Character Development and
Psychological Growth:
Roger Zelazny’s "Great Theme"

CONTENTS

Click on a subheading to jump to it.

Roger Zelazny was a science fiction writer who won high praise and many awards for his unique approach to writing science fiction. His concentration on character development in his stories was driven by a belief that one can only achieve psychological growth through the impact of experience, and that a man must strike a balance between the creative and destructive forces within himself and all things.

In his story "A Rose for Ecclesiastes," his character Gallinger restores fertility and hope to a dying race by countering their pessimistic attitude. In the process, he is changed himself when he is forced to come to grips with his own excessive vanity.

In the novel Lord of Light, a man's struggle to liberate the masses is played out against the background of the ancient Hindu and Buddhist religions. The immortality achieved by his society affords him the time to grow and change until he finally reaches enlightenment. At this point, he is able to overthrow the corrupt "gods" and bring about a new age of free thinking to the oppressed population.

In "He Who Shapes," an arrogant psychotherapist tries to place himself outside the normal rules of men and ignores the signs of his own neuroses. Since he is unable to change as a person, to grow or evolve emotionally, he becomes trapped in the fantasy world of his dream therapy and goes insane.

Zelazny’s ideas about psychological growth and the value of change through experience is apparent in all three of these stories, and his philosophy of form and chaos can fit nicely into their plots as well.

INTRODUCTION

Roger Zelazny (1937-1995) was a leading writer in the new wave science fiction (SF) movement that started in the mid 1960’s. Though there was no organized "movement," Zelazny and his contemporaries were categorized under the term coined by editor Judith Merril (Lindskold 6) to distinguish their work from the mainstream SF. As Zelazny said in his 1973 interview, the SF of the 40’s and 50’s consisted primarily of idea-based stories. The author would either take a certain innovation of science or technology and project it into the future, answering the question "If this goes on…?," or take a more abstract idea and create a situation in which he could answer "What if…?" Though many of these ideas were truly remarkable, the stories themselves were written in "a kind of nuts-and-bolts prose" with little attention to style.

Stylistic experimentation, however, was one of the hallmarks of the new wave writers. They borrowed tools common to mainstream fiction and adapted them to their own needs. Stylistic innovations like expressionism, stream-of-consciousness, and interior monologue had been foreign to SF writing. Along with these innovative styles, they moved their subject matter into the "softer" sciences like psychology and anthropology. They explored theological, social, and sexual issues. They also paid greater attention to characterization, of which Zelazny was a master.

Zelazny began his career as a published SF writer in 1962, writing short stories in the evenings while working as a claims representative for the Social Security Administration, a practice he maintained until 1969, when he left government work to write full time. From the beginning, Zelazny virtually exploded onto the literary scene. In 1963, he received his first Hugo Award nomination (from the World Science Fiction Convention) for "A Rose for Ecclesiastes." In 1966 and 1967, two of his novelettes competed against each other (Lindskold 5). He won the Hugo in 1966 for best novel, This Immortal, and again in 1968 for Lord of Light. He also won the Nebula Award (from the Science Fiction Writers of America) in 1965 for best novella, "He Who Shapes," and best novelette, "The Doors of His Face, the Lamps of His Mouth."

In the period after 1969, he concentrated more on writing novels, but he still continued to receive recognition from both fans and peers. In 1975, he won the Nebula and the Hugo for best novella, "Home is the Hangman." He won three more Hugos for best novelette, "Unicorn Variation," in 1983, best novella, "Twenty-Four Views of Mount Fuji by Hokusai," in 1986, and for best novelette, "Permafrost," in 1987. He also won several awards in foreign markets, including the Prix Apollo in 1972 for the French translation of Isle of the Dead.

Zelazny distinguished his work in many ways from the average. He believed that there was nothing in mainstream literature that didn’t have a place in SF. He was a student of the classics—He was a student of everything. He never tired of learning and maintained a diverse reading program throughout his life. And there was very little in Zelazny’s life that didn’t turn up in one form or another in his fiction. His works are filled with myths, legends, and folklore; references to great literature, poetry, jazz or folk music; themes of immortality, love, free will, existentialism, revenge, religion; and all are written in a poetic prose that has earned him a title of genius.

His skill at writing alone would have made him a brilliant author, but equally impressive is his ability to develop hero-sized, yet psychologically true-to-life characters. Character develop-ment is the overriding theme throughout his work. In fact, Joseph Sanders calls the potential for psychological growth in his characters "Zelazny’s great theme" (Yoke, Roger Zelazny 7). His belief that one can achieve psychological growth only through personal experience is what drove his stories. And it is his characters’ personal demons and what they do to overcome them (or fail to) that make his stories so complex, so dynamic.

