after that is a response that is
explicitly attributed to Jack, which, obviously, doesn't make sense.

My assumption is that this is a misprint that was introduced with the
first Signet paperback edition. I would be very interested in
locating, and buying, or just getting confirmation from someone who
has access to, either the original hardback edition, or any subsequent
printings of the paperback edition, to see if the passage is given
correctly there.

Otherwise, I'd be interested in hearing anyone else's opinions on how
the passage should be interpreted. This chapter is, in many ways, the
thematic heart of the book, with its discussion of the whole
subjective nature of reality and change as the result of consciousness
and all that, and it just really bugs me that I'm not able to read it
as Zelazny intended.

Thanks.

John Callender
j...@west.net

Steve Swope

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 1:22:56 AM9/4/01
to
On 3 Sep 2001 10:00:23 -0700, goo...@lies.com (John Callender) wrote:

> I own the Signet paperback edition of Jack of Shadows
> (first printing, August, 1972, per the copyright page).

I'm working from the 6th printing of the same edition. I'll retain
your spoiler break:

I see two possible ways to explain this.

First, the first line in the sequence you quoted could have been
spoken by Morningstar:

"The ruler of that star," he said, "has resisted all spells of


communication. It moves differently from the others and faster. It
does not twinkle. Why is this?"

The text doesn't explicitly specify that Jack is the speaker of this
line. If spoken by Morningstar, this would even out the remaining
lines, and the anomaly goes away.

I don't like this explanation, though, as the immediate antecedent for
the "he said" comes from the previous paragraph, which refers only to
Jack. Besides, Morningstar wouldn't have asked THAT question; Jack is
the one who's ignorant of the nature of artificial satellites.

So, while having Morningstar speak first satisfies the logic of the
conversational turn-taking that the paragraph structure implies, it
doesn't make sense in this context.

Second explanation: if you combine two of the paragraphs, the
turn-taking sequence makes sense. But which two? I propose that we
"steal" a line from Morningstar, so that it makes sense to end with
Jack, as the text explicitly states.

This line clearly belongs to Morningstar: "It is not a true star, but


an artificial object placed into orbit above Twilight by the dayside
scientists."

It makes sense for Jack to ask: "To what end?"

And for Morningstar to respond: "It was placed there to observe the
border."

Now, let's combine the next two short questions into a single
paragraph spoken by Jack. That gives us: "Why? Do they fear you?"

We agree that this is where the problem surfaces. This resolution
makes sense to me for two reasons:

1) Asking "Do they fear you?" isn't a sensible response to "Why?".
It seems more reasonable for a single speaker to follow the general
"Why" by suggesting, via the follow-up question, a plausible reply to
his original question.

2) In the next line, "We have no designs upon the lands of light.",
the speaker refers to himself in the plural, which seems a more
natural mannerism for Morningstar than for Jack.

We disagree on my second point, as you said:

> The subsequent line ("We have no designs upon the
> lands of light.") definitely sounds like Jack (since I don't
> think Morningstar would use "we" in that way),

Frankly, I haven't read the book in such a long time that I can't be
adamant about this, but a quick survey of the two or three pages
before and after this exchange reveals that Jack always refers to
himself in the singular, via "I" and "me".

Notice some additional editorial slop at the top of p 67: "It's
carcass would have smelled up your cliff" - of course, the possessive
form of "it" has no apostrophe.

Steve

Werner M. Schwab

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 2:22:13 PM9/4/01
to
OK, from the same edition. See below the spoiler break

"Steve Swope" <ssw...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:3b945db2...@news.mindspring.com...

I always read it like Morningstar answers the question of Jack "Why" with
a question: "Do THEY ( emphasis mine) fear YOU?" with the unspoken
argument, that the nightsiders fear the daylighters and, again an unspoken
argument that the daylighters should have reason to fear the nightsiders.
And subsequently Morningstar, after a pause, answers his own question: "We


have no designs upon the lands of light".

By the way, I do not think ist's a misprint. My other copy, a dutch
translation, sontains the same dialogue. Most probable solution: The Master
slipped up.

Werner


John Callender

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 4:04:26 PM9/4/01
to
ssw...@hotmail.com (Steve Swope) wrote in message news:<3b945db2...@news.mindspring.com>...

>
> Now, let's combine the next two short questions into a single
> paragraph spoken by Jack. That gives us: "Why? Do they fear you?"

I think you're right. At least, that explanation makes more sense than
anything I've ever been able to come up with. And I agree, upon
reflection, that Morningstar could well have used the "we" in the
subsequent line.

Thanks! I really appreciate getting your insight on this. I'm still
working on tracking down someone with the hardcover version of the
book, to see if the passage is different there, but in the meantime
I'll assume that this is the correct interpretation.

John Callender
j...@west.net

Blackjack Davy

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 4:34:01 PM9/4/01
to
goo...@lies.com (John Callender) wrote in message news:<147dfe25.01090...@posting.google.com>...

To my mind he passage itself seems a bit too internally consistent for
the confusion to be accounted for by a simple typo or printer's
lacuna; as the dialogue in question is a piece of minor verbal fencing
involved enough to make most readers unsure of who's speaking, I'm
guessing it would be not unreasonable for the author himself to lose
track of the odd line on occasion. I'll just borrow your spolier
break for a second...

> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *

My interpretation:
By assuming "Do they fear you?" to be Morningstar's line, intending to
prompt Jack to consider the question himself, rather than give him a
direct answer, the next line makes sense as Jack's reply, speaking on
behalf of Darksiders as a whole. After which, the first sentence of
the next paragraph would seem to indicate Morningstar speaking, but
this impression is reversed when the next sentence refers to
Morningstar's vigil, and is attributed explicitly to Jack. The best
sense I can make of that is to assume a break between the first and
second sentences in that paragraph, indicating a change of speaker
from Morningstar to Jack, which would make reasonable sense
narrative-wise, and evenihg out the allocation of speeech between
them. This being the case, the passage would read as follows:


"The ruler of that star," he [Jack] said, "has resisted all spells of
communication. It moves differently from the others and faster. It
does not twinkle. Why is this?"

"It is not a true star, but an artificial object placed into orbit

above Twilight by the dayside scientists." [was Morningstar's reply]

"To what end?" [asked Jack]

"It was placed there to observe the border." [Morningstar answered]

"Why?" [Jack demanded]

"Do they fear you?" [Morningstar asked instead]

"We have no designs upon the lands of light." [said Jack]

"I know.[" said Morningstar.]
[Pause]
["]But do you not also watch the border, in your own way?" asked Jack.

...And so on. Again, this is only my interpretation, but it's the
best I can come up with without taking undue liberties with the text.
Hope this helps.
-BJD

Matthew Manley

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 6:15:04 PM9/4/01
to
snip

> your spoiler break:
>
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
>
My question is, does Morningstar save Jack at the end? This is one time I
don't like the way Zelazny ends a book. I'd like to believe Morningstar
does save Jack, but the book ends before it happens. Does this indicate
that Morningstar didn't save Jack and so Jack's last thoughts are if he will
be saved?

Usually Zelazny's books end with such a satisfying finale. I enjoyed Jack
of Shadows a lot, and that is part of the reason that I was disappointed
with the ending. We're just left hanging.

Ah well...

Frost

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 6:59:34 PM9/4/01
to
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold. But what the hell, it's
home. And here "Matthew Manley" <mat...@prodigy.net> wrote on Tue, 04
Sep 2001 22:15:04 GMT:

I think it's fitting actually. Jack isn't one for a happy ending, he
was the most evil one on the world there (he even said so)... can you
imagine him living happily ever after?

No, he lives on the edge of things, or in the shadows between light
and darkness, between being saved and falling to his death.

-- R (remove 'geenrotzooi' to reply)

It was quite simple
If God could be god,
Why couldn't I?

Steve Swope

unread,
Sep 4, 2001, 10:33:45 PM9/4/01
to
On 4 Sep 2001 13:04:26 -0700, goo...@lies.com (John Callender) wrote:

> Thanks! I really appreciate getting your insight on this.

My pleasure. I'm glad you pointed out the problem. It's nice to run
into someone who has a critical ear for dialogue, and that's a puzzle
I enjoy.

> I'm still working on tracking down someone with the
> hardcover version of the book, to see if the passage is
> different there, but in the meantime I'll assume that this is
> the correct interpretation.

I'm sure I don't need to say this, but please do speak up if you find
another copy of the text.

My local library has a decent supply of Zelazny novels. I'll see if I
can turn anything up, too.

Steve

Scott Zrubek

unread,
Sep 9, 2001, 1:19:11 PM9/9/01
to
In article <9n369s$3vsk6$1...@reader03.wxs.nl>,

The Walker Hard copy edition, contains the passage exactly as does the
Signet. The Faber hard copy does, as well.

--
Scott Zrubek
Spring 2000 in Australia: http://www.itmm.com/australia
Zelazny & Amber: http://www.roger-zelazny.com

Jarry Dark

unread,
Sep 9, 2001, 9:23:21 PM9/9/01
to

I also have a problem with Morningstar speaking that line. Btw, I'd
often been annoyed by this confusing bit of dialogue and, after
numerous, readings, I also began reading "Why? Do they fear you?" as
one short paragraph spoken by Jack--with Jack referring to Morningstar
himeslf, specifically, as the cause of fear among the Daysiders and
the reason for the satellite's existence. This would make sense with
Morningstar's own existence, as he is a fairly obvious in-your-face
reminder to the Daysiders that magic is definitely real on half their
world.

I never liked "We have no designs upon the lands of light" spoken from
Morningstar, though. It sounded more like some rote observance a
darkisder and Power would make, than a deity of sorts who sees the big
picture--the part of the thrust of Morningstar's own talk about souls
is that HE doesn't consider himself "one" of the darksiders,
definitely isn't, anc onsiders them all MEN.

So why's he saying it? I think it might be Morningstar speaking for a
"we" that is neither darksider nor daysider. It might just as easily
have been said, in that case, to a daysider about the darkiders, if
the darkiders could employ sattelites. Possily here Morningstar is
identifying, for a moment, to those who bound him to Panicus.

0 new messages