In "Sign of the Unicorn", after Corwin gets stabbed, transported via the Jewel of Judgement to his home on Earth, and then taken to a hospital by his friend Bill Roth, he wakes up and first has an exchange with a doctor. At that point, the doctor's name isn't explicitly mentioned.

Only a bit later, his same friend Bill Roth comes to visit him, and the following exchange ensues:

"Are you some sort of military adviser in that place?"

I nodded.

"Can you tell me where?"

I shook my head. "Sorry."

"That I can sort of understand," he said. "Dr. Roth told me what you said had happened last night. Off the record now, was it connected with whatever you have been doing?"

Emphasis is mine.

So, I am really curious, is that just a "goof" by Roger Zelazny, to use the same name twice for two unrelated characters, who are in such close proximity? Or, is it a kind of an underhanded literary joke? If it is, I'm not sure I got it completely.

Having said that, I do have one little piece of what may count as "circumstantial evidence" that points that it may indeed be a kind of a joke/stunt. Towards the end of this chapter, Bill Roth expresses his concern that he may not see Corwin again (which would imply he wouldn't be able to find out the true story behind what really happened that night):

"But I wonder... I've a peculiar feeling that I may never see you again. It is as if I were one of those minor characters in a melodrama who gets shuffled offstage without learning how things turn out."

So, perhaps the above ties in with also giving "minor characters" generic names? Of course, Bill Roth does end up being a recurring character, but only when we get to the Merlin cycle, and it's not clear whether Roger Zelazny had that in the plans before completing the Corwin cycle.

So the question is just this, is there anything more to read into this, or is it a simple mistake/coincidence?

This might come off as a nitpicky question, but its goal is really not to nitpick an error. I am truly curious if there is something beyond the obvious explanation here.

In "Sign of the Unicorn", after Corwin gets stabbed, transported via the Jewel of Judgement to his home on Earth, and then taken to a hospital by his friend Bill Roth, he wakes up and first has an exchange with a doctor. At that point, the doctor's name isn't explicitly mentioned.

Only a bit later, his same friend Bill Roth comes to visit him, and the following exchange ensues:

"Are you some sort of military adviser in that place?"

I nodded.

"Can you tell me where?"

I shook my head. "Sorry."

"That I can sort of understand," he said. "Dr. Roth told me what you said had happened last night. Off the record now, was it connected with whatever you have been doing?"

Emphasis is mine.

So, I am really curious, is that just a "goof" by Roger Zelazny, to use the same name twice for two unrelated characters, who are in such close proximity? Or, is it a kind of an underhanded literary joke? If it is, I'm not sure I got it completely.

Having said that, I do have one little piece of what may count as "circumstantial evidence" that points that it may indeed be a kind of a joke/stunt. Towards the end of this chapter, Bill Roth expresses his concern that he may not see Corwin again (which would imply he wouldn't be able to find out the true story behind what really happened that night):

"But I wonder... I've a peculiar feeling that I may never see you again. It is as if I were one of those minor characters in a melodrama who gets shuffled offstage without learning how things turn out."

So, perhaps the above ties in with also giving "minor characters" generic names? Of course, Bill Roth does end up being a recurring character, but only when we get to the Merlin cycle, and it's not clear whether Roger Zelazny had that in the plans before completing the Corwin cycle.

So the question is just this, is there anything more to read into this, or is it a simple mistake/coincidence?

This might come off as a nitpicky question, but its goal is really not to nitpick an error. I am truly curious if there is something beyond the obvious explanation here.

In "Sign of the Unicorn", after Corwin gets stabbed, transported via the Jewel of judgement to his home on earth, and then taken to a hospital by his friend Bill Roth, he wakes up and first has an exchange with a Doctor. At that point, the Doctor's name isn't explicitly mentioned.

Only a bit later, his same friend Bill Roth comes to visit him, and the following exchange ensues:

"Are you some sort of military adviser in that place?"

I nodded.

"Can you tell me where?"

I shook my head. "Sorry."

"That I can sort of understand," he said. "Dr. Roth told me what you said had happened last night. Off the record now, was it connected with whatever you have been doing?"

Emphasis is mine.

So, I am really curious, is that just a "goof" by RZ, to use the same name twice for two unrelated characters, who are in such close proximity? Or, is it a kind of an underhanded literary joke? If it is, I'm not sure I got it completely.

Having said that, I do have one little piece of what may count as "circumstantial evidence" that points that it may indeed be a kind of a joke/stunt. Towards the end of this chapter, Bill Roth expresses his concern that he may not see Corwin again (which would imply he wouldn't be able to find out the true story behind what really happened that night):

"But I wonder... I've a peculiar feeling that I may never see you again. It is as if I were one of those minor characters in a melodrama who gets shuffled offstage without learning how things turn out."

So, perhaps the above ties in with also giving "minor characters" generic names? Of course, Bill Roth does end up being a recurring character, but only when we get to the Merlin cycle, and it's not clear whether RZ had that in the plans before completing the Corwin cycle.

So the question is just this, is there anything more to read into this, or is it a simple mistake/coincidence?

This might come off as a nitpicky question, but its goal is really not to nitpick an error. I am truly curious if there is something beyond the obvious explanation here.

In "Sign of the Unicorn", after Corwin gets stabbed, transported via the Jewel of Judgement to his home on Earth, and then taken to a hospital by his friend Bill Roth, he wakes up and first has an exchange with a doctor. At that point, the doctor's name isn't explicitly mentioned.

Only a bit later, his same friend Bill Roth comes to visit him, and the following exchange ensues:

"Are you some sort of military adviser in that place?"

I nodded.

"Can you tell me where?"

I shook my head. "Sorry."

"That I can sort of understand," he said. "Dr. Roth told me what you said had happened last night. Off the record now, was it connected with whatever you have been doing?"

Emphasis is mine.

So, I am really curious, is that just a "goof" by Roger Zelazny, to use the same name twice for two unrelated characters, who are in such close proximity? Or, is it a kind of an underhanded literary joke? If it is, I'm not sure I got it completely.

Having said that, I do have one little piece of what may count as "circumstantial evidence" that points that it may indeed be a kind of a joke/stunt. Towards the end of this chapter, Bill Roth expresses his concern that he may not see Corwin again (which would imply he wouldn't be able to find out the true story behind what really happened that night):

"But I wonder... I've a peculiar feeling that I may never see you again. It is as if I were one of those minor characters in a melodrama who gets shuffled offstage without learning how things turn out."

So, perhaps the above ties in with also giving "minor characters" generic names? Of course, Bill Roth does end up being a recurring character, but only when we get to the Merlin cycle, and it's not clear whether Roger Zelazny had that in the plans before completing the Corwin cycle.

So the question is just this, is there anything more to read into this, or is it a simple mistake/coincidence?

This might come off as a nitpicky question, but its goal is really not to nitpick an error. I am truly curious if there is something beyond the obvious explanation here.