Gradual Interview
(answers from September 2010, as of Apr 30 2026, 2:44:47 AM)
www.StephenRDonaldson.com
© 2004 by Stephen R.Donaldson

Solar

Back in 2004, you posted this answer in response to a question about the Worm and its place in the Land's cosmology:

'Personally, I don't see any inherent conflict between the two main cosmologies presented in the "Chronicles." After all, life necessitates death. Anything that lives carries within it the seeds of its own destruction. (And our own bodies demonstrate just how *many* seeds there can be.) The alternative is stasis. Indeed, anything that doesn't both grow and die (usually in that order) can't really be described as being alive. So if the Creator wanted to make a living world, he pretty much had to supply the means for the eventual ending of that world. Hence, to my way of thinking, the tangible existence of the Worm of the World's End doesn't conflict at all with the general cosmology put forth by the Lords.'

I found your thoughts on the relationship between life and death quite enlightening, but fitting these thoughts in with the events of the 'Chronicles' has proven difficult for me. If something that doesn't die can't be described as being alive, then where does the breaking of the Law of Death and the Law of Life leave us?

Post-'White Gold Wielder', the Land exists in a world where the line between life and death is not only rather blurry, but can and has been traversed. I can't help but think that the Worm's status as the natural end of the Arch's life must have been profoundly altered by the breaking of the two Laws. At the risk of turning this into a 'Creator' question: after the breaking of the Laws of Life and Death, is the Worm still what the Creator originally intended it to be?

Ah, well.  I created all these problems for myself when I first decided to tamper with â€œthe natural order.â€�  Now it seems reasonable to conclude that the breaking of the Laws of Death and Life has wider implications for the cosmology of â€œThe Chroniclesâ€� as a whole.

But there are at least two reasons why I wouldnâ€™t draw the conclusions you suggest.  First, a few exceptions donâ€™t automatically invalidate a general rule.  For example, the fact that a few dead spirits under very specialized circumstances can interact with the living after the breaking of the Law of Death doesnâ€™t make death meaningless:  it only implies that--now *hereâ€™s* an original idea--living beings have souls which donâ€™t cease to exist after death.  (Obviously my intentions would have clearer if I had written about â€œmarringâ€� rather than â€œbreakingâ€� crucial Laws.  But itâ€™s too late to worry about that now.)  Second, your reasoning doesnâ€™t take the Law of Time into account.  Causality and sequence still apply (as does â€œthe necessity of freedomâ€�).  Hence the Dead are limited in most of the same ways that the living are.  Certainly they canâ€™t resurrect *themselves*:  that would really play havoc with cosmology.  And they canâ€™t see the future:  not really.  They can guess at it the same way Lord Foul does, with wisdom and/or cunning and/or thousands and thousands of years of observation;  but they canâ€™t KNOW it.

Personally, I donâ€™t see how anything thatâ€™s happened in the first 8 books undermines or alters (or reinterprets) the implied cosmologies of â€œThe Chronicles.â€�

(09/03/2010)

Mark

Okay, some of this is outside the text and I know you don't care for those types of questions, but this has been nagging me ever since I re-read PtP.

Elena Foul Wife.

There are so many implications in that title it's staggering. Acting on the presumption that LF didn't just make it up to mess with Covenant, it calls all my assumptions about the Despiser into question.

Foul came across as asture and he loathes the world of The Land, yet this seems to imply a desire for a relationship with the Land, since you explicitly compare what he'll do to the Land to what he's done to her. Yet it's not quite the same as just abusing something because of its worthlessness. In giving Elena that title he elevates her almost to his level - so it seemed to me - and implied a committment on his part as well. It's certainly the most intimate relationship we've ever seen from him.

So, despite the Land's worthlessness and inferiortiy, for LF's point of view, could it somehow change his nature too, even against his will? I know he somehow subsists on Earthpower, since he fed on it to grow strong after the Ritual of Desecration and the First and Second Chronicles.

I've got to compare LF's relationship with Elena to  Covenant's relationships with Lena and Elena, and wonder if Covenant's actions somehow gave those desires to LF, who is fulfilling the worst of them.

And I can only speculate about what LF was thinking when he made up that creation story about the unfaithful goddess. Where did that idea come from?

It also made me wonder if Foul and the Foul Wife had any Despiser Juniors during TIW and PtP.

