Mike G: Thanks for answering...
LOL. So are you saying with the comment about Kazin, that you have no dark side whatsover and you are trying to create one, or is it that you have no hope of personal redemption? <grin>
What surprises me is what a romantic you are! Who knew? You are starting with flawed characters and unenviable situations, and your stories create an environment that allows them to grow and redeem themselves...I always realized that was a major theme, but not quite in that way...That means I'm going to have to re-read Gap! "Star Wars in Hell" wasn't it?
My question, since I don't want to over impose, is (following up on your previous answer).. Do you then start out with a character and a resolution that that character's 'problem' and then create the story around it, or do you have a storyline that you tailor a character and issues to? Or is there no particular chicken/egg scenario?
Thanks again for your time in this forum. It is fascinating to get these glimpses into what you do and how you do it. Particularly since your books are not the typical tall elf/grumpy dwarf/wise wizard stereotypes that we see out there, even those that are really great stories...
 |
Well, if you want to analyze me on the basis of Kazin's theory, you'll have to dig a whole lot deeper than *that*-- <grin> There are some fundamental things that I'm unable (not unwilling) to explain about how I work. All I can tell you is this. Stories start in a variety of different ways for me ("Reave the Just" began with the first sentence, as did "The Kings of Tarshish," but the GAP books began with names, "Mordant's Need" began with a couple of lines of poetry, and all of the "Covenant" books began at their conclusions), but certain elements have to fall into place before I can write: I have to know what the final crisis (as distinct from the resolution of that crisis) of the story is (where I'm going; my reason for telling the story); I have to know what that crisis "feels" like (this is often more a matter of imagery and context than of literal emotion); and I have to have a sense of the general shape of the process which leads to that crisis (general shape involves what I call "story architecture," the units, building blocks, temporary crises, etc. that accumulate to produce the final crisis). Once I have those things, writing is (now) very much a process of feeling my way: into the situations, into the characters, into the specific content of the architecture. (I say "now" because when I was much younger I felt a need to plan out virtually everything; but now I trust the back of my brain to do a lot of the planning for me.) I discover who all these people are, and why they're doing what they're doing, and why it matters, as I go along. This isn't much of an answer, I know. It has been said by Tony Hillerman that the difference between "plot" and "story" is the difference between "brain" and "mind." In other words, "story=plot+content." It's misleading to say that I start with plot and discover story; but there is some truth in the statement. Of all my stories, only the GAP books (and, to a significantly lesser extent, my mystery novels) truly *began* with character. In some sense, we all start with "brain" and develop "mind." (07/04/2004) |
Peter B.: I have always deeply admired your work. Now, each time I read your responses to these questions I am moved and touched anew by the thoughtfulness and intelligence of your answers. Thank you for being such a sincere and wonderful human being.
A couple quick questions and a comment.
Any idea who will be reading Runes on CD? It would be a real treat if it could be you.
Have you ever given any thought to writing a children's story? I'm guessing not since their is a strong visual component usually and the length of such works is usually a lot less than your more epic endeavors.
Not to get ahead of things, but I just love the title of the final Chronicles book-The Last Dark. Wow! For me, it conjures up all kinds of interesting possibilities.
|
I've said before that I don't (consciously) choose my stories: they choose me. For what are, I hope, obvious reasons, a children's story has never chosen me ("Mythological Beast" is the closest I've ever come). But if one ever does choose me, I trust that I will write it. The reader for the audio version of "Runes" is a man named Scott Brick. He's done other audio books, and I think he has a good voice. It's a very good thing that I'm *not* doing the reading. I would do a terrible job; and I don't have the time. (07/04/2004) |
Sean Casey: I'm interested in hearing your views on rewriting.
Personally, rewriting my work fills me with dread and I tend to avoid it. However, I know this isn't good enough. It's easy to go back and take out or add the occasional word or sentence, but writing is such hard work that when I realise a section needs completely redoing I think 'Oh no, not *again*!' Obviously, I don't expect you to solve *my* problems (but if you could, that'd be great :) ), but I was wondering how *you* deal with this sort of thing.
Would you consider posting first, intermediate and final drafts of a passage of your work on the site to illustrate?
Finally, I'm a bit concerned about the use of the word 'repeated' in the first line of the prologue to 'Runes'. '[R]epeated for the third time' means she's said it four times in total - the first time wasn't a repeat of anything - was this what you meant?
Thanks.
|
I've said before that I rewrite a *lot.* Indeed, I believe that a writer who doesn't rewrite can't learn or improve. (Oh, a cagey individual may be able to pick up a few cheap tricks by observing what other writers do; but those techniques will never be integrated into a coherent whole without lots of practice, i.e. rewriting.) Rewriting involves looking at what you've written as if it had been written by someone else (looking at it as a reader innocent of all your knowledge and assumptions), and evaluating whether or not it actually communicates what you meant to say; then admitting--as all good writers do frequently--that, no, your prose does not actually communicate what you meant, you only wish it did; and then figuring out what went wrong and making appropriate changes. I don't usually enjoy rewriting; but I do it religiously because otherwise I'll never become a better writer. But I'm not going to post "before and after" samples of my own process. How rewriting gets done is as distinctive and individual as how writing gets done: every writer is different. I know writers so fluent that they rip out a book, look at it, say, "Well, *that* didn't work," and simply write the whole book again, perhaps from a different starting point, perhaps with different characters, perhaps from a new point of view. Other writers write the book, realize it doesn't work, throw it away, and write a completely different book instead. At the opposite extreme, I know of writers who simply cannot write sentence 2 until they have made sentence 1 feel perfect. And between those extremes exist a multitude of approaches, none of which are relevant to you. You'll never be any good unless you find your own way. With all of that in mind, how can you possibly be "concerned" about my use of the word "repeated" in the first line of "Runes"? Don't you suppose I've thought about this? Don't you suppose I meant exactly what I said? After all, I rewrote that sentence five times. Of *course* I meant that she said it four times. (07/05/2004) |
Scott Wilson: As I read the gradual interview I note that a great many of your fans first came upon your works (specifically the Chronicles of TC) at an early age (12, 13, 14). I, too, read them as a juvenile. I'm now in my mid-30s (not trying to make you feel old <grin>) and have long since understood that these are not books for kids, even older kids. Does it bother you that young readers come to your work looking for another "The Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe" or "The Hobbit" or the "Chronicles of Prydain" as so many of them do; and run up against the rape of Lena and other mature topics and themes you most likely did not intend for less mature minds?
|
Actually, it bothers me quite a bit: the "Covenant" books were NOT written for kids. And I'm positively astonished that so many too-young readers enjoyed what they read so much that they became, well, fans for life. But I had a professor in graduate school who liked to say, "The reader's mind is like a stomach: it digests what it can use, and it dumps the rest." Apparently all those 12, 13, 14, 15 year old kids found enough in "Covenant" that they *could* digest to make the meal enjoyable in spite of all the spinach. (07/05/2004) |
Mike Sales: My question is about the old man that pops up in Covenant's 'real' world.
Exactly who is he? Is he the CREATOR? (Sorry, I know you said you wouldn't answer any more CREATOR related questions :0)
If he IS the creator, doesn't coming into Covenant's 'real' world violate his own rule for himself, namely that he must stay outside the ARCH OF TIME?
