Jerry McFarland: You stated you have nine more years to complete the Last Chronicles. Please tell us this was tongue in cheek.
 |
I'm sorry: it's not tongue-in-cheek at all. I spent 20 months writing the first draft of "Runes," and (so far) I've spent 10 months revising it. Toss in a family emergency here and a health problem there (such things become increasingly common at my age), and 36 months a book seems like barely enough. Naturally, I wish I could work more fluently. But there's a reason (actually, there are several) why my characters struggle so much: it's because I do the same. As I've said elsewhere, for me writing is like wrestling with the Angel of the Lord. (03/04/2004) |
Eric Kniffin: In light of quotes like, "Come Unbeliever. Do not prolong this unpleasantness. You know that you cannot stand against me. In my own name I am wholly your superior. And I possess the Illearth Stone." and "When the Despiser was powerful enough to give them strength, they enslaved creatures or people by entering into their bodies, subduing their wills, and using the captured flesh to enact their master's purposes." can you give us any specifics about Foul's powers/abilities?
|
I don't want to answer this question, mainly because I don't want to limit my options. But have you noticed that Lord Foul works primarily through proxies and instruments? (Drool, the Illearth Stone, Ravers, the Clave, the Banefire, etc..) And that the Creator does essentially the same thing? (Thomas Covenant, white gold, Linden Avery, etc..) However you look at it, in these books "power" tends to be an expression of the essential nature of the person or being whose power it is. On those occasions when we've seen Foul act directly, he seems to exert the withering force of pure scorn. imho, that's pretty intense. And it has interesting implications for the Creator. Not to mention for "The Last Chronicles." (03/07/2004) |
birdandbear: Okay, this is a theory I've had for a while, and here's where it may get shot down....;)
Does the title of the fifth book in The Gap series, A Dark and Hungry God Arises, refer to vengeance? I swear I've heard somewhere, a reference to Vengeance, or Revenge, being a dark and hungry god, but I can't for the life of me remember where. There's a line in the musical, Sweeny Todd, that would seem to support this as well. And in this case, I can see it refering to the plans of a certain character, against another certain character beginning to come to fruition at last....
Am I on the right track at all? Or if not, to what does this incredibly cool title refer? ;)
Thanks for your time, and I love your site!
-Annie
|
Forgive me: "A Dark and Hungry God Arises" is the third GAP book, not the fifth. Which--to my eye, anyway--undermines your theory a little bit. And I have to ask you: is the story really about revenge (or vengeance, which sounds more righteous)? Which characters are motivated by a desire for revenge? And of those, which might reasonably be referred to as a "god"? And of *those,* which experiences a downfall in "This Day All Gods Die"? (03/07/2004) |
Bernie Margolis: Mr. Donaldson,
I have been a hearty admirer of your works since my junior high school days (when I was probably too young to be reading them) in the early '80s. I especially like your Mordant's Need novels and your short story compilations. Thanks for all the years of entertainment and intellectual stimulation that you've provided through the years.
I have a two-part question. The press release on your site indicates that motion picture rights have been optioned. Did the recent success of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy influence your decision to sell these rights, or was it the other way around (they optioned your work hoping to capitalize on the untapped [good] fantasy movie market)? On a related note, the release doesn't specify what exactly Gordon and Winther have optioned. The article implies that they've optioned the Third Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, but this seems like an odd place to begin cranking out movies to me. Could you please clarify this?
|
No, I didn't suddenly decide to sell the movie rights. They aren't mine to sell: they are held by Ballatine Books. So your second explanation is correct: the movie people have suddenly become hungry for viable fantasy properties. Ballantine would have sold the rights decades ago if they had a buyer. (But remember: only one out of every one hundred options bought is actually made into a movie.) Hollywood having all the money and power, they get to make all the rules. So in a case like mine, here's how it works: xyz producers (or producer wannabees) buy an option on "Lord Foul's Bane"--and by doing so, they become the legal owners of the movie rights for ALL "Covenant" books. That's right: they buy one, they get them all. They can film *any* "Covenant" book, not just "Lord Foul's Bane." Or they can invent their own world and characters, give them my names, and call it "Lord Foul's Bane." And people like book publishers and agents (never mind authors) agree to this because they feel they have no choice. All the money is in movies. A dog of a movie which dies in the theaters can easily quadruple the sales of the book on which it is based. However, good agents (and sensible publishers, of where there are precious few) protect their authors by making sure that the author gets paid for each and every movie regardless of who owns the rights, or what the content of the move actually is. (03/07/2004) |
Pete: It's been roughly 20 years since you've written about Thomas Covenant and The Land. The world is a much different place from 20 years ago, and I imagine you've had many life experiences in that time. I think I've read somewhere that looking back on the First Chronicles you saw a lot that you'd like to change and were even somewhat embarassed about. My question is, has it been difficult to jump back into this series after so long and keep the same "feel" as you had two decades ago?
