GRADUAL INTERVIEW (May 2004) David Williams:  Hey Mr. Donaldson, I was wondering . . . What kind of music do you like? A Beatles man, perhaps? Heh heh. Take care! I'm 95% classical music. And of that 95%, 80% is either piano music or opera. Still, even tastes as stodgy as mine do evolve. 20 years ago it was Beethoven and Chopin, Verdi and Wagner. Now it's Liszt and Dussek, Donizetti and Bellini. (05/03/2004) Lord Fool:  Mr. Donaldson, It is mentioned earlier in this interwiev that you wanted "The Second Chronicles of Thomas Covenant" to be published in four volumes; however, your publisher insisted on trilogy. My question is: what would you have named the books? And, since you have already told us that Lester Del Ray made up the name of "Lord Foul's Bane", ignoring your opinion: are the names of the two last books of "The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever" made by yourself, and if not, what would their names have been? You know, my original four titles for "The Second Chronicles" must be buried away in my files SOMEwhere, but for the life of me I can't remember them now. Other than that: "Lord Foul's Bane" was pretty much Lester del Rey's title; he and I brainstormed "The Wounded Land" together (I wanted to call that book "Sunbane"); and the other four Covenant titles are entirely mine. As are all of my other titles, short fiction as well as books--with the exception of the first (and sort of the second) of my mystery novels. "The Man Who Killed His Brother" was *not* my title (mine was "City of Day/City of Night"), and "The Man Who Risked His Partner" was an uneasy compromise. (05/03/2004) Paul Mitchell:  Have your opinions on environmental and social issues (I'm guessing you have one or two like the rest of us!) influenced your approach to any of the six TC books so far released (or the latest)? I am an environmental consultant, so I have a tendency to project these issues onto everything including the kitchen sink, but it does seem to me that The Wounded Land has some parallels with the issues that modern and developing societies are now facing. Thanks! As I said earlier, I'm not a polemicist. In fact, I don't *believe* in being a polemicist. In my view, my imagination does not exist to serve me (or my opinions). Rather I exist to serve my imagination. That said, I do try to put everything I have to work in the service of whatever my imagination has given me to do. And one of the things I happen to have is a visceral sensitivity to environmental issues. (I cannot begin to tell you how galled I feel by the knowledge that there is no place in this country so remote that a beer can hasn't already been there.) So it's not surprising that such themes crop up in my work from time to time. For example, I don't think it would be a stretch to view the Sunbane as analogous to toxic dumping. (05/04/2004) James:  Mr Donaldson, Thanks for taking the time to answer questions, I appreciate the window into the thoughts behind the books. From some of the comments on the web page about how you were intimidated by the Last Chronicles, I get the impression that the series is one you may grow into, or that you are writing even though you don't feel totally ready for it. That raises the possibility that the story will surpass you -- if that happens, will you just finish the 'imperfect' version, having done the best you can? Will you sit on it for a while (Stretching out those already long 10 years!!) until you do feel ready? Or...? I hope the question doesn't offend, I expect to thoroughly enjoy the Last Chronicles as they come out, but they sound like a formidable task. The difficulties of the project--and my sense of unreadiness for it--will undoubtedly affect my "speed" as I write "The Last Chronicles." But I won't stop and sit on it at any point (except the in the sense of taking occasional--and relatively brief--vacations). Once I commit myself to a story, I stick to it (with one exception) until it's done. Everything that I've ever written is "imperfect." It has to be: I'm human. My standard is not, Is this perfect? but, Is this the best I can do today? And I revise a LOT, so that each sentence has been measured by a number of todays. After that, I accept the results and move on. The exception was "The Real Story." That novella spent several years in a drawer after I wrote it, not because it was "imperfect" (although it was, desperately) but because it positively screamed at me that it was "unfinished". In other words, my imagination rather than my critical judgment was profoundly dissatisfied with the results. So you can see why I don't normally put things in drawers. Novellas turn into pentalogies (sp?), and then I'm in real trouble. <grin> (05/04/2004) Rob:  A pet theory for you to gun down: Covenant begins the first chronicles by raping Lena. The second chronicles start with the rape of the Land and the Gap series starts with Angus Thermopyle..well - you know what he's like. In each case we then spend the rest of the story arc on a quest for redemption, either for the character or (in the case of the 2nd Chronicles) yourself. (I know several people who still haven't forgiven you for dreaming up the Sunbane and inflicting it on the Land!). Given that, based on indications you've given elsewhere on this site, The Runes of The Earth is likely to be followed by nothing at all for at least 2 years can you at least offer a glimmer of hope that I won't be left suicidal by the end of it? If not I may have to wait until I can get the first two books together.... Well, "rape" is obviously a theme of mine. It's an apt metaphor for evil. Given enough time (and the inclination, which I lack), I could argue that virtually any act that might plausibly be called evil can be described as a form of rape. But will you be left feeling suicidal at the end of "The Runes of the Earth"? I certainly hope not. It's not that kind of book. And in any case I don't actually want my readers to start killing themselves until after book three. <grin> But seriously: "The Last Chronicles" is structured differently than either of the preceding "Covenant" trilogies. Unlike the first "Chronicles," the story doesn't jump in and out of the Land. However, the pacing of the various crises is unlike the second "Chronicles". (05/06/2004) Luke (Variol son):  Thank you for your answer to my previous question. I must admit that the first chronicles was the first fantasy work I ever read that didn't leave me wanting to know more. When I finished reading it, it felt finished. Then I read Gildenfire and that destroyed my comfortable completeness. For some reason I now feel as strongly about the fidelity of the Bloodguard, the bravery of the Lords, and the survival of the Giants, as you appear to, and hence I have a nagging desire in the back of mind to know more about the mission to Seareach. But enough rambling. I have always wondered about Elena's strange "other sight", and the way it was powerful when it came into focus with her normal sight. I always felt that this had to do with her participation in the Horserite of Kelenbhrabanal. Any comments on this? I don't like to tell other people how to interpret my books. You read them: you have the right to think about them any way that suits you. But I will tell you that there's a bit more information about Elena and the horserite in "Runes". Perhaps that will shed some light on your question. (05/06/2004) Michael Rowlands:  Mr. Donaldson, I read alot of sci-fi. One thing in particular that I enjoy are the alien species in them. Beyond the characters and the story of the Gap sequence, I found the Amnion to be absolutely fascinating; one of the most imaginative alien species that I have ever read. I have a number of questions regarding them: 1. What was your inspiration (beyond the dwarves in Der Ring des Nibelungen) in creating the Amnion? 2. Was Holt Fasner's long-term goal possibly the most effective way to survive against the Amnion? 3. Is it possible that the Amnion would eventually win against humanity due to that they pass on their knowledge so effectively? Kind regards, Michael Ah, questions about the GAP books. What a relief. <grin> 1. Shapeshifters are common in science fiction and fantasy--although more so in fantasy. (Shucks, even good ol' Dracula was a shapeshifter.) But I've often felt that they were nowhere near as scarey--or as impressive--as they ought to be. Like the awareness of gravity, the perception of form is so deeply embedded in the human psyche that it's almost entirely unconscious. Surely, I thought, the violation (the--forgive me!--rape) of such fundamental knowledge ought to carry a tremendous emotional force. Yet in fiction it virtually never does. Most of us have an "oh, yeah, another shapeshifter" reaction. So I tried to do something about that. One of my many goals in the GAP books was to communicate, if I could, the real terror of losing form. 2. Undoubtedly Holt's long-term goal was/is the most effective possible solution to the Amnion problem--for him. But consider the implications for humankind of the sort of effective "immortality" Holt envisions. (And never mind the mere detail that we would cease to be who we are.) Egalitarian imortality might well produce a population explosion adequate to exterminate the species. And totalitarian immortality (which is surely what Holt desires) would produce tyrannies of truly staggering brutality. Face it: life *needs* death. The sooner we trick our way out of that fact, the sooner we can kiss our sorry asses goodbye. 