If he ISN'T the creator, is he an AGENT of the creator? And if he IS, will his role be explained more?
|
I swore off "Creator" questions. But let me try again to be clear about one point. The "Covenant" books deal with two fictional realities, Covenant's "real" world and the Land. It's important not to blur the distinction between these two (just as it's important not to blur the distinction between fictional realities and other, more tangible realities). Because they are separate realities, there is no reason to assume that the same being is the "Creator" of both. Indeed, there is no reason to assume that the "Creator" of one cannot be just another character in the other. Therefore there is no reason to assume that the integrity of either reality is being violated if the "Creator" of the Land appears as a character in Covenant's "real" world. Having rid ourselves of those assumptions, we can then consider the possibility that the Land's "Creator" is Covenant himself (an act of imagination which he later shares with Linden); that--in a manner of speaking--both the "Creator" and the man in the ochre robe are Covenant's dopplegangers, externalized versions of aspects of himself. My views on such subjects are better explained in my essay, "Epic Fantasy and the Modern World" (available on this site). But you might find that they repay consideration. (07/06/2004) |
Anthony: Dear Mr. Donaldson:
So what is the answer to the question posed in the introduction of your wonderful collection Reave the Just:
"...which of the stories in this book responds to a lawsuit impugning my honor, both as a writer and as a father?"
I doubt that it is The Killing Stroke, although that ranks as my very favorite short story of yours by a country mile.
Curiously yours,
Anthony
|
This is a *very* personal question, and I don't usually answer questions this personal. But enough time has passed: perhaps it's safe to answer. The story is "Penance." (07/06/2004) |
Pete Bejmuk: Hello Mr. Donaldson,
Congratulations on your extraordinary writing skills. You're a great example to may writers.
I have a question reguarding the Atlas by Karen Fonstad. With the recent revamp in interest in the LotR series, Fonstad (or at least her publisher) has re-released her atlas of Middle Earth, along with some new content. Is there any chance of a new edition of the Atlas of the Land being published, once the new Chronicles are completed?
Do you have any plans on having a comprehensive appendix at the end of the final Chronicles book, in the way that JRRT did? (I must add many thanks for the glossaries in the end of your previous books).
Finally, reguarding short stories such as "The Killing Stroke": my friends have debated if this novel could possibly have set in the Land. Obviously, there is no direct reference (although my arguement was that it could be a semi-futuristic glance at the martial arts of the Haruchai). Now, you don't have to comment on my wild imagination (thank goodness), but have you ever concidered incorporating content from your previous novellas/stories into your larger works? Not just published works, but perhaps a short story that originally had nothing to do with your main series', but would fit in nicely?
Finally, you may find it interesting to note that when asking for a recommendation of a new author similar to you, a number of employees at (various different) bookstores have recommended me to the "Game of Thrones" books by author George RR Martin, along with the words "If you like Donaldson, you'll like Martin". This may be because of the definite dark "antihero" fantasy theme that links both yourself and Martin. I just thought you'd be interested to know what major booksellers are telling people when someone asks "I liked Donaldson's books, who do you recommend that's similar?"
|
I've already discussed the improbability that "The Atlas of the Land" will ever be reissued. But I can say with confidence that I will *never* create a "comprehensive appendix" (or any appendix) to go with the "Covenant" books. Never mind the fact that I hate doing that kind of writing. I don't have the requisite raw materials. My (extremely cryptic and rudimentary) notes get trashed as soon as I use them; so all I'm left with are the maps. Unless somehow this "gradual interview" counts as an appendix. <grin> It is certainly becoming long enough. No, "The Killing Stroke" was not set in the same fictional reality which includes the Land. And I won't fudge that story by trying to squeeze it in where it doesn't belong. But I do have two stories which I secretly hope will someday lead to novels: "The Killing Stroke" and "Penance." But I must hasten to add that at present I have no ideas which would enable me to take those stories further. (07/06/2004) |
Todd: Mr. Donaldson,
This is a general question, with answers that are fairly generic in nature. Feel free to be as general or specific as you want.
When writing, do you:
1. Write the entire story, and then go back and edit.
2. Write the entire story, doing minor editing along the way, saving the major editing for the end.
3. Write and edit as you go, not moving forward into the next logical sequence of events until you're satisfied with what you've already written?
Thanks - and thanks for answering a question I asked last month with more depth than I hoped for.
Good luck with all of the editing you're doing right now!!
Todd
|
I write the entire story (by which I mean book), doing (very) minor editing along the way, and saving the major editing for the end. You might say that my "critical" (rewriting) brain is very different than my "creative" (first draft) brain; and I find I'm unable to do substantive editing until I've gained some distance from the original work. But trying to write entire sagas (in the present case, four volumes) without doing any substantive editing along the way has huge disadvantages: it would be creatively exhausting; it would force me to build on my mistakes instead of correcting them before I get *too* deeply into the story (and then the editing would be brutal beyond description); and it would require me to go too long between paychecks (I *do* have a family to support). (07/06/2004) |
gmv: There's no question here, I just wanted to say that I learned only last night about the upcoming Last Chronicles and I have yet to peel myself off the ceiling!!! Extreme glee!!! "Joy is in the ears that hear" indeed.
I've been living under a rock (e.g. focused on grad school and career), but every once in a while I resurface to check the weather and see if Stephen R. Donaldson has released another book. And now it's happening!!! This is better news than when I heard of the LOTR films.
Thank you so much for revisiting the Land! Don't let that young editor person take too much away --people who love your writing want YOUR writing, which is right up there at the pinnacle of the genre!
The highest compliment I can think to give you is to give you heavy credit for exposing me to so many wonderful words. I was once called a "f*c*ing dictionary" -- you had a hand in that.
You should buy stock in Kleenex. I always end up crying desperately throughout the Covenant books.
Bless you. Stay healthy!
Gina
|
THANK you. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: readers like you do a lot to help make the difficulties of writing books like mine worthwhile. (07/06/2004) |
Danijel Sah: Thank You for your answer. I understand completely.
I have one more question which I forgot to ask You, if You could be so kind to answer it:
I read somewhere that before your first publish of Covenant series You were rejected 47 times. Because I'm author myself and also was very difficult for me to find a publisher, please tell me what were the reasons that your work was rejected so many times and who was the first who recognised and than published your work?
Thank You again. I hope we will meet somewhere someday. I 'am inviting You to visit my beautiful country Croatia! You will enjoy it!
|
As I've said before, "Lord Foul's Bane" was rejected 47 times--every fiction publisher in the US (at that time), including all of my current publishers, plus several agents. Most gave me no explanation whatsoever: form rejections never do. The few that did respond said in various ways that: 1) they couldn't take such a large risk on an "unknown" (at that time, the Waldenbooks chain refused to stock ANY fiction by previously unpublished authors); and 2) LOTR notwithstanding, fantasy doesn't sell (Lin Carter at Ballantine had spent several years proving this to the book industry). The editor who finally gave me my chance was Lester del Rey, who eventually became the fantasy editor at Ballantine after Lin Carter was fired. And even then Lester's gamble might not have worked if he hadn't first published Terry Brooks' "The Sword of Shannara," which defied conventional wisdom by selling an astonishing number of copies. That opened the door for me, in a manner of speaking. But even *that* would not have happened if Ballantine Books hadn't been founded by Ian and Betty Ballantine, who rescued Tolkien from the stupidity of Houghton Mifflin and the subsequent theft of his work by Ace Books, and who never stopped looking for "successors" to LOTR. (07/07/2004) |
Christian Moller: Dear Sir:
I read both Thomas Covenant Chronicles many years ago, and recently re-read them. Since I had an interest in the books, I thought I'd look on the internet and see if anyone else had posted anything about them.
