Don: Your comment the other night about "needing the ring more than Tolkien" has really had me thinking about Covenant and Joan and their relationship. Just as the state of the Land was mirrored in Covenant in First Chronicles, Joan's physical state reflected the plight of the Land in 2nd and now Last Chronicles. Is Joan connected to the Land simply because she and Covenant were married, or is there some deeper reason?
 |
Well of *course* there's "some deeper reason". <grin> But I hope you don't expect me to tell you what it is. I mean, aside from obvious things like: she has a white gold ring (the "mate" to Covenant's); and her "betrayal" of her marriage vows has left her vulnerable to the insidious seductions of Despite. However, I will say that if you're willing to stretch a point or three, you could conceivably think of her as Covenant's thematic doppleganger. (How come there's never an umlaut around when you need one?) (07/02/2007) |
Fatma El Sakhawy: Hi Mr. Donaldson,
I am an Muslim Arab egyptian Lady. I liked most of your stories in your book Reave the Just and other tales. especially the " The Djinn Who Watches Over the Accursed" and " the Woman who loved Pigs". In the first mentioned above I was wondering why your setting was in a place where Muslims reside? The story is full of lust, evilness and brutality.Is this your view of the Muslim world or it is just a setting that you chose because it fits the mood you wanted to convey which is a mood of mystery, mysticism and supernatural effects.
Thank you and waiting for your comment.
Mrs. Fatma El Sakhawy
|
Thanks for asking. "The Djinn Who Watches Over the Accursed" was inspired by its title. I encountered that phrase years (by which I mean decades <sigh>) ago in a translation of "The Arabian Nights," and it stuck with me. So naturally the resulting story required an Arabian (but not necessarily Muslim) setting and ambience. But the story does not in any sense reflect my "view of the Muslim world". As I keep saying, I'm not a polemicist: I don't write stories to reflect my views (positive or negative) about anything. I write stories in an effort to do them justice, not in an attempt to promote any of my (often half-baked) opinions. (07/02/2007) |
Michael from Santa Fe: I don't believe you've talked about this or that it is answered in the text but does the way a Sandgorgon answers a summons (by speaking it's name) similar in nature to the way that Ranyhyn can show up as soon as they are called? (If I remember correctly, Nom showed up pretty quick after Covenant spoke his name). Also, in summoning a Sandgorgon does INTENT factor into it, since it seems, especially with a name like "Nom", that it could accidentally be spoken (by a child, for example)?
|
I'm reluctant to compare the two (Sandgorgons and Ranyhyn). On one side of the issue, I'm not confident that Nom would have been able to answer Covenant in WGW if Covenant hadn't first mastered the creature in TOT. After all, the primary purpose of Sandgorgons Doom is to keep the monsters in, not to let them out. And Kasreyn created Sandgorgons Doom. Is he powerful enough to cast a spell that would work planet-wide? On the other side, the Ranyhyn answer because they *choose* to do so. They've already selected their riders: they don't respond to just any old whistle. In contrast, the Sandgorgons answer because they're *compelled* to do so. That sounds like a very different kind of magic to me. (07/02/2007) |
RLY: Which would you rather have, if you had to choose between the two:
A. A book that is reviewed well, but is not appreciated by fans (and therefore has luckluster sales)
OR
B. A book appreciated by fans that sells well, but reviewers and critics do not like.
|
This one's a no-brainer (B)--but not for what may appear to be the obvious reason ("I want to be rich and famous"). No, the reason is that reviewers and critics aren't relevant to what I do. At their best, reviews and criticism exist to inform and educate readers, not to gratify (or denigrate) writers. At their worst, reviewers and critics (like the worst writers) are only interested in their own egos. Of course, I have an ego myself: I hate getting bad reviews. But I know better than to take such things seriously. As a storyteller, *my* relationship is with my readers, not with reviewers and critics. (07/02/2007) |
Robert K Murnick: Sir,
I read 'Lord Foul's Bane" at the tender age of 12. Now, nearly 30 years later, I've completed it again, and am surprised at how much my pre-teenage mind didn't catch from the first novel. (E.g., when Covenant thinks "What do you do for an encore Foul, rape children?” my 12 year-old mind hadn't seen Lena (a 16 year old, practically an adult to a 12 year old) as a child. I also hadn't caught your nod to Tolkien's Gollum in the “Kiril Threndor" chapter.) But now, many things are becoming clear. One observation I made as a 12 year old was that most characters born in the Land ("Atiaran", "Trell", "Mhoram", etc...) had names that were unheard of in the Western world. One exception was Kevin - why did Donaldson give his great tragic patriarch a real Gaelic name? I saw a small connection for the Western name exceptions of Lena and Elena - these are women for whom Covenant forms or has a bond with (albeit in a vile way) on an instinctive level. But what could explain the use of "Kevin"? It was beyond me as a 12 year old.
But at last I've finally figured it out!
You based him on the "Cousin Kevin" character from The Who's "Tommy", didn't you? Oh, it's so obvious now. ("Cousin Kevin" lyrics link: http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Cousin-Kevin-lyrics-The-Who/798D15D045B6C23048256977002D1A3D) The parallels are legion - just look:
Kevin Landwaster Cousin Kevin
1) Causes big trouble Causes big trouble
for handicapped for handicapped
Thomas Covenant. Tommy.
2) Hides 7 Wards of Hides for 7 days (a
Knowledge, requiring week), requiring Tommy
an inordinate amount to search for that
of seeking time. long, an inordinate
amount of seeking
time.