In this report I will explore aspects of that "great theme" in three of his works: "A Rose for Ecclesiastes," Lord of Light, and "He Who Shapes." I will also briefly describe Zelazny’s personal philosophy, which drove him to explore the human experience in so many ways. My sources include several criticisms and interpretations of his work, two biographies, and essays and an interview in which Zelazny himself describes his writing methods and views on SF as a whole. I also have extensive knowledge of Zelazny’s work, having read 34 of his novels and 70 of his short stories and essays. I will conclude the report by tying together various parts of the three stories and fitting them into the ideas of "form and chaos."

In his pamphlet on Zelazny and Ohio SF author Andre Norton, Carl Yoke writes that Zelazny’s characters’ success is "a direct measure of their relationship to the elemental law of the universe," a relationship governed by Zelazny’s personal philosophy of "form and chaos," which Yoke describes as follows:

In brief, his philosophy posits that two equal but opposite forces are at work in the universe, forever interacting dynamically, and that the two forces are mirrored in all life forms. Form is best described as the creative urge, the compulsion to synthesize. Chaos is best described as the analytic urge, the compulsion to tear down, to break into the simplest components. The interaction of the forces creates change, and change is fundamental to the universe. The pulse of their interaction is its rhythm. Humans fix upon earthly things and pleasures and become so desirous of them that they build up psychological complexes. The complexes block out their awareness of the rhythm as it flows through them. Zelazny believes, however, that if the complexes can be broken down under the impact of experience, humans will advance to higher and healthier states of consciousness. Awareness of the rhythm flowing through himself is what man recognizes as instinct or intuition (19).

So, to Zelazny, the goal of humanity is to grow psychologically, a process catalyzed by life experiences and brief sparks of intuition that give us glimpses of that goal. This philosophy, or rather the personal development demanded by it, is what guides the plots of most of Zelazny’s stories, including the three I describe in this paper.

"A ROSE FOR ECCLESIASTES"

-SUMMARY

The protagonist of this story is a poet by the name of Gallinger who has an almost legendary capacity for learning languages. Because of his skill, he is selected for a second expedition to Mars to translate the sacred books of the Martian culture. There he falls in love with a beautiful dancer named Braxa, sleeps with her, and impregnates her. It had been assumed that the entire Martian race was sterile. Apparently this sterility affects only the males, and it is possible to bring new life to a dying race. Shortly after this discovery, Braxa disappears, and Gallinger searches frantically for her. He learns that, because of their adherence to the holy texts, the Mothers have sentenced Braxa and the unborn child to death.

Gallinger won’t stand for it. He finds Braxa and brings her back to the temple. He subdues the hulking Martian guard and storms into their penetralium, not stopping to remove his boots. He preaches to them a new and heretical gospel, mocking the very words he speaks. And he has given Braxa a rose, a form of life entirely new to Mars. Through these actions he accidentally fulfills an ancient prophecy, and Braxa and the baby’s lives are spared. But outside the temple, the Head Priestess M’Cwyie tells him that Braxa had never loved him, that she was only doing her duty by working to fulfill the prophecy. Though he has succeeded in saving an entire race from extinction, he is personally shattered and tries to commit suicide by overdosing on sleeping pills. He fails, and wakes up in the ship’s dispensary on the return trip to Earth.

-ANALYSIS

Gallinger’s main personal flaw is vanity. His success on Earth has made him so con-ceited that he treats most people like dirt. Early in the story, his boss, Emory, calls him "‘…the most antagonistic bastard I’ve ever had to work with!’" and asks, "‘Why the hell don’t you act like a human being sometime and surprise everybody?’" He then delivers the message that the Martians have agreed to meet with him, and warns, "‘Don’t treat them the way you treat us’" (Four 167).

Gallinger’s vanity is a psychological complex blocking his growth. As is often the case in life, the mechanism for change in Gallinger is love. His love for Braxa tempers his arrogance and teaches him humility. This is shown again in the words of Emory, who confronts him over his wild search (for Braxa) in the desert: "‘You have been behaving differently these past couple months. You’ve even been downright civil on occasion…I didn’t know anything mattered that strongly to you.’" Gallinger’s only response is to bow his head (Four 198-199). The final, irreparable, change comes when Gallinger learns that Braxa’s love was a lie. This news is more than he can handle. He is finally shown that he is only a man, no better than any other, and he can be used and thrown away like any other; and he tries to kill himself rather than deal with that realization. But Zelazny wouldn’t let that happen. He forces his hero to live and to learn from his experiences.

