Gradual Interview
(answers from September 2005, as of Apr 30 2026, 2:45:13 AM)
www.StephenRDonaldson.com
© 2004 by Stephen R.Donaldson

Jerry Erbe

Dear Mr. Donaldson,
As always, thank you so much for this GI and of course for your wonderful stories. I am particularly drawn to The Gap Cycle and can't seem to stop reading and re-reading it (I really MUST broaden my horizons eventually) but to the point. Regardless of the numerous times I have read The Gap series of books, I have not yet been able to make heads-or-tails of two particular incidents that take place and how they came to be and the characters motivations behind them. I've searched for an answer to the question on Kevin’s Watch but I’ve had no luck. Perhaps you can shed some light on my incomprehension.

- WHY does Holt send a kaze to try and kill Captain Vertigus? I really don’t understand what he could have hoped to gain by this act? He had no real notion of what Warden was up to at the time and not much else had really happened that I can see that would have justified this act.
- The second question is similar, WHY would Holt send a kaze to kill Gosden? He was grooming Gosden to become President of the GCES. Was it simply a loyalty test? Either get on a shuttle to visit Holt in person, thereby saving his life or choose loyalty to Warden and die? Is it really that simple or am I missing something obvious? Holt seemed to have nothing to gain by this attack on his own subordinate.
- And for both these questions it would seem that Holt would have to be prescient in order to have foreseen his need or desire for these kazes far enough in advance to make the necessary preparations eventually uncovered by Hashi’s investigation.

Please help me to understand. On my next reading of the series I’d like to be able to think, “ah-hah!” instead of, “huh?”

Thanks! – Looking forward to Fatal Revenant 

Well, keeping in mind that you've probably read the story far more recently than I have....

Captain Vertigus opposes virtually all of Holt Fasner's political/personal agendas--and the good captain has a *lot* of credibility within the GCES.  Prior to the events precipitated by Warden Dios' "betrayal," Holt is (as I recall) trying through such tactics as the Preempt Act to reverse the roles of the UMC and the GCES:  to make the governance of Earth an extension of that in space instead of the other way around.  Consolidating his power-base.  But Vertigus is a serious threat to Holt's efforts.  He's dedicated, passionate, and persuasive.  And an attack on him (intended to be successful) would have the added benefit of making the GCES fearful for its own safety, therefore more willing to accept the hegemony of the (already powerful and effective) UMCP.

The attack on Godsen could be called a loyalty test.  Such tests are useful when the loyalty of a subordinate is open to question.  At this point in the story, Holt has plenty of reason to suspect that "something's up":  he just doesn't know what, exactly.  Sending an attack on Godsen that Godsen could avoid by blindly following Holt's orders offers Holt a chance to glean or precipitate valuable information.  And it has the added benefit of serving as a warning to Warden:  "You aren't safe from me, so toe the line."

Holt isn't prescient:  he's simply the kind of man who always keeps a few kazes handy, just in case.  (In other word:  no, this is not yet another example of excessively elaborate and implausible plotting.  <grin>)

(09/07/2005)

Pitchwife

Hi Stephen,
I was planning to finish reading all the archives from the gradual interview before writing to you, but I have been making my way slowly through them and realized that I may as well start sooner since I have so many thoughts and questions I want to share with you over time.

What is the origin of Kasreyne of the Gyre ?  In all the covenant books, he reminds me most of the Master Imagers from Geraden's world, both in character and in capabilities - his use of mirrors for translation within the sandhold, plus the use of his oculum (? not sure if I am remembering the name of this correctly) which seems optical in nature.

Another related similarity between these two worlds are the appearance of the acidic green creatures (Skeche?) that attack Covenants party in the swamps, and that Eremis translates to attack the village in Geraden's world.  Were these similarities on purpose (after all, Eremis does translate them from another world...) 

Gosh, I *wish* I had the kind of global mind that could weave together novels as disparate as "The Second Chronicles" and "Mordant's Need" with such subtlety and foresight.  Alas, I don't.  Any parallel details (glass; acidic creatures) that exist are--in effect--coincidences.  I didn't do them on purpose.  At least not with my conscious mind (the actions of my subconscious are another matter entirely).

As for Kasreyn's origin:  as far as I know, he sprang full-grown from my imagination.  In other words, I have no earthly idea where he came from.  If I could explain how the human imagination works, I would be the most important thinker since, well, ever.  <grin>  Still, it's interesting to stand back and observe how the mind recycles its own materials.  I suspect that a really obsessive-compulsive study of my stories would unearth all manner of unrecognized links (quite apart from the more obvious reiterations of theme and subject matter).  And some of those links (he said almost seriously) would be syntactical.

(09/07/2005)

Clement Singarajah, M.D

Not a question, but just a big thank you. Of all the great authors out there, you have come the closest to JRR Tolkein and in some ways have exceeded him (almost sacrilege to say so!) and I am pleased you are returning to the Land. By the way, you are one of the few authors who manages to tax my vocabulary with curious words like cerements, frangible, percipient, lambent, inchoate etc. Perhaps you could put floccinaucinihiliplification to good us as you have an undoubted mastery of English writing that very few others can match, perhaps only JRRT. Best regards to a superb author and thank you again for the alas too short hours of pleasure you have given my imagination.