3) His actions Shuts Tommy outside to
eventually force catch cold in the rain
Thomas Covenant to so he'd die.
walk for days in the
cold rain
(“Treacher’s
Gorge”), paralyzing
him like the rigor
of death.
4) His actions Sticks pins in Tommy's
eventually bring fingers, causing pain.
Thomas Covenant to
the Land, where the
nerves in his fingers
are restored, so that
they can feel pain.
5) His actions Pushes Tommy down from
eventually cause the top of the stairs.
Thomas Covenant to be
pushed down into a
crevice by an ur-vile
("Kiril Threndor").
And of course it doesn't end there - Thomas Covenant fathered a son called Roger, just as The Who's "Tommy" fathered lead singer Roger Daltrey's Hollywood debut! I've figured you out! Ha ha ha ha ha! I of course, won't be surprised when we learn in "The Last Dark" that Lord Foul is actually Uncle Ernie! Think on that, and be dismayed!
|
I'm posting this because you obviously put so much thought into it. But since my familiarity with "Tommy" pretty much begins and ends with the information that a band called The Who did actually exist at some point in recent decades, I would be reluctant--personally--to draw any conclusions based on the evidence you cite. (07/03/2007) |
Jason D. Wittman: Mr. Donaldson,
First question: have you ever contemplated having your books adapted into operas? In my opinion, The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant are not Hollywood-friendly (no offense), and the results of some movie adaptations can be frightening (witness the SciFi Channel Miniseries "Earthsea," in which Snidely Whiplash somehow became king of the Kargad Lands). I think the Chronicles would work much better as an opera. (I think the same of LOTR, though the libretto would have to be written in Elvish in order to prevent the Nazgul from singing "Kill the hobb-it, Kill the Hobb-it, Kill the HOBB-it" to Wagner's "Flight of the Valkyries.") Would you be open to this, assuming an appropriate level of talent?
And now my second question: you've often spoken of binary inspirations (unbelief and leprosy for the Chronicles, Angus Thermopyle and Richard Wagner for the Gap Series). Was there a similar inspiration for the Mordant's Need duology? (I've searched through the GI, and found nothing regarding this.)
Keep Writing!
Jason
|
I'm not sure how to answer. "Have you ever contemplated having your books adapted into operas?" This seems to imply that it's somehow up to me; that I could *choose* to have my books adapted into operas if I so desired. But as far as I can tell, it *isn't* up to me: I don't hold the rights (my publisher does); and I can't compose music. But would I object if a composer wanted to make an opera out of, say, the "Covenant" books? Keeping in mind that I don't hold the rights: no, I wouldn't object. I don't believe in stifling other people's creativity. (I *do* believe that someone who wants to earn money by making use of my work should pay me--and my publisher--for the opportunity. But that's a very different issue.) In the abstract, however, I suspect that a "Covenant" opera is not a viable concept. Opera is a *slow* form of storytelling: singing--and musical stage setting--take up so much time that the story itself has to be as "short and sweet" as possible. Like LOTR, the "Covenant" books contain too many characters, too many events, too many settings, too many different kinds of conflict: an opera that did justice to even one volume would have to be dozens of hours long. "Mordant's Need" did not have the same kind of binary inspiration that I've described for "Covenant" and the GAP books. But there is more than one kind of implicit duality in the lines from "Silverlock" that inspired the story; so if you tilt your head to the left and squint real hard...you can almost see something binary. (07/03/2007) |
Andrew Roy: Dear Stephen,
Throughout these gradual interview posts, I've noted many criticisms of your work. I admire the way you handle criticisms and assure you I'm not criticizing, but admiring your work.
So, Fatal Revenant's countdown for release is on and I couldn't be happier. Two more after that and I complete a fantastic journey that I had started in my youth.
My question is this: What comes next? I've followed Thomas Covenant on all his journeys, watched the demise of Holt Fasner in my mind's eye and enjoyed many other great tales that you've woven throughout the years.
My hope is that you'll revisit the fabulous universe that you created for the Gap series - a place where Angus Thermopyle runs free. I fear that you won't revisit that realm as you often reference it as being *out of your comfort zone*. Stephen, I feel it was some of your best work.
As a side question, Hile Troy's fate was a bit of a foreshadowing of Covenant's own - both realised in essence that they were dead back 'in the real world' and took an stand and defeated Foul. One of the principle differences is perhaps that Hile Troy was still technically 'alive' if we believe his origins. (I always pictured him in a coma after escaping the burning building.)
Knowing that you've written that his origins are enigmatic (no proof that Hile Troy is from 'the real world'), was Troy's fate meant as foreshadowing?
|
As I keep saying, I don't plan my writing life ahead. I concentrate on the story at hand and let the future take care of itself. But at this point I certainly don't have ideas that might follow on from--or precede--the GAP books. It's a little difficult to argue that "Troy's fate was meant as foreshadowing" of Covenant's since when I wrote the first "Covenant" books I had no intention of continuing the story in any form. The whole idea of foreshadowing is to hint at what will happen later--and I had no idea that ANYthing was going to happen. Still, I take it as a compliment that the themes of the "Covenant" books are consistent enough to suggest the foreshadowing you describe. (07/09/2007) |
Kevin: Mr Donaldson,
In The One Tree, when the Quest first encounters the Elohim, Daphin greets them with the lines, "You are the Sun-Sage. / You are not."
I cannot help but believe that this is very significant, by the simple fact of its inclusion in your story. The Elohim, whose "vision does not lie", were somehow misinformed, and surprised at finding themselves so; they had to do some quick thinking to put a plan together. But I cannot figure out what overarching purpose this detail in the story serves, what subsequent events in the narrative depend on it.