Of course, youâ€™re free to speculate in any way that interests you.  You--like all of my readers--have earned the right.  But from my perspective, it appears that youâ€™re over-thinking the â€œFoul-wifeâ€� issue.  After all, unless my own research is badly mistaken, Triock is the only character who uses that term.  To my mind, it says more about Triock himself (and the kind of pain heâ€™s experiencing) than it does about Elena.  And I donâ€™t see that it implies anything about Lord Foul.  After all, Triock has no direct knowledge:  heâ€™s only learned what the Ravers (and therefore LF) want him to learn.  Thinking about Elena as LFâ€™s actual *wife* seems too literal to me--and it isnâ€™t supported anywhere else in the text.

Still, you might be on to something, if you step back from the literal.  Diassomer Mininderain comes to mind.  Thereâ€™s a (for lack of a better term) female in LFâ€™s backstory somewhere.  Apparently.

(09/03/2010)

Mike D.

Hi Stephen -
First, I want to thank you for answering my previous questions - although they were some time back, I am grateful for your taking the time, and I know i speak for many when I say that your devotion to your fans goes above and beyond what any of us could hope for.
The question -
I've been re-reading the chronicles, from the first up to fatal revenant, to prepare myself for AATE...  Somehow, unbelievably even, in my previous readings, I missed a connection that you seemed to go out of your way to make.  That connection being between Pitchwife/The First and Longwrath.  Having somehow missed that he is their grandson in my previous readings, I'm now wondering if I have somehow missed the importance of that as well.  So the question is - Is there some relevant importance in the fact that Longwrath is their grandson, or was it just a nice and/or simple way of explaining the Giants knowledge of Linden and her history/story from her previous time in the Land?

Thanks again for your time and effort.  Your creation has been a friend to me for many years, and I know it will continue to be so for many more.

Mike

Sorry.  RAFO.  But keep in mind that Pitchwife and the First simply would not have told their story of Covenant, Linden, et al, exclusively to their children.  When they returned to their people, they would have told everyone.  Repeatedly.  The Giants are like that.

Besides, Iâ€™m an â€œefficientâ€� writer--as I keep saying.  Why would I bother to create a new geneology when I can use one I already have?

(09/03/2010)

mick

Stephen
First of all I dont belive you exist, you are a dream/nightmare for making me wait nine years to the conclusion of the chronicals.

Do you ever reflect, on the success of authers such as Raymond Feist and his prolific output of books around Midkemia/Pug that you erred in leaving Covernant so long and unexploited? I love with passion your work but I enjoy Feists work aswell.I dont think his prolificness of his created world devalues it at all, I think you were  bit of a miser with the land and why stop with the finnal chronicals why final? dont you have bills to pay give the people what they love!

Sorry.  I donâ€™t believe in giving people what they love.  I believe in giving them what *I* love.  Which is exactly what Iâ€™ve been doing throughout my career, with all of the books that you choose not to notice.  Any other approach would destroy my creativity.

(09/03/2010)

Steve Phillips

Hello Stephen,

Congratulations on the complete of AATE.  While I, like everyone else on here, don't ever want Thomas Covenant books to stop coming, I'm sure you're both eager to get it over with and terrified at the same time.

My question to you is this: In the Gap series, you did an outstanding job of telling the story from many different characters' viewpoints.  So far, you haven't done this in the Last Chronicles, but I think the opportunity would be there in the last two books, if you wanted to.  Without giving anything away, are you telling the story in the last two books just through Linden and Thomas, or might we see others tell the story as well?

Thanks again for your hard work
Steve

â€œWithout giving anything awayâ€¦â€�?  You canâ€™t be serious!  In important ways, point-of-view *is* story.  Certainly point of view determines how story is perceived.  I couldnâ€™t answer your question without telling you what the story is going to be.

(09/03/2010)

Terry Hornsby

Harper Collins have done wonders to sell Tolkien after Unwin relinquished the rights (the two brothers who ran it were just too old, I think). Recently they launched a print-to-order service (Â£40 a book for Christopher T's History volumes). David Langford I believe it was, once recounted how copies of his book, The Leaky Establishment, filled his small garage after the publisher did nothing to publicise the book (which is very funny) - he spent several years selling them piecemeal himself. I believe Christopher Priest has also been let down by publishers and once arranged his own book tour (not to mention how they categorised his book and ruined sales with dreadful covers). The first covers on your British prints by Peter Goodfellow joined together into a wonderful circular panaroma (if that's not a tautology) and I would love for the new books to have the same style treatment. Would it be worth your while to approach the publishers with a similar print-to-order arrangement for a deluxe treatment with some nice new Goodfellow covers, perhaps (not withstanding that Gollancz does those nice boxed editions with those bland cover designs)?