Thanks,
Pete
|
Strangely, recapturing the narrative tone and rhetoric of the earlier books has been relatively easy. I guess it comes naturally. The hard part has been convincing my editor to leave the "feel" of the prose alone. She's a modern woman, much younger than I am, who hasn't read any previous "Covenant" books, and who lacks my background in the study of Conrad, James, and Faulkner. Instinctively she prefers the kind of lean and ambiguous prose which never calls a spade a spade (never mind a ^#$%# shovel), and which certainly never identifies any of the emotions of the characters. Nor does she like the pacing of Covenant-style prose: to use a musical analogy, she would rather jump from key to key without modulations, which, she feels, "bog down the narrative." So my biggest technical challenge in revising "Runes" has been to preserve the stylistic essence of the previous books without outraging her sensibilities. (03/11/2004) |
Kay (Duchy): Of all of the vivid characters you have created which is your favorite?
|
I tend to have different favorites in different contexts. And I've always loved High Lord Mhoram and Saltheart Foamfollower. But secretly I feel an irreducible fondness for Castellan Lebbick and Hashi Lebwohl. (03/11/2004) |
MK: Thirty years later, your writing style has most definitely changed, developed, evolved. One can say that the original Covenant books are steeped in overwrought (overwritten?) prose. How will your matured attitudes change how you write this new cycle of Covenant? Will the language still be connected to the old books, or will it echo your later works?
|
As I suggested in answer to an earlier question, I'm trying to strike a balance between what I prefer to call the "operatic" prose of the earlier "Covenant" books and the less poetic sensibilities of modern readers. (03/11/2004) |
Joey: When is "The Man Who Tried To Get Away" going to be re-released? I devoured Brother and Partner both in less than a day and have been looking all over for book three- which at its cheapest is selling for $50+ online. Thanks so much.
|
"The Man Who Tried to Get Away" should be re-released in hardcover this fall (October or November, 2004), along with the paperback of "The Man Who Risked His Partner." (03/23/2004) |
Ying M.: I've had some vivid dreams about being in the Land. Maybe that's inevitable for anyone reading something as emotionally intense as the Chronicles. My dreams about the Land tend to be sad and a little morbid. Do you have dreams and/or nightmares about the Land as you write the Chronicles? Thanks, and sorry if it's a corny question.
|
Since story-telling (at least for me) is in some sense a process of externalizing the content of my subconscious, you might say that it serves the same function as--or possibly even replaces--dreaming. Only once in my life have I dreamed about anything that could even loosely be construed as Covenant-related (and remembered the dream afterward), and that was the night before I wrote most of "The Celebration of Spring" (Lord Foul's Bane). The next day, I simply transcribed the dream (the dream itself was composed primarily of words and sentences rather than of images). For the other 32 years of my full-time writing life, I've never knowingly dreamed about anything I have written, am writing, or will write. (03/23/2004) |
Steven Elliott: First, let me say thank you for bringing me to The Land. The first time I read the First Chronicles (with the Sweet covers), I fell in love. Then, when I started reading the Second Chronicles, I was mortified that the Land had been so ravaged as to be unrecognizable. I almost put the first book down in disgust. But, I couldn't walk away from your storytelling, much less from Covenant. Soon, I was of a single mind with Thomas... fix the Land. And it was fixed! But then it was gone. Story ended. I wept.
So, my question is this; Are we going back to a healthy Land?
|
It's difficult to answer such questions without spoiling things for other readers. But let me say two things. First, I have no interest in repeating stories I've already told. "The Second Chronicles" was fundamentally different in both design and content than the original trilogy; and "The Last Chronicles" will again be fundamentally different. Second, there wouldn't be much point to the story if the Land wasn't at least *threatened.* I can't spend four books simply touring the scenery while all my characters enjoy themselves. <grin> (03/23/2004) |
Josiah: Forgive me for asking a second questions so imminently, but I am curious about this.
Would you, yourself, like to see Thomas Covenant, or The Gap, or Mordent made into movies?
I've thought long and hard about this myself, and I realize that turning excellent and well loved fiction into film doesn't always end well, But after seeing Peter Jackson's overwhelming success with the 'Lord's of the Ring' series, I decided that, yeah, if there were enough time and effort, a movie could truly do the series justice, and bring a whole new group of fans to libraries and stores for your books. Also, hypothetically, who do you seeing playing as Thomas?
|
At its foundation, my work is based on language rather than images. In a sense, it would have to be "translated" in order to be made into movies, and that--as you observe--is notoriously difficult to do, even with fiction (such as Tolkien's) which is less internal than mine. But if I had to choose, I would pick the GAP books for film. Followed by "Mordant's Need." But the "Covenant" books are the only ones that are currently under option. Who could play Covenant? Twenty or thirty years ago, I would have picked Anthony Hopkins. Now I'm not sure. Dare we hope for Keanu Reeves? <grin> (03/23/2004) |
Josiah: First I'd like to say that I love everything you've written. My Mother suggested Covenent to me for years before I picked it up, and I've read the Gap series, Reave the Just, and Mordent since I finished Covenent. When I saw here, on your own site, conformation of a third Covenent series, I almost cried. Of all the books I've read, no place ever felt as REAL to me as The Land.
