Mark Walker: Surely this isn't a Stephen Donaldson novel being sold on Amazon?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1843865130
It comes up in the list when you search for Stephen Donaldson Novels and has links from other Donaldson Novels to it on Amazon. This gives the impression it is written by the same author but this book just doesn't look in the same league.
Is it one of yours or is it just amazon trying to mislead people into buying some rubbish that they can't shift?
I'd hate to purchase some inferior rubbish but i'd also hate to miss one of your classic pieces of work :)
Many thanks
 |
The author may well be "Stephen Donaldson" (it's a common enough name), but he is decidedly not the *same* Stephen Donaldson whose website this is. I see no reason to jump to the conclusion that his book is "inferior rubbish". But do not buy it expecting to find the same strengths and weaknesses that characterize, say, the "Covenant" books, "Mordant's Need," or the GAP sequence. (02/03/2010) |
Tim Koupe: Not sure if you're aware of this or not, but curiously, many of us see Hile Troy as a black man. Reviewing the text, there doesn't appear to be any description that overtly suggests this, yet roughly half of us (at the Watch) just assumed he was a black fella.
There are a few theories floating around, like a subconscious association to Geordi, from Star Trek, for obvious reasons.
Race, as opposed to culture, would seem to have little consequence to the Chronicles, but many of us just find it kind of fascinating how this character appears to our mind's eye, contrary to the rest of the cast. And we all seem to like him better that way.
And this, of course, leads to further discussion about how we associate characters to what we are familiar with. If an author does not imply any racial description in text, then are we predisposed to subconsciously visualize what we are immediately familiar with? (Not to be confused with preference)
Don't misunderstand. Race, on its face, just isn't that important and is about the least interesting thing about a person. However, the thought exercise on how we think and draw conclusions, given minimal information, can be somewhat compelling.
Your thoughts on this subject would be very interesting to me.
Anyway, just thought you might get a kick out of the whole Hile Troy thing, if you didn't already know...or did you pull something sneaky on us?
|
I really don't know what to say. In the vaguest possible terms, I have thought of the Haruchai as Asian; and the Ramen look like they might come from India. Occasionally I have imagined the Giants as black (possibly an effect of over-exposure to "Fantasy Bedtime Hour" <grin>). But Hile Troy...? Well, you surprise me. Naturally the whole subject of how readers' imaginations are triggered is both fascinating and mysterious. I wish I could explain it. (If I understood it myself, I would be a whole lot better writer than I am now.) I know that things like diction, cadence, and imagery can have oblique effects--as can associations in the reader's mind, associations over which the writer has no control. But in the particular case of Hile Troy, I wonder.... Could it be that he seems black because he has no eyes--and so do the ur-viles (who are also--duh--black)? After all, the reader is introduced to the ur-viles rather vividly long before Troy appears in the story. (02/04/2010) |
Brian Brewer: Thanks so much for this interview, I wish more artists I admire could find the time to do this. Many of my questions have been answered through it. Thank you, btw, for a series which has meant the world to me and that has been a part of my life literally from boy (15 or 16) to man (47). I consider White Gold Wielder to be among the finest works of fiction I've ever read of any genre, and one that easily brought me to tears several times reading it.
My question: I remember that (forgive me if this is a misquote, I need to get another copy of Gilden-tree and it's been perhaps 25 years) that in GT you said something to the effect of that you had little patience for those to whom the fidelity of the Bloodguard and the fate of the Unhomed held no interest. But in your series the fidelity of the Haruchai seems to commonly be a great weakness, as much as it ever is a great strength. They seem to come to ill through it through their belief in its enduring nature, the inability of what they serve to be worthy of it, and it (I'm assuming) leads them many times to ruin. In the current tale it seems to have made them into oppressors. I'm just wondering if there is some aspect of it that you think initiates all this, like a shield will shatter due to its inflexible nature or something. Some inherent weakness in such a inflexible nature. Or is redemption a possibility for them, since it does seem to be their nature? I ask because the fidelty of the Haruchai means a great deal to me, and I ask in the name of the tears I wept when Saltheart Foamfollower said "I am the last of the Giants, I will give my life as I choose" before he waded into molten lava to give Covenant a fighting chance. Thanks again.