Do you sometimes wish you'd gone with Harper Collins, or that Gollancz promoted your works in a similar fashion? After all, HC's promotions offer a free springboard for similar works if they're packaged in a similar fashion (legal matters aside!) Or are you wary of too close an identification? (I personally think your work is what fans should move onto, after Tolkien, once they grow up, not that Tolkien's work is bad, it is just less mature in its rosy view of history, chivalry and all that). I think the identification works because you complement Tolkien so well, rather than being just another sub-Middle Earth catastrophe.

HarperCollins UK and I aren't on speaking terms.  They dumped me vehemently when I submitted my most recent mystery novel, "The Man Who Fought Alone."  As I recall, they said I had "betrayed the Donaldson brand":  an accusation I found offensive.  Then they let all of my books go out of print--except, of course, the first 6 "Covenant" books (for which they nonetheless refuse to do any kind of promotion).  That's why I'm now published by Orion/Gollancz.  And I'm grateful to be where I am.  At this stage, I would be delighted if HarperCollins UK released the earlier "Chronicles" to Gollancz.

Incidentally, Orion/Gollancz now has all of my other books back in print--with the exception of "Reave the Just and Other Tales" (forthcoming).

From my perspective, Gollancz has made a couple of, well, let's call them "packaging" mistakes with my books.  But overall I've been very pleased with their treatments, both of "The Last Chronicles" and of the GAP books.  I have no desire to return to the way things were 30 years ago.

(09/04/2010)

David Bunnell

Am correct in assuming that Thomas Covenant would not have an iPhone 4 antenna reception issue?

Hmm.  I've been asked some "outside the text" questions before, but this one sets a new record.

(09/04/2010)

Brandon

Hello, I would like to ask a question. Why would the last chronicles of Thomas Covenant be called that if he isn't really the main character in the books or have any real purpose anymore in them?

Tsk tsk.  RAFO.

(09/04/2010)

James Post

I'll leave off the standard "I'm a big fan, and you've had an impact on my life" bit; we can take that as read, I hope, or why would I be here?

In the Covenant books, clearly moral/ethical questions are always at the forefront, and although I feel like we've seen enough of Covenant and Linden's internal monologues to mostly grasp their beliefs and motivations, I find myself repeatedly coming back to questions about the actions/motivations of the Haruchai.

1) The Haruchai, as we've been shown, judge others and themselves incessantly, and having judged, immediately act upon that judgment. However, in more or less every significant case we know of (trusting Kevin, distrusting first Covenant [in the first Chronicles] and then Linden [in The One Tree]) they've ultimately been proven wrong. Having perfect racial memory, they've taken this experience and gone on in the Last Chronicles to judge all the people of the Land and find them wanting. Doesn't it seem like they'd learn over the millenia that they are just too different from other people to judge their character correctly?

2. Put simply, why are the Haruchai so lacking in self-motivation? In almost every instance we've seen them, they latch onto the first strong personality they meet and choose to "serve" them, rather than acting on their own toward their own goals. Is there something in their racial history that caused this?

(I'm not really seeking extratextual information here... Just hoping you might point me to something I've missed).

One non-Haruchai query:
We've been given two apparently incompatible 'origin myths' for the world of the Land. Since each of these origins is significant to various plot points in the story, can we hope that the reconciliation of the two will be somehow fundamental to the conclusion of the Last Chronicles?

Perhaps it would help if you think of the Haruchai as religious fanatics, like jihadists or Biblical fundamentalists.  (It's an imperfect analogy, I know:  I'm just trying to shed a little light here.)  Those people surrender the meaning of their lives to some external "higher" power; some cause which they may have interpreted for themselves, but which they have acquired from some imam, preacher, or leader.  And when things don't work out as promised, their instinctive reaction is to raise the stakes (rather than to reconsider the substance of their beliefs).  E.g. "I have cancer.  I have faith that God will cure my cancer.  My cancer is still killing me.  I must not have enough faith.  The fault is in me, not in God, and certainly not in my notion of faith."  Do you see the similarity?  All of those people believe that everything would work out right if only THE WHOLE WORLD could be forced to think the same way they do.  Like missionaries, jihadists don't try to *understand* the people they want to convert/destroy.

As for the origin myths, since (as I've said before) I don't consider them incompatible, I don't see any need to reconcile them.