Sorry, I just needed to fit that bit of fan mail in.
My question: The new Covenent books aside, do you have any other short stories, novels, or series in planning, or (hopefully) even in production?)
|
Sorry, I pretty much have a one-track mind. I can only work on (or even imagine) one story or project at a time. Also there's the unfortunate fact that I write very slowly. So everything I've done is already listed in the "background" section of this site, and "The Last Chronicles" is all I'm working on. (03/23/2004) |
Anonymous: Dear Mr. Donaldson -
Your comments on the Stephen C. Mckinney Memorial Thread at kevinswatch.com?
|
My thanks to the several considerate people who have referred me to this thread (found on kevinswatch.com under The Collective in the index, Hall of Gifts). This is not the appropriate place for a discussion of that thread. However, I urge everyone who is interested in the importance of creativity, and in the relationship between creator and audience, to take a look. (03/24/2004) |
Michael S. Glosecki: Dear Mr. Donaldson, the covenant books are the best stories I've ever read and I go back to read them whenever I need some joy in my life. Thank you!
As for my question, the previous chronicles are made up of three books each but the last chronicles will be four books in length. How do you know that in advance? Is this a self-imposed limit?
Thanks again for your time,
-=Mike
|
I can't explain this; but I pretty much always know in advance how long a story is going to be. Often I know the length (roughly) before I know what the story actually is. For some reason, the germinating ideas for stories contain a "length attribute": I have only the vaguest idea of what or who the story will be about, but I know from the first whether it will be a short story, a novella, a novel, a two-volume novel, or whatever. To some extent, this is about "shape" (what I think of story architecture): x story is going to require three movements, structural units, while y story will require four--or possibly two, or one. And to some extent it is about an intuitive perception of content: x idea is only big enough to support the weight of, say, a novella, while y idea is so big that it will need, say, four large volumes. But really I don't know what's going on. All I know is that this is how my imagination works. (03/24/2004) |
Mark A. Morenz: First, I wanted to thank Mr. Donaldson for the always considerate and thoughtful responses to my (mostly sophomoric) emails over the years. He induldged me more than I would have.
My question: In several interviews you have described the various Chronicles as a "Systematic Theology". I wondered if you would expand on that?
For example: do you find writing a "theology" limiting or broadening your narrative possibilities? There are a lot of folks hung up on "Da Vinci Code" and "Passion..." right now as consumers examine what they define as metaphor and what they can enjoy as fanciful storytelling...
Thanks so much.
:-{)]
|
Let me try to be clear about this. As I've said before, I'm not a polemicist--or a preacher. It's confusing, I admit; but when I talk about writing "systematic theology" I do not mean that I'm trying to promulgate some specific set of organized beliefs. (Remember, that "sys. theo." comment was made looking back at what I had done: it wasn't intended as a comment on what I had set out to do.) Here's how it works. I decide to write a story for its own sake, because it moves or excites me in some way. Then, because I'm moved or excited, I try to bring all of my resources to bear on that story; to give it the best possible author. Now, it just so happens that my resources include an intensive background in fundamentalist Christianity, a fair acquaintance with French existentialism, and an instinct for conceptual thought. So what happens? My stories turn out to be full of organized theological implications. Go figure. S. P. Somtow once said (I hope I can quote this correctly without my notes), "Fantasy is the only valid tool for theological inquiry." Perhaps that's why I'm drawn to writing fantasy. Or perhaps it's the other way around: writing fantasy necessitates asking theological questions. (03/24/2004) |
Alis Mirak: Are you going to explain how Linden got Covenant's ring? I never quite caught how she ended up with it.
-Alis ;)
|
Alas, I can only tell you: wait and see. (03/25/2004) |
Ryan Thomas: I was wondering, everything I've read seems to have Linden as the main protagonist, how big of a role will Covenant play? Will he be a living, breathing character or some sort of behind the scenes entity, helping the people of the Land in their struggles with Lord Foul? Maybe stupid questions but he's one of my favorite all-time characters, I even changed my last name to his first, jk. Thanks for your time, and looking forward to the books!
|
I'm sorry, but this falls under the heading of Things I Don't Want To Give Away. "Spoilers" are called that for a reason. They satisfy some people--and really diminish the enjoyment for others. And, to be honest, I work hard at trying to generate narrative suspense. To reveal my secrets prematurely would cause me actual pain. (03/25/2004) |
Andrew: First I would like to thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. It is very kind of you.
I have read that it will be in the neighborhood of 10 years before the last book of the 3rd Chronicles is released. My question is, can you recommend some of your favorite fantasy books that your fans can read to help pass the time between the new Covenant installments?
|
Traditionally, I always recommend Patricia A. McKillip, Tim Powers, and Sean Russell. Now, however, I'm forced to add Steven Erikson to my list. Starting with "The Gardens of the Moon," his "Tales of the Malazan Book of the Fallen" is an astonishing achievement, and I drool over every book. Until now, his books have only been available in the UK; but Tor will soon start to release them here. (03/26/2004) |