![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
"is a renegade crewman who has turned down god-hood"
I think this sentence is incorrect. In my book we are never told if Sam is a god...
Shouldn't we mention that parts of the book was originally published in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction? -- Kristjan Wager 08:50, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
From what I remember, much of the summary is incorrect or at least gives the wrong impression of the plot. I wouldn't mind rereading the book again anyway. ^_^ --
Starwed 06:55, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Sam introduces Buddhism as a culture jamming tool and with this new religion, murder and outright rebellion strives to cripple the power of the "gods".
In many ways, the story of Lord of Light mirrors that of the novel Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse.
mkehrt 23:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
User talk:203.99.195.1 put the following into the article text. I'm not quite sure how to address it. It seems worthy of discussing here, it is not appropriate in the article as it stood. John (Jwy) 14:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
IS IT NOT BLASPHEMY TO WRITE ABOUT HINDU GODS LIKE THIS? WILL CHRISTIANS TOLERATE IT IF I WRITE A NOVEL AND KEEP JESUS AND MARY AS THE MAIN VILLAINS? WILL MUSLIMS TOLERATE IT IF I PORTRAY ALLAH AS A CRIMINAL? WHY SHOULD HINDUS BE INSULTED LIKE THIS? IT SHOWS A SICK MIND. THIS IS UTTER NONSENSE. ALL THE NAMES MENTIONED HERE ARE REVERED HINDU GODS. THE CREEPS WHO WROTE THIS NOVEL WILL DEFINITELY ROT IN THE HELL OF THEIR OWN RELIGION
It does raise the interesting question of how the novel in question was received in India, however.
[User Calibanu] 13.34, 16 August 2007
Indeed, in the Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case a kindergarten teacher was in serious legal trouble for allowing her 5-year-olds to name a teddy bear "muhammad", despite the fact that "muhammad" is in fact the most common male name in the world. 10,000 protesters took to the streets demanding her execution! Wouldn't it be better if we could all stop trying to look for ways to take offense at trivial things such as teddy bears and works of fiction, and simply try to get along?? 173.79.1.186 ( talk) 07:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I wonder what the complainant would think of Michael Moorcock's novel Behold the Man, for example. — Tamfang ( talk) 21:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
On the page, the Rakasha are consistently referred to as demons - in fact the word Rakasha appears only once, in the description of Taraka, and it's not entirely apparent that the term Rakasha refers to the race of beings of which Taraka is most powerful. I know demon is the more familiar term to English readers, and they do possess traits similar to demons (with the exception of being supernatural, as the book puts it), but I think Rakasha would be more accurate. -- Jamoche ( talk) 02:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
The article now consistently uses the spelling Rakshasa, which is more accurate in our world but does not appear in the novel (iirc). — Tamfang ( talk) 21:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Image:LordofLight(Zelazny).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The Structure section is entirely original research, and I have tagged it accordingly. It may look obvious to whoever wrote it, but this isn't the place to publish an analysis carried out by you. If you can't cite someone else who has made these observations, then cut it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.36 ( talk) 02:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
While the above comment is correct, it fails to note that some of the structure section is also flatly wrong -- the first six chapters of Lord of Light do not form a cycle at all. As noted in the summary below it, chapters 2-6 are the history leading up to the first chapter, but Sam's resurrection in the first chapter does not reset the rest of the world to the state it occupies at the beginning of chapter 2: Yama is a God in the past, and exiled in the present; the original Brahma (Madeline) is dead in the present and replaced by Shiva (to point out only two of the many significant changes that prevent the story from being cyclical). I have removed this paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.64.155 ( talk) 01:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Nice imaginative work, its nice to know that there is a work like this (almost in the lines of lord of the rings) involving India and hindu charecters, bravo!!!.
sorry to inform you that it really has no minute connection to hinduism or its philosophy and imaginatively tries to draw a magically "logical" history of religious evolution in India (offcourse not even closer to reallity). also i do not want to talk about gods and deamons but some part of story lines can definitly applied to normal human beings and period of society in India, which tried to keep the knowledge themselves and not to spread it out, may be thus cutting of all the knowledge what we had known. And now trying to go back and only to say hey we knew that !! (ya sure..:) ) .
would have been nice to have seen the ARGO work completed. (for sure banned in India ;) ).
Shrikanthv ( talk) 07:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
So, despite Zelazny being "curious as to how such a book would be received", judging by this article, there was no reception whatsoever? Also, it sorely lacks an analysis of influences. I'm sure there has been treatment of these subject in scholarly literature. -- 62.65.236.47 ( talk) 10:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
The "Characters" section hyperlinks each character to the article of the god/deity they were inspired by. I think it's important for the article to note that while the characters are based on the Hindu deities, they're not actually the same ones, and this edit of mine reflects that.
