Gradual Interview
(answers from June 2005, as of Apr 30 2026, 2:45:34 AM)
www.StephenRDonaldson.com
© 2004 by Stephen R.Donaldson

Jeff Hamilton

I just started Runes of the Earth and it feels like visiting a long lost friend. Thank you!

My question is this: You hear alot about symbolism, irony, etc. from literary scholars. Personally I don't believe that most of it was planned in the story. It just develops with the art of good storytelling. There appeared to me to be a number of both subtle and not so subtle Biblical references regarding sin and redemption. Many closely paralleling the Christian plan of salvation. How much of this was actually planned? And does any of this refelect your own beliefs?

Nothing in my stories reflects my personal beliefs--except for my belief in the integrity of storytelling, and the importance I assign to my best understanding of my characters.  However, I put an enormous amount of thought into my stories.  And I *was* trained as a literary scholar.  Very little in the way of "symbolism" and "irony" in my stories occurs by accident.  And with my intensive fundamentalist Christian upbringing, Biblical references of all kinds can hardly be avoided.  But don't be misled:  if the stories can't stand on their own, entirely independent of my--to pick a random example--personal religious beliefs, then they can't stand at all; and I've failed at what I believe in most.

(06/01/2005)

Stephen Hurwitz

Congratulations on the Runes of the Earth! I look forward to the next volume. My question is one I almost hesitate to ask, but I would like to know the answer. Is there any chance, however slim, that poor book sales would cause you to not finish all four volumes of the Last Chronicles, or do you have a contract with your publisher, that they will be published, no matter what? I think if fantasy writers wanted to get rich, most of them would need a second job. They have to love it. 

You're right, most of us really have to love it.  And I do.  There is no chance, none at all, that "poor sales"--or anything non-lethal--would prevent me from finishing "The Last Chronicles."  I have a profound (not to mention obsessive) need to finish stories once I start them.

There is a remote--but real--possibility that poor sales might cause my US publisher to dump me.  (This issue doesn't arise in the UK, where sales have been excellent.)  On the one hand, my US editors are loyal and supportive.  On the other, Putnams is well known for dumping authors when sales are unsatisfactory--or even when sales threaten to be unsatisfactory.  However, even in the unlikely event that Putnams dumps me, all would not be lost.  Books would still be available from the UK.  And another US publisher might be willing to pick up the project.

In any case, there's no immediate danger.  Hardcover sales for "Runes" were good (not great; but definitely good).

(06/01/2005)

Drew

Just for starters, you, Stephen R. Donaldson, are one of the best writers of all time. Your works have influenced me in more ways than I can express. One of the ways is actually what my questions are about. In the second book of the Gap Cycle on page 61, your "ancillary documentation" started with the conflict of Chaos and Order. I was curious where you learned of this or if it is something specific to you. If it isn't just yours then could you state where you took it from or modified it from because I want to know more, and if it is yours, I would be facinated at how you came across such a profoundly universal human trait. Thanks in advanced. From one of your most avid readers, Drew.

The "chaos vs order" theme which pervades the GAP sequence is certainly not original with me.  (Only the specific details of how that theme is deployed are mine.)  Indeed, the theme is so deeply embedded in Western thought that it might be impossible to determine who first put it into words.  But speaking solely of my own intellectual development, I like to credit William Blake, who wrote, "Reason is the circumference of energy."  This struck me when I first read it, and still strikes me today, as an ideal expression of the paradox which makes art, beauty, and even humanity possible.  If energy (chaos) is not controlled by reason (order), it remains formless and destructive.  If reason is not constantly challenged and stretched by energy, it remains rigid and destructive.

(06/01/2005)

Paul Hanrahan

Hello sir
I am currently working on my dissertation for my English degree and am looking at The Covenant Chronicles.   I am Covering The Political And Social in Contemporary Fantasy Novels.   It is clear that a lot of the issues covered in the chronicles have something to say on individual responsibility and the importance of community.  Could you tell me do you believe that there is a political element to the Chronicles particularly the second chronicles.  For example enviromental issues.   Looking forward to finishing my degree so an sit and read your new book for pleasure.

Best regards
Paul Hanrahan 

I'm uncomfortable with the idea that my novels "have something to say."  For one thing, as I keep repeating, I'm a storyteller, not a polemicist.  I don't write to communicate messages:  I write to share characters and emotions, situations and questions.  And for another, the--for lack of a better term--"content" (political or otherwise) of any story is a synergistic creation:  writer and reader bring it into being together.  And since, like the writer, every reader is a unique individual, each reading experience--each synergistic creation--has its own unique "content".  For example, "The Second Chronicles".  For you, and possibly for me, it may be an object lesson about toxic dumping.  But for another reader, it may be pure escapism.  For yet another, it may be a welcome relief from the rather claustrophobic confines of the Land.  For still another, it may be a troubling exercise in implausibly elaborate machination--a "conspiracy theory" book, in a manner of speaking.  And for still another, it may be a patently dishonest assertion that any human being can ever transcend the abyss.