(09/04/2010)

Michael from Santa Fe

I believe you have stated in the past that in preparation for writing the Last Chronicles you re-read the First and Second.  And if memory serves, you recently read through them again?  I assume you are quite familiar with the fact that most people who love the Chronicles of TC have read them multiple times (myself, I have no clue anymore how many times I've read them since I first discovered them back in my teens - I would hazard it's a few).  That said, I'm sure I'm not alone in stating that every time I read them I still get moved/excited in all the places I'm supposed to get moved/excited even though I know the story pretty well.  I liken this to the Luke Skywalker effect, no matter how many times I've seen Star Wars and Luke flying through the Death Star trench at the end, it still gets my heart pumping...even though I know he's going to "win".  Granted, I'm not nearly as excited as when first seeing it...but still.  My question for you is: do you get moved/excited when re-reading the books?  Are you just reading to get information for the next book or does the story grab you again?  

I certainly hope that none of my readers react to re-reading the earlier "Chronicles" the same way I do.  I don't react the way I want my readers to react.  And I don't react the way I react when I read books I didn't write.

For both of my (comparatively) recent re-readings, I was hard at work "mining" the text for material and descriptions and hints:  my readers don't do that (or don't do it in the same way) because they don't already know my story.  And the mining itself has been a mixed experience.  In some situations, I have better ideas now than I did then, ideas which are unfortunately inconsistent with the earlier material.  That makes me wish I could change the earlier books to match what I'm doing now.

But on a different level:  the first time I re-read Covenant 1-6, my primary reaction was intimidation.  I thought, I can't compete with *that*.  (Don't laugh:  I'm perfectly serious.)  The second time I re-read Covenant 1-3, my primary reactions were boredom and regret.  I found them tedious, as well as full of narrative crudity, and I felt bad about inflicting them on people.  (Again, I'm perfectly serious.)  Covenant 4-6 were better:  I actually enjoyed them for the most part.  But it was the writing I enjoyed, not particular scenes, events, or characters.

You asked....

(09/04/2010)

ahmet kurt

hi Mr.Donaldson,

first i want to know,what was you thoughts about your name before starting to write books.have you contemplated to write with your right name or with a pseudonyme.and if you intent to need a new one allow me to suggest some here.something like;

Stephen D.Ronaldson,Ronald D.Stephenson or Donald S.Ronaldson.(i intend no offense here with your name,sir.)

secondly,i want to ask you this one before it is to late.you have descriped many places on the Land,and there was incidents and occurences all around and on the other places they were not mapped.is there any other places on the land or around of it,that we will see with new incidents on the upcomming books?

tyvm 

When I was forced to use a pseudonym for my first three mystery novels, I chose a name that reminded me of mine.  "Reed Stephens" is based on "Stephen Reeder Donaldson."  But I'm proud of my work, and I've always wanted to put my real name on it.

As for your second question, I'm afraid you'll have to RAFO (read and find out).  Certain places recur because they must:  Kevin's Watch, Revelstone, Andelain, Mount Thunder, Sarangrave Flat.  In other situations, I try to avoid repeating myself.

(09/04/2010)

Mark Powis

Dear Dr. Donaldson: I regret to inform you that the text of AATE appears to have been illegally leaked to the public. I myself haven't seen or found it, but judging from the newest discussion thread at Kevins Watch, it *is* available for public consuumption. Even though I haven't seen it myself, the comments in the aforementioned new thread CLEARLY indicate that people are reading / have read the book. Automatically I assumed you would wish to be made aware of the situation. Personally, I refuse to read it "early" for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the truly genuine respect I have for you as an author. In my opinion, anyone reading AATE for free on the Web is guilty of theft of intellectual property from you, theft of money from the publisher, recieveing & possessing stolen property.....well, you get the idea. And last but not least: Don't these people realize how badly they're cheating themselves? It's like sneaking under the Christmas tree as a child, carefully peeling back the wrapping paper, and finding out early what your present is. Kinda took a lot of the fun out of Christmas morning when I did that. By the same emotional token, I choose to preserve the joy of holding the book in my hands for the first time, and the almost sexually aroused (!!!) feeling I'll get as I slowly open the front cover for the first time, and begin reading. These people are cheating everyone! Starting with you, and next the publisher, and finally themselves! "Hear you all? You are foolish beyond all hope of redemption, and Steve's lawyers shall feast upon your very souls!".....Best Wishes ! The Spoony

I appreciate your concern.  However, the situation you describe may not be what it appears to be.  Here's a perfectly plausible scenario that does *not* mean the text has been "illegally leaked to the public."  The publisher contracts with a printer to produce ARCs ("advance reading copies") which the publisher intends to distribute free to reviewers, book-buyers, and the like in an effort to create "buzz."  Someone who works for the printer slips, say, 3 copies off the production line (in effect, stealing them from the publisher), takes them home, and immediately lists them for sale on eBay.  Someone from Kevin's Watch buys one of them, and the discussion starts.