3. Good question. I don't have a good answer. Deep knowledge and unwavering communal purpose vs imagination and mass production (of humans as well as of equipment). I predict a *very* long stalemate. (05/06/2004) Sean Casey:  Your current series is the *Last* Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, and you've said that after that you plan to write another The Man Who... book - also the last in that series. Is it a coincidence that these are coming one after the other or is this a symptom of old age angst? Also, how 'draft' is the draft version of the book cover? Do you like it? It looks very textured and much starker than any of your other books - which I think is interesting. It looks like something aimed at a more literary market. Thanks and good luck with the new book. Old age angst, probably. I've already outlived all of my known male ancestors by a considerable margin--and most of my known female ancestors as well (the ones who lived longer than I have fell into senile dementia at about my age). I'm very aware that time is running out; and I truly hate the idea of leaving stories unfinished. The "draft" cover posted here (from my UK publisher) won't change much when it reaches its final form. (I've begged them to eliminate that reference to "fantasy events." Maybe they will.) It is intentionally a genre-bending design. I like that; and I like the design itself. But the picture posted here doesn't really convey the intended cover. For one thing, Orion hopes to print the cover on canvas instead of paper (or cardboard)--which will be nothing if not distinctive in a tactile sense. The down side is that Orion's proposed cover doesn't "throw" well: it isn't eye-catching from across the room. But most people don't buy books from across the room anyway. (05/06/2004) Revan:  Hi! Thanks for answering my previous questions. :) I was wondering how much power do you have over the titles and editing of your stories? If the publisher wants to change them, do you have to go along with them? I tried to answer this question once before (well, I might add). But somehow my response was deleted. <sigh> I'll try again. Here's how it works: the author has total authority over the content of the book, and editors (like Lester del Rey) who make changes which the author has not approved are in violation of contract; BUT the publisher has total authority over whether or not the book gets published. The existence of a contract guarantees nothing: the contract clearly states, "the author shall submit a manuscript suitable to the publisher." If the author submits an unsuitable manuscript (i.e. one that ignores the editor's requested changes), the publisher is free to cancel the contract. Fortunately, this seldom happens with fiction. Titles are another matter. Since they cannot be copyrighted, they don't "belong" to the author in the same way that the text itself does. It used to be said that "It's a rare author who can call his title his own." In my limited experience, however, most authors have it their way most of the time. "Lord Foul's Bane" and "The Man Who Killed His Brother" are my only titles which were unilaterally imposed by my editor(s). And "The Wounded Land," "The Man Who Risked His Partner," and "Strange Dreams" all went through extended negotiations. All of my other titles are mine. The exception to all of the above is what's called "work for hire." In those cases, the author agrees in advance to produce a work (usually novel or article) according to specifications provided by the publisher. The author receives a flat fee (no royalties or other income), and the publisher owns the work outright. (You can usually identify a "work for hire" by looking at the copyright information. If the copyright is in the name of a corporation instead of a person, that's a "work for hire"--unless the author has incorporated him/herself, which is possible, but which isn't common.) In those cases, the publisher can change anything at all: the author has no say in the matter. I hope it goes without saying that I *never* do "work for hire". (05/06/2004) Nick G:  A quick thankyou for completing the Covenant saga. I've read a lot (read: too much) of fantasy and sci-fi, but whenever asked I point to you as my favourite author in both genres. Will you be releasing limited edition signed prints (as you did for the gap series)? There are plans afoot, but I don't know if anything will come of them. Keep in mind that I have no say in any of this. Such decisions belong entirely to the publisher. As it happens, Putnams has been approached by a publisher of signed limited editions (Hill House), and they may very well release such editions for some or all of "The Last Chronicles"--and, in fact, for some or all of the previous "Covenant" books as well. Or they may not. Hill House produces beautiful books, but the company is too new to have established much of a track record, so it hasn't yet built a reputation for follow-through. Only time will tell whether signed limited editions actually become available. And many such projects die for lack of sales. That's why Bantam/Spectra only released the first two GAP books in special editions. (05/06/2004) steve cook:  thanks for taking the time to reply to my first question (which came on my birthday!), i've since read that the question i put bothers you somewhat... god knows you must have fielded it countless times. so i've read pretty much everything on your web-site... and here's hoping i can avoid a repeat... please tell me are we going to have to wait any longer for a release of "runes...." here in England? I fervently hope not. p.s. have you ever heard the eponymous album by Mark Hollis (once of a british band Talk Talk) it's the sort of music i can imagine Covenant rambling around haven farm listening to. Last I heard, Orion plans to release "The Runes of the Earth" in the UK early in November. That will be approximately 2-3 weeks after the US release. Sorry, I've never heard of Mark Hollis. btw, I didn't mean to embarrass you when I suggested that your earlier question bothered me. Some questions just make me squirm more than others. I intended my comment as a personal revelation, not as a criticism. (05/06/2004) Peter Purcell:  First, thank you for the Covenant series. I have read them many times - they are like old friends. I look forward to "The Runes of The Earth". [any possibility of posting an early excerpt on your web site?!] Now to the questions. If Foul and Thomas Covenant are opposites where does the "Creator" fit in? Speaking of the "Creator", would you reconcile the "Worm of the World's End" creation ledgend with the "Creator" creation legend from the Land. Lastly, tell me the giants will be back! Covenant's JOY at seeing them for the first time in the second series matched my joy at welcoming them back. I would miss them in the Third. [and perhaps the Ranyhyn as well!] I'll have to consult with my publishers about posting an excerpt (or excerpts) from "Runes" on this site. They now own the right to publish the book, and anything which a) might be considered an enfringement on their right, or b) might conceivably be construed as marketting, requires their permission and approval. In other words, I can't promise anything. And I'm a bit uncomfortable with the idea myself. I don't want to give anything away. Which is why I'm not willing to answer your question about the Giants. I work hard to build my stories (and their effects) in a certain way, and revealing anything ahead of time may undermine the actual experience of reading the book. I feel I've already given out too many hints as it is. I don't see Covenant and Lord Foul as "opposites" at all. Covenant is more like the battleground where Lord Foul and the Creator carry out their struggle. As for reconciling the Lords' view of the Creator with the Worm of the World's End, I gave that my best shot in answer to an earlier question. (05/06/2004) Mike White:  Dear Mr Donaldson, Several times in various interviews you have expounded upon the ability of the characters you create to surprise you - to grow in their capabilities and / or their character. My question - how do you define to what extremity you allow them to "grow" - do you have a defined sense of their capabilities, or do you allow them to move outside of your initial view of them? Oh, I definitely allow them to move outside of my initial view of them. Saltheart Foamfollower's *role* in the story never changed, but his *effect* on the story increased exponentially as I "discovered" him. But that was long ago (the first "Chronicles"). These days my characters are free to take on new roles as well as new effects whenever they convince me that the change is appropriate. (05/06/2004) Mark Shaw:  In a purely physical sense how do you write your books, has the method changed over the years say from typewriter to word processor?? Has technology had an impact on the way you write? I'm talking about being able to cut and paste whole chunks of text around or destroy it with the delete key, have the computer thesauras suggest alternative words, things like that?? Oh, I never use a thesaurus, computer-based or otherwise. But modern word processing technology has dramatically changed my writing life for the better. And I like to think that it has improved my writing as well. Here's what I mean. When I wrote the original "Chronicles," I used a typewriter; and when I was done--including all revisions--I discovered that I had typed 27 REAMS of paper. That's a LOT of typing. And I'm not a good typist, never have been: even at 40 words a minute, I make a lot of mistakes. But now, of course, I only have to type the story once. After that, I only have to type the changes. This saves me many hundreds of hours a year. Not to mention sparing me the sheer tedium of all that retyping. In consequence, I now do a great deal more revising. On a day by day basis, I can afford the time. And it's so-o-o-o much easier. Sadly, using a word processor does *not* save paper. I've learned (the hard way) not to trust hard drives; so I print out hard copies frequently. But I feel guilty about that (wasting trees, you know), so I always print my own copies (as opposed to the ones I send to publishers) on the backs of other people's manuscripts. These have been sent to me by publishers seeking blurbs, and the publishers certainly don't want them back, so I "recycle" them. Incidentally, I should probably mention that I compose at the keyboard. Always have. If I had to write a novel--or even a short story--longhand, I'd look for some other line of work. (05/06/2004) Aaron Kraemer:   HI my name is Aaron Kraemer and I am doing a class project on American authors. I chose you and one of the things I'm to do for the project is try to contact you and get a response. I have been all over the internet looking for a way to contact you and I finally found you. I also had trouble finding anything on your childhood experiences, so would you send me any information that you feel cofortable with regarding your childhood. I thank you for your time. I need a reply by 5/10/2004. I'm sorry you had trouble contacting me. But you had reached me easily, it probably wouldn't have helped you. I'm a lousy correspondent. No doubt that's because I was forced to write letters home once or twice a week while I was in boarding school. Left deep psychic scars. <grin> Anyway, all the information I'm comfortable with giving out is on this website. I hope you got what you needed in time. (05/10/2004) Steve Anderson:  Mr Donaldson, I have been a huge admirer of all your works for many years, thanks. I have often wondered to what extent ancient myths have influenced your work, it seems to me you have distilled certain elements of these from a variety of sources. I give some examples from Chronicles below, please say which of these have at least been a trigger in your work, or not at all. The One Tree - Yggdrasill from Norse myth Giants and Men - Norse myth Lorik's Krill emerging from Glimmermere - Excalibur and the Lady of the Lake. Covenant's ring - Wagner/ Tolkien Covenant's death - the sacrifice of Christ Vain/ Findail - Hermes/Aphrodite The Sunbane - Biblical pestilence and plagues Worm of the World's End - Numerous cosmologies Elohim - the Gods in Homeric legends many thanks Steve In a world where so much is written and--to an extent--known, it's difficult to be literate and *not* be influenced by sources in mythology. Of the details you list, only two were not suggested to me by the sources you mention. 