On a conscious level, I'm a totally apolitical storyteller (although I admit that I have trouble turning off my environmental instincts).  But that doesn't mean my stories lack political "content".  In fact, my stories lack ALL "content"--until the reader makes his/her contribution to the creation.

(06/04/2005)

Robert J. Pitkanen

My question is simple, where my reasons are not.  My question is this, how many books will make up the "Last Chronicles"?  I've read most of your books twice, and love the depth of internal conflict.  How do you develope such realistic characters?  (BTW I've started reading "The Ruines of the Earth" and its great.

There will be four books in "The Last Chronicles."  The titles are hidden away in this interview somewhere.

If I could explain how I do what I do (how, for example, the human imagination works; or how my particular ethos intersects with and shapes--or is shaped by--my imagination), I would become far more famous for that insight than I ever will be for my books.  <rueful smile>  All I can tell you is this:  1) my tastes in literature were shaped by greatness (from Shakespeare and Donne to James and Conrad); 2) the--I don't have a better word for it--"content" of my imagination was shaped by my childhood in India; and 3) and I've spent most of my life (certainly my adult life) making an intensive study of personal integrity.

(06/05/2005)

Mary Matthews

Having thoroughly enjoyed The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant I am now getting stuck into the second triligy - all I want to do is read! Can you please tell me if there are plans to publish the final four in The Last Chronicles of 
Thomas Covenant as a one-volume edition? Also please do you have any release dates for the paperback version of the last four books?

From here in the UK - my best wishes to everyone, particularly to Mr Donaldson. I also write, but I fear I will never be as good an author. I can only aspire to be ALMOST as good!

Many thanks. Mary

No publisher that I know of plans that far in advance.  Decisions about things like omnibus editions are made after--sometimes long after--all of the original books are published.  And since what I call Covenant 8, 9, and 10 haven't even been written yet (although I'm making good progress on 8), no sane publisher would announce "release dates" for the paperbacks; or for any versions.

Good luck with your own writing!  I hope you fare well.

(06/11/2005)

Michael Weinhardt

Hi Stephen,

I'm just wondering if you *will* ever appear as an expert on Fantasy Bedtime Hour?

I *definitely* love your work, but I also love the show and, somehow, the show won't seem complete until you are on it! Plus, I'm sure Julie, Heatherly and Cameraman Jenn would love to see you there...

Cheers

Having had the pleasure of meeting Julie and Cameraman Jenn (Heatherly was apparently "asleep") during a book tour last fall, I find that I've now been invited to appear as the "final expert" on Fantasy Bedtime Hour.  I can't honestly say that I feel equal to the challenge <grin>, but I don't see how I can refuse.

And for those readers of the GI who are *still* wondering who should play Thomas Covenant in the hypothetical film version of "Lord Foul's Bane":  can anyone compare with Gamecat on FBH?

(06/11/2005)

Stephen

IVB at Kev's Watch is sharing with us "As the World Burns - A Kevin's Watch SOAP".

It is ECSTATICALLY FUNNY!
If you want to burst your sides laughing check it out!  (Runes Forum, Sticky)

But be warned!  Your characters are HILARIOUSLY ABUSED!  (And the action starts at the end of Runes too... )

And Thanks for the news about book 2!!!  We had a celebration!

Best.
Stephen.

I'm passing this along for people who might enjoy it.  I haven't had time to check it out myself--although typically I enjoy such things (witness my fondness for Heatherly and Julie's Fantasy Bedtime Hour).

(06/15/2005)

Doc

Mr. Donaldson,
       In LFB Foamfollower stated that a Giantship was always at sea seaching for a route home. What happened to the ship that was at sea during The Illearth War? 

This is a more complex question than it probably ought to be.  But consider the fact that in LFB the Lords promised Foamfollower Gildenlode keels and rudders (if memory serves) for the Giantships.  From this one might well infer that when the current "searching" Giantship returned to The Grieve it stayed there--and no new ships were sent out--because the Giants were hard at work retrofitting all of their ships.  Plus, of course, the sea is a perilous place.  Any number of Giantships might simply have never returned.

A more probing question, I think, is:  why did Lord Hyrim et al find no Giantships at all when they reached The Grieve in TIW?  "The Last Chronicles" may conceivably suggest an answer.  Or not.  Authors have been known to be very clever.  They've also been known to be badly confused.

(06/15/2005)

Mike

Mr. Donaldson,

I have been enjoying the Thomas Covenant series since it began, and am enjoying _The Runes of the Earth_ right now!  For what it's worth, I was going to KSU when you donated your original manuscripts, etc., to the library, and was actually at the reception they had for you -- though I was only a lowly undergrad at the time!

Anyhow, I've been looking around to try and find a statement I *think* you made long ago, about the potential for exploring various concepts of redemption through the various Thomas Covenant series.  If I remember correctly, the themes were: redemption through victory,
redemption through self-sacrifice,
redemption though the sacrifice of others.

I'm curious if a) I'm rememberig correctly and you recall saying something like that and b) if so, if you are following that theme through the 3rd Chronicles series, since the first two series seem to fit within that mold.

Thanks for your time!