OK, this is a quiz for regular readers of the GI.  Do any of you own a dictionary that contains the word "floccinaucinihiliplification"?  If you do, please post a definition--and 4-6 months later I'll post my heartiest congratulations.  <grin>

P.S. No points will be awarded if it turns out that no one except Clement Singarajah, M.D., can provide a definition.  (Now I'm *really* grinning.)

(09/07/2005)

Chris O'Connell

Mr. Donaldson,

I"m a big fan and I appreciate your taking the time to answer our questions.  My question is: what is your interest in a potential 'Lord Fouls Bane'?  I don't mean monetarily, but I mean as the original author.

I'm not judging by any means, but I'm curious about your motivation (if any).  Since you have said you would not write a screenplay and you aren't interested in having input into the process, in a lot of ways, the movie will having nothing to do with you.

As fans, we are interested because we can't get enough.  As I have read through the GI, you don't seem to be that interested in any life your stories may have outside the books.  Is it curiousity?  Maybe just a chance to learn 'how Hollywood works'?  Or just plain ol' pride?

This is pretty open-ended, so any thoughts you'd care to share would be great.

Thanks,
Chris

Since I would have no control whatsoever over the outcome, I work hard at not investing any mental or emotional energy in a "Lord Foul's Bane" film.  (And in any case I have too much other work to do.)  But of course I'm curious:  who wouldn't be?  And of course I have as much ego as anyone else, so naturally I want my books to get more recognition than is actually possible <grin>.  In addition, however, I believe strongly in not stifling other people's creativity.  By legal and honest means, certain individuals have obtained the right to attempt a LFB film.  Who am I to stand in their way?  And how can I assume that the result of their efforts will be failure (a bad movie; an unsuccessful movie; no movie at all)?  I'm not that prescient--and I'm certainly not that wise.

(09/07/2005)

Have you read Stephen King's Dark Tower series?  I wonder if it is coincidence that the protagonist of that story is maimed in a suspiciously famialiar way-he loses two fingers on one hand.  

You have recommended Stephen Erikson several times as an author you enjoy.  Which of his books specifically would you recommend to start with?  Its difficult to find good fantasy these days, and I've got to read something until the next Covenant book comes out.

You have said earlier that you currently do not have any ideas as far as what you will write when the Third Chronicles is finished.  Do you expect to retire at that point, or by that time will there probably be another project in mind? 

Thanks for the stories.    

1) As far as I'm concerned, it's just a coincidence.  I didn't encounter Stephen King's Dark Tower series until long after I had written the first "Covenant" trilogy.

2) If you want to read Steven Erikson, you have to start at the beginning:  "The Gardens of the Moon".  But be warned:  it's the most baffling book in the series because so many new concepts have to be introduced simultaneously.

3) I have no intention of ever retiring.  The fact that I don't know *now* what I'll write when "The Last Chronicles" is done doesn't mean that I won't continue writing.

(09/07/2005)

Greg Larson

Mr. Donaldson,
I first heard of Chronicles of Thomas Covenant from my 7th grade reading teacher, Mrs. Fritsch. (later to become Mrs. Wheeler) She had a Lord Foul's Bane poster and I was sold!
I have read both trilogies and am very excited to see 'Last Chronicles' come out!
I am in the process of rereading the first of the series again and once again find myself falling in love with the Bloodgaurd! How did you come up with the idea for the Bloodguard? 

Thank you so much for sharing your imagination with the rest of of! It is truly inspiring!

As I keep saying, I can't explain how my imagination works.  Details aside, however, I had three guiding concepts in my creation of the Land and its peoples.  1) The Land is the opposite of leprosy.  2) My story in the first "Covenant" trilogy is the opposite of Tennyson's in "The Idylls of the King."  Tennyson took one heroic, romantic, mythic character, Arthur, and surrounded him with ordinary, fallible, self-conflicted, and (to coin a word) debase-able human beings--with the result that the grand dream of Camelot failed.  I took one ordinary, fallible, self-conflicted, debase-able human being and surrounded him with heroic, romantic, mythic characters--with the result that the human being eventually discovered a capacity for grandeur in himself.  3) My story is one of extremes:  it's about people who push their own beliefs and personalities beyond all rational limits.  So, in the case of the Bloodguard, mere fidelity isn't enough:  it has to be deathless, sleepless, super-human fidelity or nothing.  For Kevin, it was victory or nothing.  For the Giants, it was pure untarnished love of life or nothing.  And for Lord Foul, it's (for lack of a better term) absolute transcendance or nothing.  Only a few characters--Lord Mhoram, Saltheart Foamfollower, Covenant himself--find salvation between the extremes.

(09/07/2005)

dr.gonzo

hey dude! first of all thanks! the covenant books are among the the best i've ever read. kudos for the mordants need duet too! i'm currently re-reading the first trilogy, lord fouls bane. one thing that always gets me is the savageness of covenants actions towards lena, and i find myself making excusses for his brutality. i;ve always wondered if it was truly his actions,(most likly as he belives he is dreaming and therfore not harming a real person)or is has he been taken by a raver? being new to the land he would be an easy target, white gold weilder or not. plus several times in the text he questions what foul will do next, rape children/harm children. were you trying to get across the supressed thoughts and emotions of covenant or some obscure similarity with foul or was it to show the paradoxical nature of the bearer of white gold? being equaly capable of evil and good. 
i hope you can shead some light on this quiery of mine.
p.s. cant wait for the fatal revenant! the cliffhanger to the runes of the earth is unbearable.

