Paul Morris: Dear Mr Donaldson, your Chronicles depict on many levels the Journey motif.To what extent are you influenced by the monomyth or heroes journey as described by Joseph Campbell?The struggles of Thomas and Linden are very human, both riddled with doubt and frailty, with yet to be discovered hidden strengths: their worth and value to be found in their heroic struggles that they must overcome.
That they are a pair, lovers, human, opposites, is a theme you have yet to really explore: will the qualities that they share together redeem and save the Land?We shall see.
 |
Under the circumstances, I'm glad (not to mention relieved) I can say honestly that I've never read Joseph Campbell. Of course, I have nothing against Campbell or his work. I'm just better off when my thinking isn't constrained by other people's conceptualizations about what I might or might not be doing. I prefer to develop my ideas by reading fiction rather than by reading analyses or abstractions of fiction. (01/06/2010) |
Aaron Holt: I am a slow reader. I almost never re-read a story once I have read it because there are so many stories to experience and so little time. I did not hesitate to re-read the Thomas Covenant Chronicles and have felt very fortunate to be able to do so. I have to say I will read them again before it is all over.
Have you ever re-read a story?(besides your own) If so which one?
Thank you for all that you do for us.
|
In fact, much of my reading is re-reading. I'm so often disappointed by new books, no matter how highly they've been recommended, that I find I need to go back to what I consider the "classics" (e.g. Conrad, Faulkner) fairly often in order to recover the sensation that writing books is worth the effort. For example, not long ago I re-read LeCarre's "Smiley" trilogy, both for pleasure and for creative nourishment. (01/11/2010) |
Gary Barnett: Dear Mr Donaldson,
Firstly, many thanks for offering this facility. I find it quite amazing that I have the potential to ask a direct question! And actually, I'm going to venture two...
As a UK reader, who first subsumed himself in your Thomas Covenant books back in the early 80s, I now find myself reading the Last Chronicles (having happened upon them in a bookshop - afraid all your time consuming personal promotion of them (that I read about here) failed to reach me)! I now realise, however, that I should have gone back and re-read the First and Second Chronicles before embarking on the Last Chronicles - there is too much mythology and background to the Land that I have quite forgotten. So I read with interest your statement that the original UK editions contain "many typos, a number of which substantially alter the meaning". Before I restart Lord Foul's Bane, are there any particular typos which change meaning that I should be aware of? (By the way, I see you are disatisfied with your UK publishers in some way, but they did at least provide by far the best cover art for the frst two Chronicles.)
Secondly, I am interested by your choice of names in the books - I am working on the premise that they were carefully chosen. Two names have always struck me as rather odd choices. Firstly I can confirm that Kevin (at least from a UK perspective - where the name Kevin is very much of the 60/70s and now actually associated with silent ungrateful teenage boys) is seriously bizarre following on from Berek, Damon, Loric - and I have searched and found your answer that this is just accident and that from your perspective, there is no oddity here (I too had assumed like some other readers that it would be revealed at some stage that he had come from our world.) The other name (and I can find no explanation on your site) is Hile Troy. I have never heard of anyone with the real first name "Hile". And "Troy" is full of mythological potential. So it seems an odd choice for someone from our world. Was the intent to give this person a name more fitting to a resident of the Land to deepen Covenant's confusion over the reality of the Land and whether in fact someone with the name Hile Troy could have "really" come from his own world?
And a final throw-away on names? Are there any names of characters that, in retrospect, you would have changed? (Apologies, but to me, "Lord Foul" ultimately seemed a little too obvious...".)
Many thanks for many many hours of enjoyable reading.