This makes me squirm because, well, you *almost* got it right (which means that your memory is considerably better than mine); but I don't know how to correct any misapprehension without committing a spoiler.  So let me try it this way:  "victory" works; "self-sacrifice" is close enough (I usually refer to "surrender," but lo those many years ago I could easily have said "self-sacrifice"); but "sacrifice of others" is way off.  Admittedly, Covenant is a pretty expensive guy to be around through much of the first trilogy.  But by the end of the second he has become adamant about trying not to sacrifice others.  And whatever inclination Linden may have had to let other people take the fall was--in a manner of speaking--cleaned out of her during the second trilogy.  It's difficult to imagine either of these people considering "redemption through the sacrifice of others" to be anything except an oxymoron.

I am (very) consistently following through on my original model for the whole "Covenant" saga.  But in some respects your memory has played you false.

(06/15/2005)

Paul Haynes

Does Berek's victory on Mount Thunder have any relation to the scene in the leprosarium in Lord Fouls Bane where Covenant vomits at the sight,stench,repulsion of the old leper and decides he wants to live?Also do you ever read any message boards concerning your writings?

Meaning is where you find it.  Speaking purely for myself, I did not intend anything more than a thematic connection between Berek's victory on Mount Thunder and Covenant's reaction to his first encounter with another leper.  But if you see more--well, enjoy it.

I stay away from message boards concerning my writing.  As I've said before, I'm not the intended audience, and for that reason (among others) the experience isn't good for me.

(06/15/2005)

Michael Waltrip

Hello Steve,
Good news, I think. I used the search (keys: "Fatal" & "Reverent"), and what I wanted to ask came right up.

One question, "Runes" has seems quite a different "ending" style. The build up, i.e. cliff-hanger, took me by surprise. I wanted to immediately go on to the next book. I realize the "Quest for the Staff", is one common thread for the 3 chronicles. Any comment on the intention for the "Runes" ending, is what I'm wondering about. 

I've read several places that "four" books is known already, for the 3rd Chronicles. Is that in stone?

Last, will I "we" get an email, if/when our question appears here (in this forum)?

"Runes" was vivid and rich to read. I was stunned, first time I read "Wounded Land", but this [has] a whole different feel. You could almost hear the ocean waves, when ever Esmer approached.

Didn't Mistweave (Giant of the Search) go with Cail Haruchi, when Cail left Revelstone to seek the Meerwives? The intent, if I recall, was to journey together, but Mistweave was going to the Giantship in Coerci.

Thank you!

Michael

You've asked a number of questions, here and elsewhere.  I'm sorry I'm so slow getting to them.

I didn't consciously set out to create cliff-hanger endings for "The Runes of the Earth," or for any of subsequent installments.  Rather the story itself seemed to dictate that structural device.  (I refer you to "Mordant's Need," which is also organized in four parts, three cliff-hangers and a resolution.)  Frankly, the only way that I could have extended "Runes" past the point where I ended it would have been by including all of "Fatal Revenant"--which would then have required me to include all of "Shall Pass Utterly"--which would then have demanded the inclusion of all of "The Last Dark."  And that was not a practical possibility on many levels.

And yes, four volumes is definitely "in stone."  The way my imagination works doesn't allow for variations which would change either the shape or the structural units of the story.

I'm sorry:  neither my webmaster nor I can afford the time to send out e-mail "notifications" when questions are answered in this interview.  Considering the lag (!) between question and answer, I can certainly understand *why* you would like to be notified.  But then my answers would be delayed even further.

Yes, Mistweave left Revelstone with Cail.  But Mistweave had a necessary purpose for going to Seareach; and in any case Cail would almost certainly have refused company on his quest for the merewives.

(06/15/2005)

John Clem

TC’s lack of understanding of the ring’s power made his desperate and sincere attempt to save Elena against Kevin’s assault futile. TC’s earlier decision to remain an observer and to not get involved prevented any motivation to determine the trigger mechanism of the ring so when he finally wanted to use it to save her nothing happened.  The loss of Elena rendered him with such extreme despair and guilt he was initially unable to recognize his return to own world (i.e. mistaken his lawyer’s voice for Elena).  Was it your intention to give readers the impression TC's rescue of the little girl who was bitten by a snake, to be a “psychological” rescue of Elena ?  In his mind, did he initially think it was a little Elena who was crying for help ?     

I have greatly enjoyed reading your remarkable work and look forward to your future books.

John

I'm sure you could argue that subconsciously Covenant was still trying to "rescue" Elena--or to expiate for his failure to save his daughter.  But on a conscious level he was responding to an immediate--and very real--crisis.  Indeed, *I* could argue that consciously he had learned from Elena's example and was refusing to repeat her mistake.  Putting it another way:  he was now humble enough to understand that he was neither wise enough nor grandiose enough to "save the world."  Trying to save an endangered child who happened to be standing right in front of him, on the other hand:  that *did* lie within his abilities.  (Incidentally, I consider it self-evident that Lord Mhoram would have made exactly the same decision in Covenant's position.)