I've already taken up a fair amount of space discussing the rape of Lena.  The short answer:  that was Covenant's action--and Covenant's responsibility.  He was not under the influence of a Raver (although he *was* under the influence of his own inner Despiser).  So there's no excuse for what he did.  Which is the whole point.  Covenant is demonstrably a man who "could go either way."  And when the story begins, he is far more likely to go in Lord Foul's direction than in the Creator's.  The real subject of the story is how and why that balance tips.

(09/07/2005)

Bill Rich

Mr. Donaldson, 
I have read several months worth of your answers to the "Gradual Interview" questions, however I did not see the question asked as follows, "when will the next book in "The Last Chronicles" be released? I have read many questions and critical points of view seeking answers to questions about how you wrote the stories, possible paradox issues and so on, I am not qualified to critique your books nor the detail of the stories. What I am qualified to do is read and thuroughly enjoy them, I am disabled and home bound, your stories give my mind a chance to soar to places my body isn't able to go, for that I a simple reader, thank you.

Since "Fatal Revenant" does not yet exist as a complete manuscript, its release date is impossible to guess.  However, work on the first draft is proceeding more quickly than--just to pick a random comparison--the first draft of "The Runes of the Earth" did.  On the other hand, "Revenant" threatens to be longer than "Runes".  So there you have it:  a non-answer if ever there was one.  <sigh>

(09/10/2005)

Chris Reade

I wrote a paper about 10-12 years ago in college about Mordant's Need.  It was an upper level Lit Criticism class so the choice of subject matter was up to us and I had just finished the series so it seemed appropriate.

What I wrote about is that I saw a the series as an interpretation of the King Lear story.  Mordant is filled with the same characters - the king who has lost control of his kingdon, his three daughters, the king's personal lunatic, etc.  Even down to the one daughter who stays loyal to him even though he doesn't deserve it.

Now, Lear, of course, is as feeble as he appears and Joyce is canny and proves himself in the end.  But the similarity was striking to me and I was wondering if it was an on-base comparison or if I'm looking through the wrong mirror?  

Since I was an English major in college, and later earned an M.A. in English lit, you can be confident that I spent a *lot* of time studying Shakespeare.  (And I still re-read some of the plays regularly, although I was never a big "King Lear" fan.)  If I were to claim that "Lear" had no influence on "Mordant's Need," no sensible reader would believe me.  However, I can say with a clear conscience that "Lear" had no *conscious* influence on "Mordant's Need."  My attention was fully engaged elsewhere (on the story and characters), and I didn't become aware of the "Lear" parallels until later.  But then, my un(or sub)conscious mind has always been a lot smarter than my conscious mind.  <grin>  Perhaps the cleverest thing I've ever done as a writer was learn to let my un/subconscious express itself without interference.

(09/10/2005)

Katten

Mr Donaldson,

From reading the First Chronicles, I somewhat got the impression that the Haruchai, while being quite extreme as a race (who else could come up with the Vow?), were mostly made the outwardly cold and unexpressive beings they were because of their millenia of service as Bloodguard.  This was reinforced for me when the Bloodguard in The Illearth War, whose name I forget, returns to tell of the trip through the swamp and has a panicked outburst while telling his tale, which is explained through him being recently made a Bloodguard.

The Haruchai in the later books, while being very slightly more expressive than the Bloodguard, are still extremely stony-faced and it is hard to imagine any of them having an outburst like that.  Is this one of those small discrepancies that happen over series, or did I miss the point, and was that Bloodguard just an unusally sensitive Haruchai?

Thanks.

No, I think my point was that the Bloodguard of the unseemly outburst was unusually *young*.  In my thinking, it has always been true of the Haruchai (not just the Bloodguard) that they cultivate a stoney stoicism as a defense against, or as a way of managing, their extreme passions.  And since they lead long lives (when they aren't killed in battle), they have lots of time to practice their impassivity.  But even Haruchai start out as children; and it seems likely that at least a few of them became Bloodguard pretty early in life.

(09/10/2005)

Brian Gannon

Hi,
Let's assume that our collective dream comes true. That is, that the Thomas Covenant movies are made and are a great success. (I admit that you are probably right about their success, and in fact, i think that Mordants Need would make a more accessable movie for most people). With success comes imitation, and therefore I would expect that a number of authors would want to start writing stories that take place in the land (Gregory Benford comes to mind. :^) )  Would you allow other authors to work on your turf - so to speak?

Thank You
Bri

One curious demonstration of the general proposition that Hollywood Rules the World:  if a LFB film were to be made, and if that film became successful, the producers who purchased the original option would--in a manner of speaking--*own* the turf.  They wouldn't have any control over my own work in the Covenant/Land world, or over the sale and publication of my own books; but they would control everything else Covenant/Land-related.  If they wanted to license Playboy to produce a "Girls of the Land" wall calendar, they wouldn't need my permission.  And if they wanted to pay--just picking unlikely names at random--Piers Anthony or John Cheever to write Covenant/Land novelizations or spin-offs ("The Legendary Journeys of the Giants," by Kevin Sorbo), they wouldn't need my permission.  I would have no legal say in the matter.