Well, if this is what happened, there are several sides to the story.  1) Personally, I find it reprehensible that someone stole a few copies from the publisher.  But that isn't exactly the same thing as releasing the book to the public. 2) And someone else was always going to do the same thing anyway:  reviewers are *forever* picking up some unearned money by selling their ARCs--and in fact there's nothing illegal about this (immoral, perhaps:  illegal, no).  3) Meanwhile, I can't blame someone for buying a book on eBay.  In particular, I can't blame anyone from Kevin's Watch. The people who belong to that virtual community have always "played fair" with me; and I have good reason to believe that the person or persons who bought ARCs will also buy "legitimate" copies when the time comes.  So where's the harm?

My publishers certainly don't see any harm.  As far as they are concerned, this is (almost) free advertising.  The only "victim"--if there is one--is the poor person who paid too much for a book on eBay.  And as far as *I* am concerned--well, like you, I wouldn't do it myself.  I don't like to reward people (the sellers) who want money they haven't earned.  But I can't honestly say that I feel damaged.  And I don't think ill of the people who buy the books.

(09/05/2010)

Michael from Santa Fe

What happens to an advance an author gets on his/her royalties, if the book(s) they write don't make enough to cover the advance?  Do they owe back the difference, or is the publisher contractually out of luck?

The short answer is the publisher is contractually out of luck.  The publisher guessed wrong about how well the book would sell, and has to accept the consequences.  The author gets to keep the money.

Of course, this is bad for the author in the long run.  After a significant loss, the publisher doesn't want to publish that author again.  Which is why I'm now on my 4th US publisher.

But the situation isn't quite as simple as it looks.  Publishers work hard to manage their expenses and set their prices so that they can make a profit *before* the advance has "earned out."  As an extremely crude rule of thumb, if a book earns out 2/3 of its advance, the publisher is usually willing to take another chance on the author.

(09/07/2010)

Festil

Mr. Donaldson,
It has been said, (paraphrasing) "dreams are the mind's way of working out the problems of the day." Poetic? Perhaps. But accurate? And it need not be true. Afterall, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Nevertheless, proceeding from the assumption that that assessment is in fact accurate:
From a layman's point of view, what "problems of the day" might be indicated if - while reading tbe Gap sequence or TCOTC (with or without TU) one were to find oneself experiencing dreams of soaring through space aboard Captains Fancy, or navigating the seas upon Starfares Gem?
Thanks!
    -Festil
P.S. - As an aside, I borrowed the name of one of your characters and incorporated it into one of my (way too many to remember them all) email addresses. I bet you'll never guess which...

I know you don't really expect me to interpret your dreams for you.  But I know of several theories of dream interpretation, each of which has felt valid on one occasion or another in my life.

1) "Dreams are the mind's way of working out the problems of the day."  Actually, I have very little experience with this.

2) Dreams are a form of mental "house-cleaning."  The whole point of dreaming is to forget the dreams as a way of getting rid of debris for which the mind has no further use.

3) All of the characters in the dream are you, and the action of the dream dramatizes in symbolic terms an internal conflict (you vs you vs you) which your mind is attempting to resolve.  Sometimes successfully:  hence the epiphanies which some people experience in dreams.

4) Dreams are a teaching tool which the unconscious mind uses in an attempt to persuade the conscious mind to change the way it thinks, often by dramatizing the absurdity of what the conscious mind is doing.

There are, of course, other theories, some of them extremely explicit.  But the real trick to dream interpretation is to identify which theory actually applies to a particular dream.  Applying an inappropriate theory perpetuates confusion.  Applying an appropriate theory sheds light.

(09/07/2010)

Mike S.

Mr. Donaldson.  Thank you for taking the time to read - and respond to - our questions.  This time 'round, I have two...

1.  In re-reading the first trilogy of TC, noticed that there appears to be a congruence between the philosophy of the Oath of Peace and the philosophy of many modern martial arts (particularly Judo).  Judo emphasizes "maximum efficiency" and "mutual benefit";  restraint to only that response necessary for defense is the central theme - same with the Oath of Peace.  Note that neither forbids outright violence if called for, but only forbids <excessive> reaction beyond the minimum needed.  Knowing your background in the martial arts, I thought this was interesting - comments?