It is not only Gallinger who changes. His deeds force change on the entire Martian society. He restores fertility to the dead planet. He opposes the Mothers’ self-destructive pessimism, brought on by their religious scriptures, with scriptures from the Bible: the Book of Ecclesiastes, with its own pessimistic attitude saying all is vanity. He has to blaspheme their religion in order to fulfill their religious prophecy. Gallinger is the agent of chaos that revitalizes the stagnant form of the ancient culture that’s killing the Martians. In the end, the Mothers realize that there is more to be experienced than what they have known. They will mate with the Earth men, rebuild their civilization, and they will cultivate flowers on Mars. The man and Mars change each other, and with that change each can grow.

LORD OF LIGHT

-SUMMARY

This is a novel about a world conquered by Earth men who, through ultratechnology, give themselves godlike powers and set themselves up as the Hindu gods to rule the common people. Called The First, they have achieved a kind of immortality by transferring their identities from old bodies to new ones. These deicrats (as Zelazny calls them) through centuries of "divine" rule, have become corrupt, and only one among them will openly oppose their tyranny. He is the hero, "…who was variously known as Mahasamatman, Kalkin, Manjusri, Siddhartha, Tathagatha, Binder, Maitreya, the Enlight-ened One, Buddha and Sam" (Lord 16). Sam, in looking for an ideal way to oppose the Hindu "gods," takes on the personification of the Buddha and teaches the Way of Enlightenment. Preaching Accelerationism, "the belief that the Hindu pantheon should share their technological knowledge with the other people of the planet" (Krulik 70), Sam liberates the minds of the people and turns some of them away from the laws of Karma and the gods. He then assumes his old identity as Siddhartha, the Binder, and releases the old energy beings that once ruled the planet to raise an army against the city of Heaven. Though he gains allies among the First and costs the forces of Heaven dearly in the battle of Keenset, he is defeated, and his atman or soul is scattered into the magnetic cloud surrounding the planet.

During his absence of some 50 years, the gods, severely weakened, are unable to stop the spread of Acceleration and Buddhism. They no longer have control over the entire population of men. Another of the First called Nirriti, who was the crew’s chaplain and who left Heaven of his own will, decides to take advantage of the situation and wage a Christian holy war to destroy utterly the Hindu religion. At about the same time, Yama-Dharma, Lord of Death, one of Sam’s early allies, manages to collect his atman and reincarnate him to lead them again in their fight against Heaven. But Sam and his forces finally end up joining the Hindu gods against their greater enemy, Nirriti. After this second great battle at Khaipur, Sam’s side is the true winner: Nirriti is destroyed, and the old gods are weakened sufficiently that men are free to live as they choose; only Vishnu, the Preserver, reigns in Heaven.

-ANALYSIS

There are direct parallels to be drawn between the interaction of Hinduism and Buddhism and Zelazny’s form and chaos theory. Yoke writes:

In the relationship between Hinduism and Buddhism, Zelazny found a perfect metaphor for his own doctrine. The parallels between the historical relationship of the two great religions and the novel are obvious. Buddha found Hinduism to be static and corrupt, weighed down by its own dead and meaningless ritual, insensitive to the common man, and too complex to be understood by him. Sam …found the Hindu system of the novel …to be the same. Buddha’s mission on Earth was to reform the old religion, not to start a new one. Sam’s mission…is identical, to reform the old religion through Accelerationism. Both men are instruments of change (Reader’s Guide 61).

And we see the change brought on in the world by Sam’s actions. He must be a force of destruction in order to restore the proper rhythm to men’s lives. Sam himself evolves throughout the course of the story. His immortality grants him the length of time necessary for such personal change. Each of his many names reflects a different person he has become, even to the point that he says, about the Buddha, "‘I don’t recall any longer whether I was really that one, or whether it was another. But I am gone away from that one now’" (Lord 311). At first, he takes a Machiavellian approach to it all, doing whatever he deems necessary to achieve his goals. Though he spends years as the Buddha, he doesn’t believe a word of his own teaching; he is still willing to murder Brahma and Shiva in the city of Heaven; he still goes to battle against the gods. And he loses, because he is flawed: he has failed to integrate all the creative and destructive forces within himself. But by the end of the story, Sam has become all of the men/gods he once was, and his side prevails. He has managed to attain true enlightenment.