Gary
|
I'm not going to try to compile a list of all the substantive typos I've found in the UK "Covenant" editions (incidentally, LFB is by far the worst): I can't afford the time. But I'll give you one example. LFB, page one, end of the 4th paragraph: the UK edition refers to "the right mechanism of his will"; but of course that should be "the *tight* mechanism". I've discussed some of your questions about names before. In general, they're very carefully chosen--but not always for obvious reasons. (For example, "Thomas Covenant" and "Sunder" are pretty obvious: "Hollian" and "Linden Avery" may not be.) I don't feel the same "oddity" you do about Kevin. (And how come no one objects to "Trevor"?) I *have* personally known a man named "Hile". However, when I picked the name for my character, I was thinking in German: loosely "Hail Fidelity". The reference to the Troy of legend was incidental. As for Lord Foul: as I've said before, I was young and unpublished, had nothing to lose, and saw no reason not to be overt about my archtypal intentions. If I were starting the whole project today, I would probably want to be more subtle. However (he said ruefully), the name I most wish I could change is "krill". When I picked that name for Loric's dagger, I had no idea that it was a real word--or that its real meaning isn't even remotely useful for my intentions. <sigh> And the second worst name, from my perspective, is "Elemesnedene," for the simple reason that the spelling encourages a grating mispronunciation. Who would guess from that spelling that I meant "ele-main-DEAN"? (01/11/2010) |
Michael from Santa Fe: OK, you're starting to scare me. As we all know it was discovered that Stephen Donaldson is an anagram for LAND NEEDS PHOTONS - thus giving us a clue on the direction of the Last Chronicles and the scourge of Kevin's Dirt. I decided to see how far you were going to push this, so I took the first letters of all the titles of the Last Chronicles: TROTEFRAATETLD and got:
LOFTED TARTRATE
My first thought was geez, the guy is even throwing his obscure words at us even through his anagrams! "LOFTED", of course, would refer to the fact that Kevin's Dirt has been lofted into the air. Looking up what tartrate is and I find out that it's: a salt or ester of tartaric acid. Tartaric acid turns out is one of the main acids found in wine! Excellent! Good job on this, I like the fact that Kevin's Dirt is composed of one of my favorite beverages. Perhaps I'll order a "Kevin's Dirt" next time I'm at a bar and see what I get. Other than thrown out. Keep hidin' the clues and we'll keep findin' them. :-)
|
<sigh> Now didn't *I* think of using an anagram-generator instead of trying so hard to come up with my own names? (01/11/2010) |
Michael from Santa Fe: Oh, by the way, if you want to increase the sales of the Last Chronicles, or get them turned into a movie may I suggest that you make either Covenant or Linden into a vampire (maybe make the other a werewolf). Really, it will work. Really.
|
I can't tell you how frustrating it is that I didn't think of this for myself. (Oh, wait: maybe the reason I can't tell you is--I'm not frustrated at all.) (01/18/2010) |
Bob DeFrank: Hey and hope you're well. I've got a question about an unfulfilled expectation.
I confess I felt a chill in the Power that Preserves when Covenent helped that snakebit girl. At that time I knew there was a Second Chronicles still to be read and when his blood mixed with hers (when he sucked the venom out) I was certain she would contract leprosy.
I was sort of looking forward to seeing how this would play out in the Second Chronicles. Her having to deal with the despite of having this disease, which was inevitable if Covenent was going to save her life. Whether she might embrace hope and live as she could, or despair.
Obviously this didn't happen, and Linden is a better character overall, but did it ever occur to you to give the girl a bigger role?
Of course, you could still bring her in, since now the good guys have the Staff of Law they can summon people from our world at need (just fishing for spoilers, don't tell me if I got a bite).
This leads me to another observation: when I was reading the first chronciles, I wasn't as anxious about Covenant's fate as I could have been, knowing that a second chronicles was out there, but when I read the second I was at the edge of my seat with suspense, not knowing if Covenant or Linden would survive or not, since I had no idea a final chronciles was coming.
So, do you ever worry that the existance of the subsequent chronciles robs the earlier ones of their impact on first time readers? If so, do you think there any compensations for that loss of suspense?