I've come to conclude that must be be a clue to the Elohim's character, that it is representative of something that they lack. (And which Covenant and Linden ultimately do not.)
Am I on the write track? Can you elaborate on this point?
|
First things first. The statment, "You are the Sun-Sage," is addressed to Linden. "You are not" is addressed to Covenant. Of *course* this is significant. Everything the Elohim do from this point in the story on revolves around the fact that the Sun-Sage and the white gold wielder are not the same person (who from their perspective should be Linden). If I haven't made that plain in the course of the story, I've done my job pretty badly. The question, as I see it, is not, "Why do the Elohim care which one of them is the Sun-Sage?" but rather, "Why didn't they already know?" Being so, well, Elohim and all. And I reply that the Elohim *could* have known, but that they're often too self-absorbed to pay much attention to events/characters/etc. in the larger world. If you really believe that you are "equal to all things," how much time are you actually going to spend studying the details? Hence the fact that the Elohim can be taken by surprise--on some subjects. (07/09/2007) |
Todd: Hi Steve,
Looking forward to October!
I recently heard a Pulitzer prize winning author say that every sentence they write is difficult, and if they didn't feel compelled to write they would do be doing something else with their lives as opposed to this (my words) sadistic torture.
Do you ever have that experience when writing? Do find yourself struggling with certain passages? Are some easier than others? Say, Covenant talking to his dead vs. Lord Mhoram's Victory. If you do find yourself struggling or floundering, how do you get past it?
And if you didn't feel compelled to tell stories, what do you imagine you would be doing?
As always,
Thanks
|
I would never call writing "sadistic torture". But I do find it arduous. I'm not a fluent writer. Prose seldom flows for me until I've spent a certain amount of time lashing the words along. Especially at the beginning(s). The beginning of a book. The beginning of the day. The beginning--or re-beginning--of work after a significant interruption or vacation. Part of the problem is that the "muscles" (mental, emotional, imaginative) I use to write get out of shape easily--and resist getting back into shape. And part of the problem (as I've explained elsewhere) is that decision-making is much more complex and ambiguous at the beginning than it is later on. Inevitably some passages are easier to write than others. Often this seems to be more a function of biorhythms than of content: in every area of my life, some days I'm better at what I'm doing than others. But once I'm well into a story, the, well, let's call it the adrenalin level of what I'm describing is sometimes reflected in the fluency with which I describe it. Other times not. (Although I do seem to consistently enjoy writing arguments. <rueful smile>) My response to "struggling or floundering" depends on what's causing the problem. Broadly speaking, however, I believe that it's better to write ANYthing than to abandon the struggle. I like to say that every day I give myself permission to write badly. If what I write *is* bad, I can revise until I get it right. But if I let myself stop just because writing is hard, I risk enduring paralysis. Since I don't distinguish between storytelling and thought (therefore writing stories down is just a more concentrated or sustained form of thought), I imagine that the only viable alternative to storytelling is death. (07/11/2007) |
David Wiles: Steve;Do you find it difficult to contemplate the ending of a story? As you have stated throughout the GI, each of your characters are a part of your imagination. With so much coming from within on such a grand scale, it must be like letting go on a loved one. Do you ever look back and say I wish it could have been different for that protagonist? I am reminded of Pieten or Trell. Thanks, David
|
No. I have the opposite problem. Because my stories tend to be so *long*--and because the ending is my *reason* for telling the story--I find it difficult not to RUSH as I near the ending. In addition, ending a book involves a whole lot less "letting go" than you might think. First there's rewriting. Followed (usually) by more rewriting. Then there's editorial feedback and more rewriting. Then there's copyediting. And proofreading. And jacket copy. And book tours. In practice, books never seem to end: they just dribble away by ever more mundane and mechanical stages. Even after I've completed all of the work on an entire epic, I often have to wait for years to get that feeling of "letting go"--and by then it can only be a relief. As I've said before, there is one character who--in my personal opinion--deserved a better author than he/she got: Morn Hyland's son, Davies. But do I ever wish that the story could have been different for any of its characters? Never. That would imply that I wish I had written a different story--but the ending of the story (how everything turns out for everyone) is why I told the story in the first place. To regret the workings of my own imagination would be a form of suicide. (07/11/2007) |
Robert Cordo: Stephen,
Will there be any hardback special editions (US & UK) of "Fatal Revenant" as was done for "Runes.."?
E.g., I have the slipcase, signed, numbered UK "Runes..".
Thank you!
|
Gollancz released a "collector's limited edition" of "The Runes of the Earth" in the UK. All of their efforts with/for "Runes" were highly successful; so I assume that they will also produce a collector's limited edition of "Fatal Revenant". There was no collector's edition of "Runes" in the US, limited or otherwise. I don't expect to see anything of the sort for any of "The Last Chronicles". At least not from Putnams: they aren't making enough money to justify the added expense. (07/11/2007) |
John Gauker: Hello again Mr Donaldson. I am including a link to an artical that you and your readers may find interesting. I am currently re-reading the Gap series and it made me think of the Amnion and they way you created their technology.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=4SHVMBW02V3FNQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/28/nlife128.xml
Were you aware of any type of this research when you wrote the Gap series?
|
This is fascinating stuff. But of course I was completely unaware of it when I wrote the GAP books 10+ years ago. (07/12/2007) |
Russell Smith: Hi Stephen,
I was interested to read your various postings about the publishing process. Particularly that pre-order figure in first day sales. My copy of Fatal Revenant is now on pre-order.