1) I didn't have anything like "Hermes/Aphrodite" in mind when I envisioned Vain and Findail. 2) My source for the word "Elohim" was the Bible. Like Yahweh and Adonai, Elohim is one of the Bible's indirect references to God. (05/10/2004) Dustin A. Frost (Syl):  Something I should have done the first time I submitted a question - Thank you, Mr. Donaldson. Covenant, Foamfollwer, and Mhoram gave me some insight in times that I really needed some. "However, I will say that in my view the underlying purpose of all literature--and perhaps of all art--is to answer the question, 'What does it mean to be human?'" With this statement foremost in mind, I'd like to ask a few questions concerning the Forestal: First, what is the difference to you between similarly natured beings like Tolkien's Ents or McKillip's Queen of the Woods? Second, other than being descended from the Elohim's power, what is the significance of the Forestals' power being expressed through music? Last, is there any chance of seeing another Forestal in the Last Chronicles? Well, I haven't encountered McKillip's Queen of the Woods, so I can't comment on that. But the Ents are clearly natural beings (natural to Middle Earth, anyway) who have essentially the same relationship with trees that shepherds do with sheep. The Forestals, on the other hand, are not natural in the same sense. They were created by the sentience of the forests, using the natural Earthpower of the trees and the knowledge of the Elohim. To that extent, at least, the Forestals are more truly the servants of the trees than the Ents are. The shepherd is the "mind" which tends the sheep, whereas in the Land the forests are the "mind" which articulates itself--and acts--through the Forestals. Is that clear? As to the significance of the fact that the Forestals express power through music: well, how else could they do it? Through flame and blade, as humans (in the Land) do? Unlikely--not to mention potentially self-destructive. Through physical action (as the Ents mobilize the trees)? Again, unlikely. The trees are the mind, and the mind--any mind--only acts through instruments (hands, legs, and all extensions thereof). Remember, this isn't an sf world. Concepts like ESP and telekenesis aren't options. In the Land, one being can only control or influence another through possession. So what's left? Of course, this doesn't answer your question about "significance." But I don't ordinarily think in terms of "significance." I think about trying to tell the truth. I don't know of any other way to address the question, "What does it mean to be human?" And the truth here, as I see it, is that music is the most natural and appropriate way for the forests of the Land to express themselves. As for seeing another Forestal in "The Last Chronicles": how is that actually possible? (No, don't tell me. I already know the answer.) (05/13/2004) Revan:  Did Thomas tell a Prophecy about the Second Chronicles? I'm going to quote something I asked in a topic at Kevinswatch "I was thinking that the lady with the beautiful smile that Thomas described, when talking about his time in the leper house has a connection with what happens in the second chronicles. The woman aways has a beautiful smile, even before she starts falling apart, and then, all of her gets destroyed, but the most beautiful part of her remains. (I have got a point to this) Elena or Mhoram preceed to say the Thomas is a prophet. And another lord goes on to ask if he speaks the future of the land. Mhoram and Elena say no, but passionately. In the second chronicles the whole of the land is destroyed; but the most beautiful part of the land is still intact, Andelain. So Andelain could symbolize the womans smile, because they both remain intact, despite what is being done to the rest of the Land/face. Am I the only one who has thought about this, or am I speaking a load of rubbish? What do you think?" Did you do this Intentionally? By defintion, anything that you find in any book--or any work of art--which sheds light on that work in your eyes is valid. So it isn't actually possible that you're "speaking a load of rubbish." The practical fact, however, is that I did not imagine ever writing a second "Chronicles" while I was at work on the first. I didn't see that far ahead. (In contrast, I had "The Last Chronicles" quite clearly in mind when I wrote the second trilogy.) In that sense, I didn't intentionally try to make Covenant look like a prophet. But in another sense, of course, I did. Since the first trilogy already existed, I mined it for all it was worth when I wrote the second. So (to pick a more simple and concrete example) Sandgorgons exist in the second "Chronicles" because I mentioned them in the first; but when I mentioned them in the first, I didn't foresee their eventual importance. (05/13/2004) ghosa:  Firstly I'd like to say how grateful I am to hear that your continuing work on the thomas covent chronicles. Secodly I'd like to ask you some questions concerning ravers. 1. I dont know If im right about this but, Is it correct to assume that within the three raver brothers there exists a kind of hierarchy itself? I ask this because of samadhi/sheol's role as the possesor of the na-mhoram in the second chronicles and his role as satansfist in the frist, also (I maybe wrong about this) but isnt samadhi the orginal possesor of the king who fought berek?. Dont worry I wont trobule you to much more with my idle curiousness, just one more question concerning ravers. 2.When Nom the sandgorgon consumes samadhi and absorbs all the intelligence and knowledge from the raver, does this mean the raver is dead? or will the raver eventually corrupt the snadgorgons after thousands of years? (if sandgorgons livethat long). thank you, I wait eagerly for 'runes of earth'. Ah, Ravers. I don't see any hierarchy myself. (These aren't Ringwraiths, after all.) Perhaps that's because none of them have enough individuality or personal history to outrank the others. They started out as brothers, they became Ravers as brothers, and they serve Lord Foul as brothers. (See "Runes" for a bit more information on the subject.) Samadhi, of course, wasn't *killed* by Honninscrave and Nom: the Raver was "rent," torn to shreds. Not the same thing at all, especially for a being which exists almost entirely as "spirit." So it seems natural--doesn't it?--that absorbing the scraps of a Raver would have a profound effect on Nom. But exactly what that effect might or will be I'm not prepared to say. However, you might ask yourself this: are the Sandgorgons inherently savage (and destructive)? or were they made savage by their imprisonment? or is the whole idea of their savagery simply a perception on the part of the vulnerable Bhrathair? (05/13/2004) Mark A. Morenz:  Hello Mr. Donaldson: Thanks again for your brilliant work and for answering my queries (past and present). All of these questions do tend to be repetitive, so I will try to break the cycle and ask something more bold: Can you please tell us about yourself? While you've obviously shared much about your childhood/early adult years, your personal life since becoming an author is more of a mystery. I might ask this because there is a proud scholarly tradition of enhancing one's appreciation of creative works (both fiction and historical "fact") by attempting to understand the personal milleu of the author themselves. Or maybe I'm just asking because I'm nosy. :-) Your art has obviously captured our hearts and minds. And of course it stands on its own. But you should also please feel free to share the occasional personal triumph/tragedy directly with your audience, too. After all, these days you could probably post an annotated grocery list and get an interested readership (witness the blog explosion). Best Regards, :-{)] You know, I've never felt that my appreciation for an author's work was enhanced by knowing something about his/her life. Although there are exceptions: knowing a little bit about Sir Walter Scott's life has clearly increased my admiration for him. But by and large.... I think that my writing is more deeply personal than that of almost any other writer I know. (This, I suspect, is why readers either love or loathe what I do: you either respond to the exposure of such psychic depths, or you feel threatened by it.) Perhaps this explains why I feel a strong need to protect my privacy in other areas. Indeed, I believe that in a perfect world (by which I mean, The World According to Steve), all novels would be published anonymously, just as Sir Walter Scott first published his. (Of course, in The World According to Steve--which goes by the curious acronym TWATS--many things would be different than they actually are.) (And if that joke appears to be in bad taste, please accept my regrets.) So I will certainly never write an autobiography. And if a biography appears during my lifetime, it will almost certainly be unauthorized. But if you're just DYING to know stuff about me: well, there's a certain amount of information available in the "background" section of this site. More specifically, the bibliography includes three "downloadable" articles, all of which contain some personal glimpses. (05/14/2004) Graham Ames:  First, I want to thank you for your amazing books. Oddly enough, I came across The Wounded Land first, and then had to travel "backward" to the 1st chronicles, and then "forward" again as One Tree and White Gold Wielder were published. Not ideal, but the effect of discovering the beauty of the Land AFTER confronting the devastation of the Sunbane has stayed with me all my life. Having read most of what you've written thus far, I draw a lot from your insights into personal motivation and its external appearance and how confusing it all can be. It's colored my own outlook, and given me a much deeper appreciation for not "knowing" what someone's thinking or feeling at any moment, even if I think I do. After picking up Karen Wynn Fonstad's Atlas Of The Land in the mid-80s, I've had a couple of questions nagging at me for years now. First off, it declares the Atlas is "Authorized" on the cover, but what to you think of this project? Second, I grew up in southern New Mexico, and have sworn for most of my life that places in the Land are based on features found in NM, and often "saw" the Land as I travelled around the area. Could that actually be the case? Finally, thank you so much for the time and care which you apply to your craft. I have often wondered if there will be anything new from you coming out (and there will be -- hurrah!), but I'd rather have to wait 7 years from start to finish for something as amazing as the Gap, rather than have a hundred lesser-quality works from you in the same amount of time. I've lost interest in SO many "prolific" authors over the years, but I keep returning to your