|
Hmm. As I see it, both the Giants and the Haruchai exemplify fidelity. As do the Ranyhyn and the Ramen. The issue, as Foamfollower almost said to Covenant in LFB, is, "What are you being faithful *to*?" The Haruchai, it seems to me, are faithful to an image of *themselves*--as were the Unhomed who perished in The Grieve. Foamfollower, in contrast, is faithful to--the Land? to life? to the struggle against Despite? This distinction, I think, is crucial. If the value of the fight lies in what you're fighting *for*, not in whether or not you can win, then Foamfollower's fidelity is of a fundamentally different kind than that of, say, the Masters. So is redemption possible for the Masters? Look at Stave. His image of himself is effectively shattered in the horserite (TROTE)--yet there he stands, as faithful as ever. Only what he is being faithful *to* has changed. Does that help? (02/04/2010) |
Catcher: Hi Stephen,
Since I've seen you talk about the current state of fiction publishing in the GI, I though you might be interested in the following article that appeared in a recent issue of the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14966219
It's thesis is that "media is diverging into blockbusters and niches -- with everything else struggling". Meaning, a few blockbuster books/movies appeal to seemingly everyone and generate tons of money; and at the same time there are thousands of small budget niche products such as "a documentary about Leica cameras" that manage to find an adequate audience, generating a small profit. But everything in between is not doing well
Does that sound plausible to you? Do you think that The Last Chronicles could be a blockbuster (anyone can/should read it), or do you see it more as something for a select subset of people, if not necessarily a narrow niche?
Regards,
Catcher
|
The idea that “media is diverging into blockbusters and niches -- with everything else struggling” has been common knowledge? perception? belief? in publishing for at least the past decade or two. As faceless and uncaring conglomerates have taken over more and more of publishing, and have imposed on publishers arbitrary profit requirements derived from other industries (and greed), the pressure on publishers to produce *nothing* but bestsellers increases every year. Yet readers have lost none of their desires for diversity and personal taste. As a result, more and more “niche” publishers have appeared in order to meet the needs that the conglomerate publishers are forced to ignore. Nonetheless readers who crave not-quite-specialist, not-quite-bestseller books get less and less of what they want or need. This appears to be the category into which my books fall. *I* certainly don’t consider them to be “blockbuster” material: I ask my readers to do too much thinking. Yet I’ve been treated to considerably more success than I ever expected. (02/06/2010) |
James Bleifus: Hi, I'm a member of Audible.com. You have one audiobook available through Audible and several books available through other outlets. Will these other books be coming to Audible soon?
Cheers, James
|
Whether or not audio books are sold through a “commercial” outlet like Audible.com is commonly a question of “Who pays the person who does the reading?” When a publisher hires someone to do a reading (e.g. Scott Brick for “The Runes of the Earth”), that book is usually made available through Audible.com in the same way that a physical book is made available through a bookstore. But when the person doing the reading spends his own money to acquire the rights and produce the book (e.g. Scott Brick for other “Covenant” books), he doesn’t get paid at all unless readers buy his work, so he pretty much has to avoid outlets like Audible.com that take a slice of his already-slim income. So why is Brick now spending his own money instead of being paid by Putnams? Because the Putnams audio “Runes” didn’t sell at all, so Putnams is no longer willing to finance the production of Donaldson audio books. Therefore readers who want Donaldson audio books should do their best to make sure that Brick gets paid. (02/06/2010) |
Patrick Jones: There are several ideas/scenes in the movie Avatar that resemble the Thomas Covenant series. A disabled person finds himself reborn in another world. The land is “alive”. The land finds this person special as signified by tiny wraiths floating to him and dancing on his body. The People of the land live in a giant tree like the wood elves. The bad people burn the tree down. The People of the land are chosen by creatures much like the horses of RA. These creatures bond for life with the people. I’m sure there is more.
My question is. Is this plagiarism, or did he pay you to use these ideas?
|
Cameron has been widely accused of plagiarism. (In fact, if I have my facts straight, he once lost a plagiarism lawsuit over “Terminator”.) But usually he’s accused of stealing from stories older than mine. So he certainly didn’t pay me for “using” “my” ideas. However, as far as I’m concerned, the whole subject is a non-issue. If you applied to me the same reasoning you apply to Cameron, I could probably be sued for plagiarism a dozen times over. (Except for the fact that--clever me--most of what I “stole” is in the public domain. <grin>) “Vanity, vanity, all is vanity, sayeth the preacher. There is nothing new under the sun.” There may very well be no new ideas under the sun. The only thing that’s really new is what the particular artist does with his/her chosen ideas. And as far as I can tell, what Cameron does with his chosen ideas doesn’t much resemble what I do with mine. (Where other possible “sources” for Cameron’s ideas are concerned, the issue is less clear.) (02/06/2010) |
Reed Byers: I understand your reasons for not wanting to "release those (few) e-rights I still hold".