I imagine internet pre-orders are more prevalent than they may have been through book stores (I am guessing here), mostly because it is so easy. Do you, or your publishers, get access to pre sales figures in the same way they do post publication sales.
Looking forward to Fatal Revenant. I have so far resisted the temptation to read the teaser posted on your front page.
Regards,
Russell Smith
|
Like you, I suspect that Internet pre-orders have become much more common than pre-orders through bookstores. But I don't know whether or not my publishers have access to any pre-order information. *I* certainly don't. For reasons that I've tried to explain elsewhere ("returns" etc.), publishers are reluctant to give out concrete information about sales until long after a book has been published. (07/12/2007) |
Kevin OFlaherty: Mr. Donaldson.
I must say I'm impressed. I recently completed my (first) read of the GAP sequence. This non-stop angstfest is definitely the best story I've read lately (possibly ever), so I decided to have a look at what such a great writer was up to next. While googling your name I never imagined finding such a wonderful thing as the GI.
My question is a follow up on the comments you've made that you try to mentally *become* your POV characters while writing. Do you ever find that your characters rebel, or take over? Considering you write toward an ending, do you ever find the characters "want" to go someplace else? Or are their actions predetermined because of their roles in the story?
Thank you, and good luck with all things!
/Kevin
PS. Years ago, when I'd just discovered fantasy, I was given the first chronicles of TC (guess why). They didn't really take, mostly because I think much was lost in the translation to Swedish. What did take, however, was the need to regularly check my fingertips for feeling: "Okay, so my nerves haven't decayed. I'm not leprous. Whew!" This is not a nice thing to do to a young impressionable hypocondriac! I'm just glad I won't catch gap sickness. <grin>
|
Surely I've been over this? Or perhaps not. I have as much trouble searching the GI as anyone else. <sigh> I have (often?) had characters who were originally intended as "background" (necessary to facilitate a particular scene, but unimportant in the larger story) step forward--in a manner of speaking--and demand that I pay more attention to them. (In the GAP books, Liete Corregio would be an example of this.) In that sense, my characters do sometimes "rebel". But "rebel" isn't really the right word because they never (and I do mean never) strive "to go someplace else" or "take over". Rather they step forward and demand my attention because they have something positive to contribute to the ending toward which I write. I can't explain this: it's an unconscious function of my imagination. I can only tell you that all of my various minds (conscious, unconscious, subconscious, preconscious, whatever) consistently work together toward a common goal. At least where storytelling is concerned. <rueful smile> (Incidentally, I like "angstfest". That describes the GAP books pretty well. Some of my friends think it describes my *life*.) (07/12/2007) |
Fatma El Sakhawy : Hello again Mr Donaldson,
In your selection of " Reave The Unjust And Others", I have realized that you appreciate wommen's characters. In most selections in this book, I have seen that the roles women have played were more positive and constructive. they are good decision makers, take difficult decisive steps are more consciencious. Is this true? If yes,Why and if no, how then do you perceieve them and what do you think are their worst qualities.
Thank You,
Fatma
|
It would be difficult to deny that I'm drawn to "strong" female characters--and that, taken as a group, my women are (much?) less often "destructive" than my men. But why this is true--ah, well, I can only speculate. (After all, I don't tell my imagination what to do. I just do what it tells *me* to do.) Maybe it's because I grew up in a missionary culture which explicitly considered women morally superior to men? Maybe it's because I was raised in a house full of sisters? Maybe it's because I've been told until I'm ready to scream that men are incapable of understanding women, so naturally I want to prove that's not true? Maybe I find it easier to believe in strong women because I know too many weak men? All of the above? None? This is only one of several reasons why I believe that the characteristics and convictions of the writer are (or should be) irrelevant to storytelling. The human imagination is a mystery. Therefore trying to understand how (or why) a particular imagination works isn't a very useful basis on which to read or interpret a story produced by that imagination. (07/12/2007) |
Robert: Have any of your books gone out already signed to stores, like a random signature sitting in a Wal-Mart store?
|
Yep. After all, I signed 7500 tip-in sheets for "The Runes of the Earth". Those books had to go SOMEwhere. They could easily have turned up in rather random locations--not excluding remainder bins. (07/12/2007) |
Matt: Three random questions, for fun:
1. Amok mentions in the Illearth War that he had visited the Elohim and "ridden Sandgorgons". The mention of these exotic-sounding adventures give Amok flavor, but at that point in the writing process, did you already have in the back of your mind an idea of what Elohim and Sandgorgons were like? (The logical followup: what about trading apothegms with the Great Desert, and teasing brave what's his name in his grave?)
2. Mirror of her dreams/Man rides through: 4 books, each precisely 13 chapters, 52 in all. Like a deck of cards. Coincidence?
3. Chaos and order: Nick's last word(s) were "Morn--God--". Can we read anything into this, in light of all the god references/ring-cycle references? Is Morn a god or a mortal? Similarly, my literal mind has always thought that Angus was the "dark and hungry god" from book three...but if on this day, all gods die, why ain't angus among the casualty list? (By the way, it's cool that Warden Dios=Guardian God)
Thanks for your time!