But if the question ever came up, and I *did* have a say:  no, I would not "allow" anyone else to milk my ideas for money.  (Doing so for private enjoyment, or for the amusement of one's friends--as in fan fiction--is a different question altogether.  There I have no objection.)  If other writers want characters and/or worlds, let them get their own.

(09/14/2005)

Sean Farrell

Hey you,

I know you're super-clever and all that (what with your very British, if I may say, sense of humour) but I've got a rather un-deep question! Have you seen the new Doctor Who, and do you like it? It's not exactly traditional, but we Brits are lapping it up!

Now for something a bit (not much!) deeper. I consider you a writer of rare talent. Now, I read a wide variety of genres (as a bookstore manager, I need to) and I know that your skill compares extremely favourably with 'mainstream' or 'general' fiction writers. Yet you're NEVER going to receive the breadth of acclaim that lesser writers acheive simply because your chosen field is fantasy. Does this irk you? I know it irks me!!

Hope you are well and getting on with Vol II. Simply can't wait!! You're still the best.

Sean

People keep asking; but no, I haven't yet had a chance to see the new Doctor Who.  Would that it were otherwise.

And speaking of things that I would were otherwise:  I wish that genre labels did not automatically doom books to the critical dustbin.  One of many reasons why we live in such an anti-intellectual society is that those who consider themselves intellectuals are such ^#$%^ snobs.  (A woman of my acquaintance once wrote a long and highly favorable review of "The Mirror of Her Dreams" for the NY Times Book Review.  The editors ran the review--because they were under deadline--and then fired the reviewer for wasting readers' time on such crap.)  Of course, I'm not suggesting that "cookie-cutter" books, books which value formula over imagination, insight, and skill (Harlequin Romances leap to mind), should be taken seriously.  But why, I ask myself, are writers like Elmore Leonard and Patricia McKillip denied substantive acclaim?  The only explanation I can think of is that they've been cursed by genre labels.  (And McKillip is double-cursed by the "fantasy" and "young adult" labels.)

For reasons which surpass my comprehension, publishers believe that labeling is the only way they can sell books.  (In the US, at least, the packaging of "The Runes of the Earth" positively shouts GENRE LABEL.)  I can only hope that the passage of time will allow "dreck" like "Last Call" and "The Book of Atrix Wolfe" to arise from the dustbin and finally receive the validation they deserve.

(09/14/2005)

Mr. Donaldson,

First of all, an obligatory "thank you" for your wonderful work.  I absolutely loved the first two Covenant series which I devoured for the first time (of several times) back in the 80s.  It's quite a gift to be able to revisit the Land one last time.

While I was thrilled to read Runes, I was left with a nagging sense of dissatisfaction in one respect:  the lack of any sign of advancement, technological or otherwise.  I know that you've briefly addressed this question a time or two, citing (for example) the stifling effects of totalitarian regimes.  I can buy this as an explanation for the repressed Land, but I'm having difficulty buying it for the entire Earth.  The Chronicles have collectively covered, what, 7,000 years of recorded history?  Given the irrepressible nature of humanity, and the residents of this Earth don't seem to have an inherently less creative drive, it would seem to me not only possible but probable that technology would develop _somewhere_ in the world.  I realize that we haven't seen many other residents of the Earth, so it's certainly possible that there is some explanation (Lord Foul's reach being broader than we were led to believe, some behavior by the Elohim, etc.).  But the residents we _have_ seen were not only seafaring, they were clearly part of an extensive trade network.  Knowledge normally advances quickly against this backdrop, but as far as we know, not much has changed for over 7,000 years!  As far back as the time of the old Lords, the Giants (at the very least) had reached a level of technology equivalent to what we had reached only several hundred years ago.  One would think that over that vast a period of time, repression or not, individuals would emerge sporadically to push technology forward.  And that they would find their way to the Land...

Thoughts?  I suppose that you might believe that this falls into the "not necessary to tell the story" category, but it seems to me that that's not the case.  At least that's not the case for me.

Again, perhaps a minor point in the grand scheme of things, but something that stood out to me as a reader.

Thanks again for your work and your willingness to participate in this forum.

Matt

<sigh>  I shy away from tackling questions like, Why hasn't there been any technological advancement? and their corollaries, like, Why haven't metalsmiths learned how to forge white gold?  Beneath the surface, such questions ask me to define the essential nature and purposes of fantasy; but any postulate I might advance will have so many exceptions that it may well cause more confusion than it relieves.  So I'm going to confine myself to a few (possibly) cryptic remarks, and then I'm going to bravely run away <grin>, deleting valid counter-arguments as I go.

Unlike every other form of storytelling (with the possible exception of romances, "bodice-rippers"), fantasy is not *about* material reality, or even material plausibility.  It does not describe or comment upon rational or tangible observations of the external world; the world of science and technology.  Nor does it describe or comment upon verifiable observations of the human condition, in general or in particular, through research into the past or extrapolation into the future.  Fantasy is *about* metaphysical reality, the intersection of the spiritual with the psychological.  It describes and comments upon non-rational and (ideally) universal observations of the internal world; the world of the unverifiable; the world of imagination and nightmare, of hope and despair and faith; the world of magic.