(06/15/2005)

David Wiles

Steve; I hope this finds all is well. I was wondering if you are still training in martial arts.
In your line of work it probably helps having an outlet for stess and pressures associated with keeping the story moving as well as remaining creative. It does'nt hurt on the physical health either. Thanks David Wiles   

Yes, I'm still a dedicated student of the martial arts.  As I've tried to explain elsewhere, there is wisdom hidden deep within the martial arts that I find invaluable.  And I know that such exercise is a good pressure-valve; but I'm less conscious of that benefit than I am of other, more (for lack of a better term) spiritual benefits.

(06/15/2005)

Steven Koper

Dear Mr. Donaldson,

I have enjoyed the Chronicals Of Thomas Covenant a great deal over the last 20 years. (I was 14 when I read the chronicals the first time, I am now 35). I was very excited to see the Last Chronicals Of Thomas Covenant and I loved The Runes of the Earth. That said, I would like to ask if you have any more ideas about Penance and Scriven? I read in an earlier question that you thought there might be more story to tell. 
I was also wondering about the convention in Madison, Wisconsin.  Your website has you listed as appearing but I can't find you listed as the guest of honor (as it should be) on the website of the convention. I am located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and was looking forward to meeting you and a possible book signing opportunity. I know (hope?) you are busy on the next book and would like to thank you for your time. 

                    Yours Truly,
                        Steven Koper

I will not be the Guest of Honor at the World Fantasy Convention in Madison for the simple and sufficient reason that the organizers didn't ask me.  No, wait a minute, that's not it.  Or it *is*, but it's not *why* they didn't ask me.  The real reason is that I've already had my turn.  I was the WFC GoH way back in Tucson 20 years ago.

More about Scriven and the "Penance" world?  I'm sorry, you'll have to ask me that question after I finish "The Last Chronicles."  I have a one-track mind, and I don't want to risk derailment by even pretending to think about other stories.

(06/15/2005)

Zack Handlen

This question has been hidden since it is listed in the following categories:

Spoilers - The Runes of the Earth

To include this question in the downloaded file, you must change your preferences in the Options screen.  Go to www.StephenRDonaldson.com, click on "from the author" and then "Options."  The question can also be viewed online.

(06/16/2005)

Sergio D. Caplan

Mr. Donaldson, 

Am curious, are there questions asked of you that you would have to say, "I can't say I thought of that at the time, so I'm not sure there is an answer"?

Am just saying it because, let's face it, these are stories (wonderfully written and emotionally capturing stories mind you) and being just stories...Mistakes can be made, things you didn't think of LFB might have become an issue in WGW, and you just had to say, "to heck with it, will just ahve to write around it!"  Things of that nature.

But this leads me to a big "writing" question, how do you do it?  How do you keep track of all that you have written (names, characteristics, bio, past history and interaction, etc.)?

I mean surely at some point while writing one episode where char A speaks with char B you must have to sit there and go, now wait, are they aware of each others histories already?  Did I cover that?  Is one taller, did I write that already?  etc. etc. etc.

whew....thanks

Yes, it's true:  I'm human.  Ergo there are always things that I've missed, ranging from thematic implications (apt or otherwise) to details of internal consistency.  And this forum has brought a number of them to my attention (which I find embarrassing, but almost always valuable).  So yes, there are occasionally "mistakes" that I simply have to "write around"--or to bury in bullshit as cleverly as I can <grin>.  In some happy cases, however, having my mistakes pointed out to me (or discovering them myself) opens doors for the material that remains to be written.

As to how I achieve as much internal consistency as I do:  I've already discussed that at some length in this interview.  I'll just reiterate here that I do a great deal of research on an almost daily basis, primarily into the "past" of the "Chronicles," but also into the "future" of what I haven't written yet.

(06/16/2005)

Richard Medlin

When I was half way through "Runes of the Earth" I wrote you concerning the Haruchai. Specifically how they have befuddled me since the first Chroncles. They live by extremes, seeing things as black and white, right and wrong with no middle ground. Now it seems the "Masters" have become the new "Clave." Only instead of robbing the people of the Land of their lives, they rob them of their reason for living. Didn't Berek make a deal with the earth when the fire lions were called that the people of the land would serve the earth and wasn't "earthpower" the gift of the land to the people to empower them to keep that promise? 

I did learn one thing about the Haruchai from "Runes" that i hadn't realized before. For some reason the statement from Foamfollower came to mind when he said "does it surprise you then that I have been thinking about hope?" I guess what gives a person the ability to hope also gives them the ability to dispair. One cannot exist without the other since they spring from the same source; our passions. The Haruchai have been trying to subdue their passions so that they will not fall prey to dispair but at the same time they cut themselves off from hope. They have manipulated the land so that the people cannot perform great acts of dispair and thus harm the land but also the people of the land have no way to act on their hopes to save the land from its peril. To me this makes the Haruchai like some kind of disfunctional Taoist. They have denied their inner "yang" and in so doing, cut themselves off from their inner "yin."
In the Taoist philosophy, the yin and yang comprise the meaning of life, the coexistence of good/light and evil/darkness and that in all good, there is some evil and in all evil there is some good. Is this the way you intended the Haruchai to be in the story or is there some deeper meaning or agenda attached to them that I'm just not getting?