2.  One reason I love your work is that your characters are truly "human" (in most cases, that is).  They are flawed, they are tortured, they suffer and die, they make mistakes IN THE NARRATIVE that haunt them throughout the book(s).  They are "alive".  The only other author I've found with a similar penchant is Katheryn Kurtz, who has no problem showing the full spectrum of humanity - and human life - in her stories.  Are there any other authors you would care to recommend that have a similar outlook on their craft?

Thanks,
Mike

1) What *I* find interesting is that I didn't start to study the martial arts until more than 10 years AFTER the publication of "Lord Foul's Bane."  During my years of work on both the first and second trilogies, I hardly knew that the martial arts existed.  I certainly had no idea that they might embody philosophies.

2) Over the long haul, every writer worth reading is unique.  Each brings a singular set of strengths and weaknesses to his/her work.  If you read my books looking for Patricia McKillip's extraordinarily evocative prose, you're going to be disappointed.  If you read Tim Powers looking for a writer who wrestles with his characters the way I do, you're going to be disappointed.  But this takes nothing away from McKillip or Powers--or from me.

However, when I try to think about your question, the name that comes most readily to mind is Paul Scott, particularly "The Raj Quartet."  A remarkable work that accumulates power at about the same rate that its characters accumulate flaws.  Or you might take a look at some Henry James.  Or George Meredith.  There are also examples in Conrad, Eliot (George, not T. S.), Austen:  the list goes on.

(09/07/2010)

Newlyn

Stephen,

I've never seen this question on the GI before but I may have missed it.

My question is more of a motivational type question.  I have found myself in the, quite new for me, situation of doing most of my work from home.  I find that I have trouble staying on task and keeping motivated to do my work.  Even though I love what I do, something about being completely on my own with it makes it hard to keep the cogs turning.  Do you have any specific techniques or advice to those of us who are struggling with this?  You've obviously got it down or you wouldn't be producing the quality of work that you are!

Everyone I know who works from home has the same problem, whether or not the work is creative or--for lack of a better term--self-generated.  Personally, I relieved several of the obstacles by getting an office *away* from home, a place that's physically separate, and that I use exclusively for work.  But not everyone has that option.  However, everyone I've talked to uses several techniques to create a sense of isolation and an atmosphere of concentration.  The first key is to eliminate distractions, which are often visual (e.g. someone walking past the window, or the sight of a pile of dirty laundry), or involve other people sharing the house (e.g. you leave your work space to use the bathroom; your partner/child/whatever says, "Since you're not working, can you help me with...?"  I cannot tell you what a blessing it is to have a private bathroom).  The second key is to eliminate any sense that you're being *watched*.  This is really about eliminating triggers for self-consciousness; and everyone I've talked to does it with *sound*:  I call it working in "a cocoon of sound."  If you can't hear the outside world, it's easier to believe that the outside world isn't paying attention to you.  And as a corollary to this point, you need *appropriate* sound, sound that conduces to the kind of concentration you need.

I also need a writing "ritual" which helps me get going every day.  Most of the people I've talked to use some version of a ritual or habit.  For example, one part of my ritual involves re-reading and revising the work I did the previous day.

Does that help?

(09/15/2010)

I have been looking for large print versions of your work without success. After searching the GI I understand some of the reasons why now.
May I suggest to you that a lot of your older fans could really benefit from LP. I read the first chronicles of TC when they were first published, I am now an old & tired old man and would love to read them again as well as some of your newer stuff. I can not read regular print now even with the aid of glasses. Amazon's Kindle DX would be an excellent way to do this as far as I am concerned. And I think Amazon's software would insure that your piracy concern's were handled as well? I know it's hard to accept all this new technology, but ignoring it is sort of like ignoring the telephone or the automobile in 1910. It is still going to change the world we live in, regardless.

This isn't under my control.  Publishers use small print to reduce costs.  Personally, I hate it:  I want large print myself.  But there's nothing I can do.

E-books offer one solution.  I'm told you can choose your own font size and even type when you read an e-book.  Meanwhile negotiations for the "Covenant" books in e-formats are still on hold:  my publishers still haven't convinced me--or themselves--that they can produce an accurate text from a physical book.

(09/15/2010)

Mike White

Hi Mr Donaldson,

Just a quick one - publication date of AATE in the UK is down on all the online stores as 28/10 - is this correct?

Kind Regards,

Mike White.

In fact, I didn't know the answer until today.  But yes, October 28, 2010, is the correct publication date for the UK edition.

(09/20/2010)

Andy Pastuszak

Having thoroughly enjoyed Scott Bricks audiobook of Fatal Revanent, I was wondering if a similar deal has been struck to have him do an audiobook of Against All Things Ending?