I was surprised to come across your so-called "official" web site, and disheartened to learn that you were masquerading as Mr. Donaldson. I have copies of the books that contain a picture of Mr. Donaldson on the book jacket, and the picture of old fellow on the home page who is supposed to be the author doesn't match. I wish I could paste the picture from the book jacket with this email to show you what Mr. Donaldson really looks like, but unfortunately the constraints of email won't allow me to. Sufficient to say, Mr. Donaldson is a young looking fellow, with long dark hair, very literary looking, wearing glasses. From this picture I gather he seems to be a nice guy, since he's got a Siamese cat sitting on his shoulder. The picture of the man on your website you've posted claiming to be that of the author is a gray-haired and eldery man, and to my mind rather disreputable looking. Not a cat lover at all.
If I were you, I would remove all claims to being the author from your web site. I don't know whether Mr. Donaldson is a litigious sort of person, but if he should find out that an old fellow such as yourself is claiming to be him, he might not take it too well, and a lawsuit might result.
Other than your false claims of celebrity, I found your website interesting, and actually enjoyed some of the insights into the books. Being a fan and making a decent web site should be enough, without claiming to be something you're not. I know that sometimes people get caught up and want to immerse themselves in a beloved topic such as in this case, but as I said, if Mr. Donaldson finds out that you are claiming authorship of his books, and I imagine he will eventually, you may be in for some serious consequences at his hands.
Sincerely,
Christian Moller
|
Well, you caught me. I am in fact *not* "Stephen R. Donaldson." I'm an actor hired by Mr Donaldson to impersonate him because he, well, doesn't think he looks like a writer. So you'll be glad to hear that the real "Stephen R. Donaldson" still looks *exactly* the way he did back in 1876 when the photo you mention was taken. Admittedly, the cat on his shoulder is starting to look a bit ratty--but otherwise, no change at all. I'm sure you'll also be glad to hear that since I was hired for this gig by the real "Stephen R. Donaldson," I'm in no danger whatsoever of being sued for my impersonation. And I should know. At my age, I'm very aware of the difference between being sued and not being sued. If you still doubt that my impersonation is authorized, I suggest that you contact my publishers. They'll set you straight. (07/08/2004) |
Allen: I think it must take much courage to write the Last Chronicles because it means that you are now willing to outlive and outlast your own primary vision. My question regards Reave The Just. You said somewhere that the story began with a sentence. I am wondering if you would reveal to us devotees of Reave what inspirations like behind the character himself. Also, how about a younger Christopher Walken to play Reave?
|
I can say with complete honesty that the entire story of "Reave the Just," including the character himself, grew out of the first sentence. Such is the magic of language for me--especially names. I knew exactly who Reave and Jillet were as soon as I heard their names in my mind, just as I knew all about the setting from the name Forebridge. And I knew what the story was going to be about (thematically, anyway) as soon as I heard the words "strange, unrelenting tales." How this works, I can not explain. I have no idea. All I know is that only one other story started with the first sentence ("The Kings of Tarshish"--unless you're willing to really stretch a point, in which case I might also mention "The Man Who Tried to Get Away," or indeed "By Any Other Name," which actually started with the 4th sentence). Casting Reave? I've never given it any thought. But a much younger Colin Baker would be an interesting possibility. (07/08/2004) |
Paul S.: GAP Casting:
Angus: Liam Neeson - maybe too old, but could pull it off; but I think your suggestion of Vin Diesel is still the best
Nick: Brad Pitt - he's good looking (apparently), cocky, and has played the bad guy (Fight Club); second choice: Jude Law.
Min: 7 of 9, from Star Trek Voyager... can't remember the actresses name.
Morn: Charlize Theron or Nancy McKeon (ok, Nancy's not an A-List actor but she's played the victim who comes back swinging role before very well)
Holt: Al Paccino, he's already played the Devil and the head of crime family...
Warden: Can't think of anyone...
|
Since the GAP movies will never be made (the only "producers" who ever approached me wanted *me* to finance the project), casting them is just a parlor game. But parlor games are fun. At the moment, I like Robert de Niro for Warden, Carrie-Anne Moss for Min, and good ol' whatshername who played 7 of 9 for Sorus Chatelaine. And it's just barely possible that the actress who played Jack Bauer's wife on "24" would make a good Morn Hyland. And how about Sam Sorbo for Koina Hannish? (As I say, parlor games are fun.) Francis McDermott for Lane Harbinger? And my buddy Colin Baker for Hashi Lebwohl? (07/08/2004) |
Anthony: Mr Donaldson,
Thankyou so very much, you introduced the concept of the anti hero to me, and I feel fortunate that the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant were the first novels I had ever read. Since then you were always my favourite author and have reread the chronicles 4 times, taking pride of place on my Bookshelf.
My question however is, why does it seem you have been inactive for so long? Please however, stop answering all these questions, and go write the next book, I cant wait for the first one as it is.
|
If it seems I've been inactive, there are several explanations. 1) You may be unaware of my mystery novels. 2) Over the past decade, I've been trying to "reinvent" myself as a writer, one consequence of which is that for 8 months in '96 (I think it was) I couldn't write at all. 3) My most recent novel, "The Man Who Fought Alone," took me three full years to write, in part because I was--and still am--"reinventing" myself, and in part because in that book I deliberately tackled a challenge which has effectively paralyzed me throughout my writing life. From the beginning, my ability to write has depended on "making things up": I've never written "from life," so none of the characters, settings, or situations have been (consciously) based on my own experience. But in "The Man Who Fought Alone," I chose to write about some things which are demonstrably "real" (in other words, you could go out and check my facts for yourself), specifically martial arts styles and tournaments. Not to put too fine a point on it, this ^#$%#^ near killed me. Sure, verifiable facts occasionally appear in my other books. The information about leprosy in "Lord Foul's Bane" was accurate and up-to-date when I wrote the book. But nothing that I've ever written has depended so heavily on my personal knowledge and experience. (07/08/2004) |
Derrik S: As far as the geography of the Land:
There is an ice field to the north of the Land
There is a desert to the south of the Land
And a sea to the east of the Land and a few things to the west
As far as my question goes:
In The One Tree, i came across that there is a desert to the north(?) of one of the cities (where they picked up some weapons from the palace, i believe), they say that there is a land far north(?) of the desert, i was wondering if that is the Land they were talking about?
(My memory isn't quite as clear as when i read the books a couple years ago)
|
I've never tried to construct a map of the entire planet; but in my mind the land of the Bhrathair and the Sandgorgons is on a different continent than *the* Land. After all, any self-respecting planet has more than one desert. <grin> (07/09/2004) |
Stephen Smith: Dear Steve:
First of all, I am amazed at your dedication to answering the questions submitted in this gradual interview. But I have known for a long time that you treat your readers with a tender devotion. Back in 1992, (in the halcyon days before e-mail) I finished the Covenant books, and you were kind enough to respond to my snail mail letter with one of your own. It has taken me 12 years to say thank you.
Thank you. It was the only such "fan letter" I've written, before or since. It's my pleasure to write you again.