Therefore the essential substance of fantasy worlds is composed of "that which transcends definition" rather than of, for example, electrons and J particles.  And *therefore* the inhabitants of fantasy worlds think and act in magical rather than in technological or scientific terms.  (Just one example.  I hope you don't imagine that the Giants formed Starfare's Gem by digging up chunks of granite, devising tools to cut the granite into slabs, and then glueing, pegging, or trussing the slabs together.  That's *way* too much trouble when you already have access to wood.  And then there's Revelstone.  My point is that the ability of the Giants to work with stone doesn't derive from tools:  it derives from magic; from the essence of who they are.)

It follows, then, that "advancement" in a fantasy world isn't measured by, say, constructing a device to replace a horse.  Rather "advancement" is measured by movement toward internal integration, wholeness; toward an effective affirmation of life and consciousness in all of their many avatars.  And by that standard, the people of the Land--and, by extension, all of the peoples of the Earth--are *not* advancing.  Bit by bit, evil (both mortal and otherwise) is breaking the world down.  If that were not true (I hope I'll be forgiven for saying this), there would be no point in telling the story.

LOTR is a perfect example--although as far as I know Tolkien never analysed his own work in these terms.

Putting the matter crudely, you're asking an external question about an internal story.  Still crudely:  my nightmares don't care whether ravaging monsters with four heads and venomous fangs have ever existed, or whether such creatures can be killed with gauss rifles; my nightmares only care that those monsters are after *me*.

(09/14/2005)

Allen

In my eyes Covenant is the absolute paragon of heroism.  His passion for truth is so severe he is willing to destroy a cosmos rather than lie.  I remember when I was a youth marching about town with my friends discussing life the universe and everything else. I asserted, one day, that Thomas Covenant was more emblematic of the heroic than was Aragorn.  That statement initiated a war of almost cosmic proportions.  Though, in my old age, I've come to see the point of the Aragorns of the world, Thomas Covenant remains the my heroic icon.
My questions: 1. Were there or are there any antecedents for Covenant in literature, for you? 2.Do you have any thoughts on the nature of the heroic in general? 3. When do I get my autographed copy of "Or I Will Sell My Soul For Guilt"?

Gracias, Allen

1) I didn't consciously base Covenant on any specific antecedants.  But the argument could be made that Covenant--like many of my characters--is loosely based on the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky, the work of Joseph Conrad, and the life of Sir Walter Scott.  a) Dostoevsky.  First, he wrote about moral and emotional cripples.  And second, he wrote about them with relentless artistic integrity.  Although he yearned to write explicitly "Christian" novels, he refused to compromise his actual stories; to distort his characters so that they would suit his beliefs.  b) Conrad.  He demonstrated that the resources of melodrama (high adventure, exotic locales, etc.) could be used to serve the most serious artistic purposes.  c) Scott.  Sparing myself the effort of going into detail, he was a shining example of personal responsibility and integrity.  Few human beings have ever gone as far or given as much for the best of reasons:  to keep his word.

2) I suspect you can deduce my "thoughts on the nature of the heroic" from what I've just said.  Doing what's hard, and doing it for the right reasons.  In my personal experience, the third hardest thing is to have artistic integrity.  The second hardest thing is to love without stinting.  And the hardest thing is to have personal integrity.  (What is personal integrity?  Here's one definition:  to always tell yourself the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about yourself; and then to act on that truth without flinching.)

3) That novel is available in bookstores everywhere just two dimensions away from ours.  And every single copy has been autographed by the--you guessed it--author. 

(09/14/2005)

michael sasen

will there be giants.

RAFO.

(09/14/2005)

Jessica

Hey SRD.  Being an avid reader I have read many good books during my 16 years but yours stand superior to the rest.  Good books may be forgotten, and even, in time great books.  But your writing is astoundingly unforgettable.  Thank you for the enjoyment of such works.

Couple of questions:

1) Do you base your characters off of a particular race when you create them?  I just like to get a mental picture of what everyone looks like and you described the Haruchai with brown skin.  Would they almost be Hispanic looking or African-American or...what?  Just wondered...

2) Could anything develope between Linden and Stave or is that just wishful thinking?  :) I'm probably just jumping to conclusions, but it would be so sweet in a way...a Haruchai romance. *grins*

Thank you for your time.  I will continue to anxiously await your next books in this series.

1) Two things to keep in mind about how I work.  One, I'm not a visual personal.  And two, my imagination doesn't respond well when I try to base what I'm doing on verifiable reality.  So no, I didn't have any particular races in mind for any of the "Covenant" characters.  However, it is a little known fact that many of the Ramen names and words are based on or extrapolated from Marathi (which is derived from Hindi, which in turn is derived from Sanskrit).

2) "Could anything develop between Linden and Stave...?"  Now there's an idea that literally never crossed my mind.  <grin>  Several problems.  a) I suspect that no ordinary human woman is strong or fierce enough to appeal to Haruchai males.  b) Parents whose children are in danger really don't think about much of anything else.  If they *appear* to think about something else, that's only because they're scrambling to find SOME way to help their children.  c) It's neither an accident nor a marketing ploy that this story is called "The Last Chronicles of Thomas Covenant."

(09/17/2005)

Mark Harris

I've been trying for nearly a year to buy the Gap Series, why are such popular books not in print?