All the best,
Bob
|
Actually, I never considered bringing that girl back into the story. In retrospect, I can think of several reasons. For one, who needs anOTHER leper? And, more seriously, the story works better with an outsider (Linden) who has no background with Covenant or his history at all. But at the time...well, I can't remember having given the idea a moment's thought. There are many different kinds of suspense. Is-he-going-to-live-through-it is one of the most obvious, but it isn't necessarily one of the most useful. Especially for a writer with my intentions. Will-he-or-won't-he-face-the-real-issues is often more interesting to me; therefore more suspenseful. And that kind of suspense isn't weakened at all by knowing that subsequent books exist. On an entirely different level, Lester del Rey would never have published a trilogy in which the "hero" gets killed in the end. He would have considered that a violation of the writer's (and the publisher's) contract with the reader. And he was really only interested in publishing books he considered ripe for sequels. So: NO KILLING THE MAIN CHARACTER. (Therefore it probably goes without saying that he was *not* my editor for "White Gold Wielder".) And on an entirely personal level, live-or-die doesn't engage me anywhere near as much as grow-or-shrink. As I like to say, I'm not attracted to stories (my own or anyone else's) in which small people become smaller. I see too much of that all around me: I don't need more. I would much rather read (or write) a story in which a small person becomes bigger, and dies as a result, than one in which a small person becomes smaller, and lives as a result. (01/18/2010) |
Bob DeFrank: A question about the nature of Earthpower in the Land. I was re-listening to the Illearth War (Scott Brick is awesome) and I noticed something: Covenent is explicitly told that the Power of Command can't effect Lord Foul, which seems to imply that Roger incognito's story about planning to wish a time-cyst around the Despiser was complete balderdash.
But then I thought, the command wouldn't be directed at him but at the environment around him, sort of like attacking the ground from under a guy immune to magic.
Or would the Command still not work, since the Earthblood would still know the ultimate result would effect Lord Foul, which is a no-no?
In other words, could some clever phrasing or a 'trick command' on Elena or Linden's part have ended the Despiser's threat forever?
|
Personally, I'm not convinced that *anyone* can use the Power of Command without disastrous consequences, no matter how clever or tricky that "anyone" is. No one--and I do mean NO one--can foresee all the consequences of any action; and that's especially true for an action as potentially immense as using the Power of Command. Hence Damelon's (and Kevin's) *very* elaborate precautions--and even they couldn't foresee all the consequences of their precautions. (01/18/2010) |
Joey: Was reading Faulkner's Nobel acceptance speech this morning and came across this paragraph; reminded me of the struggles you mentioned having with starting on the Last Chronicles.
"He must learn them again. He must teach himself that the basest of all things is to be afraid; and, teaching himself that, forget it forever, leaving no room in his workshop for anything but the old verities and truths of the heart, the old universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed - love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice. Until he does so, he labors under a curse. He writes not of love but of lust, of defeats in which nobody loses anything of value, of victories without hope and, worst of all, without pity or compassion. His griefs grieve on no universal bones, leaving no scars. He writes not of the heart but of the glands."
So, having apparently learned this lesson yourself I have to ask, when are you speaking in Oslo? :)
And congrats on delivery of book 9.
|
I'm posting this because it speaks to me. Faulkner was nothing if not eloquent. But I'm afraid I'm a poor example. I never forget to be, well, afraid. (btw, I've already spoken in Oslo. At an sf convention, as it happens. But who's keeping score? <grin>) (01/18/2010) |
Rob Smith: Hi Steve,
Just a thought on the whole 'Will there be a movie, will it be any good' discussions.
In an interview the director Alan Parker was discussing the 'combative' relationship he'd had with the musician Roger Waters when adapting The Wall. Parker pointed out that for a musician or a writer, the act of creation is a solo effort where they have complete control over every aspect of how their song or story is presented. Filmaking with, lets face it, other peoples money, has to be a more collaborative process where experts (camera operators, lighting directors etc) all contribute to the final vision which cannot be identical to that envisioned by the artist. (Slavishly following every nuance of a novels plot can be hopeless on screen)
Sometimes the group effort pays off (Lord of the Rings) and lots of times it doesn't (insert your choice of woeful adaptation of great novel here. I recall The Postman personally..)
I reckon your arms length relationship with the movie folk is a very sensible approach. If they do a good job you can bask in the glory and if they stuff it up you had nothing to do with it...
|
<applause> (01/18/2010) |
Dale Cebula: In reading the GI I've noticed that you suggest that the Ravers have, in effect, no more sense of self because they are simply extenstions of Lord Foul. However, I do recall reading in a few instances (I think in TPTP and maybe in WGW) wherein Foul does have a degree of concern about any one of the Ravers seizing White Gold and displacing him. So, my question is, do the Ravers have any sense of self or their own identity at all or are they just plain old tools? The text suggests one thing, but I think some comments on GI suggest another.
thanks!