My $64 question: I have recently been able to start writing my own novel full-time at home. I'm finding it difficult to stay on task in this too comfortable environment. I appreciated your candor in a previous answer about treating your writing like a "normal" 40-hour a week job. Do you have any advice for staying focused on the work, and the loneliness that (for me at least) dovetails so smoothly with this solitary craft?
I hope you and yours are well. Thanks for everything,
Steve Smith.
|
If you can afford to write full-time, can you afford an office outside your home? That would be my first piece of advice: get a space that is dedicated exclusivly to writing, ideally a space away from phones, family, friends, or anything else that threatens to make you self-conscious about what you're doing. Then (or instead, if you can't afford a separate space) devise a congenial "cocoon of sound" to isolate you from distractions (it also helps to be sure you don't have a distracting view from any windows): you need a form of sound that helps you relax, that doesn't require you to think about it, and that is loud enough to resist penetration by noises from outside your place of work. Then make "rules" for yourself, something along the lines of, "If you are in your place of work, you are either reading or writing. If you aren't doing either of those things, leave." People like Fred Pohl require a certain number of pages from themselves every day; and everything else is secondary until those pages are done. Roger Zelazny used to require himself to walk into his office and write four sentences; if those sentences didn't start a flow of words, he left; if they did, he stayed as long as the flow lasted; and he required himself to walk into his office at least four times a day. Me, I require myself to put in the hours rather than the words or sentences or pages. But the best advice I can give you is this: trust your excitement. You need self-discipline to get yourself going every day; but after that your only reliable guide is your own excitement. If what you're doing doesn't excite you, there's something wrong somewhere. And if you *are* excited, nothing else matters--except nuturing your excitement. (07/09/2004) |
Mark A. Valco: Dear Stephen R Donaldson:
I just came across your website last week and just read 90% of the "Gradual Interview" yesterday. My brother and his son recommended last Thanksgiving that I read your Covenant Trilogy. I suddenly found myself with an insatiable appetite for Donaldson, so as soon as I finish the GAP series, I will start on the Mordant books. It smacks of synchronicity (for me personally) that you are writing the last trilogy now. I was elated to deliver that exciting news to my brother and his son.
I notice that most of your emails are from guys, yet your novels have such strong female characters, that I think it is sad that women readers have not discovered you yet. (Either that or they are not as compelled to give you feedback). For each strong male character, there seems to be an even stronger female character. By "strong" I mean intelligent, complicated, brave, and forceful. For this reason --among many other reasons-- you may be well ahead of your time. (Especially when you consider that the Covenant trilogies were written in the eighties).
If I may comment about the "living forever" thread in a few of your previous emails, I think you have certainly made yourself immortal with your writing. Let's face it, after two or three genertions, most people are soon forgotten (even in their own families!). My first question is: Does it ever dawn on you that you *have* made "Stephen R. Donaldson" immortal? If so, doesn't that make you feel fulfilled? There is no doubt in my mind that there will be college classes on the Covenant books, and there is no doubt in my mind that over the course of the next fifty years there will be a couple remakes of movies based on your books. They are simply too rich to ignore.
|
Well, thank you! I especially appreciate your comments about my female characters. I was told vehemently (not to mention savagely) many years ago that no man could write convincing female characters; the male mind being inherently crippled by, well, maleness, etc.. After a fair amount of soul-searching, I decided to ignore the people who say such things. You see the results. But about "living forever." Naturally I'm pleased that you think my work will stand the test of time. But I have no illusions about my artistic "immortality." There were plenty of people in Dickens' time who considered Galsworthy a greater novelist; and now we all say, Gal-who? Similarly, many of Shakespeare's contemporaries considered Ben Jonson a greater playwright--and poet. History teaches us over and over again that time (at least 50-100 years) is the only true test of artistic significance. Well, the bad news about the test of time is that I'll never know if I passed. The *good* news is that I'll never know if I failed. Meanwhile the only thing I can do is the only thing any of us can do: give it my best shot, and take my chances. Hence the attraction of *actually* "living forever." <grin> Which I have solemnly sworn to do. (07/09/2004) |
Peter Hunt: Mr Donaldson,
You've mentioned Colin Baker a couple of time in this interview (and dedicated Forbidden KNowledge to him). Are you referring to the same Colin Baker who played the sixth Doctor Who?
If so, do you know him personally, or did you just used to watch a lot of Doctor Who? :)
(Sorry for the personal question. I am an unabashed fan, and do have a lot of questions about your writing, but I'm curious about this, too.)
|
In fact, I have the good fortune to consider Colin Baker (the 6th Doctor) a personal friend. But I'm also a major Dr Who fan. You should *see* my collection of bootleg Dr Who tapes. <grin> And I've never forgiven the BBC for what they did to Colin's Doctor. (07/09/2004) |
Louis Sytsma: Here's a couple of more actors for your consideration to play Thomas Convenant:
Viggo Mortensen
Christian Bale
|
Sorry, Viggo (I call him that because he has no idea who I am) has never shown me the range needed for Covenant. And I don't know who Christian Bale is, although other readers of this site have mentioned him. (07/09/2004) |
Lee Whipple: Thank you, I needed to read this today.
"I'm only responsible for the meaning of my own life; and the meaning I choose to create requires certain varieties of kindness."
This world would be a better place if more people believed the same.
|
I agree. And I know a fair number of people who would do the same. Unfortunately most of them actually consider "convenience" more important than either "responsibility" or "kindness." Well, you get what you pay for. "Responsibility" and "kindness" take effort. When people let "convenience" determine the meaning of their lives--well, the results ain't pretty. (07/09/2004) |
dlbpharmd: What is the time ratio between the "real world" and The Land?
|
It is roughly one day in the "real world" to one year in the Land--give or take a little poetic license. (07/09/2004) |
Ross Edwards: Dear Mr. Donaldson,
I can't begin to tell you how excited I am that you've taken up the Chronicles again. The first six books amazed me, but to my mind your writing has gotten even more intense in the past 20 years (the Gap series has now passed TC as my favorite story -- once the action hits Billingsgate, it really takes off, and Chaos and Order just HAS to be read in one sitting).
I just might have to hose myself down when the Last Chronicles are released!
And I was relieved when I found out that you finally had your own official Website. For so many years, your (unofficial) Website community had been sorely lacking in content and news -- I wish I’d discovered Kevin’s Watch earlier… Thanks for giving us a glimpse into your world!
Anyway, I could babble on and on, but I won’t take up any more of your time. I have two questions for you, and then I’ll hang up and listen to your answer (if there is one).
First, the news that Hollywood has an option on TC has made me dust off my unfinished screenplay based on Lord Foul’s Bane. If I end up finishing it, where would I send it to (potentially) be read by whomever is in charge of the project?
Second, though I know Runes is already in final proofing stage, would you be interested in some free proofreading for the next books? I can say I’m pretty good at it, and would love to help out (did you notice the small formatting issues in the posted Prologue chapter? Reversed quotation marks, for one… Hope those didn’t make it to the final proof! Or were those only caused by the conversion process?) ;-)
Hey, thanks for listening! And take care.