Indeed, the GAP books were quite popular in the UK.  Nevertheless my (now former) publisher, HarperCollins (once Fontana, then Collins, and so on), has abandoned support for all things Donaldson.  "Mordant's Need" is also a casualty; and I suspect that the first two "Covenant" trilogies will disappear in England soon.

My agents are working to rectify this problem.  And my new publisher, Orion/Gollancz, has expressed some interest in bringing my "lost" books back into print.  But movement has been slow.  In the meantime, I can only suggest Amazon.co.uk, which seems to offer books from the US.

(09/18/2005)

Alan

Hi Stephen. 
Obviously, I love your work.
But... I gotta say. I WILL NOT be buying your books new if the intended deadlines of 2007, 2010 and 2013 are correct. That is just too long to wait and I will by the books 2nd hand or thru Ebay. 
I must ask, Why would you(or your publishers) do this. The time limit is much too long. No story is worth waiting that long for! 
For me, I've passed up books for the very same reason, too long to be published, I don't care for the endings if the wait is that long. I can wait a year or two, perhaps three. But 8 years is beyond a joke!
Why would you do this?
Secondly; was there any need to use swear words, as in sh*t, f*ck, bullsh*t? what was the point in using modern expletives?
Thanks for your time(if indeed you give it, as I suspect you wont)
Alan.

<sigh>  I don't suppose it ever occurred to you that books like mine might be difficult to write?  Or that a man my age might have health problems?  Or that I'm a human being who has to deal with all of the many complications that beset human beings?  Or that I might by trying hard to beat the announced deadline(s)?  No, of course not.

I hope to make my characters as real as possible.  You show me one human being who doesn't use obscene or sacrilegious (?) expletives--not even in the privacy of his/her own mind--and I'll show you twenty who do.

(09/18/2005)

Steven S 

I discovered Lord Foul's Bane around 1978, on the scheme of things not long after the first three in the Covenant trilogy were published.  I have read them and re-read them, as I have your other novels and short collections.  I am excited at Runes, I have read that as well.  I cannot express how your craft has touched my life, and keep me company through the many years since I first picked up from the school library a copy of Lord Fouls Bane.   My question is this.  Why even attempt to bring this to the big screen in movie form?  I realize it is your art, your vision but it has touched millions including me beyond words. To run the risk of damaging our own mental view of the Land and the struggles withing, are a risk I think is too great to take.  Literature, great literature should stay that way and not be allowed to be subjected to massacre by a director and editor that turns it into an action spectacle, fodder for the normal cheap hollywood formula for success.  Please reconsider and allow the Land to live as it is meant to, in the imagine of your loyal readers. Thank You. 

I've said it before, but I'll say it again:  I have absolutely no control over whether or not anyone ever makes a "Covenant" film.  My contracts for the first six books with Ballantine/Del Rey give that company the movie rights.  (I was young, inexperienced, had no agent, and was just glad to get published.)  So Ballantine doesn't need my consent to sell anything to anyone.  I understand your feelings, but this issue is entirely out of my hands.

(09/18/2005)

John Dunn

Mr. Donaldson,

I would like to express my gratitude for the books you have written. I especially found the Mordant's Need series extremely enjoyable-not to say that I do not consider your other works (Chronicles, Gap, Man Who) to be about the best written works published in the last 3 decades, because they are! As I have aged, I find it more and more difficult to *force* myself to read most of the trash published today that I sadly enjoyed as a younger man. Learning that you had returned to the Covenant series I was delighted; reading the Ruins of the Earth was perhaps the best literary pleasure I have had in many years. 

If you have answered this question before, pardon my asking again. In the Illearth War Hile Troy is given Covenant's ring, but is prevented from using it by Caerroil Wildwood, who states "I cannot permit this. It is breaking of Law." Maybe I am too dense to have understood, or I missed it, but what Law is Wildwood referring to?

Thank you so much for you time, and I wish you and yours the very best.

What I want to say is, "If you have to ask the question, you wouldn't understand the answer."  But that's a joke.  What I really mean is that your question makes me squirm.  The answer is intuitively obvious to me--and I'm particularly bad at explaining things which are intuitively obvious to me.

(Now I want to say--quoting, or perhaps misquoting, Robert Browning--"When I wrote that, only God and I knew what it meant.  Now only God knows.")

But let me try this.  1) The Law of identity.  As Mhoram says, Covenant *is* white gold.  The use of his power by someone else violates his relationship with that power.  In "The Power that Preserves," Elena destroys herself--and the Staff of Law--by violating Covenant's relationship with white gold.  2) The Law of promises.  Troy has offered to pay Wildwood's price; to trade himself for the survival of his army.  If he becomes a white gold wielder and goes off to confront Elena/Kevin, he'll be breaking his word--and once Troy does that, Wildwood won't have the power to force him back.  3) The Law of, well, let's call it consequences.  Elena has broken the Law of Death.  She's locked in a battle with Kevin's ghost/spirit/whatever.  Troy wants to intrude on that battle, determine the outcome.  But wild magic is the wrong tool for the job.  It's better suited to breaking Laws than to mending them.  Elena already has the only tool that could possibly be used to repair what she's done--but she's fighting for her life, and besides she's out of her mind.  In a situation like that, how could wild magic do anything except make matters worse (break more Laws)?

I hope this helps.