"HE WHO SHAPES"

-SUMMARY

Charles Render is a psychologist, called a neuroparticipation therapist, or a Shaper, who treats his patients using a sophisticated machine called a "ro-womb" that allows him to enter and manipulate their dreams. He agrees to work with a blind psychologist, Eileen Shallot in introducing her to a visual world through the use of dream therapy. But it goes wrong. Eileen is incapable of handling the trauma of all this new sensory input. A couple of times in a session, she gets carried away by the spectacle and actually manages to influence the aspect of the dream. In the end, she becomes lost in that visual world; she wrests control away from Render and traps him inside their final nightmare. They both go insane.

-ANALYSIS

Render is an egotist, a perfectionist. He is still obsessed with death years after his wife and daughter were killed in a winter auto accident. Though he feels himself in control of his emotions, he is only fooling himself. And though signals in the story point to the truth, and he takes note of them, he denies their potential effects on him out of sheer arrogance. It’s his arrogance that keeps him from ending his therapy with Eileen. He knows the dangers involved but "feels that he is above the normal rules and therefore fails to heed the danger signals in his analysis of Eileen" (Yoke, Reader’s Guide 51).

The reason why Render fails in this story is because he cannot learn from experience. He is no longer capable of analyzing himself as he would one of his patients. His entire career as a Shaper is a complex means of escaping his own reality by exploring other people’s problems in a world of his own making. The ro-womb, with its banks of buttons, gives him the control over that world which he thinks he has over himself in the real one. He has locked himself into a static existence, refusing to change, to admit to his problems. And so when his control falters for a moment (in either world), he pretends it didn’t happen.

Render is given many opportunities to see his fatal flaw, but each time he rationalizes his mistakes. Zelazny has set this protagonist up for a fall, and when the time comes, he falls hard. There is no mercy. In his downward spiral toward insanity, trapped in Eileen’s nightmarish world, Render is forced to face what he’s locked away for so long: the car wreck. Zelazny writes:

He could not check his forward motion; he was swept tide-like toward the wreck. He came to a stop, at last, before it.

Some things never change. They are things which have long ceased to exist as objects and stand solely as never-to-be-calendared occasions outside that sequence of elements called Time.

Render stood there and did not care if Fenris leaped upon his back and ate his brains. He had covered his eyes, but he could not stop the seeing. Not this time. He did not care about anything. Most of himself lay dead at his feet (Last Defender 109).

The horror-show continues as Render’s psyche is laid open to attacks for which he has no defense. That which will not change is destroyed. Render is left an invalid.

CONCLUSION

In this report I have outlined briefly Zelazny’s career as a science fiction author and the aspect of his style that have placed his work apart from the mainstream SF and above that of most of his contemporaries in the new wave. Focusing on characterization, one of his most highly acclaimed skills, I have analyzed three of his stories and concluded that his beliefs about psychological growth and Man’s relationship to the universe are at the heart of each story. In terms of form and chaos, the underlying dynamics of "A Rose for Ecclesiastes" and Lord of Light are virtually identical. In each story, a man confronts an ancient society so structured with religious contexts that it has become static. The Hindu world of Lord of Light is ruled by corrupt gods who maintain their power by denying progress to the people of the planet. The Mothers in "A Rose…" deny any fate exists but the one ordained by their scriptures. Both societies are avoiding change, and both stories’ heroes force change upon them. For change allows growth, and growth is what Zelazny sees as the ultimate goal of our existence.

"He Who Shapes" is very different from the first two stories. Zelazny patterned this story after the classic tragedy, and, to him, the most tragic thing is for a man to become static in his own existence. If his protagonist is going to fail, it will be because he was unable or unwilling to change, to grow psychologically. While Render’s experiences give him the animus for change—and his skills certainly make it possible!—he does not accept it. If form and chaos are the fundamental forces of the universe, and they always seek to balance each other, then the chaos was bound to break into Render’s "stable" world in one way or another. By denying its entry for so long, he let the chaos build up until it overpowered him.

If Zelazny’s characters are only as successful as their relationship to the fundamental law of the universe, then that law is change. Gallinger and Sam triumph over great odds, because they are able to change to meet the challenge, and because they are instruments of change on a greater scale. Charles Render fails because he will not accept change and finally has it thrust upon him when it is more than he can handle.

WORKS CITED

---. Writing Science Fiction. Audiotape. Writer’s Voice. Cincinnati, 74A-14B, 1973.

===================================================================

Back to the top.

Back to the Main Page.