Sincerely,
Ross Edwards
|
1) As it happens, the producers who purchased the "Covenant" option already have a screenplay in hand. They're using it to try to attract a "bankable" star. But if you want to pursue the matter, the names of the producers are in the Putnams press release on this site. You can track them down at least as easily as I can (I don't do "web searches" well) and offer them your screenplay. 2) Sorry, I don't let anyone else do my proofreading for me. *I'm* responsible for my work. And I make changes right up to the last minute. Or even later: I occasionally make changes between the hardback and paperback editions of a book. (Small stuff, usually; or matters of internal consistency.) (07/09/2004) |
Adrian: Mr. Donaldson, The Covenant Books and Mordant's Need both focus on a person from the "real" world entering into an impossible world and then learning the rules and surviving.
First question: how did you come up with this very intriguing idea of mixing reality and fantasy?
Second Question: I absolutely love the notion of using mirrors in Mordant’s Need. This was one of the most original ideas I had ever read up to that point. How did you come up with the notion of using mirrors in this way?
Last Question: when you set out to create a world (Mordant’s Need for example), how much of the “rules” of the world do you outline before writing, and how much do you “make up as you go”? In other words, how much of the rules of conjuring did you know before you began to write and how much was made up after you had begun?
Thank you.
|
1) Well, it's been done before: the Lewis Carroll books; the "Narnia" books; shucks, even the "Oz" books. I grew up on that stuff. 2) Again, this isn't original. "Through the Looking Glass" leaps to mind, as does a Kurt Vonnegut novel ("Breakfast of Champions," if my memory does not mislead me). 3) This isn't a subject on which I've ever felt that I could afford to wing it. Sticking with the example of "Mordant's Need": since the "known" rules of Imagery (known by the Congery, at any rate) are violated right at the beginning of the story (by Geraden), I had to start out with a pretty clear picture of what those rules were. Or a completely different example: the GAP books. Virtually all of the essential parameters of that entire saga are laid out in "The Real Story" (many of them obliquely, I admit). (07/09/2004) |
Scott Rush: Mr. Donaldson,
It is with a large smile on my face that I write this short message to you today. I can’t tell you how much I am looking forward to the release of Runes of the Earth. It has been about 18 years since I finished WGW the first time and I have been trying to find a fantasy series that can match the excellence of the first two chronicles of TC ever since. I just may have found one such series in George Martin’s excellent Song of Fire and Ice. It is certainly worth a read if you have the time, and you will need a lot of time because Mr. Martin likes to write even larger books than you :-)
I have so many thoughts about the final series spinning in my head that it is driving me nuts. For example:
1. What sort of new “Council of Lords” did Sunder and Hollian form?
2. Did the new council (foolishly?) recover Kevin’s Lore from Revelstone and make use of it, or did they fashion their own lore?
3. Did the beloved Ranyhyn come back to The Land after so many centuries?
4. Did the Giants re-populate Coercri?
5. What about the Haruchai? What part do they play?
6. Just how in the Seven Hells does TC come back from the dead? I know that the Law of Death was broken, but wouldn’t have this been fixed by the new Staff of Law?
I realize that you cannot answer any of these questions in this forum, but I hope that they and the many other un-asked questions that I have will be answered in the Last Chronicles. You could have very well left the chronicles complete after WGW. I thank you though from the bottom of my heart for taking the time to write the Last Chronicles.
I am a displaced native of Cleveland just like you and I was wondering, assuming you enjoy professional sports, if you still are a fan of the Browns, Indians, Cavs etc? I haven’t lived in Cleveland for 20 years, but I can’t bring myself to follow any other sports team but my “Home Town” teams.
Now get busy writing Fatal Revenant!
|
You're right: I can't answer any of those questions without giving things away. But just to tease you, I can say that Kevin's Lore is in what we might politely call a parlous state. <grin> The only professional sport that actually holds my interest these days is the NBA. I was living near Philadelphia when I became interested, so the 76'ers are approximately "my team." But since I virtually never get to watch their games, I do root for other teams on an almost random basis. The only thing that isn't random is that I always root *against* the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks. And, no, I can't explain that. It just is. (07/10/2004) |
Peter Hunt: Mr. Donaldson,
When I read "The Killing Stroke" a few (um ... six? Yikes!) years ago, it struck me that the world you had created was complex and complete enough that it could have supported a novel-length story. I've read elsewhere that you know almost immediately what form (or how many volumes) a story will take, even when the idea is young.
Is this the case for "The Killing Stroke"? Did it always exist in your mind as a short story? If so,
(and I don't know how to word this question differently, so forgive me if it's unanswerable) how did you know that the world and situations of "The Killing Stroke" were to be the subject of a short story rather than a novel?
Do you ever look back at the world that you've created in a short story, and think "Hmm, that's pretty cool. I'll bet there are other tales to tell in that world"?
|
Well, I've been known to look back at a story and say, "That's pretty cool. I *hope* there are other tales to tell in that world." Having written them, I'm perfectly aware that some of my tales *could* support additional or longer narratives. Nevertheless I simply can't answer your real question. When a story idea appears in my head (and I can't explain how that happens), it always arrives carrying a "length attribute," a tag or label which tells me roughly how long the story will be (and I certainly can't explain how *that* happens). Often I know how long a story will be well before, even years before, I know what the story itself actually is. In "The Killing Stroke," for example, the original idea was nothing more than the possibility of a martial arts story involving unspecified characters caught in a "time-loop" who could only escape by somehow transcending the limitations of their own identities (an idea stolen directly from Doctor Who); but I knew immediately that the story would be a novella. Years later, when I was ready to actually write the story, I could hardly fail to notice that it was full of unexplored potential. Nevertheless I had then, and still have now, NO IDEAS which would enable me to explore that potential. For reasons I can not explain, the longer an idea sits in my head before I write it, the more context (setting, background, etc.) it accretes; but the idea itself doesn't grow to match its (now more elaborate) context. All I know is that the worlds of, say, "The Killing Stroke," "Penance," or "Daughter of Regals" could support other or longer stories; but the stories themselves can't support any more length than they started with. (07/13/2004) |
Pier Giorgio (Xar): Dear Mr. Donaldson,
I must say that when I first heard you were going to write the Last Chronicles, I hardly could believe it. There I was, just after I finished reading WGW for the first time, feeling sad because Covenant was gone and the journey to the Land was over, too... and then I found out about all this. Thank you! I was introduced to the Chronicles by a friend of mine from Venezuela, in Germany of all places (I'm Italian) - isn't it strange how life goes? ;) It's a pity your books haven't enjoyed much success over here :(
Anyway, on to my question... I just realized that time and again, all Laws that were broken in the Land that I can think of were broken because the Land itself, directly or not, provided the means to do that. What I mean is, without the EarthBlood, no Law of Death would have been broken; without a Forestal, no Law of Life would have been broken; and so on. Not even Foul with the Illearth Stone could apparently break the Law of Death without the unwitting assistance of Elena.