|
Hmm. As I've suggested before, I think the Ravers have pretty much lost their individual identities. In effect, they are "just plain old tools". But Lord Foul isn't the trusting sort. And even a plain old tool might start to get his own ideas if he had access to something like wild magic. (But first he would have to be able to Pick It Up. Remember that the Ravers need bodies. They don't have Lord Foul's ability to take occasional corporeal action without a corporeal host. A Raver would have to possess someone *before* seizing the ring. Which rather stacks the deck in Lord Foul's favor, I suspect.) (01/18/2010) |
Guy Andrew Hall (Rook): Okay, first, self-disclosure: I am a Chemical Dependency Counselor.
Second, I am tired of questions about your writing, stories, creative process, etc. So......
As a trust/risk building exercise, I ask my clients to talk about their favorite bad movie. That is, a movie they know is bad, for whatever reason, but they can't help but watch when they come across it channel surfing. Then, of course, I ask them why they think it is bad, and what the love about it.
As an example, mine is "Big Trouble In Little China." A movie with absolutely no plot to speak of. I hated it the first time I watch it. Then, I came across it months later, and because I knew there was no plot, I ended up watching the actors. I found myself laughing my arse off.
So, what is your favorite bad movie?
|
Oh, who knows. I like so many movies that other people consider "bad"--and dislike so many that other people consider "good". But just picking a name off the top of my head: "Drunken Master II," with Jackie Chan in some ridiculously impressive fight scenes, but no actual (for lack of a better term) substance. A fair number of martial arts movies need a good Chemical Dep...er, Substance Abuse Counselor. But I'll defend "Mr Vampire" with my dying breath. (01/19/2010) |
Ethan: Hello Mr. Donaldson,
I hope things go well for you and congratulations on your Doctorate! Have you started introducing yourself as The Doctor yet?
With winter upon us I wanted to ask you something seasonal (assuming of course this makes it way to you before winter moves on heh) But just curious if you’d like to share any of the authors or books (if any) you asked for Christmas this year.
Personally I’m in a bit of a jam since the series I’m reading won’t be updated with a new book this holiday…<cough cough> ;)
Best wishes!
Ethan
|
Brace yourself. The book I asked for is an up-to-date encyclopedia of medicine. (Sub-text? What sub-text?) After all, I don't want to mislead people when I introduce myself as The Doctor. (01/19/2010) |
Stewart McRae: Steve, my reply to your email On 29 Dec 2009, at 22:20,
Thanks for your reply. Yep, I'm in the UK.
The last book in the GAP series 'This Day All Gods Die' has just been released as an ebook, but strangely enough no. 2 has not.
I've put the link below for Waterstones where I purchased and downloaded them.
'Chaos and Order' had the most errors with dozens of mistakes including chapter headings. Prepare yourself to be a bit annoyed if you download it. The others had typo's throughout but not to the same extent.
Looks to me as if it a copy was was scanned and converted to text as the errors are consistent with what you get out of those programmes.
http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/browse/ebooks/science-fiction-fantasy-and-horror/gap/stephen-r-donaldson/4294964550%5E4291098019%7Egap/
Trust you had a nice Christmas and wishing you and your family all the best for the New Year.
You wrote:
Actually, I didn't know that e-books of the GAP even existed. Since you mentioned Waterstones, I assume you're talking about the UK? (Waterstones is naturally indifferent. They don't produce e-books: they simply provide an outlet. Or so I understand.) Can you help me track down those books for myself? I certainly proofread the physical editions scrupulously.
--Steve
|
This is very strange. I'm making it public to warn unwary readers. Although you're in the UK, the edition Waterstones is selling is the US e-book from Bantam/Spectra. And I'm sure your explanation for the corruption of the text is accurate: scanned and converted without proofreading. But the absence of "Forbidden Knowledge" is so blatantly stupid that I'm shocked. I'll ask my agent to look into this at my first opportunity. (01/19/2010) |
Tom: I just found out that your original title for "Forbidden Knowledge" was "Strange Dreams." I'm puzzled. Having just re-read "Forbidden Knowledge," I can't see how dreams -- strange or otherwise -- have any relevance to the story at all. Actually, I think the only mention of dreams in the text is when Morn has a nightmare involving her father (I can't find it right now or I would quote it). So, why was that the original name? Did you have Morn's nightmare in mind? Or was the story vastly different when "Strange Dreams" was the working title? Just curious.