But I still have to say, some of us are DYING to have all our favorite books in our Kindles, for easy access and casual reading anytime we like!
And (re)reading your works on the Kindle is a true joy. For Runes and Revenant, anytime I hit an unknown word, even when it's fairly clear enough from context, I can just jiggle the joystick a few times, and up pops the definition.
It's a whole new experience for reading Donaldson!
So... you know... food for thought... :)
|
So here’s another issue I have to consider. Bantam/Spectra has recently issued the GAP books in e-versions, and the results are painfully corrupt. As far as I can tell, the publisher simply scanned the physical books and posted the results, despite the fact that this process always produces corrupt--and sometimes spectacularly corrupt--results. Well, how do I protect myself--and my readers--from such sloppiness? I can’t compel the publisher to re-proofread books they’ve “already” published. I would have to insist on the right to proofread the e-versions myself: a task for which I don’t have time, and which brings no guarantee of success, as Gollancz has recently demonstrated with the GAP books in physical editions (despite my meticulous proofreading, the published text is littered with garbage). Such problems would undoubtedly be worse with the first six “Covenant” books, since the original “corrected” text exists only as a manuscript, not as a computer-generated digital document. Ballantine/DEL REY could only produce e-versions by the scan-and-post method (Bantam/Spectra *did* have other options available), and I think we can take their sloppiness for granted. (02/06/2010) |
Skippy The Bush Kangaroo: Hail Mr Donaldson!
You can purchase "Mr Vampire" on amazon.com As for "Adventures of the spooky kind 2": an internet search brings up absolutely nothing, and since I consider myself to be the best internet searcher on the face of the planet I'd say it doesn't exist (on DVD or anything else for that matter).
Kind regards.
|
I want to thank the many (!) readers who took the time to inform me that "Mr Vampire" is available from Amazon as well as from Netflix. I won't thank you all individually (you know who you are), but only to save time. I've already ordered my copy--and a few spares, just in case. (OK, I'm kidding about the "just in case". The truth is that my children will want their own copies.) (02/06/2010) |
Peter: How come Ace fantasy is publishing The Last Chronicles and not Del-Rey?
|
Because Ballantine/DEL REY effectively "passed" on "The Last Chronicles". They were willing to publish the books, but were not willing to pay me enough to live on. Perhaps they were scared off by the prospect of having to wait three years per book. (02/06/2010) |
mick walker: Mr Donaldson, im a Psychiatric Nurse and I find it strange that one of the first things you do in Runes is to destroy Kevins Watch! could this be a latent desire to destroy your fan site 'kevins watch?' you know the old saying 'we always hurt the ones we love' bet you dont answer this one
|
Tsk, tsk. How little you know me. I wrote the destruction of Kevin's Watch years before I knew that a website by that name even existed. (02/06/2010) |
David G: Your comment that your webmaster might create a trailer for the next book got me to go back and look at the one for book two. That raised a question for me. Did he get to read the book in advance, or did you write the test for the trailer and give him the quote to use at the end?
Looking forward to October something or other, so I can get the next book.
|
Yes, my webmaster does get to read the books before he creates the trailers. And he writes and designs them himself. For them, I'm *his* editor. (02/06/2010) |
Charles Adams: I just read the news that your AATE was accepted (congratulations), and that you will not be doing a book tour.
Is there a formal difference between that which is considered part of a book tour and that which is considered an "appearance"? Would you be under contractual obligation to not discuss the book in an appearance if you forgo the book tour (as in they own you and your appearances)?
|
In practice, every part of a book tour is an "appearance," but not every appearance is part of a book tour. The appearances that are not part of book tours are ones that I arrange for myself, sometimes by invitation (my up-coming GoH spot at CopperCon ), sometimes by personal preference (my attendance at virtually every International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts). There are no contractual limitations concerning what I can talk about whenever I choose. Naturally my publishers hope that I exercise some common sense (e.g. they don't want me to release spoilers any more than I do myself). But the audiences for appearances, however organized, are so tiny compared to the potential audience for the books that my publishers see no reason to handcuff me in any way. Which, I think, is as it should be. After all, they're *my* books: I should be free to say whatever I want about them (and that includes doing readings from contracted-but-unpublished material). (02/08/2010) |
Jim Latimer: Congratulations on the final acceptance of AATE...October can't come soon enough!!!