So, is this another facet of Covenant's belief that to have power (in this case, Earthpower) one (the Land) cannot be wholly innocent (in this case, by placing within the very Earthpower the possibility of "guilt", intended as the destruction of natural Laws)? In other words, that for the Land to be rich in Earthpower, it must also "accept" the fact that it holds within itself the seeds of its fall, whereas to avoid holding those seeds (being "innocent"), the Land couldn't hold Earthpower either (and therefore would be "powerless")? Or am I just rationalizing? ;)
|
That's quite a question! I'm not sure I can do it justice. But here's how I look at it. You're a Creator; and you want to create a world that will be an organic whole, a living, breathing entity, rather than a mere mechanical extrapolation of your own personality and preferences. So how do you accomplish that goal? The obvious answer is: give the inhabitants of your world--or perhaps even the world itself--free will. Allow them to use or misuse as they see fit whatever your world happens to contain. Therefore they must be equally capable of both preserving and destroying your creation. QED. When you look at it that way, the fact that the powers in the Land can be used to break the Laws which preserve the Land is sort of a "Duh." That *has* to be true. Otherwise your world is nothing more than an exercise in ego, a piece of machinery which exists solely to glorify you. Such "Covenant"-esque ideas as "innocence is impotence" and "only the guilty have power" are inferences drawn from the basic precepts of free will. They might be rephrased thus: only a person who has truly experienced the consequences of his/her own destructive actions is qualified to evaluate--is, indeed, capable of evaluating--his/her future actions in order to make meaningful choices between destruction and preservation. Hile Troy is an interesting example. He's "innocent" in a way that Covenant is not: he's never done anything even remotely comparable to the rape of Lena. As a result, he's bloody dangerous. He literally doesn't know what he's doing: he hasn't learned the kind of humility that comes from meeting his own inner Despiser face-to-face. Therefore, in spite of all his good intentions, he makes decisions which bear an ineluctable resemblence to Kevin's. Do you doubt me? Look at Troy's "accomplishments." If Mhoram hadn't saved his bacon at the edge of Garroting Deep, his decisions would have effectively destroyed the Lords' ability to defend the Land. He's just too damn innocent. He hasn't learned the self-doubt, the humility, that makes Covenant hesitate, or that makes Mhoram wise. Does this help? I hope so. (07/13/2004) |
Michael from Santa Fe: Thanks for posting the cover art, very nice, but who/what are the figures seen on it? It looks like three people and a white horse. Now, I know you probably aren't going to tell me who they are, but can you at least confirm that this is a scene in the book? Thanks!
P.S. I have to admit that when I first saw the cover I thought the white animal was a giant poodle! Please confirm that this is not the case!
|
Sorry, I can't explain Whelan's art for "Runes." He does what are considered "symbolic" covers: they don't illustrate a scene from the book; instead they're intended to *evoke* the book in a general sense. But once you've read "Runes," you'll be able to appreciate Whelan's concept. In the meantime, I can assure you that the white animal is NOT a "poodle." <grin> Merciful Heavens, what will you people think of next? (07/13/2004) |
Marc Alan: While reading the Second Chronicles, as a reader I was always hoping that Covenant and Linden would talk more about the real world. Instead, the trilogy seemed to alternate with one or the other character being locked up in his or her own thoughts. They seem to remain strangers for most of the book(s) as they struggle with their own inner demons. Even after they become close, they bounce right back to being alone and miserable. Do you have something against happy endings, or do you just find them boring?
|
Do I have something against happy endings? Not as such. (Doesn't saving the entire world count as a happy ending?) But I desperately want to make my characters as real as possible. And virtually all of the real people I know "remain strangers...as they struggle with their own inner demons." Certainly that has been my lot in life. The true connections that I occasionally succeed at making with other people are so precious because they are so (comparatively) rare. None of us would really cherish the people we love if such connections came easily. Meanwhile struggling with inner demons is pretty much the name of the game for most human beings. (07/13/2004) |
Kristen: Dear Mr. Donaldson,
I would like to start this off by saying that my favorite books are the Gap series (although Thomas Covenant was great, too) and I absolutely love your writing.
My question is this: What advice could you give to aspiring writers?
|
Well, they always say that anyone who CAN be discouraged from being a writer SHOULD be discouraged from being a writer. My own take on that basic concept goes something like this: No one is born with an owner's manual. We have no idea what our true abilities, talents, and interests are: we have to *discover* that information about ourselves through an (unfortunately messy) process of trial-and-error. So the important question is not: Do you aspire to being a writer? The important question is: What have you discovered about yourself? Now, as far as I can tell, the only reliable guide to self-discovery is self-observation: watch your own behavior, watch your own emotions, and draw reasonable conclusions from that data. The particular things to look for are: how does your mind work (what comes naturally to you)? and what excites you? (Unfortunately excitement often presents as fear, so making the distinction can be difficult.) Or another, perhaps simpler, way to say the same things: when do you feel most alive? and what are you doing when you feel that way? If the answer is, "When I'm writing," then give it everything you've got. If the answer is *not*, "When I'm writing," then give it up. Incidentally, the same principle applies *within* writing. How do you know what KIND of writing you should be doing? And how do you know HOW you should be writing? The answer, again, is self-observation. Experiment. Watch. And trust what makes you feel more alive; distrust what doesn't. (07/15/2004) |
Anonymous: Mr Donaldson.
As an admirer of your work and literature in general I find myself perplexed by a simple problem.
Taking a world, its characters and placces from notes and maps into a fully realized story. I am able to envision a world, its continents, cultures peoples and heros. I can see its cities, forests, mountains and valleys. I have a clear vision of its history and future. Yet I find all my vision is channeled more into an analysis of my world than stories about it.
I have no problem writing analytical research papers yet creative writing other than poetry eludes and boggles me.
I know each writer is unique in how they write so what you do will not necessarily work for me. However I am still curious. Is there any advice you may have which could change the world I see from a notebook and drawings ( many digital ) from an analytical work to a creative work.
|
Sorry, the best answer I can give you is the answer to the previous question. Instead of trying to become someone else, you need to trust who you are. (07/15/2004) |
Louis Sytsma: Hello again!
My first post was short - this one will make up for it!
Reading the questions and your responses here have been quite illuminating. One of the highlights was where you explained how you shift your POV to aid you in empathizing with each character so that you may better articulate what each is feeling.
That approach is quite successful. I have described your work as harsh and angular yet tinged with compassion and despair. Please take that at it's most complementary! All those aspects work together to create characters that emotionally resonant for me like few writers are capable of.
You do seem to thrive with anti-heroes. Do you enjoy the challenge of presenting us with lead characters that are hard to sympathize with initially? I remember my initial revulsion - with shame - on reading about Covenant's leprosy and his shameful actions upon arriving in the Land. Yet, by the end of saga the character had won me over.
As a writer, such scenarios must present an exciting and difficult challenge. The payoff to end with a sympathetic or at the least - an understood character - must provide you with great satisfaction.
Thanks again for your time.
|
As I think (hope?) I've said before, I don't view my characters as "anti-heroes." Within my creative ethos, the term makes no sense. I think of my characters has troubled and damaged, but profoundly sympathetic, people who need to have intense stories happen to them (otherwise they'll be stuck where they are forever), and who need all the understanding I can give them in order to benefit from those stories. So, Do I enjoy the challenge? Does the payoff give me great satisfaction? Such questions don't have any particular meaning for me. I don't mean to suggest that I feel neither enjoyment nor satisfaction, either while I'm working or after the work is done. But for me those emotions have nothing at all to do with the challenge of dealing with "anti-heroes," or with the payoff of finally making them "sympathetic." For me, they were sympathetic from the beginning. And every human being is the hero of his/her own story. (07/15/2004) |
Paul Culmsee: Hi Steve
I just wanted to say that stumbling across this site and discovering that we will be returning to the land again brought me a great sense of joy.
When I first watched Lord Of The Rings, I immediately thought "Holy shit they *have* to do Covenant" - but Peter Jackson would have to do it :-).