works time and again. This seems like as good an opportunity as any to say to everyone who has posted questions and comments on my site: thank you! I value your good opinion of my work, and I will do my utter best to earn your continuing respect. Now, about Fonstad's Atlas.... Well, I wouldn't have done it myself, but her work is certainly "authorized." In fact, I spent a number of hours with her, going over her work in an attempt to achieve a literal accuracy which I actually believe runs counter to the spirit of my work (or of Tolkien's, for that matter). (We could get into a long discussion here about the nature of communication through language, and about how that differs from, say, the nature of communication through visual images; but frankly I don't have the energy for it.) Fonstad tackled an impossible job, and I think she gave it a valiant and honest try. But, no, sorry, none of the "Covenant" landscapes are based on landscapes in New Mexico--or anywhere else, for that matter--except in the sense that anything I see (indeed, anything I experience) has the potential to affect me subconsciously, thus shaping my imagination in unconscious ways. As I've said before, I don't write "from life." And that is particularly true of physical settings. I learned a long time ago that I can't write at all unless I have near-total control over "terrain" (in the broadest sense of the term). Which would be another long discussion for which I lack the energy. (05/14/2004) David Bowles:  We're all very much aware of the impact that myth has had on your work, but I specifically wanted to ask whether you've read any of the Hindu epics... I'm actually thinking of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Perhaps it's just me projecting onto those ancient works, but I see echoes of their images in the Chronicles (for example, the thumbnail-sized Valakhilyas that dance around Sri Rama in Dandaka Forest, begging for his protection- I couldn't help but think of the wraiths in Andelain). Anyway, I was just curious, especially given your other linguist allusions to Hinduism and your childhood in India. I should probably try to dispel a natural misconception.... The fact that I grew up in India doesn't actually mean that I know anything about India. Speaking very broadly, missionaries loathe (which usually means *fear*) the cultures and peoples they're trying to "redeem," and so missionaries do everything possible to insulate their children from those cultures and peoples. We lived in walled compounds and went to school in walled compounds. The mission school I attended taught zero/zip/nada classes in Indian languages, history, philosopy, or religion. My childhood in India offered me many things, but what is commonly thought of as "knowledge" was not among them. However, the college I attended (in the US, of course) had an extensive Indian studies program, and I used it to fulfill my "history" requirement. So I've read patches of the Mahabharata and Ramayana. But I can't honestly say that they influenced me on any deep level. (05/15/2004) James DiBenedetto:  You've already answered a similar question to this, but I have a different take on it. I know it's hypothetical because you've already said you won't do it, but, just "for fun" are there any other authors whose take on The Land or any of your other worlds you'd be curious to see? In the same vein, are there any other authors' worlds that you'd like to write something in/for (based on your comments about "What Makes Us Human" I suspect we already know the answer to this one)? One more quickie: have you ever been approached, or thought about, licensing any of your works to be used as a setting for role playing games? Mordant's Need would seem to be a perfect world for a fantasy RPG. Please understand that I'm only talking about myself here; but for me, the whole idea of "using" someone else's creation is antithetical to the very concept of creativity. "Shared worlds" don't interest me at all on any level. So no, even hypothetically there are no writers whose "take" on the Land would interest me; and there are no writers in whose creations I would like to participate. I've been approached many times about RPGs. When the gamers want to use my creations for their own private amusement, I give them an automatic Yes. When the gamers want to design a product which they could actually sell, I'm forced to refer them to my publishers (since my publishers hold the relevant rights); and my publishers always say No, typically by never answering the question. (Now PLEASE don't ask me to explain the behavior of publishers. I have a hard enough time dealing with individuals. Corporations give me hives.) (05/15/2004) Scott R. Kuchma:  Mr. Donaldson , Can you give us an idea on how long it takes from the time we submit a question until you respond here on this Forum ? My first question seems to have vanished into the "Land" , so I'll ask a second and just wait. I've been following the Q&A here and I don't think I've missed this one . You stated several times that the Last Chronicles will not bounce back and forth between the Land and Covenant's reality . Why then is the next book entitled "Runes of the Earth" and not "Runes of the Land" or have I missed the point altogether ? Scott.................. Perhaps I should have called this a "desultory interview" rather than a "gradual" one. I answer questions when I can afford the time, and when I feel ready to tackle them. So some questions get postponed considerably longer than others. I didn't mean "The Runes of the Earth" to be confusing. The "Earth" of the title refers to the Earth which contains the Land, not the Earth of our world. In the Land, the bones of the planet are striving to communicate in the only way they can. (05/19/2004) Harry Kanth:  Mr Donaldson, I want to firstly thank you for the gift of your works. I feel no shame in admitting that the Chronicles of TC helped support me through a difficult adolesence - something I had not realised until I started to read them again recently. I am really looking forward to reading the Third Chronicles. My question(s) concerns the Creator. He has always been something of a figure on the edge of the story, perhaps because of his inability to intervene directly. The explanation given by Lord Mhoram in the First Chronicle was that this was because direct intervention by the Creator would destroy the Arch of Time and so release Lord Foul to wreak havoc across the Universe. This always seemed to me in some way to parallel the impotence of people in The Land against Lord Foul by virtue of their oath of peace, something which Lord Mhoram realised, Will the Creator also have a deeper role in the Third Chronicles now that Lord Foul is attacking the Arch of Time directly (by corrupting time as I read somewhere)? Will this involve him having to reconsider his own impotence? Forgive me for repeating myself; but I don't want to talk about what is or is not coming up in "The Last Chronicles." I don't want to spoil anything for other readers; I don't want to create expectations which I may or may not be able to satisfy; and I don't want to commit myself to decisions which I might not be ready to make. With that in mind, I'm uncomfortable with your parallel between the restrictions which bind the Creator and the Oath of Peace which at one time bound the people of the Land. Sure, both are voluntary commitments to moral principles. And sure, both restrict the options of those committed to them. But if a Lord (say) violates the Oath of Peace, he/she has only violated him/herself, his/her personal integrity. And if, in consequence, another being is harmed, that harm is a secondary effect of the essential violation. If, on the other hand, the Creator violates the restrictions which apply to all "creators," he/she/it has violated the creation. The Creator has *not* violated him/her/itself because the creation, in a fundamental sense, *belongs* to the Creator; and so the Creator can do whatever the hell he/she/it happens to feel like doing. But if the creation itself is to have integrity, then--having been created--it must be allowed to exist on its own terms. It must have "dignity": its beings must be free to determine the meaning of their own lives. For that reason, the Creator of the Land/Earth cannot interfere (reach through the Arch of Time) without effectively destroying the creation--i.e. without destroying the integrity of the creation, which comes to the same thing. This moral distinction has already had profound effects in the "Chronicles." Doubtless it will continue to do so--if I (the creator of the "Chronicles") continue to respect the integrity of my creation. (05/20/2004) Scott R. Kuchma:  Hello Mr. Donaldson , Well , imagine being able to converse with the writer of the Thomas Covenant books , amazing ! I read the entire series each year and am very much looking forward to the next and last Covenant series . Well not as much to this being the last , but you know what I mean . I am now trying to acquire the "The Man who..." series and found that the TOR Books have released them in your name and not Reed Stephens ! Why ? I also have been able to get the first , The Man Who Killed his Brother , in Paperback and the last , The Man Who Fought Alone (also in paperback) but the second and third are only in Hardcover with the third only to be released this November (2004) . Makes it a little difficult to maintain the flow . I haven't been able to locate the Reed Stephens published works anywhere . I have read ALL your other published works and have enjoyed them all . Thanks. I do see Kevin Spacey as Thomas in any movie deal . Scott................ Thanks for your interest! I'm always pleased when someone reads an Axbrewder/Fistoulari novel (readers of those books being so few). Meanwhile, publishers continue to be what they are: inexplicable. Ballantine published my first three mystery novels, but required the pseudonym ("Reed Stephens" was never *my* idea)--and then declared all three out of print and reverted the rights within a week of publishing book three, "Tried to Get Away." As a result, those three were unavailable for a decade. Well, since I didn't want the pseudonym anyway, when I wrote "The Man Who Fought Alone" I went looking for a publisher who would release all four with my name on them. Tor jumped in. But then they made their own inexplicable decision: they decided to release #4 first, followed at yearly intervals by !, 2, and 3. So as matters stand: 4, 1, and 2 have appeared in hardcover; and 4 and 1 have appeared in paperback. This fall, at about the same time "Runes" comes out, Tor will release 2 in paperback and 3 in hardcover. And a year later 3 will finally see print in paperback. Of course, God alone knows how long Tor will keep these books in print. Longer than Ballantine, I hope. Meanwhile, the Brits (Orion) cleverly published a "Reed Stephens" omnibus at the same time as "The Man Who Fought Alone," and all four novels are now available in the UK in paperback. (05/20/2004) Peter B.:  You've mentioned that The Gap books are based, at least partly, around Wagner's Ring of the Nibelung. I believe you've even said that some aspects of The Chronicles are derived from Wagner. Have any other composers or musical works influenced your stories and do you listen to music when you write? I listen to music constantly when I write. I create what I think of as a "cocoon of sound" which isolates me from the outside world and helps me concentrate. Toward that end, I have a stereo that can make semis stagger as they drive by. Wagner has influenced everything I write, primarily (with the obvious exception of the GAP books) in a technical sense. Over the years, I've developed my own version of the "lietmotifs" which characterize Wagner's mature work. I'm sure most of my readers have noticed how words, phrases, and sentences tend to repeat throughout a given story. On one level, this expresses the attempts of my characters to make sense out of what's happening to them. On another level, it represents one of the several ways in which I strive to make sense of what's happening for my readers. It's my way of saying, "See, *this* connects to *that*--which in turn connects to *that*." And on still another level, I'm trying to increase the efficiency (and, by extension, the effectiveness) of my writing by using "signposts" or "reminders" instead of full-scale exposition (never mind endless dislogue) to develop my themes. I hope it works. (05/20/2004) josiah:  I have kind of an odd question. Do you ever 'wonder' of the fates of characters and worlds you leave behind when the story is done? Like, whether Theresa ever went back and fixed things with her father (important to her, but not "book worthy" in and of itself), or if Morn ever was able to settle into a relationship, or if trauma from Angus' and Nick's treatment of her kept her away from love and physical contact? On another note about the Gap series, did Morn love Angus? Towards the end of the series he did protect her, at risk to himself, and she had grown to trust him (more than anyone else could have trusted someone like him). She also knew that, in his way, he DID care for her and her son. When I say "Did Morn love Angus," I don't mean, did she want to leap into his open arms and fly off into the sunset, part of her, a large part, would always despise him. I meant, in your view, as their creator and their author, do you think at least a small part of her forgave him, and cared for him too? An interesting question about Covenent: is The Land real? I assume it is, I'm sure all the readers assume it is, but, unless I'm mistaken, it was never actually stated that it was real. Thomas may have just excepted it as a place in his own mind, were he was not an angry, old leper, but rather someone who was able to help, and wanted to help (here i'm speaking of the last book of the first Chronicles, were he fought off the summons to save a child, then gave in to letting them call him into the land). Granted, the very begining of the second chronicles kinda dashes that to hell, but i thought i'd like to ask you about that anyways. Also, will Thomas' ex-wife, or (i hope) son have any role in the upcoming books? And though I know their relationship was... taboo for lack of a better way to put it, I'd have liked to have seen Thomas and Elena stay togeather. Did a part of you regret writing her out, or do you wholey feel her death was nessasry, and her relationship with Thomas was simply a dead end? In the above questions, that others have asked, i've noticed some of the fantasy fiction you've recomended, and noticed that a series I had finished short months before I picked up covenent wasn't there, so I thought I'd inquire: have you read Sara Douglass' "The Wayfearers Redemption" series, and did you like it if you did? I was very acustom to Tolkien style fantasy, so her world was very new, and very enjoyable to me (as was The World when I finally read Covenent). In the Gap series, the physics of space flight, space travel, combat, etc, seemed so... real. Most Sci-fi (that i've seen/read) has either ommited such things, or has come up with cheap excuses to avoid dealing with them (Star Trek's 'Innertial Dampeners' are a good example of that). Did the reasoning behind the truer-to-life physics you used in the Gap come to you naturally (you accelerate, and are pressed against your seat, pressed harder of you accelerate fast, makes sense) or had you taken physics classes (or just have a friend perhaps, 'school' you in it for the sake of the novels) to make the Gap that much more real? Lastly (lol, i truely appologize for such a long submission), as you are in ancreadible story teller, and an obvious fan of well told stories, do you ever roleplay? By that, I mean both videogames, in which you take on the role of a character, play through to save the world/humanity/the universe, and the story unfolds for you as you progress (one such game i played had a deeper story and more dialog than, say, Shogun, a 1000+ page softcover), or even table top, such as classic D&D. If you do or don't, what's your view on those kind of games? and would you, personally, like to see any of your works be turned into such games (though i think table top would be better, allowing for more detail, and a wider range of stories to play)? dear lord, i did not realize i wrote so much! if you choose to answer this, and it's easier for you, i kinda sugest breaking it into 2 or 3 parts lol Actually, you *have* asked quite a few questions; and some not easily answered. I'm going to tackle a couple of them here, and then I'll ask you to repost your other questions just two or three at a time. That way it will be easier for me to, well, make sure everybody gets a turn. Now, do I ever wonder what happens to my characters and/or worlds after I leave them? No, I don't--but I'm not sure I can explain why. It has something to do with the fact that writing stories is (at least in part) a process of getting things *out* of my head. When I've done my job the way I think it should be done--specifically when I've told the story that came to me to be written as well and thoroughly as I can--that task is done; gone. It no longer engages my imagination. If it did, I would know that I hadn't done my job right. So I have no particular curiosity about, say, what happens to Angus or Morn. Did Morn love Angus? Not by any definition of "love" that I'm comfortable with. He did her too much harm, and that kind of damage lingers. But "grudging respect"? That's certainly a possibility. After all, he eventually became a man who "played straight" with her; a man upon whom she could rely--in the context of their shared predicaments. For him, that was a huge change. And she was clearly capable of recognizing the value of that change. But love, it seems to me, requires something a whole lot deeper and broader than just, "He did what I hoped he would do in a crisis." In fact, I would stop short of saying that she forgave him. Why should she? And why would he want her to? But I do think she came to accept both him and what he had done to her; and *that* I consider a huge personal victory. More later.... (05/20/2004) Darth Revan:  How often do you visit KW? Ordinarily I would consider this question an invasion of privacy. But Kevin's Watch is a special case; so I'll try to explain why I don't visit very often. 1) For some reason (technophobia, perhaps, or an extremely specialized sense of curiosity), I don't "hang out"--or even browse--on the web. I can't find things easily, the commands never do what I want them to, and I quickly lose interest. 2) Writing, as I'm sure you realize, is a very private occupation. I do it totally alone. So when I'm not writing, I want *people." The (admittedly very human) interactions which can occur on the web are too intangible to meet my needs. Even if we all had cameras and could look each other in the eye while we typed our exchanges, I would find that too, well, *removed* to feed my hunger for people. 3) And then there's the problem that doing anything on the web usually involves typing; and I already do more than enough of that. I'm neither an accurate nor a fluent typist. And any form of writing seems to require irrational amounts of thought. As a result, interacting with anyone on the web--or with the web itself--is, well, "too much like work." 4) Plus there's the complex problem of ego. Of course, I have as much ego as anyone else. But I've learned over the years that my ego gets confused easily. And the kind of writing I do (the kind that has attracted the attention of the members of Kevin's Watch) is NOT a function of ego. At its best, it is almost entirely devoid of self. So going to places where people take my work seriously and talk about it alot can create ego-confusion. (Hmm. That probably isn't clear; but it's the best I can do tonight.) Anyway, the point of all this is: don't take it personally. (05/20/2004) Renny Richardson:  Mr.Donaldson like many others your tales have had a deep effect on me and I have returned to them many times over the years.So much so that my eldest daughter was named Hollian when she was born as a living reminder of the beauty of the Land and it's people. my question is simple really:have you started work on volume 2 yet?And if not,why not?lol thanks and regards Renny No, I haven't yet started work on "Fatal Revenant"--except to the extent that I've been planning the whole project for actual decades. The reason is simple: my publishers are in a tremendous hurry to release "Runes," and so they need me to do things like revise the manuscript, check the copy-edited manuscript, and proofread the finished manuscript *very* quickly, and with little or no "free time" between tasks. As a result, I haven't had a chance to even think about starting book two. Life isn't normally like this. If my publishers were not in such a hurry, I would have lots of gaps between assigned tasks. Under those circumstances, I would certainly have started on "Fatal Revenant" by now. (05/20/2004) Harry Kanth:  Hello, Mr Donaldson! I have a question about White Gold. Why did you decide to use this as the key element representing or channeling wild magic in the Land? Secondary reasons: 1) I *like* white gold; and 2) it's different than Tolkien. Primary reason: I needed a material which would plausibly be beyond the capabilities of a non-technological world (although of course they do make swords and stuff), a material literally not found in the Land, and white gold (being an alloy and all) seemed like a reasonable choice. Then how, one might well ask, do the people of the Land even know about white gold? Prophecy, lore, myth, take your pick. (05/27/2004) Todd Haney:  Finally! The wait is nearly over! Next to waiting for Stephen King to finish The Dark Tower, my other wish was always to see just a bit more of the Land--sounds