(09/21/2005)

Stumpy

Thank you for 'The Chronicles' - if only they were longer...... you can't get too much of a good thing (allegedly)

I have just read a thread on the GI where you comment upon the fact that the author gets only a small percentage of the selling price for his/her work.  

Do you think that with the internet and online community there is a market for authors to sell direct to the public via a website?  This is a concept which at least one major games producer is pursuing as it allows them to maximise profits whilst also not being at the mercy of their publishers.  It also allows them to release additional content as and when they wish.  Understand that this would probably not be viable for a new author, but for one who is well known it could be a perfectly reasonable proposition.  Particularly with a 'cult' following.

Best wishes

Stumpy

Other writers have tried this--or some variation of it (Stephen King leaps to mind).  I don't know how well it worked.  But I'm the wrong guy to make the attempt.  I'm a storyteller, not a bookseller.  Even with a gun to my head, I wouldn't be able to force myself to do all the different chores necessary to marketting books online.  And there are other problems.  These days, publishers won't publish books unless the publisher gets the "electronic" rights.  Any writer who wants to self-publish online will have to turn his/her back on all conventional forms of publication (unless, of course, you have clout on Stephen King's order of magnitude).  I couldn't bring myself to do that.

(09/21/2005)

Hazel

Hi there,

It is a great pleasure to find your website.  I, and I'm sure every other fan, greatly appreciate the time, thought and effort you put into replying to the various queries arising.

I am an avid reader, but somehow only came across your books two years ago. I have now read and re-read every single one of them, and completed the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant a third time in preparation for The Runes of The Earth (which I *loved*).  Despite reading practically anything I can get my hands on (and I mean anything!)I have not found any authors' work as compelling or emotive as yours, nor indeed, thought provoking. What, do you believe, gives your work the extra "oomph" that seems to linger in the mind?

Thanks for your time.

Well, assuming that you don't supply "the extra 'oomph'" for yourself (a dubious assumption at best, since reading is an interactive process)....

On one level, it has to be a function of imagination.  On another, it has to be a function of narrative skill.  And on another, it has to be a function of psychological insight/empathy.  Logic requires such conclusions.  But I suspect that there may be another factor at work as well:  the amount of myself that I give to what I'm writing.  Putting it crudely (because at the moment I can't think of a better way to say this), I don't "visit" my stories while I'm writing:  I "live" them.  I'm a participant, not a spectator.  Somewhere deep inside, I put myself into all my characters and go through everything they experience or feel.  (Which is why what I do is so ^#&% arduous.)  (And which, I'm forced to add, wouldn't be possible without imagination, skill, and insight.)  (Nor, in the case of prose storytelling, would it be possible for someone who isn't a fundamentally verbal person; someone who doesn't naturally experience life through words.)

(09/21/2005)

Pier Giorgio (Xar)

Hello Steve! I was reading a question you recently answered, concerning the Haruchai and their obsessions with moral absolutes, and I was wondering - the Haruchai of the Last Chronicles, as far as we can see, appear to believe themselves the only ones who are worthy of preserving the Land, and they absolutely refuse to accept any criticism about their ways, their deeds, and the actions they undertook in order to become the Masters of the Land. In short, in their own eyes, they appear to believe themselves unassailable, and they exorcise the fear of being inadequate which was shown by the Haruchai in the Second Chronicles by establishing the tradition of the three Humbled, which should technically serve as reminders of past mistakes and lessons in humility. Even this tradition has become a source of pride though, as we learn that it is a great honor to be maimed into a Humbled, and the Haruchai actually fight to prove themselves worthy of this honor. So, in short, it seems that the Haruchai have a deep-rooted desire - perhaps on an unconscious level - to prove themselves to be the best, bar none. This is also reflected in the obsessive way all Haruchai we have known hone their physical skills to near-perfection.
Obviously, this attitude leads to a certain amount of metaphorical blindness (if I believe to be always right, and you show me evidence that I'm wrong, chances are I'll pretend I didn't see them and keep believing I'm always right), and so the Haruchai end up being generally impervious to outside influence - somewhat tragically, though, this imperviousness seems to apply more to their would-be allies than to their subtler foes. 

Anyway, all of these considerations led me to wonder: Stave, who has shown the typical behaviour of the Masters throughout most of "Runes", eventually rejects at least part of this belief. Could the loss of his eye, which happens shortly before this event, also be taken to exemplify a "crack" in the imperviousness of the Haruchai (or at least Stave)? I mean: the marring of a Haruchai's near-perfect physical skills (and I would imagine that having one less eye does have an impact on those) could symbolize the shattering of Stave's preconceptions and a "crack" in the "moral armor" all Haruchai have? The Humbled are also maimed, but they do so voluntarily, and turn the maiming into a source of pride; whereas Stave's maiming seems to symbolize something more - although I could easily be reading too much into this event :)

I'm posting this more because of the thought and care you put into it than because I have anything substantial to add (although the theme is being explored further in "Fatal Revenant" even as we speak <grin>).  But I do want to confirm that I intended the loss of Stave's eye pretty much the way you interpreted it.  His "single" vision is both physically less and psychologically more than the ordinary "double" vision of the Haruchai.