But now I feel the trepidation that Tolkien fans must have felt. "They better not fuck it up", etc. Plus I figured that now producers would be falling over themselves looking for other fantasy series to convert to the big screen - and there probably are a couple).
It would seem likely to me that any commercial studio would want to take out elements like Lena's rape and change Elena's character altogether. How would you personally feel about your work being stripped/dumbed down and rehashed as well as risking being labelled a Lord Of the Rings cash in?
thanks
Paul
|
In my opinion, the "Covenant" books are un-film-able. They are too "adult" for commercial studios--and only commercial studios have the bucks for such a special-effects-intensive project. In addition, there are LOTS of fantasy series around that would be *much* easier to do. "Shannara" leaps to mind; but so does "Elric"--and let's not even mention Ray Feist's books. At opposite ends of the spectrum, both Patricia McKillip and Steven Erikson would be easier to film. So I don't think I'll ever have to face the dumbing-down of my work. But if it happens, well, here's my philosophy: it's not my problem. *I* wrote the *books.* That's what matters to me. Everything else is just a distraction. (07/27/2004) |
James DiBenedetto: You wrote, in response to a question about "Mordant's Need":
"Imagery and the use of mirrors occupy a sort of middle ground between the manifestations of power in more traditional fantasy ("magic and monsters") and those in science fiction (typically "weaponry"). The kingdom of Mordant is not *in itself* a magical place. In fact, it is a rather "mundane" quasi-medieval reality. Instead it has access to magic through the manipulation of devices; through a kind of technology."
I hadn't ever thought of it that way, because , the use of mirrors in Mordant's Need involves one of what (to me, anyway) is one of the big indicators of "magic" in fantasy: that it's only accessible to the select few who have an inborn, mysterious, unteachable ability to access it. The smartest, most dedicated resident of Mordant could try to shape mirrors and perform translations every day of his life and never have the slightest success, if he didn't have the whatever-it-is that makes one an Imager.
Thinking about it more, in the Land, especially in the First Chronicles, it seems that Earthpower, and the many "magical" things that can be done with it, is accessible to anyone, so long as they're willing to work at it. In that sense, you could say that the Land is LESS magical than Mordant, and that the sort of power the Lords of Revelstone wielded is more like science (since anyone, in theory, could study hard enough and long enough to master Kevin's Lore and become a Lord) than the Imagery of Mordant.
I guess my question is, does that make any kind of sense at all, or am I completely off base/missing something obvious?
|
If I may say so, you're proposing a rather "elitist" view of magic. This is certainly a defensible position. The important thing to remember about "magic" in fantasy, however--good fantasy, anyway, fantasy with real emotional depth and resonance--is that it is pretty much always a metaphor of one form or another. The writer isn't saying, "This place really exists, and these things really happen in it." The writer is saying, "If you will imagine this place with me, and imagine as well that these things can happen in it, then I have a good and, I believe, important story that I would like to share with you." Therefore the relevant question is not: What are the inherent attributes of magic? (E.g. Is magic by definition a power accessible only to a few, or is it a more universal resource of life?) The relevant question is: What are the assigned attributes of magic in x, y, or z particular story, and what is the writer trying to communicate by assigning those attributes to magic? In these terms, it is essentially meaningless to say that the world of "Mordant's Need" is inherently more (or less) magical than the world of "Covenant." The stories are different; the focus of the themes is different; the (necessary) parameters of the worlds are different; so of course the manifestations of magic are different. (07/28/2004) |
John McCann: I see you have posted the US cover for Runes. It is beautiful, I am sitting here trying to figure out where it is. My guess is Kevin's Watch. I know it is unlikely, but would be willing to post the text which inspired the image?
Other guesses are the character in the background under the tree is Covenant. I beleive this since he appears to be wearing jeans. There also appears to be a Ranyhyn in the foreground. I don't know who the other 2 characters are since I do not picture Linden in a dress. She appears to be running joyfully towards the character under the tree, so it could be her.
While typing the word Ranyhyn, the similarity to Swift's Houyhnhnm struck me. Is this the inspiration for the name you chose for the noble horses?
|
As I said earlier, Whelan's art is intended symbolically. Its purpose is evocative: it isn't meant to represent a literal scene. Or literal characters. I've studied enough Swift to know that his work may well have influenced me on an unconscious level. However, I drew no conscious inspiration from his horses when I named the Ranyhyn. I was much more aware of "modifying" Tolkien than I was of "modifying" Swift. (07/28/2004) |
Todd S: How many books do you read in a given time
(week, month or year ?)and what kind of books do you read currently ?
|
I'm a slow reader: two books a month, three at most. And I only read one book at a time (otherwise I can't keep them straight). I've just finished Patrick O'Brian's "The Fortune of War" and Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons." Now I'm back to reading fantasy. (07/28/2004) |
Peter Purcell: Thanks for answering my prior questions - I waited until July to submit a new one!
I have a question about pets in the Land. I'm a pet person; I have always had dogs (and cats and other critters). My current dog pack consists of two 5 year old doberman females at 70lbs each and my baby is Rusty, a cuddly and loveable 2 year old 110lbs rottweiler.
My questions: why are there no pets in the Land!? There are horses and Ranyhyn - but no one would call a Ranyhyn a pet (and live after the Ramen heard about it!) There were small animals that the Unfettered One called to save Covenant. But other than that - no animal companions. I would think as close to nature as the first Land was there would be some. [OK, the Sunbane gives you an excuse for the Second Chronicles.] Perhaps the third?
|
Well, the real reason may be that I'm not a pet person myself. But my meticulously-rationalized, yet spur-of-the-moment, explanation is that the whole notion of "domestication" sort of violates the spirit of Land (at least as it existed in the first "Chronicles"). Sure, ordinary survival depends to some extent on having things like herds, transportation (e.g. horses), etc.. And the people who originally ventured into the Land don't have a particularly attractive history. But once Berek got that whole "reverence for life" thing going, people probably stopped thinking of animals as potential pets. Incidentally, since you asked much later in this interview, no, I'm not planning to wait until after my "Runes" tours to start on "Fatal Revenant." The delays imposed by my publishers are already making me crazy. The hardest part of any book--at least for me--is starting it; and the longer I put off starting, the more difficult it becomes. (07/28/2004) |
Avalest: Dear Mr Donaldson,
Why at this site is your beard a link to your "private office"? If someone clicks on your beard in real life do they also get linked to your "Private office"?
Thanks for your time, Avalest.
|
People who click on my beard in real life usually get linked to my "Private Jab-Cross Combination." <grin> You should try it sometime. (07/28/2004) |
Beverly (caamora): Not a question, just a thank you for the wonderful question and answer session you did for us last night at Garduno's. I hope you had as much fun as we did.
|
And thank YOU. I was pleased and flattered by the occasion myself, and I'm glad it went so well. (07/28/2004) |
Pete M.: You've posted the stats on how each of your book series have sold compared to each other, and I'm assuming it's fair to say you were disappointed with how the Gap books sold? If a musician or band puts out a so-so album after a million-selling one they can always say, "Well, our next one will be better". As an author, though, what's it like to be in the middle of a 5-book series that isn't selling well? You can't just say, "Well, the third book will be really great!" Obviously you liked and believed in the Gap books (as did most everyone else on this site), but were there ever any "What's wrong with you people!" moments? How about the publishers - were they giving you any heat about sales? (not that there's much you could have done)
Speaking of publishers, if you hadn't decided on The Last Chronicles and were instead writing a "new" fantasy or sci-fi series, would you have had a problem finding a publisher?