Keep up the good work!
|
Well, since they're just for fun.... 1) No. As I keep saying, while I was working on the first "Covenant" trilogy, I had no intention of writing any more "Chronicles". And--as I also keep saying--I'm an efficient writer in the sense that I only invent what I need. Everything you mention about Amok was intended to shed light on the character--and to suggest the presence of a larger world beyond the Land. At the time, I didn't go beyond what I actually wrote. (Later, of course, what I had written proved to be very useful. But that's a different issue.) 2) Pure coincidence. I strive for symmetry when I can. And I do like to work in four movement structures (although I can't explain why). But I had no intention of making "Mordant's Need" resemble a deck of cards. Card games aren't germane to the story. If I had been thinking of, say, bridge instead of "hop-board," the whole story would have been very different. 3) You can't take these "God" references too literally. They are intentional. They are intended to have significance. But they are more easily understood in reference to my source materials, which include an entire pantheon of gods: Wotan, Donner, Fricka (recognize anything yet?), Freia, Loge, the Norns--not to mention Fafner. (It's not an accident that Fafner's possession of the Rhinegold makes him effectively a god.) So sure, Morn belongs in the GAP pantheon of gods. As do Dios, Fasner, Donner, Lebwohl, Angus, Norna, etc.. If you think in those terms, you may have an easier time with the titles. (07/13/2007) |
Charles W. Adams: You have stated previously that the idea for the 3rd chronicles came at the same time you came up with the idea for the second chronicles (at least, that's what I understood). Also, you have said that you work backwords, that you have to see the end and then work towards that end.
Did you have to come up with the ending for the 3rd chronicles in order for you to "get to" the ending of the 2nd chronicles? Or were they separate enough such that you could write the 2nd without knowing much of the 3rd (except for the ending)?
Thanks.
|
In this specific case, the ending for "The Second Chronicles" came first. But that inspiration led me *immediately* to the ending of "The Last Chronicles": a rush rather like an avalanche of ideas. Or a syllogism. I didn't experience a pause between "if this" and "then that". If you see what I mean. Certainly my knowledge of "The Last Chronicles" was sufficient to let me build all of the loopholes and loose ends that I would eventually need into "The Second Chronicles". (07/25/2007) |
Nathan Eddy: Mr. Donaldson,
In a couple writer’s quides, I’ve read that an author seeking publication should be able to sum up his book with a sentence or two. An aspiring novelist should have a “pitch” version handy that can be given easily in a conversation with agents or editors at a writer’s conference, for instance. This makes sense to me for marketing and networking purposes, but also as an exercise for a writer to sharpen his focus while creating a long and complicated work.
Just for fun . . . how would you describe the Chronicles in one sentence per book? (Feel free to include those not published. In fact, I encourage you to do so!)
In the process of creating your first drafts, do you use summaries or outlines to help you retain your focus on your larger narrative goals? Or is knowing the end enough? At the very least, do you have a one-sentence “mantra” you remember to keep you on the path? I want to know how you keep that “laser” of yours aimed at the conclusion (the one you used to describe sentences in the Gap Cycle).
Besides keeping an eye on the goal, I assume a writer has to keep an eye on where he’s already been, too. While writing, do you create (for example) separate Word files to record what the text has explicitly revealed thus far on specific, developing topics? Or do you just rely on rereads and revision to catch instances of over-repetition and underdevelopment?
|
It's implicit in some of my other responses, I think, that I'm suspicious of anything that purports to tell a writer how to go about writing and/or getting published. For example: "an author seeking publication should be able to sum up his book with a sentence or two." This sounds like egregious nonsense to me. I've never done such a thing myself--and never will (I won't even supply my publishers with outlines). In fact, I don't think I've ever known a published author who has ever done such a thing. (I could be wrong, of course: of the, say, 150 professional writers I've met, I've only had real conversations with maybe 50-60.) Nor have I ever met an editor whose interest could be seriously engaged (or discouraged) by nothing more than a sentence or two. Instinctively I believe that any novel that *can* be summed up in a sentence or two isn't worth reading. Such mechanistic, simplistic thinking seems more characteristic of Hollywood than of publishing. And yet--and yet-- "It takes all kinds." Surely there are good and intelligent writers out there who actually *can* summarize their books in a sentence or two. The fact that I don't know who they are doesn't mean that they don't exist. And maybe some editors and/or agents listen to such sentences. Again, the fact that I don't know who they are etc.. My underlying point, however, is that "how-to" advice tends to be either useless or damaging, not because the advice is intended as such, but rather because creative imaginations are such ideosyncratic entities that they only thrive when they aren't being told what to do or how to do it. In my own (*very* ideosyncratic) experience, the only valuable advice is either wildly generalized (e.g. "the only way to write a book is to sit down and actually write it") or almost stupidly mundane (e.g. "no editor wants to read a handwritten manuscript"). Everything else has to be figured out on a case-by-case basis by the individual(s) involved. Maybe for you being able to sum up your book in a sentence or two is a good idea. *I* don't know--and the writers' guides you've read don't know either. In this context, I'm reluctant to say anything about how I go about writing books--or dealing with publishers. Now that I've explained the "how-to" fallacy, I don't want to make the same mistake myself. <rueful smile> But the "creative process" and "writing & publishing process" categories of the Gradual Interview already contain my answers to all of your other questions. But Just For Fun: The Runes of the Earth: "This is impossible." Fatal Revenant: "You thought *that* was impossible? Just take a look at *this*!" Against All Things Ending: "I'll never be a good enough writer to carry this off." The Last Dark: "God send that my readers won't be *too* disappointed." <grin> (07/25/2007) |
Jerry Erbe: WOW...I just want to go on record as saying that the questions posed recently by "Anonymous" regarding metanarrative's etc., had me more confused then I had ever hoped to be, that is, until I read your answer, upon which I realized how very little I understand about the world of literature. I often wonder if most readers are like me and just READ THE STORY AND THE WORDS ON THE PAGE and enjoy it for what it is? A STORY! But perhaps I'm the opposite of Anonymous and could be classified as a simpleton. However, having said ALL that, I believe you've educated the readers of the GI enough to understand that everyone's view and opinion of your work, regardless of how it may differ from others, is valid, and for that I thank you! Hope all is well in your world (How’s that Spaceport coming along?)