PS: If Haruchai owned pickup trucks, their bumper stickers would read "You can have my pride when you pry it from my cold dead fingers."

Thank you,
Richard Medlin
Pataskala Ohio

Your interpretation seems apt to me.  I didn't have anything specifically "Taoist" in mind when I first created the Haruchai/Bloodguard.  Nor have I thought in those terms since then.  Rather I've been thinking about the inherent destructiveness of moral absolutes; and in particular about the dangers of "extremism" in the face of dilemmas which appear to demand extreme solutions.  (E.g. exactly what *does* a person who abhors killing do when someone or something dearly loved is about to be killed?)  But such themes consort well with the ideas you've expressed.

One practical point, however:  Berek swore his particular service to the Earth and Earthpower long before the Haruchai came along; the Haruchai never swore *his* vow, they swore their own; and they have good reason to distrust the ramifications of Berek's oath as it was handed down through the old Council of Lords.

(06/16/2005)

LaGinna Vincent

When will the second book of the Last Chronicles, "Fatal Revenant" be available to the public?

Such questions are posted often in the GI, and have been answered several times.  In the absence of a FAQ, I'll simply say that news about "Fatal Revenant" will be posted as soon as it becomes available in the "news" section of the site.  However, I'm unwilling to provide vague "status reports."  That seems too much like teasing.  So I'll only post news when I have something concrete to report.

(06/16/2005)

wrathex

Mr Donaldson, thank you for the Covenant series,
it is indeed a literary treasure. I would like to
know why Covenant had to rape ? His character as
a leper already puts all the hardcore emotions
needed at his disposal. The rape scene has
desturbed me continually on a very personal level.
I don't want to feel sorry for a rapist, I do not
want to forgive a rapist and I do not want him
to be loved. Apart from murder, I think rape is the most selfish and destructive act against another human. No amount of 'alanthia'or
'hurtloam' can ever heal one who has been raped.
Nevertheless, your insight into human emotions are
clearly visible in your writing, and I suspect that your experiences in India touched you deeply.

When I turn the last page of Thomas Covenant one
day, I will mourn, for the beauty and possibilities of love therein has impressed me
and I hope that I will find the strength to
forgive those who defile. *I doubt it though.

<sigh>  This keeps coming up.  And God knows I can understand why.  But I always want to ask:  how have I failed to demonstrate a) the thematic revelance (even the thematic necessity) of Covenant's crime? and b) the enduring consequences of such violence?  You say, "His character as a leper already puts all the hardcore emotions needed at his disposal."  I disagree.  In my view, "his character as a leper" casts him in the role of "victim"--and that is decidedly *not* where I want him.  I want the reader to see that he is in truth a potential Despiser; or that he has already assumed the role of the Despiser.  Otherwise there's no story.

A bit of narrative theory.  (All such theories have severe limitations, but they also offer useful insights.)  There are really only three roles that a character can play in a story:  Victim, Victimizer, and Rescuer.  And what makes the difference between what I think of as Real Stories and mere plot spinning is this:  in a Real Story, characters change roles because of what happens to them.  So Covenant starts out as a pure Victim.  But I happen to think that being a Victim (or even thinking of oneself as a Victim) naturally inclines a person to become a Victimizer.  Being cast in the role of Victim is morally damaging; and that damage tends to breed a desire to impose Victim-hood on someone else.  Hence the rape of Lena.

To my way of thinking, however, the really interesting question is not how a Victim becomes a Victimizer, but rather how either a Victim or a Victimizer becomes a Rescuer.  How does a human being find the resources to step away from that kind of damage (Victim or Victimizer) in order to become the opponent of damage?  This theme manifests itself in one form or another in virtually everything I write.

(Sidebar:  of course, there are plenty of Real Stories out there that deal with how Rescuers become Victims or Victimizers.  But that doesn't seem to be my natural theme.)

Another way to look at this whole question is to think of "rape" as a metaphor for all forms of violation and betrayal, emotional, psychological, and spiritual as well as physical.  And in those terms, I don't know anyone who isn't guilty of "rape."  Speaking purely for myself, I've been on the receiving end of metaphorical "rapes" many times.  Sometimes I've engaged in such actions myself, with or without provocation.  Sometimes I've responded to the "rape" by holding myself to a higher standard of conduct--but I've done so entirely without forgiving the "rapist."  And sometimes, just sometimes, I've both held myself to a higher standard of conduct *and* learned how to forgive my "rapist."  (Which is, of course, the only road that leads to the place where I might be able to forgive myself.)  Considering my own actions, I can only hope that the people I've "raped" (deliberately or inadvertently) will find it in their hearts to forgive *me*.

(06/16/2005)

David Sweet

Mr. Donaldson,
I am so happy to see you return to Thomas Covenant.  I have enjoyed your works over the years.  I had the pleasure of meeting you during the "Gap" books which were outstanding!  Like you Mr. Donaldson, I am like dirt, and I was wondering if this old bit of dirt could ask you for a signed bookplate for my newest collection of your work.  I am not able to attend any of the upcoming signings you have planned.  I understand if you are not able to grant this reguest, as I am sure you must be asked this a lot.  Keep up the great work.  I can't wait for book two!!
Sincerely,
David Sweet

Procedures for obtaining autographs are explained elsewhere on this site.