(09/21/2005)

Rachel Bevilacqua

The Chronicls of Thomas Covenant have deeply touched me and they inspire me daily to face up to my fears and keep going, even though I know I'll probably fail.  Having these books is like having a Staff of Law, they spread a warm sense of calmness and sureness through me whenever I have to face something I don't think I can do.  My question, then, is how can your readers ever thank you enough for the precious gift you've given us?

You've already done so.  It's not just that you enable me to earn a living while doing what I was born to do:  by reading what I write and responding to it, you clarify and enhance my sense of purpose in life.  And, as I'm sure you know, a sense of purpose is at least as precious as anything that I've ever given my readers.

(09/21/2005)

Daniel Bateson

Firstly a thank-you! I grew up in a house with more books that the average household. Great towering bookshelves filled with an enormous selection of subjects and stories. My mother, in her youth, worked in a book shop and I guess her love of books started there - seemingly she passed that love to me.  These bookshelves happened to contain the then entire collection of "The Chronicals of Thomas Covenant The Unbeliever"! and I was introduced to them at about the age of twelve (some seventeen years ago). As time passed I found "Mordant's Need" very entertaining. I annoyed many a bookshop clerk for the release of each and every "GAP" publication through the years. I am sure the many hours spent "glued" to the insides of all of these books has impaired my vision - though I have no regrets. At having found this web site I discover that there are still a good deal more of your books that I would like to own - one day... 

SO my THANK-YOU!

I have noticed, after having read your "The Aging  Student of the Martial Arts" article, that your use of Martial Arts or hand-to-hand combat through your work began sometime before you began your personal journey in Martial Arts. One thing that comes to mind is that your earlier work contained hand-to-hand combat that seemed to last longer than such combat in your later and most recent works. Perhaps I see this because my memory could be liken to that of a fish, but do you feel that your personal experience with Martial Arts has allowed you to create hand-to-hand combat that is shorter lived and more precise? Or is this just mere coincidence?

I've noticed something similar myself.  Back in the, say, early "Covenant" and "Mordant's Need" days, I often described fights at greater length, but with less concrete detail.  No doubt the fact that I had never seen a fight in my life played a part.  But now, after years of study, my fight scenes tend to contain less movement (or fewer movements) but considerably more precision.

That was never a conscious or deliberate change:  it just happened as a result of changes in my own knowledge and experience.

(09/24/2005)

Zack Handlen

Mr. Donaldson,

I just started reading Runes of the Earth. It's been a couple years since I last read the Covenant books (although I did read most of the Gap series recently; had to put it to one side, as their darkness was really getting to me, but I'll be picking them up again soon), so I had to re-discover your writing style again. It's  unique; initially, it always seems labored and over-done, but after a few paragraphs it becomes clear that this is intentional. The effect is one of the reasons I love your work so much, as it lends an amazing weight and intensity to the story, and makes the reader more vulnerable and empathetic to the characters and their needs.

I said this style is unique to you, and it is, but I have found one other writer with a similiarly gravid prose line, who's work I had only discovered a year ago- Mervyn Peake. You've mentioned elsewhere that you're a fan of the Gormenghast trilogy (although man, it hurts saying "trilogy" when you know the last book is as disappointing as it is), and I was wondering, has Peake been an influence on your writing? Had you read him before you started the first Covenant series? Or is it simply a case of two different authors developing similiar styles based on a similarity of intent, even if the end results are disparate?

Thank you, and thank you for your wonderful novels. 

I suppose I could pretend that I wasn't influenced by Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast books (as you say, the third is a crushing disappointment), but I would be lying.  I love the richness of Peake's prose:  in certain ways very akin to some of Joseph Conrad's writing ("Heart of Darkness" or any of the other "Marlowe" stories), but deployed for very different purposes.  And I love what Peake achieves with his prose.  Certainly I read him before I began work on "Covenant".

My own purposes probably have more in common with Conrad's than with Peake's.  To see what I mean, look at Peake's florid use of caricature, normally a technique of satire, but employed by Peake to poignant effect.  You'll find little that could be called caricature in my novels--or in Conrad's.  In this respect, Peake more closely resembles Dickens.

(09/28/2005)

Jory

Main Entry:   floccinaucinihilipilification 
Part of Speech:   noun 
Definition:   an act or instance of judging something to be worthless or trivial 
Etymology:   the parts of the word each mean `at nothing' or `with a small price' 

I couldn't resist looking ahead; and I've been astonished by the number of readers who have answered--correctly!--my question about "floccinaucinihilipilification" (try saying *that* three times fast).  For reasons of space, I won't post the other responses.  But you should all give yourselves a hearty pat on the back.  (Or, if your shoulders are like mine, a pat on the head will suffice.)

However, the award for both the quickest and the most comprehensive response goes to Robyn Butler of Australia, who turned in a veritable term paper on the subject.  Kudos, girl!

(09/28/2005)

Tom

I guess you'll get quite a few answers to your request for information, but here's my bid for a no-prize: floccinaucinihilip[i]lification - the action of estimating as worthless.  There was a missing i.

It's supposedly the longest word in the English language, along with floccipaucinihilipilification, which means exactly the same thing.  I remember it from a 'did you know' article printed on the back of a packet of Walkers Crisps (or as Americans would say, chips) back in the 80s.  Or maybe the 70s.

And you can reMEMber things like that?  Wow!

(09/28/2005)