It's likely, I suppose.  But I don't have any solid information.  Scott Brick is dedicated to the "Covenant" books.  But he's risking his own money (not to mention his time), and his "Covenant" audiobooks don't sell well.

(09/22/2010)

Michael (a,k.a. Steve) from Santa Fe

So I was going over a list of some of my very favorite authors and I noticed something that I had never noticed before, here was the start of the list:

Stephen R. Donaldson
Stephen King
Steven Brust
Steven Erikson
Neal Stephenson

I was thinking, geez, have I discovered the secret to being a great writer?  Is it that easy?  Then I remembered the movie, "The Tao of Steve" (a local, filmed in NM movie - see it if you haven't, I thought it was very good).  It postulates that all cool guys are named "Steve" and/or being named "Steve" makes you cool.  And if my theory holds, also a great writer.  So, I guess I can blame my lack of great writing ability on my parents (stupid Great Uncle)...oh, and just call me "Steve from Santa Fe" from now on... 

It's interesting to note that the Biblical "Stephen" was a martyr.  So be careful what you wish for.

(09/22/2010)

Mark L. Slay

I see from some of the posts that you think the idea of turning the "Chronicles of Thomas Covenant" into a Sci-Fi or Fantasy series is atrocious to you.  Would you reconsider writing the screenplay if the Sci-Fi channel promised to do a good job say like they have done with Steven Kings "Haven" based on the Colorado Kid or say the Star Gate series?

I would never under any circumstances consider writing a screenplay for any of my books.  The reasons are many (e.g. I don't know how), but here are two that leap immediately to mind.  1) Movies and tv are "visual," and I'm almost exclusively verbal.  I think I'm incapable of telling a story in any form except a verbal narrative.  2) I hate re-hashing my own work.  I want to move on.  I don't want to go over the same material again.

(09/22/2010)

anonymous

Im just gonna keep this question as short and too the point as I can possibly get.  Do you feel that if Thomas Covenant had chosen to stay in The Land after "The Power that Preserves" that Lord Foul would not have been able to aquire the power to create the sunbane? Let me put it this way, After TC is killed he turns into the Wild Magic and is able to defeat Foul that way, But if he had stayed in The Land, and died thousands of years before the events of "The Wounded Land" do you think he would have been able to stop Foul before it ever happenned?

Since your question comes from WAY outside the text, your own ideas are probably as good as mine.  In effect, you're asking, "If you had decided to tell a different story, how different would it be?"  To that I have no answer.  But I can't help thinking that if Covenant had died a natural death in the Land after the first trilogy, he would never have become a spirit of wild magic capable of defending the Arch of Time.  Then everything in "The Second Chronicles" and "The Last Chronicles" simply falls apart.

(09/22/2010)

Roger Huffman

Hello Mr. Donaldson,
While searching the internet I found a book called "Last Drink Bird Head" which is some kind of fundraiser for ProLiteracy.  Here is a link:

http://wyrmpublishing.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=20

It says that "Stephen R. Donaldson" contributed.  Is that you?  Or is there another Stephen R. Donaldson that writes?  Does that mean you contributed a story to the book?  A Donaldson story that isn't published anywhere else?

Roger

Yes, that's me in "Last Drink Bird Head."  The gimmick of the collection was this:  the editor sent out those four words (last, drink, bird, head) to an array of writers and asked them to contribute the first thing that popped into mind.  The subject-line of the email was, Don't think, just write.  Well, it was a good cause, and I know the editor, so I complied.  But I didn't contribute a story.  I wrote maybe four sentences offering a completely spurious idiomatic explanation of those four words in a foreign language.

Most of the other contributers had much more interesting things to say.

(09/22/2010)

Jim Latimer

Greetings, Stephen!!! I'm waiting with great anticipation for the publication of AATE...but my question is about the GAP e-books.

You mentioned the release of one of them and the proofreading of a second...2 questions regarding this great news...
1) Where is it available?
2) How can I know I'm getting the new proofread version and not the older "corrupt" version? (BTW, do I sense Lord Foul's hand in these poor "corrupt" copies, or was that just a subconscious slip of the tongue?)

Here's hoping for the 1st and 2nd Chronicles in e-book form soon as well.

You should be able to get the GAP e-books from places like amazon.com and ereader.com.  All five are now available.  But I can't confirm that they've actually been proofread.  Last I heard, the proofreading process was "on-going."  In any case, I don't trust what the publisher calls QA (quality assurance).  "Cheap" is more important than "good," especially in the e-book business.  I'm waiting for some kind of evidence that the GAP e-text is accurate before I sign away the e-rights to the first six "Covenant" books.