|
I actually feel more kinship with "Anonymous" than my response may have revealed. True, he/she was using terminology with which I'm unfamiliar. And true, I'm very tired of the kind of narrow-mindedness which often seems to afflict academic intellectuals (people who really ought to be able to distinguish between "reason" and "prejudice"). But like "Anonymous," I feel compelled to try to extract as much meaning as possible from what I read. We may use different words, and those words may reflect different modes of thought, but I suspect that our motivations are very similar. When I read, I'm always hoping that I'll find a good story. At least on the surface, that's what I want most. But in practice the process of looking for a good story (reading) cannot be separated from the quality of the writing, first because the writing is the door into the story (and you usually have to read a lot of the writing before you find out whether the story is any good or not), and second because every facet of a good story becomes more effective when it's well written. So I always have to consider the writing before I get far enough along to consider the story. Then, if I find a good story that's well written, the next thing I look for is, well, I'm going to call it "concentration" or "design," although it could be called by any number of other names (e.g. metanarrative?). Putting the issue very crudely: does the story sprawl, or does it focus? Does every element of the story contribute to its final effect? Or do some elements of the story distract me from or vitiate the final effect? Well, obviously, what I'm always hoping to find when I read is a good story that's well written and has intense concentration. (In this respect, my priorities when I read reflect my priorities when I write.) Which is the same thing *you* want, right? You may not have thought about your reading in these terms, but you understand what I'm talking about. (Otherwise you wouldn't be posting comments in the GI. <grin>) If you're with me so far, however, we only have to take one more step to understand what "Anonymous" is going on about. If I find a good story that well written and has intense concentration, then the *next* thing I want as a reader is to get the full benefit of everything the writer has offered me. Which is exactly what "Anonymous" is trying to do. His/her questions only *sound* confusing because there are so MANY possible approaches "to get the full benefit etc.." Some readers try to get the full benefit by understanding who the writer is as a person; or by understanding the time and culture which formed the writer. Others try to get the full benefit by searching for patterns within a particular story, or within the language of a particular story, or within the writer's whole body of work, or within literature in general. There are historical approaches, psychological approaches, thematic approaches, symbolic approaches, rhetorical approaches. The list goes on. But as far as I'm concerned, the *point* is always the same: to get as much as possible out of a story that I loved reading. Is that WAY more than you wanted to hear on the subject? <rueful smile> Too bad: I'm not about to hit the delete key at this point. <grin> (07/25/2007) |
Cagliostro: Dear Stephen,
As you have wandered into the wonderful world of answering fan questions, I'd like you to see what someone else who went through this had to say. I thank you for your attempts to answer the unanswerable, so I send this merely for your amusement, unless you want to post this as a deterrent to certain questions. It's from Douglas Adams. Enjoy!
-------------------
Subject: What kind of Apple Mac did Arthur Dent have?
Posted by Rick Tanner
I don't even know when he bought the machine, but it definately says in So Long and Thanks for all the Fish that he bought an Apple. Was it a snazzy little all in one number, or a hideous boxy thing?
Posted by Douglas Adams
I never know how to answer questions like this.
I hate to sound curmudgeonly, and I really don't mean to, but I am genuinely mystified as to what it is that people mean. I will try to explain why I'm so mystified, and if it sounds as if I am stating the very, very obvious then it's truly because I don't know what else to do.
The book is a work of fiction. It's a sequence of words arranged to unfold a story in a reader's mind. There is no such actual, real person as Arthur Dent. He has no existence outside the sequence of words designed to create an idea of this imaginary person in people's minds. There is no objective real world I am describing, or which I can enter, and pick up his computer, look at it and tell you what model it is, or turn it over and read off its serial number for you. It doesn't exist.
At the time I was writing the book I wrote that he had an Apple computer because writing those words helped to unfold the story I had to tell. If it had helped the story to say that it was a particular model, running a particular version of the system software then I would have done, but in fact I think it would have been a rather dull extension to the story and would have held up the narrative rather than furthered it. So I didn't put anything like into the story. With the result that the information doesn't exist. It's not that I chose not to reveal it - it actually, really and truly doesn't exist.
So what you're doing if you ask me what sort of computer Arthur Dent had is 'please would you make up a story for me which has to do with what sort of computer Arthur had'. So I have to start thinking in a story kind of a way. 'One day, Arthur Dent woke up and went and sat at his computer...' which makes me then ask myself - what did he want to do at his computer? Was he writing a letter to somebody? Was he going to play a game? The question of what what kind of computer it was still isn't asking to be part of the story. A story about how he chose his computer and why he chose the one he did would probably be very dull.