|
<sigh> The mind works in mysterious ways, its wonders to perform. Also its disasters. When I was originally planning the GAP books, "Strange Dreams" just popped into my head as a good title, so I intended to use it for the second book. Of course, in retrospect I can see that it was wildly inappropriate. Fortunately, my editor, agent, and friends were never put in the position of pointing that out to me. The title troubled me well before I got around to actually using it. So eventually I had the good sense to switch it to an anthology I was invited to edit, and to come up with a different (better) title for GAP 2. But speaking of Strange Dreams (although I probably shouldn't reveal this), I have a recurring--fantasy?--in which GAP 2 is entitled "Forbidden Cannelloni". <lugubrious sigh> (01/19/2010) |
Anonymous: Knowing from book jackets that you lived in New Mexico I always envisioned TC living in New Mexico at the beginning of LFB (even though later I think I found out in 1977 you weren't there yet). Why did you move from NJ to NM?
|
Because I could. NJ was necessity. NM was choice. I fell in love with this region during a providential summer job while I was in college; so when I finally found a publisher and could afford to move, I came here. (01/19/2010) |
Tom: I first read the Gap books when I was about 13. I've read and re-read the story many times since then, and now, at the age of 33, I'm once again immersed in the lives of Morn, Angus, Nick, Warden, and all the rest of your brilliantly imagined characters. Anyway, I just started "Dark and Hung" (grin) and came across a sentence that got me thinking about how relevant the Gap story is to current events. Indeed, you seem frighteningly prescient on some key issues. (You don't keep Norna Fasner locked away in the basement, do you?)
In the first chapter, Holt describes Warden as an "idealist." He says he's even heard Ward "make speeches against 'descending to the level of our enemies.'" Sound familiar? It did to me. It got me thinking about the debate over Gitmo and torture. The rivalry between Dick (Holt) Cheney and President Obama. Then I started thinking about the Preempt Act and the preemptive strike on Iraq. Kazis and suicide bombers. Liberals and conservatives. Chaos and Order . . . Aaaaahhh!
What's the relevance of all this? What's my question? Well, it got me thinking (in a roundabout kind of way, I admit) about Warden Dios, and how I should regard him. Personally, I consider him a hero (in fact, I view the entire Gap saga as *his* story), but that's in the fictional world of your story. I would probably be horrified (I *have* been horrified!) to discover some real-world politician engaged in the same "the means justifies the ends" behavior that Warden engages in. Of course it helps that Warden's "ends" are noble; that he's willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for the betterment of humankind. But still? Look what he does to Morn and Angus, to the people who trust and look up to him. If this were a real person, I don't know if I would forgive those crimes so easily.
So, first question (finally!): Do you view Warden Dios as a hero or a villain? Or both? Second question: Do you believe that sometimes the end *does* justify the means, as Warden obviously does? If some real-world politician (say Obama) could somehow put into motion a plan that would eventually lead to peace in the Middle East, even if to implement that plan he had allow some "evil" things to take place. Would you be for it? I know this is all hypothetical, but, hell, it's interesting.
Thank you for your time and your wonderful stories!
Tom
|
A couple of random thoughts before I get to my main point. 1) I guess as an English major I'm required to consider Warden Dios a "tragic hero": a good man undone by his own flaws and mistakes who tries hard to mitigate the harm caused to his world by those flaws and mistakes before he sacrifices himself. You could say that he judges himself, finds himself wanting, and therefore works (by whatever means he finds available or effective) to cleanse the world of both himself and his enemy. 2) In this case, his "tragic flaw" might be his "idealism": he's a True Believer in the constructive function of a police force, which makes him, well, ideal for Holt Fasner's purposes (because he's a True Believer, he's credible, he attracts support and other believers; but the pure or naive nature of his vision makes him easy to manipulate). The character of his idealism prevents him from seeing (until too late: hence the tragedy) that he's actually being used to undermine his own ideals. But the crucial ethical point, it seems to me, is this: sure, he pulls a lot of strings ("uses a lot of people") to bring about the outcome he desires; but he does so in a way that allows Morn and Angus--and even, say, Min and Dolph--the option of NOT doing what he wants. Just one central example. Warden doesn't *make* Morn release Angus from his zone implants--*or* manipulate her into doing so. Instead, in essence, Warden gives her the power to determine Angus' fate (and her own), and then leaves her free to use that power as she chooses (despite the fact that she has powerful reasons *not* to release Angus, the end result of which would be Warden's defeat in his struggle against Holt). The crux of Warden's plot against Holt is TRUST. He risks everything by trusting Morn--and eventually by trusting Angus. I consider this a vital distinction. It's what makes Warden a hero rather than a villain. (For more on this general subject--"Good cannot be accomplished by evil means"--you could of course take a look at "The Last Chronicles of Thomas Covenant". <sheepish grin>) (01/25/2010) |
Colin R. Grimes: Hi, Stephen! Just out of curiosity, what are some of your favorite fantasy films?