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
"is a renegade crewman who has turned down god-hood"
I think this sentence is incorrect. In my book we are never told if Sam is a god...
Shouldn't we mention that parts of the book was originally published in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction? -- Kristjan Wager 08:50, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
From what I remember, much of the summary is incorrect or at least gives the wrong impression of the plot. I wouldn't mind rereading the book again anyway. ^_^ --
Starwed 06:55, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Sam introduces Buddhism as a culture jamming tool and with this new religion, murder and outright rebellion strives to cripple the power of the "gods".
In many ways, the story of Lord of Light mirrors that of the novel Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse.
mkehrt 23:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
User talk:203.99.195.1 put the following into the article text. I'm not quite sure how to address it. It seems worthy of discussing here, it is not appropriate in the article as it stood. John (Jwy) 14:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
IS IT NOT BLASPHEMY TO WRITE ABOUT HINDU GODS LIKE THIS? WILL CHRISTIANS TOLERATE IT IF I WRITE A NOVEL AND KEEP JESUS AND MARY AS THE MAIN VILLAINS? WILL MUSLIMS TOLERATE IT IF I PORTRAY ALLAH AS A CRIMINAL? WHY SHOULD HINDUS BE INSULTED LIKE THIS? IT SHOWS A SICK MIND. THIS IS UTTER NONSENSE. ALL THE NAMES MENTIONED HERE ARE REVERED HINDU GODS. THE CREEPS WHO WROTE THIS NOVEL WILL DEFINITELY ROT IN THE HELL OF THEIR OWN RELIGION
It does raise the interesting question of how the novel in question was received in India, however.
[User Calibanu] 13.34, 16 August 2007
Indeed, in the Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case a kindergarten teacher was in serious legal trouble for allowing her 5-year-olds to name a teddy bear "muhammad", despite the fact that "muhammad" is in fact the most common male name in the world. 10,000 protesters took to the streets demanding her execution! Wouldn't it be better if we could all stop trying to look for ways to take offense at trivial things such as teddy bears and works of fiction, and simply try to get along?? 173.79.1.186 ( talk) 07:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I wonder what the complainant would think of Michael Moorcock's novel Behold the Man, for example. — Tamfang ( talk) 21:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
On the page, the Rakasha are consistently referred to as demons - in fact the word Rakasha appears only once, in the description of Taraka, and it's not entirely apparent that the term Rakasha refers to the race of beings of which Taraka is most powerful. I know demon is the more familiar term to English readers, and they do possess traits similar to demons (with the exception of being supernatural, as the book puts it), but I think Rakasha would be more accurate. -- Jamoche ( talk) 02:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
The article now consistently uses the spelling Rakshasa, which is more accurate in our world but does not appear in the novel (iirc). — Tamfang ( talk) 21:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Image:LordofLight(Zelazny).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The Structure section is entirely original research, and I have tagged it accordingly. It may look obvious to whoever wrote it, but this isn't the place to publish an analysis carried out by you. If you can't cite someone else who has made these observations, then cut it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.36 ( talk) 02:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
While the above comment is correct, it fails to note that some of the structure section is also flatly wrong -- the first six chapters of Lord of Light do not form a cycle at all. As noted in the summary below it, chapters 2-6 are the history leading up to the first chapter, but Sam's resurrection in the first chapter does not reset the rest of the world to the state it occupies at the beginning of chapter 2: Yama is a God in the past, and exiled in the present; the original Brahma (Madeline) is dead in the present and replaced by Shiva (to point out only two of the many significant changes that prevent the story from being cyclical). I have removed this paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.64.155 ( talk) 01:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Nice imaginative work, its nice to know that there is a work like this (almost in the lines of lord of the rings) involving India and hindu charecters, bravo!!!.
sorry to inform you that it really has no minute connection to hinduism or its philosophy and imaginatively tries to draw a magically "logical" history of religious evolution in India (offcourse not even closer to reallity). also i do not want to talk about gods and deamons but some part of story lines can definitly applied to normal human beings and period of society in India, which tried to keep the knowledge themselves and not to spread it out, may be thus cutting of all the knowledge what we had known. And now trying to go back and only to say hey we knew that !! (ya sure..:) ) .
would have been nice to have seen the ARGO work completed. (for sure banned in India ;) ).
Shrikanthv ( talk) 07:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
So, despite Zelazny being "curious as to how such a book would be received", judging by this article, there was no reception whatsoever? Also, it sorely lacks an analysis of influences. I'm sure there has been treatment of these subject in scholarly literature. -- 62.65.236.47 ( talk) 10:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
The "Characters" section hyperlinks each character to the article of the god/deity they were inspired by. I think it's important for the article to note that while the characters are based on the Hindu deities, they're not actually the same ones, and this edit of mine reflects that.