A question on your work schedule at this point of AATE's lifecycle...When will you start TLD? With the final rewrites of AATE done, are you creatively able to start at this point, or are the processes of wrapping up and publishing AATE distracting to the point of being unable to "shift gears" so to speak between TLD and AATE?
|
I have in fact started on "The Last Dark". But this will be a brutal process for the next, say, 8 months because of all the interruptions necessitated by preparing AATE for publication. I'm not a good stop-and-start writer: every interruption breaks my concentration, costing me momentum and "flow". I lose the sensation that the story is alive, and I have to flounder for a while before I can resuscitate it. Which inevitably means extra rewriting later. <sigh> But still, I need to feel that I'm making progress whenever I can. (02/08/2010) |
David Scott: In the 2,000 to 3,000 years since Linden Avery healed the land, why are there so few people? One would expect even modest population growth to created a crowded Land after 3,000 years.
|
Hmm. You raise a realistic point, of course. I suppose I could say something about just how drastically the population was reduced under the Sunbane. Or about how deceptively large the place is geographically. Or even about how dangerous it is to live there. But perhaps it would be more honest to say that Linden et al encounter only a tiny portion of the Land’s population because that’s the way I wanted to story to go. More people means more characters, and more characters mean more pages, which would make my publishers tear their hair. Also more characters mean more complications, and I’m already in over my head. I deliberately set out to create a story in which it often seems that Linden and her companions are the only people in the world. (02/08/2010) |
Darryl: I remember reading one interviewer saying that Lord Foul was really Mr. Burns from the Simpsons in a cloak. That was just silly.
Anybody can see LF is really Grouchy Smurf!
"I hate the Land" "I hate Covenant" "I hate Ramen (even the chicken-flavored spicy noodle kind)" "I hate Lords" etc, etc...
But seriously, keep up the good work!
|
Kinda makes me wish I knew who "Grouchy Smurf" is.... (02/18/2010) |
Gideon F (England): I'm afraid I must conform to your general reader base, as you described. I'm a fan of the COTC books, having started Mordant's Need but not finishing it. Although this may be because I'm a teenager and not equipped to enjoy the rest! But I digress.
Not that I'm trying to pick faults, but why must the Despiser use white gold to escape his prison? I'm sure he says at one point that he has other means to destroy the Arch of Time - ceasures just one attempt. By drawing Linden back into the Land, doesn't he risk losing it all?
Concerning Hile Troy. When Covenant tried to find out if he is 'real', because he couldn't find record of Troy existing, does that mean Troy was never 'real'? That he was only a creation of the Land.
One further, small point. If humans are transported to the Land with clothes and artifacts intact, does that mean Roger has a gun in the Land?
In much awe of your work, and will promptly be checking out the Gap novels.
|
As the text repeats fairly often, wild magic is the keystone of the Arch of Time. Lord Foul's other attempts to break free have failed. Apparently wild magic is his only hope. Certainly LF risks "losing it all" by bringing his foes (Covenant as well as Linden) to the Land. But the only way to gain it all is to risk losing it all. Life is like that. My handling of Hile Troy's "reality" was deliberately ambiguous. I wanted to leave the question of whether or not he's real open to the reader's interpretation. Presumably Roger *could* still have his gun. If he didn't drop it when he was shot (a natural reflex). But it would be effectively useless. Never mind that it can't compare with the power he gets from Kastenessen. Where would he get more bullets? (02/19/2010) |
Larry Hampton: I have no Campbell-esque interests in the developement of your characters. I am only vaguely interested in how you feel about your characters at all. I would like you to know that I began reading your books over thiry years ago and have been alternately deeply moved and thouroughly pissed off by them. In my opinion only great writers can do that. But I do have a bitch about the ending of Fatal Revenant, and therein lies my question. Have you ever seen a movie called Tideland? It was written by Terry Gilliam, and included Jeff Bridges and Jennifer Tilley in the cast. The movie was well written, well made, and very well acted. It was also the most vile movie I have ever seen. Not because it was bloody, violent or full of perverse sexual content, but because it portrayed, starkly, the true horror that can come of obssessive human selfishness. I never thought I would experience anything in fiction again as vile as Tideland; and then I read the end of Fatal Revenant. I'm going to read the next two books because I've come to love the characters and because I believe you are a truly exceptional writer, but if what you are is contained in Fatal Revenant I never would want to meet you.
|
Hmm. I'm always bemused by people who feel ready to judge a story (and its author) after only reading part of it. Of course, I do the same thing. Many's the book I've tossed aside unfinished because I've come to conclusions about the story (or the author). But I never do that when the author has previously given me reason to trust him/her. So what is it about the previous seven "Covenant" books that causes you not to trust me? After all, you *do* "love the characters". (02/19/2010) |
Dave P.: Have you ever considered working on an autobiography? Or maybe working with someone else who would write a biography of your life? Maybe it would just be something for the Kent State Library, and maybe not released until after you're gone, considering the privacy you like to maintain.