like it's coming with a vengance! I've started on Man Who Fought Alone before finding out it's one of the latter books of the series, but I can't stop now! You have a way of creating the most noble SOB's in fantasy/science-fiction (Covenant, Angus, and now Brew). You make me want to follow them wherever they go, no matter how horrifying it may get. Thank you for creating such compelling characters and plotlines. The Runes, I'm sure, will follow in this tradition. A question about covers--What is up with the SFBC's collection of the Second Chronicles? As far as I can tell, it has almost nothing to do with the tale contained within. Thanks again for providing years of fine entertainment! Generally speaking, SFBC covers are a mystery wrapped in an enigma. Back in the day when I was acquainted with an artist who actually did SFBC covers (at least 25 years ago), I was told that the artists were not *allowed* to read the book. Instead they were sent 1 or 2 pages of the manuscript with a paragraph circled which they were supposed to turn into a cover scene. Hence the truly extraordinary art on the SFBC's first edition of "Lord Foul's Bane." In the case of the present omnibus editions, the artist (?) may have said, "Oh, I read those years ago," and relied on his/her (faulty) memory to produce those, well, unique images. Or not: I'm just guessing. (05/27/2004) Vain:  A shade over two years ago we took the old Kevins Watch discussion forum, dusted it off, and breathed new life into it. Little did we know then that we would be honoured by your kind gesture to recognise the Watch as the official discussion forum. On to my question though: I am interested in understanding what part the internet will have in further promoting your works - do you see it as a valuable marketing tool or simply as a means to stay in touch with your readers? For myself, the chief value of the internet (aside from research) lies in allowing me to engage in a dialogue with my readers. For my publishers? Well, I'm not sure they quite know what to do with the 'net. Of course, they maintain web sites of varying quality. But they don't yet appear to have a coherent strategy for using the 'net to promote books, mine or anyone else's. Perhaps they do--or will--rely on the kind of service Amazon.com provides (readers reviews to help buyers make informed decisions--which is more than you can hope for from bookstores these days). (05/27/2004) Don (dlbpharmd):  How did you choose the name "Covenant"? A couple of people have asked this. Remember, I was raised and educated (through 11th grade) by Christian fundamentalists; so naturally I was thinking of the profound differences between the Old and New Testaments, specifically as those differences pertain to the relationship between God and Man (forgive the male word Man: it's appropriate in this context), the "covenant of law" versus the "covenant of grace." That this is apt won't surprise anyone familiar with the Bible. The "old" Thomas Covenant can't survive unless he abides by the strict rules of his illness (hence his Unbelief, his rigidity, his difficulty giving or accepting forgiveness). The "new" Thomas Covenant finds the grace/love/open-heartedness to transcend his old laws. But I hasten to add that while all this is very "Christian" in its sources it is by no means "Christian" in its application and development. It was a natural starting point for me, but I have taken it in directions which would doubtless have horrified the missionaries of my childhood. (05/27/2004) Sean Casey:  Stephen, I'm sure I speak for all of your readers when I say that we're deeply appreciative of the chance to communicate so directly with you. Thank you for taking the time to answer all the questions asked (or the ones that appear on the site, anyway!). I was wondering what you feel you get out of this communication. Do you enjoy it, value it, feel challenged by it, feel obliged to do it? (Not sure if that's one question or four...) Also, my compliments to the web master: this morning I sent a comment about preferring the month-by-month breakdown of the gradual interview; when I logged on this afternoon: voila! There it was, restored to its former bite-size glory. Well, I'm not sure I would use the word "enjoy." Answering all these questions is a bit too much like holding my toes to the fire. <grin> But "value it, feel challenged by it, feel obliged to do it" all apply. I value it because writing is such lonely work--and once books get written they take so *long* to get published. The sort of Q&A I'm doing here gives me the sense that I'm writing for actual people who appreciate what I do. That means a lot. I feel challenged by it because so many of the questions force me to *think*--which is good for me on a number of different levels. Certainly the more thinking I do the more clarity I can bring to my work. And thinking counteracts the natural human impulse to function on automatic pilot. As for feeling obliged, well, that's the kind of guy I am. I can hardly get up in the morning without turning it into a *duty* of some kind. Doubtless this is an arduous way to live, but it's so deeply engrained in my personality that I can seldom turn it off. btw, my webmaster looks at all these questions, so he has already received your compliments. I'm sure he appreciates them. If he doesn't, I'll appreciate them on his behalf. <grin> (05/27/2004) Tracie (Furls Fire):  You never use a thesaurus?? My goodness!! You mean all those beautifully huge and complicated words are in your head?? I am now in utter awe of you, not that I wasn't before, but man oh man if there is a threshold for "awe" I've just been pushed over the edge! A true wordsmith you are, Mr Donaldson. {big smile} Oh, and Happy Birthday to you on the 13th!! Be well and happy! Peace, Tracie PS. You don't have to respond to this. It was just a moment of mush on my part and I just had to pass it on to you. {big smile} Certainly I'm glad for all the "mush" I can get. <grin> But don't give me too much credit. I compile word lists almost obsessively. Especially when I'm reading writers whose prose avoids the "modern" flavors we're all so familiar with. Good ol' Sir Walter Scott has been a veritable cornucopia of words: "oast," "eyot," "dromond," "surquedry." And I add to my list from such diverse sources as China Mieville, Steven Erikson, and John Crowley. (And yes, just in case you were wondering: I do use the OED, complete with magnifying glass.) (05/27/2004) Peter B.:  Although this is not my first time submitting a question I would like to thank you for the opportunity to communicate with you. It is very generous of your time and energy, and is much appreciated. Runes is now listed on Amazon.com with an October 14 release date and 496 pages. Is this accurate? Also, will there be a "What's Happened Before" section summarizing the previous novels, a map, or Author Note in the upcoming Runes? October 14 should be reasonably accurate. 496 pages is just an approximation. I'll be surprised if it isn't longer. Yes, a summary of the previous books (affectionately [?] known as WHGB, What Has Gone Before) will be included. It is entirely different than the summaries in the previous books. And yes, there will be maps--although they may not be quite what you're expecting. No "author's note": I hate writing such things almost as intensely as I hated writing WHGB. (05/29/2004) David Booker:  When my warm and tender-hearted daughter turned 14 or so she picked up my well-worn copy of Lord Foul's Bane and began reading. A few days later she burst into our living room with tears running down her cheeks and sobbed "Dad, he turned Hile Troy into a tree". While I'm sure that at that time in her life Stephanie missed many of the subtle points and messages you convey in your works, I think she held Hile Troy's transformation against you for some time after that time. The question? Well, Stephanie is a bit older and wiser now. She went off to college this year and is majoring in journalism. However, these many years later she maintains that Hile Troy is one of her favorite characters in literature. So, for Steph. Gived us an anecdote or some insight on writing this fascinating character. I'm not sure how to react. I'm touched that your daughter cared enough about Hile Troy to cry over him. But I'm also baffled: he didn't fascinate or move *me* to the same extent. And I'm a bit troubled that a 14-year-old was reading "Covenant" in the first place. I didn't intend the story for someone so young. Doubtless she's been traumatized for life, and it's ALL MY FAULT. <grin> Frankly, I conceived of Hile Troy as an antidote to WhyDoesn'tCovenantGetOffHisButtAndDoSomething-itis. I was acutely aware that many of my readers, especially readers with a background in traditional sword-and-sorcery, would be very impatient with Covenant's ambivalence. I wanted a chance to discuss the implications (by which I mean the dangers) of *not* being ambivalent; and I created Troy as an exemplar of everything Covenant is not. You see the results. The only reason Troy didn't effectively destroy all of the Land's defenses is that Mhoram created an opportunity for him to sacrifice himself instead. Whatever the "answer to evil" may be, it cannot involve Hile Troy's unwillingness to question his own assumptions. Just try to imagine what would have happened to the Land if Troy were the ring-wielder. (05/29/2004) dlbpharmd (Don):  Have you had an opportunity to review the "Dissecting the Land" forum on kevinswatch.com? If so, what do you think of the detailed, almost rabid way your fans examine every minute detail of your work? I've had occasion to glance at some of the "dissecting" threads on KevinsWatch.com. Frankly, I'm flattered. FINALLY (or so it seems to me) I have readers who are willing to put as much thought into reading my books as I put into writing them. When you spend as many hours laboring over every aspect of a book as I do, you're just plain *grateful* to be read with such attention to detail. (05/29/2004) David Wiles:  Dear Steve; I hope this finds all is well. Thanks for everything. Steve, I was wondering if you have ever had the chance to sit with a group of people and tell your short stories. If I could draw an analogy, think of Atiaran as she retold the Legend of Berek Halfhand to the stonedown or Foamfollowers tales. He did say that joy is in the ears. I picture a small outdoor setting far from any noise or disturance. Thanks David Wiles It's hard to explain; but I'm not really an oral storyteller. In some fundamental sense, storytelling is a "manual" process for me. If I'm not writing, I can hardly think; and if I'm not writing at a keyboard, I can't think fluently. My kids used to ask me to make up bed-time stories for them, and I just couldn't do it. Which is a bit surprising, because in other ways I'm very oral (by which I mean I've been known to talk a LOT), and I've been told that I talk *about* writing eloquently. But on some