|
I feel obliged to cite LOTR. "Underworld," "Constantine," and "13 Ghosts" are a kind of comfort-food for me (although "13 Ghosts" does fall apart right at the end). As is the "Matrix" trilogy: fantasy that blurs the distinction between fantasy and science fiction. Then there are a couple of Chinese fantasy films, poorly titled "Mr Vampire" and "Adventures of the Spooky Kind 2" (I was given bootleg copies on videotape: I have no idea if those movies are commercially available [helpful readers? does anyone know of a source? I would love to see those movies on DVD]). (01/25/2010) |
Jim in Campbell: Mr. Donaldson;
For years, you've been speaking of your familiarity with Wagner's Ring Cycle, and the influence it's had -- explicitly and through subtext -- on parts of your approach to storytelling. Even a quick search here on the GI for 'Wagner' brings up a dozen or two entries where it's mentioned.
Have you ever -- or would you? -- consider writing a full-on serious study of the operas? While I'm sure there are sound annotations or well-received academic papers available, would you consider penning a serious study and dissection of Wagner's Ring Cycle with an eye towards exploring or understanding your own approach to storytelling (or whatever the hell you feel like writing about -- author's license, and all that)?
|
Sorry. I consider non-fiction writing of that kind to be a form of torture (even the "Introductions" and "Afterwords" to my own books). My published essays were all written under one form of duress or another: I would never have written them otherwise. Writing fiction is hard enough. I only do it because the story justifies the effort by nurturing me. Essays do NOT nurture me. (I can hardly describe the relief with which I fled grad school, even though I was good at it.) (01/25/2010) |
Jeff: Mr. D,
Thank you for your works, and the GI.
I'm aware that you avoid discussing/revealing certain aspects of your personal life/opinions, and I hope that this doesn't enter that territory, I'm simply curious for no real reason other than the fact that there have been mentions recently of these people:
How do/did you find your personal readers? Random people you already knew that you trusted? Seek them out by search/application like a regular employer? They sought you out as fans and had insight that you found valuable? Referals from your agent or publisher?
I swear, I'm just curious, I'm not fishing for a job..;).
|
My personal readers cannot be called "random" because I knew and trusted them before (in most cases, *long* before) I asked them to read for me. I knew what they had to offer, and I knew that I could count on them. More than that I don't feel comfortable saying about them. But for writers who want or need personal readers, there's a point here that I consider worth making. If you (the writer) can't evaluate (for lack of a better word) the person doing the reading, you'll never be able to evaluate the worth of the feedback you get. You know the old saying: "If one person calls you a donkey, laugh and walk away. If two people call you a donkey, buy a saddle." Well, that's true--sort of. But it presupposes that the people calling you a donkey are firmly grounded in the real world (i.e. they actually know what a donkey is), and that they have no personal agenda (e.g. they aren't trying to sell you a saddle). Incidentally, this is why other writers often make very poor personal readers: too often we (the other writers) have our own agendas (commonly we need to defend the belief that our own approach to writing--content, style, whatever--is the correct one). My personal readers have three qualities in common: they don't try to tell me how I *should* write; they can tell me the truth about their reactions to what I've written; and they (and I) can distinguish between reactions which arise from their own experiences and/or agendas and reactions which arise from what I actually wrote. (01/25/2010) |