I've inferred many things based on what you have written on the Gradual Interview, and I'm guessing you've had an interesting life. Why does Steve have rather harsh opinions of organize religion? What was wrong with his early life in India? Why the intimacy with leprosy? Does he know someone who suffered from it, or did he have it himself?
Please - don't think I'm asking you to answer any of these questions (although it really sounds like that - asking for a biography, huh?). Just curious if you've ever thought about it to "complete" your library.
(Feel free to post as much or as little of this on the GI as you're comfortable with.)
|
No, I'll never write an autobiography. Two quick reasons. 1) The idea doesn't interest me. I already get as much of me as I can stand. <rueful smile> 2) I'm lousy at that kind of writing. (I also hate doing it.) In essence, it's a form of journalism: it requires a certain fidelity to facts. But as I've said often, I can hardly write at all unless I have the freedom to Make Things Up. My imagination, my ability to "bring things to life," requires that. That said, I've known the title for my never-to-be-written autobiography for at least 45 years. It's called, "Important People I Might Have Known If I Had Been Paying Attention". (02/19/2010) |
Ray: I am a long time fan of your work and have gone out of my way to spread your work to the point of purchasing LFB for any browser who is unsure of what they want in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy section, as this is how I came across your work initially. I have also read Mordant's Need and some of the Gap.
My questions are two-fold. The first question is in regards to your use of Mirror's in Mordant. I have recently read another novel by another popular author who seems to have borrowed the conventions you established, the question is are you aware of this and do you feel this borrowing to be praise or shameless?
The second question is a "have you considered" question, so I apologize beforehand. Have you considered trying to have the Covenant stories produced on film only using what happens in the "Real" world. Taking out all of the action that happens in the Land, but not its effects or references would still be a very compelling piece. I would love a chance to attempt this project as I am a Master's student in Theater. The elements of his "Real" story are just as complete a read without the land for reference. The reason this would work is simple. We never get to see the whole story of anyone on stage. The actions are predetermined but a playwright is not compelled to explain any of them as long as the journey is made. If you are interested in this project as it relates to my Graduate education I would love to hear back from you.
With Utmost Respect
Ray Townsend
Master's Candidate
Regent University
|
1) No, I'm not aware of any other writers borrowing *my* use of mirrors in "Mordant's Need". But so what? I borrowed those ideas myself, primarily from "Through the Looking Glass," Vonnegut's "Breakfast of Champions," and--obviously--John Myers Myers' "Silverlock". Magic mirrors are probably the least original part of the whole story. 2) Since I have no control over whether or not anything ever gets produced on film, or on stage, I don't spend much time considering such things. But, speaking purely for myself, I don't see the point of telling only the "real world" portions of the "Covenant" story. After all, what you're left with is characters who change without explanation. How do you make that work dramatically? Do you add REAMS of exposition to account for the missing transformations? Or do you just plow ahead on the theory that characters don't have to make sense as long as they keep moving? Just my opinion, of course; but I don't see why anyone would want to tell (or sit in the audience for) a story like that. (02/19/2010) |
Bonso: Hi Stephen.
Do you believe that Lord Mhorams greatest strength was empathy.
It is my thought that his ability to truly empathise enabled him to transcend the pitfalls of power without resorting to pity and possibly despite.
To take this a step further when he lost the power of prophecy he had gained a far greater understanding namely true empathy.
Thanks Dave
|
That makes sense to me. After all, if you think of Kevin's tragic flaw as narcissism ("Only my decisions matter. I'm responsible for everything."), empathy seems to describe Mhoram pretty well. Empathy teaches humility and respect, two qualities which counteract Despite--and forbid Desecration. (02/19/2010) |
Tom: Hi, Mr. Donaldson,
Have you heard of Michael Chabon? I’ve read a few of his works and enjoyed them, but what really interested me is how the “literary” community is responding to him. He seems to be their new Golden Boy.