From a loyal (sometimes fiercely) reader since 1983 I just want to say thanks for all of your great work over the years.
Pete
|
My reactions to the sales of the GAP books are difficult to explain. Yes, I was (painfully) disappointed: who wouldn't be? We all want to be read by as many readers as possible. And on some level, we all want the ego-boo of popularity. Naturally I felt rejected by my readers. On the other hand, the sales were about what I was expecting: no matter what my publishers' expectations may have been, I *knew* the books wouldn't sell particularly well. They're too dark--and you have to stick with them too long before you begin to get any of the normal "rewards" of reading (characters you can respect, vindication, resolution, hope, that sort of thing). And on still another hand, I found the whole situation vastly depressing. Publishers never blame the author *directly* for poor sales: they're too polite for that. However, they seldom accept any responsibility themselves: indirectly they *do* blame the author. So what always happens is that they simply decline to publish your next book. Hence my appearance of publisher-hopping: Ballantine dumped me because they were disappointed in the sales of "Mordant's Need," Bantam dumped me because they were disappointed in the sales of the GAP books, and Tor dumped me because they were disappointed in the sales of my mystery novels. And in England HarperCollins dumped me because they were likewise disappointed in the sales of my mystery novels (even though in England all of my other books have been *very* successful, yes, even including the GAP books). So now I'm with Putnams and Orion. God only knows what will happen if they're disappointed in the sales of "The Last Chronicles." As I say, I find all this very depressing. But Lester del Rey would probably respond (perhaps aptly) that I did it to myself. After all, I found out what my readers like--and then I spent 20 years refusing to provide it. Why, he might ask, *shouldn't* they reject my non-"Covenant" books? All I can say in my own defense is that I'm not that kind of reader myself. Once I decide that I like a writer, I'll read anything that he/she writes. I don't care about mere details like genre, setting, or story-type: I care about the particular gifts and integrity that writer brings to his/her work. Would I have had difficulty finding a publisher if I were currently working on more non-"Covenant" books? Depends on what you mean by difficulty. If I accepted a small enough advance (possibly too small to live on), I could probably get published by anybody. (After all, the sales of the GAP books are still better than most of the sf out there. Bantam was only disappointed because their expectatons were so high.) So, no, I wouldn't necessarily have had difficulty, but, yes, I might have had to get a day job. Which at my age would have been "difficulty" on a whole new order of magnitude. (07/29/2004) |
Paul S.: I was just re-reading you first Structured Interview from 1979... and noticed that you mentioned that Holt and Ballantine had both rejected LFB.
Just wondering if there's any connection between "Holt" the publishing company rejecting your work and a character -- coincidentally named "Holt" who was a rather despicable corporate type....
hmmm...
|
No, it's just a coincidence. Holt (known then as Holt Rinehart & Winston) treated me very well--once Judy-Lynn del Rey at Ballantine talked them into publishing my first trilogy. In fact, they did a great deal to launch my career by publishing three long books by an unknown author all on the same day. That attracted an enormous amount of review attention, which in turn helped make the paperbacks successful. I've long since forgiven Holt for first rejecting "Covenant" so many years ago. (07/30/2004) |
Dustin A. Frost : In June's responses you said, "...but I've never seen Goodman produce anything that resembles the squalor of Angus' early malice." I never would have thought of Goodman myself, but that remark (call me contrary) made me think of Barton Fink, starring John Turturro. If you haven't seen it, and if you will forgive me for projecting, I believe you might enjoy it.
Lastly, there is only one other F/SF writer whose praises I sing as loudly as yours, and that is Gene Wolfe. What are your thoughts on his writing? Or, to be a little less vague, perhaps _The Book of the New Sun_ or even his newest, _The Knight_? Any amusing anecdotes from conventions, etc.?
Respectfully,
Syl
|
Yes, I saw Goodman's demonic side in "Barton Fink." Perhaps that would work for Angus. But I'm afraid that too much of his normal geniality would show through. Angus doesn't have a genial bone in his body. I've known Gene Wolfe for years. He's an interesting man; he's often treated me kindly; and his opinions are frequently enlightening. (07/30/2004) |
J C Bronsted: I have read of authors in the past (Tolkien first: I am sure the number of people he inspires to write is staggering; Yourself: also one of the top members of my list in inspiration to create for myself), and their journey to publication described (in every single case, in my experience) as seeking a Publisher. Once found, they speak of an Editor who helps them polish and revise still more. In my reading of this Gradual Interview, I have read many references of your interactions with various Editors (Lester Del Ray, et al), and only (within the last few days, in fact) two references to your Agent. Are Agents a perhaps "forgotten" part of the publishing process: condemned to be never mentioned in the story of publication? I do not doubt the necessity of having an Agent, but is this a recent trend in writing: a rise of middlemen who do work once relegated to the author himself? And is the difficulty of finding an Agent the same for that of finding an Editor and/or the Publishing House he works for/with? Are their concerns only parallel in judging incoming material, or do they seek the same thing? Are these questions perhaps beyond your ken or the purview of this interview? Have I misunderstood the industry?
My most sincere thanks for even reading this question. I cannot imagine how I would endure such a forum, and I hope those who submit continue to respect your generosity.
|
If I haven't mentioned my agent very often, it's because he hasn't been germane to this discussion--and because he doesn't particularly want the attention. But in fact he is both a good friend and an essential "player" in my career. I would be lost without him. For a number of reasons, several of which involve the changes in the publishing industry over the past 20-30 years. Back in the days when Lester del Rey gave me my "break," editors still read unsolicited manuscripts (the "slush pile," manuscripts submitted "over the transom"). But what I call the conglomoratization of modern publishing has put huge pressures on publishers, forcing them to change the way they do business. The vast and faceless corporations which now own virtually all of US publishering don't give a damn about books, or authors, or (God forbid) literature. They care about bucks. And they demand profits from their subsidiaries (only some of which are publishers) on a scale previously unknown in publishing. This has had two primary effects: 1) publishers are under tremendous pressure to produce bestsellers, and only bestsellers; and 2) publishers have been forced to dramatically reduce their costs of doing business. One result is that, as a general rule, the average editor today is doing the work that three editors did ten years ago, and five twenty years ago. (There are other results, but they aren't relevant at the moment.) He/she can't afford to put much time into editing; and he/she certainly can't afford to read unsolicited manuscripts. Therefore much of the work that editors used to do has been transferred to agents. An editor simply won't read a manuscript that doesn't come from an agent; and the agent had damn well better do a fair amount of editing before he ever shows the manuscript to an editor. My agent is vital to me because he has clout with editors (because he represents good books), and because he is a good editor. I'm confident that Putnams would not have agreed to publish "The Runes of the Earth" if my agent hadn't first worked long and hard on the manuscript with me. So yes, you need an agent. And no, no professional writer "forgets" about his/her agent. The role of the agent has become central to the life of the writer. (07/30/2004) |
Jonas Kyratzes: I have only a comment this time, not a question. I just finished reading your essay "Epic Fantasy in the Modern World" and I have to tell you that this is the first time that I have found an explanation of why fantasy is popular and why it is important that really hits the mark.
Thank you.
Jonas
|
Thanks! I guess my degrees in English literature were good for something after all. <grin> (07/30/2004) |