So you see the problem? "What kind of Apple Mac did Arthur Dent have?" is a completely unanswerable question. I like to think he's the kind of person who would have an Apple Mac, but at the same time it's a fairly meaningless statement, and to try and specify which model he had... it can't be done. He doesn't exist.
|
I'm posting this because a) I think it's worth reading for its own sake, b) it sheds some fascinating light on Douglas Adams, c) I actually found it rather moving, and d) as "Cagliostro" has recognized, it answers certain kinds of questions better than I have. (07/25/2007) |
Anonymous: Steve,
Do you have any rituals upon completion of a book? I know that though you have completed FR you still have several more to write,so in a sense you have not finnished... yet this must still be seen as some sort of end. Yes? One famous author whos books I can not remember - and yes, I am just that lazy to look it up on the internet - had the habbit of firing off a revolver and drinking a good bottle of liquor, I think. An unsettling combination to be sure. What do you do? A dance in front of the computer? Should pedestrains be weary of stray bullets coming from the Donaldson household upon completion of a novel? Might we hear one of your neighbors say with some sense of bewilderment, "Was that *Steve* running naked down the street? No, cant be!" Or something else entirely....?
Just Curious :)
|
No, no "book completion" rituals. As I think I've said elsewhere, books never actually seem to be completed--at least in my experience. They just slowly plod off into the distance. Doubtless I would be psychologically healthier if I had some sort of "ah HA" or "at LAST" ritual to achieve a sense of (inevitably artificial) closure. But instead I just start typing in my current revisions so that I can send a clean text to my personal readers. (07/25/2007) |
Michael from Santa Fe: When you first announced the new title for the third book of the Last Chronicles: "Against All Things Ending", something about it was familiar to me, but I couldn't quite place it. It's only been months later and quite by accident that I remembered what it was. It's similar to a line from Tolkien's "The Return of the King". At the end after Frodo and Sam (with help from Gollem) have destroyed the ring they believe they are going to die as Mt. Doom erupts. Frodo says something like: "...here at the end of all things...". It was even used in the movie, I believe. This is probably just a coincidence, but did that reference have anything to do with the new title?
|
If you looked hard enough, you could probably find dozens of examples of the phrase, "the end of all things." In any case, I certainly can't pretend that I haven't been influenced by LOTR. In fact, I considered calling Covenant 9 "Against the End of All Things". <sigh> All I can say in my own defense is that it wasn't a *conscious* influence. (07/25/2007) |
Der Stuttgarter: Well I've read through several hours of GI track, and with the recent announcment of the movie rights, I think it's time to re-invigorate the cast list parlo(u)r game.
A few I've had in my mind since FK.
Angus - Randal "Tex" Cobbs (if ever someone looked like a toad bloated with malice it's this guy.)
Hashi - John Lithgow (Just quirky enough to add something realy great to that part)
Koina - Julia Roberts
Holt - Lance Henricksen
Dolph - Charles S. Dutton Nick - I really like the suggestion Tom Cruise as he's generally considered gorgeous, and I hate him.
At first I was really excited about the rights being sold, now I'm getting scared; the story just won't be the same without some of those great Kodak moments between Milos and Angus.
Angus is the greatest fictional character I've ever read. My wife was pregnant at the time I was reading one or two of the GAP books, and I had convinced her to name the kid "Joshua." Probably best for everyone's psyche that she gave birth to a girl.
And the question: Do you have any mental music for the GAP sound track? I always heard "Policy of Truth" by DePeche Mode when envisioning either C&O or Dark and Hung as a film.
(obligatory fawning and flowery praise omitted to allow time savings for moderator. note that while not enumerated, it exists.)
|
I am deliberately refusing to play this game. Pure self protection: I don't want to get my hopes up; and even if GAP films are made (always unlikely at this stage), they can't really, well, tell the truth about the story. But don't let me stop you.... btw, I never hear sound tracks for my stories. I only hear voices and narration. (07/27/2007) |
Paul Higginbotham: Steve, I am also a writer but why do you have characters using the same $25 words as the narrator? For example, in the Runes of the Earth, on page 130 and others, the character uses the word puissant yet you, as the narrator use it too. It is distracting. However, I have read all your books and I always look forward to the next one.
|
Because as far as I'm concerned the language *is* the world. The language that I use to describe my characters and their setting has to be appropriate to who and what they are; so it follows logically that the characters themselves would use the same--or very similar--language. Under the right circumstances, a discrepancy between, say, the narration and the dialogue can be a powerful tool. As it happens, however, that tool doesn't suit my purposes. (07/27/2007) |
Thomas Cardin: Hello Steve! You have got to be the most brutal and vicious author I have read and I LOVE every word you write <big gracious smile>. Thank you for telling your stories to us and going through all the hard work involved in doing so.
With ROTE still fresh in my mind I can see that every intelligent question I have to ask MUST wait to be answered as the story continues to unfold.
Sure, I want to know how Covenant is currently experiencing "things" while integrated with the Arch of Time. He is certainly aware of LH soon after she returns to the Land, and he knows how to possess Anele when the poor old man is standing on the right kind of ground. It all just leads me to wonder what else he is aware of in the Land and through time. I assume he is still experiencing time in a linear fashion but I can see where the potential is there for him to experience things very differently, especially since he mentions being in two places at once. I am sure this is something you will clue us in on in due course if it is integral to the story.
On another note, I am greatly disturbed by Esmer, I don't like him, nope not a bit. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. We have plenty of embodiments of Earthpower, Esmer seems to be the first being to embody Wild Magic. Certainly LH can't do Wild Magic while he is near so he has "something" to do with the forces involved. His duality of being sure seems to be more trouble to our heroes than its worth. Don't get me wrong, he is a wonderfully chaotic plot device, but I sure hope someone is around when he shows up again that can put a bullet in his head. If he is already so full of despair that there has got to be ravers waiting in line to possess him <ok one raver, the second is busy with Joan, my god he has to be pissed at Foul for that kind of ---- detail and the third is currently presumed dead>.