level speech is an exercise of intellect for me: imagination flows primarily through my hands. (05/29/2004) Kim Coleman Healy:  Are you familiar with Cordwainer Smith's work, and especially the short story "Scanners Live In Vain"? Though it's SF rather than fantasy, it has some interesting resonances with the Covenant mythos. The Scanners, who are surgically modified for space travel, experience sensory losses even more pronounced than Covenant's losses to leprosy (and monitor themselves and their crews by a VSE-like method); and they make a commitment as irrevocable as the Bloodguard's, though it doesn't make them even conditionally immortal. I'm wondering if these similarities are by design. I read that story an exTREMEly long time ago, and it did not affect my writing of "Covenant" on any conscious level. Unconscious levels are, of course, well, unconscious, so I don't know what happens there. (05/30/2004) Peter Purcell:  Thank you for answering my last questions and for considering my request! The Creator is a very interesting character. One of his comments discusses the Power and Impotence of Creators - plural. At the end of the first trilogy he talks about the rules of the "real" world and his ability to heal Covenant of the snake venom due to the "special" circumstances. Did the "Land" world Creator get permission from the "real" world Creator? It would be interesting to pursue the relationship between the two Creators. Have you considered this line of thought? Do you have a background cosmology fleshed out ala the Tolkien notes that became the Silmarillion? Lastly, I found Nom's "rending" and consuming of the raver very interesting (and gratifying.) But I wonder - Nom got power from the consuming (as if he needed more!) and knowledge. Is it possible that he might also be "infected" by the evil of the raver? A raving sandgorgon - now that would be frightening!! I think it's safe to say that *I* was the only other "creator" that the Creator of the Land/Earth had to deal with. And no, sorry, I don't have anything resembling a Tolkien-esque background or cosmology fleshed out for the "Chronicles." I've never been able to compete with Tolkien in that kind of world-building. Since what I do is almost exclusively story-driven, as a general rule I don't try to figure out anything I don't need for the story at hand. I find that this approach leaves more doors open for things like "The Last Chronicles." And sorry again, I either can't or won't (you'll have to figure out which for yourself) answer your question about the effect of ingesting a Raver on Nom. If I can't, it's because I don't need to (see above). If I won't, it's because the answer would be a spoiler. (05/30/2004) Peter B:  What is your philosophy or attitude toward literary criticism and praise as it relates to your work and how has this changed over time? The UK draft cover of Runes has a VERY complimentary aspect to it, one that may or may not make you squirm even as it congratulates. Peter David Frost once said, "When a writer asks for constructive criticism, what he really wants is a few thousand words of closely-reasoned adulation." Well, I have as much ego as anyone else. But for that very reason--I tried to explain this earlier in the interview--I distrust literary praise. And I did more than squirm when I saw the "comment" on the UK draft cover for "Runes": I screamed aloud. Fortunately, that was a *draft,* not an actual cover. Unfortunately, the actual cover has replaced the objectionable "comment" with an--to my mind--equally objectionable quote: "comparable to Tolkien at his best". <sigh> I've always disliked that quote. WHOSE best, I'd like to know? Mine? Tolkien's? And what is the *point* of these comparisons, I ask, since excellence is by its very nature incomparable? Comparing me to Tolkien is like admitting that I'm not very good. (But try telling *that* to a publisher....) Literary criticism in the scholarly sense of the term is entirely another matter. In that sense, "criticism" means "analysis," and I'm always interested in hearing how other people analyse my work. If nothing else, it helps me understand how clearly--or poorly--I've communicated my intentions. (05/30/2004) appointed one:  what are the names of the last chronicles? 1 "The Runes of the Earth" 2 "Fatal Revenant" 3 "Shall Pass Utterly" 4 "The Last Dark" (05/30/2004) Dennis Glascock:  In my opinion, there are three important fantasy series: LOTR, the Covenant books, and the Wheel books by Robert Jordan. Have you read the Wheel books (10 books and counting) and do you have an opinion upon them? I especially enjoy long series, so I encourage you to exceed Mr. Jordan's book count! many thanks! Well, I don't read Jordan, so I can't comment. As I think (hope?) I said earlier in this interview, I have tremendous respect for Tolkien's achievement. He re-created an entire genre (at least in English), the epic. (For more on this, you might want to look at my essay "Epic Fantasy and the Modern World". It's on this site under "publications".) Without Tolkien's work, what I do would have been impossible. (05/31/2004) Ryan H.:  Mr. Donaldson, If you are a visitor to the Kevin's Watch forum, you might have seen a post in the TC discussion about a PC adventure module I am creating for the RPG game Neverwinter Nights which uses elelments of The Chronicles. I am following up with a previous question concerning RPG adventures and possible copyright infringement. I wish you to know that I have nothing but the utmost respect for your work and consider The Chronicles my favorite piece of literature. You mentioned making an RPG for "private amusement" is OK. I have been making a module that can be played on this Neverwinter Nights game, but I don't sell it to anyone (Bioware, the makers, wouldn't allow it anyway) and no one paid me to create it. Does private amusement mean I can give it away for other people to enjoy FREELY? I really hope so because I have so much fun bringing some of your characters, settings, and plots to the digital domain. (I hope you might possibly be interetsed in trying it out!?) Thank you. In practice, the key issue is MONEY. My publishers hold the relevant rights, and in theory they could object to virtually anything. But in reality they only care if money is changing hands. As long as you were not paid to create your game module, and no one has to pay to use it, you have no problem. *I* certainly don't object. But I'm not interested in trying out your module--or in RPGs generally. Nothing personal: it's just (as I said in another context) "too much like work." One could well argue that role-playing is what I do for a living. For recreation I want activities which are as much unlike writing books as possible. (05/31/2004) Revan:  Hi! First I want to thank you for answering my other questions Steve. I'm grateful. Anyways... gratitude aside, I will ask another. :) In my opinion, and others of Kevinswatch, The character Thomas Covenant had generally inspired loyalty. And considering in the Third Chronicles he has been somewhat replaced as the main character; some people, I do not doubt, are going to be vexed at this... Has this matter crossed your mind at all during your creating of the Last Chronicles? Ah, I fear you are making assumptions about "The Last Chronicles"--assumptions which I'm not prepared to confirm or deny. Clearly "The Runes of the Earth" starts with Linden Avery. You can see that for yourself. But so did "The Second Chronicles." And the fact that Covenant is dead certainly *seems* to diminish his potential as a point-of-view character. <grin> But there are several clever authors out there who wouldn't let a little thing like, "He's dead, Jim," stand in their way. So if any potentially vexed readers are perusing this interview, I would like to suggest that they try not to make assumptions. (05/31/2004) Russell:   the continuation of the tale of the land and it's redemption has been my fondest wish for over 15 years. thank you so much for taking the effort to finish the greatest tale in fantasy literature. Now then, I probably won't get a straight answer for sake of spoilers, but, will the last chronicles combine aspects of the past present and future of the land? "The past present and future of the land," hmm? Now, that--as they used to say--is a poser. The present? Well, yeah. The past? I certainly hope so. I think I've already stated that my goal is to write "The Last Chronicles" in such a way that it unifies the entire saga into one vast whole. But the future? Um, er, well.... How exactly do you imagine I could do that? Presumably it would have to be described in some way, either by the (theoretically) omniscient author or by some point-of-view character--and wouldn't that make it "the present," in effect? If it exists to be described, it either has happened or it is happening. To say that it *will* happen is inherently speculative. But you know me. I'll probably solve the problem by just nuking the whole place. <huge grin> (05/31/2004) obscurity:  Hi, thanks for answering these questions. I'm a huge fan of your work, and like a previous questioner I'd particularly like to thank you for spending the time to write the books well, rather than churn 'em out by the truckload. The first question I'd like to ask is about how you tackled the Gap series. The thing that strikes me most about those is how well designed they seem to be - the character's actions arise from the intersection of the information they have and their motives with no discernable (to me, at least) hand of the author pushing them towards the plot. Given the scale of these books, the complexities of the plot, the conflicting agendas (hidden or not) of the characters and the various layers of subterfuge they engaged in, the large (and ever-expanding) canon of established 'facts' in the created universe, and the length of time over which the books were written, how on earth did you make it all seem so self-consistent? How did you keep track of it all? How much of it did you plan out in advance, and how much did you make up as you went along? Were you actually able to hold the whole thing in your head at any one time, or were you constantly having to 'research' the previous books when writing a new one? And considering that you couldn't revise a previous volume (since it had been published) while working on a new one, just how terrified were you of not being able to tie it all up at the end? :) Secondly (or, um, sixthly, depending on how you're counting) how do you feel about the fact that whilst you consider the Gap series to be your best work (or so I recall reading), it seems to be the Covenant books that get all the attention and praise? Do you feel at all jealous of the Covenant books on the Gap books' behalf? Or over-protective of the Gap books' reputation? Or do you not mind at all? Wow, I wrote a lot more than I intended to there. Sorry about that. If you're still awake at this point, thanks for