(06/16/2005)

Steve Brown

Not really a question, just an answer to your question RAFO means read and find out <grin>. But since I'm here...Your answer to my question concerning how Foul/Ravers were able to posses someone across the gulf's between worlds?
So Foul had access to Joan, and Roger?

In some form, yes--if only symbolically or metaphorically; or perhaps by "sympathetic magic".  After all, the people of the Land can summon individuals out of the "real world"?  So why couldn't a power like Lord Foul affect the thinking of obviously vulnerable individuals like Joan and Roger?

(06/16/2005)

a watcher

The sincerest form of flattery is... Folks at the watch are debating where something like this book (which appears to be extensively derivitive of TCTC) falls in terms of intellectual property rights.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/1586607251/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/104-0923583-7251146?

http://www.michaelwarden.com/Books/GideonsDawn.aspx

I don't want to comment on Michael Warden's work.  But the subject of "intellectual property rights" holds some interest.

As I see it, it's impossible to write without drawing on "sources"--things read, studied, seen, experienced, felt, etc.  And how those sources are used ranges along a continuum from, for lack of a better term, "creative transformation" (Tolkien is a good example:  anyone who wishes to make the effort can identify any number of his sources; but he has "re-created" those sources, "made them his own," so uniquely and well that no one can fault his artistic integrity) to literal plagiarism, direct quotation from someone else's work as if it were one's own (otherwise known as stealing).  Everything else falls somewhere between those two extremes.  And how a given "source" (presumably a living, copyrighted author) responds to being used to one degree or another is as much a matter of personality as of ethics.

Speaking purely for myself:  if a case of literal plagiarism came to my attention, I would certainly take offense; and I might well take legal action.  But anything short of literal plagiarism seems to me, well, a tempest in a teapot.  The person who, let's call it, "leans heavily" on my work will be damaged more than I ever will (as soon as anyone notices what's happened); and I see no need to respond with anything more than a snort of derision.  But other writers feel otherwise.  I've seen "intellectual property" lawsuits filed--and won--on the most improbable grounds.  IMNSHO, writers who do that are taking their own egos way too seriously.

Sidebar:  it was T. S. Eliot, I believe, who wrote, "Bad writers borrow.  Good writers steal."  Clearly he was referring to theft in a different sense than I did above.  He meant that a good writer takes his/her sources and transforms them into something entirely his/her own.  A bad writer, on the other hand, commits something short of literal plagiarism.  He/she simply and obviously fails to transform--or even digest--his/her sources.  Then, mercifully, that writer lapses into oblivion.

(06/22/2005)

Pet Peeve

Earlier in this amazing gradual interview, you said that you consider the old lore to now be irrelevant.

The lore was discovered by Berek after he made the staff, and expanded on by the old lords through Kevin as the wards were codified. But is the lore all aspects of the constraints put on the earth by the Staff of Law? If that was the case, wouldn't the new lords have had no power the moment the original staff was broken? They wouldn't have had any lore knowledge to pervert into the practices of the clave.

If it's NOT an aspect of the staff, then the lore is still valid. Maybe the Mahdoubt is the seventh ward with a sex change.

Ah, where to start.  The lore of the Old Lords was not contained in, nor did it require, the Staff.  Berek's *ability* to make the Staff was one expression of that lore.  But the Staff itself was/is merely an instrument for wielding Earthpower in the service of Law.  Both Law and Earthpower existed long before Berek became aware of them.  The Old Lords simply studied what they could, taught what they knew, and did their best to understand.  Think of their lore as a body of knowledge (but only *a* body of knowledge, not all possible knowledge) about how the world works, and about how to benefit from how the world works.  As the story demonstrates, the Staff is not necessary to the validity of the lore, and the lore is not necessary to the existence or power of the Staff.

Sure, the lore of the Old Lords is still valid (taking into account that some crucial Laws have been broken).  But who's going to rediscover it?  And how?  It isn't a book you can suddenly find misfiled in the library and, ah ha! there it all is.  It has to be built; learned in stages.  And it requires a starting point, which Berek had, but which no one else since the corruption of the Council has had.

(06/22/2005)

Michael Waltrip (San Diego)

This question has been hidden since it is listed in the following categories:

Spoilers - The Runes of the Earth
	Spoilers - The Runes of the Earth

To include this question in the downloaded file, you must change your preferences in the Options screen.  Go to www.StephenRDonaldson.com, click on "from the author" and then "Options."  The question can also be viewed online.

(06/26/2005)

Daniel Bateson

Hello Mr Donaldson,

I have recently started on "the Runes of the Earth" and at approximately half way though I'm beginning to see how dissapointed I'll be at having to wait a few years for part 2 to arrive. However, I have expienced this "dilemma" with your books for years now so I guess I'll manage :)
Having read the first and second Thomas Covenant series and then finishing The Gap series (All quite a few years ago now) This third series of Thomas Covenant has hilighted a large difference between the writing styles of Covenant and The Gap, and even Mirror of Her Dreams, I hadn't paid much attention to up until now. 

