I liked John Gregory Betancourt's prelude to the Amber series. Others hate it & say he got too much wrong. John said the 5th book would have wrapped up a lot of the inconsistencies, but we may never know. The publisher folded before he wrote it & the new publisher isn't interested. (Jerk!)

What do you think about it?

No spoilers here, please. Use the "Amber - General comments - Spoilers" topic.
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1967...

Here's my two cents (if worth even that! ;-) ):

I think Betancourt made about as good a stab at writing an Amber novel (several, of course!) as anyone who isn't Zelazny could reasonably expect to. That having been said, they're a far cry from the original stuff. I miss Zelazny's almost unique ability to turn words on their heads and make them do tricks in conveying an image. That sharp, rapier-like strike of his wit also is mostly lacking in Betancourt's works. I gave much allowance for his interpretation of the characters and their (lack of?) continuity, so that didn't bother me as much. Perhaps what bothered me most is that he didn't really introduce much that was new or memorable in the stories, and so the books in turn don't establish themselves as good stories in their own right; they need the original works to stand at all...

I'd still like to read the 5th book, but I do agree, it isn't to Zelazny's standards. Few, if any are. The way he described the color of the dawn in "Lord of Light" is a good example of his writing:

"The day of battle dawned pink as the fresh-bitten thigh of a maiden."

Now how can you top that?