How can you be sure you're getting a corrected version?  I have no idea.  But since there's no physical product involved, the publisher should be able to replace a corrupt book with a corrected one almost instantaneously.

(09/22/2010)

I've actually read a number of books / authors that you mentioned on the site as being some of your favorites. (Tim Powers, Le Carre's Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, Erickson).  I'm finding your tastes are a bit more esoteric than mine.  I'm being forced to read very slowly just to understand the material presented.  Lets just say my score was higher on the Math SAT than the verbal so I am pre-disposed in some way to numbers rather than words.  You have a much more heightened sense to words and the english language, a unique perspective, and more developed sense of story, character, tone, etc.. than I.  And then of course there is just the matter of personal taste involved in this also which is hard to account for.  Any tips or personal observations for reading and enjoying books that you find challenging in the manner I described? 

My immediate reaction is:  where's the problem?  Are your tastes different than mine?  Do you enjoy different books than I do?  So what?  That seems perfectly normal to me.  After all, there's nothing sacred about my opinions.  They're just, well, opinions.

But if you actually *want* "esoteric" (for whatever reason), try Ford Madox Ford's WWI tetralogy, "Parade's End."  That'll work your brain right down to the white meat.  <grin>

You'll notice that I haven't mentioned writers like James Joyce and Vladimir Nabokov.  From my perspective, those guys are *really* esoteric.  They're so busy playing intellectual games that the whole notion of "story" ceases to have any relevance.  Every passion except the cerebral has been denatured.  Writers like Powers, Le Carre, Erickson, and Ford may be difficult to keep up with, but they are telling real stories with real passion.

(09/30/2010)

Mark

Hi Stephen,

I was perusing a chat board that talks about the Nook - B&N's e-reader - and found this link talking about the publishers attempting to screw over the authors. Here's the link...

http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2010/08/publishers-behaving-badly-again.html

What is your take on this? Have your publishers approached you about porting all of your books to e-book form?

Have a great day.

For the record, a publisher who asks an author to sign over the e-rights is not necessarily trying to screw that author.  No doubt there are exceptions; but for the most part, publishers are simply trying to survive.  Physical books sales dwindle every year.  Meanwhile e-book sales appear to be growing.  So naturally publishers are trying to expand their presence in the e-book business.

The effect of this process on authors depends pretty much on the terms of the contract--or the terms of the amendment.  Broadly speaking, however, anything that helps publishers make a profit has the potential to benefit authors.  After all, authors need readers as much as publishers do.

As for *my* books in e-formats, I've already said enough on the subject elsewhere in the gradual interview.

(09/30/2010)

DrPaul

Dear Stephen,

Some years ago I read an online discussion in which a contributor accused Star Trek of a particular ideological bias because no millionaires ever appeared in the series.  About the same time I read one of David Brin's articles complaining about the tendency of fantasy writers to situate their stories in feudal monarchies rather than in liberal societies.  More recently I have participated in a Kevin's Watch discussion prompted by a post suggesting that the Land in TCOTC was "backward" because it didn't have a monetary system.  It seems to me that such views miss an important point about both SF and fantasy as genres.  This is that much of the best of both genres would not be possible without both the freedom to imagine alternative social possibilities, and the challenge of convincingly exploring both the alternative social possibilities themselves and how people succeed or fail in making authentic choices within such contexts.  What do you think?

It appears to me that this whole discussion proceeds from a false premise:  that the function of storytelling is to portray societies.  While this premise clearly holds true in some cases, it is far from being universally relevant.  For many many writers, the society being portrayed is simply a means to an end.  Context enables story.  Why else do science fiction and fantasy exist?  I don't write about Covenant because I want to portray a "backward" society.  I portray a "backward" society because it frees me to tell Covenant's story the way I want to tell it.  Similarly, I don't write about Angus Thermopyle and Morn Hyland because I want to portray an "advanced," corrupt society.  I've imagined an "advanced," corrupt society because it enables me to tell the story of Angus and Morn.

Of course, being "convincing" is essential to good storytelling.  No matter what story I'm telling, it will fail if I can't make the context convincing.  So I have to understand that context well enough to pursue its implications consistently and even logically.  But the context is *not* the point of the story.

For some other writers, of course, the context *is* the point of the story.  A fair amount of hard sf comes to mind.  To a certain extent, even LOTR comes to mind.  During certain literary periods (say, Victorian England), a portrait of society was one of the expected requirements of a novel.  Nonetheless I could easily spend the rest of the day listing exceptions.

(09/30/2010)