While Thomas Covenant largely dealt with the main character's point of view and their obsevations and interactions within the story, The Gap series primarily dealt with each characters point of view seperately as we shared each of their lives, pains and trials as the story was built. Given the main plot of each series this difference appears necessary and is, to me, a fundamental ingredient in the stories themselves. 

What are your views on this observation, and the importance, if any, it appears to have on each of the stories individually? 

How do you find that this difference in perspective affected the way you wrote or constructed each of the series?

Thank-you and Kind Regards. 

I discussed this at some length (much) earlier in the GI.  But briefly:

My use of POV is always dictated--nay, positively required--but the nature of the story I'm trying to tell.  The stories you mention--and all of my short stories--and all of my mystery novels--simply could not have been told in any other way (at least by me).  The perspective is inherent to the nature, the content, and the structure of the story.

How does this affect me?  Well, I suffer from an a-rational dislike of first person narration; so I have to master certain aspects of myself in order to write stories which require such narration.  (And don't even get me *started* on present tense narration.  <grin>  Or on third person omniscient narration.)  And I find the use of multiple POV characters (most obviously in the GAP books) extremely arduous.  From my perspective as the storyteller, multiple POVs require me to completely re-invent the world every time I change "heads".  For me (I can't speak for other writers), this is exhausting in the extreme--which explains in part why I got so little writing done in the first few years after I finished the GAP books.

(06/26/2005)

Jimmy Suzuki

Mr Donaldson.

Thank you and your agency for the quick submission of the bookplates. They rock!

Probably you didn't have the time to answer two question that puzzled you from the GI, so these are the answers. Hope it helps.

1)Mr. Poe writes about the difference between chess and checkers in the introductory paragraphs of The Murders in the Rue Morgue, a story that according to my Literature class from last semester was the first sleuth mystery.

2)RAFO, according to the UrbanDictionary.com is “an acronym for ‘read and find out.’

And I've got a question of my own :). I love Penance, and I even butchered it to present it in Forensics tournaments—fitting novellas into a 10-minute time-frame ain't easy matter. I was wondering about the main character's name. Why you don't reveal its actual name? Is it irrelevant? Does it follow a theme or underlying principle in the story? Do you actually know it? If so, can you reveal it to us? And what about Aposter? did you choose it just because of the music? or did you consciously think of Apostle and/or Apostate? or is there something else I didn't think of?

Thank you in advance. I hope to see Fatal Revenant in my hot little hands soon. Take care, Steve.

Thank you!  Other readers have given me the meaning of RAFO, but the Poe citation on checkers and chess eluded me until you came along.

Ah, "Penance."  I didn't reveal Scriven's original or "actual" name because the story doesn't require that information:  the story only requires that the character has a substantial past--which I can adequately convey through hints rather than with elaborate and digressive exposition.  (As I keep saying, I'm an "efficient" writer:  I only create what the story I'm writing absolutely requires.  So no, I don't actually know Scriven's previous name(s).)  All of the names I chose primarily because their music spoke to me.  But I also chose "Scriven" because it resembles "shriven" and implies something written down (a story told).  As you suggest, I chose Aposter because it might refer to both Apostle and Apostate.  (With my religious background, such references are unavoidable.)  And I chose Straylish because it includes "stray" (suggesting that Straylish has taken Mother Church far from its more benevolent roots).

(06/26/2005)

Maybe you have answered this somewhere before, but I haven't seen it.  I've wondered for a long time if your father was acquainted with Dr. Paul Brand.  They were both orthopedic surgeons and missionaries working with lepers in India. Dr. Brand and Philip Yancey wrote several books together about Brand's experiences (including at the leprosarium [sp?] in Louisiana) and drawing analogies from the human body for faith and so forth.  

Thanks for your books.  I just finished Runes and thought it was excellent.  I really liked Mahrtiir's line to the Cords about giving our lives new meaning.  The beauty of that really touched me.

If my father knew Dr Brand, he never mentioned it to me.  But he obviously knew Dr Brand's work.  He cited Dr Brand when he wrote a paper for me on the subject of leprosy and its emotional consequences.

(06/26/2005)

Gene Marsh

Mr. Donaldson,

I know in past responses you have stated you have given up on playing "cast the movie".  However, I was absolutely STRICKEN this evening with the image of Gary Oldman playing Thomas Covenant.  I'm not sure I'll ever get this face-to-character match out of my head.

Gene Marsh

Well, he could do it--because he can do just about anything.  So can Johnny Depp.  But Oldman fits better because he's, well, older.

(06/26/2005)

Ken

Thank you for doing this gradual interview.  It is nothing short of amazing that you take time to let us look behind the curtain.  Finding out that you were returning to the Land was like hearing I was going to be with old friends I hadn't seen in a long time.  I finished “Runes” in a matter of days, and look forward to “Fatal Revenant”.  I don’t mind the wait, considering the quality of the product. 