Here are a couple of blurbs to give you an idea of what I mean:
“Chabon is still a literary novelist, but he’s having a hot, star-crossed flirtation with the ‘popular’ genres. He riffs on them, toys with them, steals their best tricks, passes them notes in class . . . “
“Some writers try to build bridges over the chasm that separates genre fiction from ‘serious’ lit. Michael Chabon simply denies the gap exists . . . [He] dares you to contradict his assertion that comic books, noir whodunits, boys’ stories of derring-do, and Pulitzer-worthy novels share the same DNA.”
First, isn’t this mixing of genre and serious lit what you (and other authors) have been doing for years? Second, why are these lit snobs finally catching on? Why is it finally okay to do this type of thing? And what was up their asses for so long that they didn’t recognize the brilliance of such an approach in the first place? Finally, why do we even listen to these bozos? I mean, they are always wrong! Dickens and Shakespeare (to name just a couple of writers) were derided by the critics of their day, now they are considered paragons of literature.
I read in the GI (I think) that someone lost their job for writing a review of one of your books. I can’t remember the details, but apparently this critic thought your work had merit and decided to write a serious review, but the powers-that-be disagreed and fired him/her. Anyway, do you think that could happen today? Or do you think, if you were starting out now, your work would be getting the kind of recognition that Chabon’s is getting?
Thank you for your time. I love the GI and your work!
(P.S. -- I ordered all of your mystery novels recently, and I’m looking forward to starting them. If it wasn’t for the GI, I would’ve never known you had a mystery series.)
Tom
|
I'm sorry to say that I've never heard of Michael Chabon until now. He sounds interesting. Certainly the reviews make him sound interesting. Of course, what I call "using genres for serious literary purposes" has been going on for, well, forever. I'm fond of pointing out that fantasy is the oldest and most enduring form of literature on the planet. But I don't think that "these lit snobs [are] finally catching on". Instead I think it depends on where or how a writer first gets noticed. A writer who first gets noticed as "literary" can pretty much do whatever he/she wants without losing literary credibility. (Margaret Atwood and Doris Lessing leap to mind.) In contrast, a writer who first gets noticed as "genre" can *never* gain literary credibility (at least during his/her lifetime: time always winnows the wheat from the chaff eventually). That's why the NY Times Book Review fired a reviewer for raving about a Donaldson novel ("The Mirror of Her Dreams"). And that problem, it seems to me, is only getting worse. Many academics now argue that fiction itself is not worth critical attention--except as an expression of "popular culture". Why is this happening? Your guess is as good as mine. But my guess is that it's a by-product of growing anti-intellectualism. The more our society hates/fears knowledge--or even education--the more "ghetto-ized" the people who value intellect become. And one of the sad-but-predictable consequences of being ghetto-ized is that the people *in* the ghetto become increasingly snobbish, increasingly us-against-them, increasingly nobody-who-isn't-already-in-the-ghetto-is-good-enough-to-belong-to-our-club. The people in the ghetto need to feel superior to "somebody". Where books are concerned, that "somebody" happens to be writers who get slapped with the "genre" label. So-o-o-- Academics and critics give mountains of attention to, say, Stephanie Meyer (?) because she expresses "popular culture". But they ignore, say, Patricia A. McKillip (or me) because if they actually read the work they wouldn't be able to sneer at it. (02/26/2010) |
Colin R. Grimes: This may be an odd question, but I was just watching your very funny appearance as "Higgins O'Higgins" on Fantasy Bedtime Hour, and I wondered: Are you really a cigar smoker? You look very natural and comfortable with it. In fact, when you had the pen cap in your mouth during your chart drawing, I thought you looked like you were used to having a cigar in your mouth while writing.
Colin
|
For my sins, I *am* a cigar smoker. Or perhaps cigars *are* my sins. I'm so [expletive deleted] virtuous, I would hardly be human if I didn't have at least one vice. <grin> (02/26/2010) |
Kale Swinehart: Very sorry if this has been asked before, I wasn't sure of what search terms to use. Anyway, do you ever have plans to release the Gap Cycle in a single monster volume? Whenever I travel, there's 3 series I always take with me--Lord of the Rings, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the Gap Cycle. The former two are available in a single volume but for the Gap series I'm forced to carry around five paperbacks which is less convenient.
Thanks for listening!
|
I'm afraid I have no control over such things. I decide what and how to write: my publishers decide what and how to publish. I often think (strenuously) that they're wrong; but they don't listen to me. And why should they? Publishing is their job, not mine. They have to at least pretend that they know what they're doing. Just as I do. (02/26/2010) |