So if Foul has gotten a lot smarter with old age, there must be some restriction on him from manipulating Esmer to "take an axe to the Land lines" and free him.
Thank you in advance for your time spent reading this.
|
You're right: this all falls under the heading of RAFO. I can only promise that I will do my utmost to make this story as satisfying as possible. (07/27/2007) |
Paul S.: My question is about the Words of Power -- was your intention to hint that there may in fact be an entire "language of power" that might exist (of which perhaps the old lords had only discovered/translated 7)? Perhaps the "words of power" are actually the native language of something more powerful (like Lord Foul and The Creator)?
However, since you've said that you are both not a linguist and only invent what you need for the story... maybe the answer is simply that you liked the number seven and those seven words were all you needed for the story you were telling?
Thanks for the time!
Paul S.
|
It's true that I'm human. Therefore I make mistakes. Accidents happen. Nonetheless it strains credulity to think that I announced (over and over again) that there are 7 Words--and then only bothered to invent 6 because 7 was too much work. No, I consider it far more likely that the author is positively begging his readers to draw inferences. Of course, one has to be cautious in these situations. I've observed on more than one occasion in this interview that "hinting at more than is actually revealed" is one of my many world-building techniques. But still.... (07/27/2007) |
Perry Bell: Hello Stephen,
Are you slated for the best seller list yet? My pre-order is in. :)
Anyway, I was wondering, is there a reason Linden seems so much, how shall I say, weaker (?) than she was at the end of the second chronicles? It seems like she isn't dogged by the past as much, but she seems very dependant on others. Just curious.
Thank you for all you do,
Perry Bell
Reno, Nevada.
|
Interesting. Other readers have had the opposite reaction. In fact, one described Linden as "large and in charge." Another went so far as to express disapproval because Linden acts "too much like a man." Covenant himself never took a step in the Land that wasn't dependent on someone else. The only difference that is obvious to me is this: Linden is *very* aware of--and frustrated by--her dependence on other people. (Other differences may be more obvious to readers who are not as intimately involved with Linden as I am.) Her obsessive desire to DO SOMETHING about Jeremiah's plight makes it difficult for her to accept her imposed reliance upon other people's needs, agendas, knowledge, guidance, whatever. I hope I don't have to point out that "dependence" is thematically germane to "The Last Chronicles"--and in fact to *all* of the "Chronicles". <grin> (07/27/2007) |
Fatma El Sakhawy : Hi Mr. Stephen R. Donaldson,
Thank you very much for your answers to 2 of my three questions. Again, your stories triggered a lot of feelings and thoughts inside of me. I do thank you for that as well. I hope that I could find your novels in Egypt, but unfortunately I haven't found them until now.
My question is : In " The Woman Who loved Pigs" ,the end was so bewidering to me. I saw that the woman's choice was rational , but difficult. She chose her freedom and dignity and refused fake love. However, was it really fake love? didn't that love teach her to choose at the end her path in life? I find that it is difficult to go back to that kind of life she used to live and that if she really had the ability to choose that end, she could have kept that love ; It is very difficult to live without love. These are only some of the thoughts and feelings this story triggered in me. Again, I would like to know why you did choose that end ? I think that woman chose the difficult path and she didn't acheive her freedom because she is the slave of her own weaknesses.
Thank You,
Fatma El Sakhawy
|
I admit that the ending of "The Woman Who Loved Pigs" is deliberately ambiguous, although I did not intend it to be obscure. Fern has been given a precious gift, but she has also been unscrupulously manipulated. The warlock who transformed her has a history of sacrificing other people to his own desires, but in the process of transforming her he may have learned to care for Fern. The warlock's life is forfeit for crimes he actually did commit. Did Fern "rescue" him by the only means available to her? Did she "imprison" him because he had taught her to be as unscrupulous as he was? Is he safe at last, or is everyone else now safe from him? Did she love him, or did she only love the mind and magic that he had given her? The story asks the reader to arrive at his/her own conclusions; conclusions which will of necessity be based on his/her perception of Fern's character. One thing is clear (at least to me). Fern did not "go back to the kind of life she used to live." Instead she is pretending to live her former life in order to protect the secret of what she has gained. That secret may be the warlock's life, or the warlock's love, or the warlock's power; but whatever it is, the warlock's enemies (Prince Chorl etc.) will almost certainly take it from her if they know she has it. I suppose you could argue that Fern has become a kind of "slave". If so, however, I suspect that she is enslaved by her strengths rather than by her weaknesses. This probably doesn't shed any light. But it is the nature of this story to be ambiguous. I couldn't have written it any other way. (07/27/2007) |
Paul: Will the audiobook version of book 2 of the last chronicles of thomas covenant be released at the same time as the hardcover? And will scott brick read it? Can I buy it from audible.com?
|
Several readers have asked about an audio version of "Fatal Revenant". I'm in an unfamiliar position here. The editor who bought "The Last Chronicles" for Putnams no longer works there, so the editorial responsibilities for dealing with me were transferred to Susan Allison at Berkeley/Ace. That's been a very good thing--as far as it goes. The problem is that she doesn't actually work for the company publishing "Fatal Revenant," so she isn't automatically involved in Putnams' decisions about, say, whether or not to release an audio version. The result is that she often can't answer practical questions like this one easily. In addition, she doesn't have ready access to important details like, How well did the audio version of "The Runes of the Earth" sell? And if she doesn't know, I don't know. I'll pass this question on to her. When she's able to get an answer for me--which might take a while--I'll post the information in the "news" section of this site. Sorry I can't do better. Life is full of strange quirks. (07/31/2007) |