sticking with me :) There appear to be several questions about internal consistency, especially as it pertains to the GAP books. I hope I can answer them all here. I consider internal consistency to be absolutely crucial. Readers may not notice inconsistencies consciously--especially when those breaks in coherence are separated by hundreds of pages--but I believe that inconsistences *always* make themselves felt unconsciously. In the short term, they diminish the reader's emotional engagement in the story. In the long run, they damage both the reader's trust in the author and the re-readability of the story. Sometimes consciously, but always unconsciously, readers feel manipulated and ultimately disappointed by stories which are not rigorously self-consistent. But rigorous internal consistency is difficult to achieve in any extended work. And it is made more difficult in my case by two things: how I work (about which I'll say more in answer to a later question); and what my goals as a story-teller are. On this latter point, I believe I've already mentioned (after answering a few score questions it becomes hard to be sure) one of my dominant goals: I want all of my significant characters to have dignity. By this I mean that I want all of them to do what they do, not to satisfy *my* requirements (such as my requirement for internal consistency), but for their own reasons: because of who they are, what has happened to them, what they know, and what they want. In other words, I want them to be as much like "real people" as possible. So the question is: how do I strive for internal consistency *while* writing in a way which makes such consistency difficult *while* giving all of my characters dignity *while* attempting to achieve my other dominant goals (such as intense engagement, or harmony/symmetry/aesthetic beauty)? Of course it helps that I'm good at what I do. But frankly, well, I ain't *that* good. So I use a number of aids. For one, I take a lot of notes. I mean a LOT of notes. For another, I write those notes on pages of notepaper, several notes to a page in a completely random fashion, and I make no attempt to organize those notes. (This forces me to look through all of my notes whenever I want a particular note, which has the effect of refreshing my memory of everything I want to do.) For another, I throw my notes away as soon as I use them. (This forces me to re-read what I've already written whenever I want to check something.) For another, I do other forms of self-research extensively: my "work" copies of the first six Covenant books are heavily annotated, and covered in those little sticky arrows that help me locate important passages quickly--and then I make separate notes based on my annotations. For another, I rewrite both extensively and intensively--and I take *more* notes while I'm doing so. In addition, I rewrite backwards as well as forwards. In other words, sometimes I change what lies behind me to suit what lies in front of me, and sometimes I change what lies in front of me to suit what lies behind me. For another, I re-read books *after* they are published, taking still more notes, and checking the published text against my other notes. This I do with the hardback editions, so that if necessary I can beg my publishers to make changes in the paperback editions. (One quick example: despite all of my other self-checking mechanisms, when I read "The Mirror of Her Dreams" in hardcover, I discovered that Terisa's sole bedroom window faced the sunrise AND--400 pages later--the sunset. Naturally I was horrified. But I had real clout with my publishers in those days, so they cheerfully allowed me to make the necessary changes before they released the paperback.) And for yet another, I always have at least one personal reader--someone who has nothing to do with publishing--whose job-description includes telling me whenever he/she thinks I might have screwed up. <whew> So, no, I don't (can't) hold the whole thing in my mind at once. And I don't try: I reserve as much energy as possible for the actual writing--which includes doing things like making sure my characters have dignity. Instead I rely on all of my aids to help me be consistent. How much do I plan out stories like the GAP books or "The Last Chronicles" in advance? I think I've answered that earlier in this interview; but the short answer is: quite a bit, but not as much as I once did. Over the years I've learned to believe that as long as I know where I'm going I'll be able to get there somehow. As for your other question: yes, I have been known to feel jealous of the "Covenant" books, especially on behalf of the GAP books, but also on behalf of my mystery novels and--to a lesser extent--"Mordant's Need." At times I have even felt resentment toward my readers for so soundly rejecting everything that isn't "Covenant." But I got over all that. After years of therapy. <grin> Now I (mostly) accept that life is what it is, and both jealousy and resentment are wasted emotions--not to mention being inherently toxic. (05/31/2004) Allen Parmenter:  Mister D. I wish to thank you personally for writing the Gap Cycle. It remains your greatest work and it interprets Wagner far better than that impoverished thug Hitler ever did. The Gap was the literary sound-track of my youth (wont bore you with details.). You will be amused to learn that a friend of mine pictured Pat Robertson playing the role of Holt Fasner. My question concerns the endless speculation about your religious or anti-religious proclivities. I understand you are not a "believer" but do you think a Creator exists? And - anything to say about that strange and complicated man from Nazareth? Again, thankyou for the Gap. It is a juggernaut that towers above most s-f written in the Nineties along side of Gene Wolfe's wonderful Book of the Long Son. I've tried to say before that I don't think my opinion on the existence or otherwise of a "real" Creator matters. My opinion is just that: *my*...*opinion*. Everyone has opinions. Everyone is entitled to them. End of story. But since so many people want to know, I'll say this. It is my opinion that the question of whether or not a Creator (let's call her God) exists itself does not matter. If God does exist, her existence will not be affected by my belief--or lack of belief--in her. If God does not exist, no amount of belief on my part will call her into existence. Either way, asking the question doesn't make any difference. But I'll go further. I think that asking the question *shouldn't* make any difference. Here's what I believe *is* important. (Take it or leave it: it's just an opinion.) 1) Every human being is responsible for the meaning of his/her own life. God's existence, or lack thereof, doesn't change that. And in fact the very notion of God is often a destructive concept, since so many people use their belief in God as a means to avoid accepting responsibility for their own lives. Hence it is my *opinion* of the man from Nazareth that his story enriches some people's lives and degrades others, depending on whether or not those people use his story as an excuse to avoid their responsibility for their own lives. 2) We live in what I like to call a "possible" world; a world in which far more things are possible than we will ever be able to know, recognize, or name. "God" is certainly a convenient term of reference for many of those possibilities. So is "soul." So is "ghost." So is "Grace." But the terms of reference only exist for *our* convenience: they have no bearing on what actually is or is not possible. And now I suppose I'm in trouble. <sigh> I've probably alienated every third person who reads this site. Certainly my poor mother is turning over in her grave. (My father was more inclined to the idea that religion is something you *do* rather than something you *believe*: he might conceivably have understood what I'm saying.) But, gol durn it, you DID ask. (05/31/2004) David Hughes:  Steve, No question here; merely a statement of deep admiration and gratitude for your work. I'm a 41 year-old corporate exec, country club golfer, who hardly fits a stereotypical view of a fantasy fiction reader. And in truth, I'm not much of one. That's actually all the more reason that I hope you'll accept my gratitude as sincere and perhaps unusual. I've read the Chronicles through twice, 15 years apart, and have never been more impressed by any work, in any genre. Period. It's astonishingly sweeping, majestic, and unforgettable stuff. Thanks again for bringing such grace (and as passing an attempt at literary appreciation as I can muster) into my typically predictable, hectic but mundane, modern American life. After reading your responses today it's my new mantra to try to make future decisions based on how closely they advance the concept of "Control with passion". David Hughes Atlanta, GA THANK you. I'm touched--and gratified. But remember that "Joy is in the ears that hear." All I did was write the books. You're the one who read them--and responded. I think that says at least as much about you as it does about my work. (05/31/2004) Julia van Niekerk:  Seeing as you've basically answered my previous question in response to someone else's question, I'll give this another go. Do you read your own work on a recreational basis? Once you've put all your energy into crafting a story, editing it, revising it, fine-tuning it, do you say "Enough of that!" or do you pick up your own books and read them? If you do, do you gain any "new" insight into your characters and storylines that you didn't realize you were writing into them? Well, I've been known to pick up a book--usually one of my short story collections--and read a page or two here and there. But in a broader sense, no, I do not read my own books for recreation. Once I've done all of my work on them, I try to forget about them (except in the sense of occasionally thinking back on them with--I hope--pleasure). The exception, of course--and it wasn't recreation--is the "Covenant" books. I studied them hard to prepare myself for "The Last Chronicles." Maybe someday.... (05/31/2004) Lindsay Addison:  Hello Mr. Donaldson. It's been a pleasure to find this site and (more so) to read your books, including, most recently, the Reed Stephens myeteries. I had to laugh when I read in this gradual interview that you made lists of interesting or arcane words. It's a vice of mine as well, and man, I had a HUGE list derived from your books--it was an entertaining and enlightening exercise. So, my deep and weighty question is, what's your favorite "list-worthy" word? (Or more likely, what's the first one that comes to mind? <g>) Peace. As with books and characters, I have different favorites for different reasons. Not to mention for different days. I even have different favorites at different times of day. But two list-worthy words which are unlikely to find their way into "The Last Chronicles" are: "rachitic" and "nystagmus." (05/31/2004)