My question relates to a comment you made (11/27/04) about Lord Foul and his ability to choose.  You said Foul is free to choose how he responds to being trapped in the world.  In LFB, Lord Tamarantha tells the story of creation and describes Despite and Creation as Necessary Opposites, and Lord Foul as the avatar of Despite.  How is it, then, that Lord Foul has a choice?  Are despite and evil not the same thing, or at least is not despite a mechanism of evil?  I took the story to mean evil/despite is what Foul IS. 

I suggest Foul exists on a different level than the denizens of the Land because he is an Absolute.  He doesn’t contain the Necessary Opposites, despite and creation, within himself as the created beings do.  He can’t choose between the two.  The same obviously goes for the Creator.  The reason the Creator and Foul can act at all, in my opinion, is because they act through the medium of the Land, overlapping spheres of influence as it were, reestablishing the co-existence of the Necessary Opposites.  Well, that is just my two cents.  I do not mean to presume to instruct the creator on his own creation, it is just the thing about Foul having a choice doesn’t seem to fit.  I would prefer that you had a better answer than evil for it’s own sake, but given the Necessary Opposites I don’t see how.

Thank you again for stories that opened my eyes to a lot of different things, while expanding my vocabulary at the same time.  In Thomas Covenant I found a character possessing more of what it is to be human than I usually encounter in the genre, or anywhere else for that matter.  Tolkien may have showed me The Road, but Donaldson placed me firmly on it.

Thank you for your long and thoughtful message.  I've pruned it significantly, not because I don't value your views (I do), but because there's little I can say in response.  (I certainly can't comment on your analysis of Senior's book.  <grin>)

Your view of Lord Foul is certainly defensible.  Indeed, it is "authorized" (in a manner of speaking) by the explicitly archetypal intentions to which I've made reference throughout this interview.  Further, it is consistent with the ideas I wrote about in "Epic Fantasy in the Modern World":  if fantasy is a form of psychodrama in which a mind is turned inside out so that its aspects and conflicts can be dramatized as external characters and events, that implies a certain, well, let's call it single-minded-ness among many of the players.  The Bloodguard.  The Ramen and Ranyhyn.  The Cavewights and ur-viles.  The jheherrin.  And, obviously, Lord Foul.  So it follows that if he is a pure characteristic (evil, for example) rather than a true character (with a back-story, complex desires, and the power to make choices), he might well be considered a "Necessary Opposite"; essentially static.  In a case like that, the whole "necessity of freedom" concept simply doesn't apply.

And yet--  Everything that I've just said only fits comfortably around the original "Chronicles."  It seems obvious (at least to me) that my own perception of Lord Foul (like my priorities as a writer) is undergoing a sea-change.  In "The Second Chronicles," for example, Lord Foul plainly demonstrates an ability to change and adapt.  His tactics have changed radically--and his stated agenda has shifted subtlely (less emphasis on "eradicate hope from the Land," more emphasis on breaking the Arch of Time).  (Curiously, a cursory glance suggests that the word "arch" isn't even capitalized until "The Second Chronicles.") And he adjusts "on the fly," as it were, to Linden's presence (even though the attitude of the Elohim seems to imply that her presence has been foreseen).  Doesn't that entail an ability to make meaningful choices?

One could argue legitimately, of course, that no prisoner is free.  By definition.  But one could also argue with equal legitimacy that even a prisoner is free to choose his/her attitude toward imprisonment.  Indeed, one could argue that self-mastery (the ability to choose one's own thoughts and emotions) is the only truly human form of power.

So where does that leave us?  Beats the by-products out of me.  All I can tell you for sure is that the comparative moral simplicities of the first trilogy have been left behind.  And that this change affects the characters--all of them--as well as the story on every level.  In my (current) view, Lord Foul is like Nick Succorso:  the fact that Lord Foul chooses only ruin doesn't mean he hasn't made a choice; it simply means that--consciously or otherwise--he has rejected the alternatives.

Shucks, even in "Paradise Lost"--a far more didactic work than anything I've ever written--God's highest Angels themselves have the power to choose.

In short, if you want "Necessary Opposites," you may have to look at Elric instead of Covenant.

(06/29/2005)

Khat

Stephen;
I hope - needing a break while writing FR - you choose to answer my post:
After devouring (so to speak) Runes after Christmas, I needed to reread the first two Chronicles (and Gilden Fire) to help me remember more about "The Land", the characters, and to help me with the trivia games on the Watch <grin hee hee>.  I am really curious about the Mahdoubt lady we meet at the end of Runes.  She truly reminds me of the healer who saved Covenant after he ate amanibhavam and died in his place - (I never did find her name) - in PTP.  At one time she seems to look like someone else - like the Elohim - Any chance you can "spoil" me here with more on this character?
Thank you again for bringing us (your readers) back to the Land - what a great ride!

Sorry, no.  The Mahdoubt is a subject on which I can't offer "spoilers" of any kind.  This is firmly in the category of RAFO.  (From which you may safely deduce that the story isn't done with her.  <grin>)

(06/29/2005)