Ethan : Dear soon to be Doctor Donaldson.
I was thinking recently about the way space travel is presented in the Gap cycle. It’s very “nuts and bolts.” The human element is very clear in the way you describe how ships fly and work. I always got the impression that there was a lot of reality in the world compared to other science fiction. However, in popular science fiction today, on T.V and in movies, and in books too, space travel is often depicted in the space opera mode. Sort of like pirates and swashbuckling in space. The whole “nuts and bolts” science fiction seems to have lost its appeal. Trying to explain something in sci-fi is now just a bunch of technobabel followed by a simply analogy. I guess my question is, have you, being on the “inside” noticed a push by publishers to get more of the Star Wars style space adventure and less of the more down to earth “nuts and bolts” style?
If so, do you think that might change anytime soon?
 |
Since my background in science is effectively nil, I'm pleased that you found my descriptions of space travel realistic. I credit a fortuitious visit to the Johnson Space Center in Houston, where I was given the opportunity to climb around in a mock-up of a space station, sit in the cockpit of a training module, and hear explanations on a wide variety of subjects. "Hard" (nuts and bolts) SF typically attracts a smaller audience than space opera--or fantasy. With the general decline in US publishing, hard SF has been suffering. But then, so has everything else. Meanwhile, publishers still love a good story. The hardest AND most enjoyable SF I've read recently is by Chris Moriarty. Check out "Spin State" and (slightly less enjoyable, but still terrific) "Spin Control". (09/06/2008) |
DrPaul: Dear Stephen,
A counterfactual question. If Covenant, or the First, or Cail had acceded to Honninscrave's last wish and killed him whilst he contained samadhi Sheol, would the Raver have been rent, as it was by Nom in the actual narrative? If so, what would have become of the shreds of the Raver? Would a cloud of spiteful little Raverlettes have drifted around Revelstone to infect and corrupt its post-Clave inhabitants?
A more general question about the Ravers and their relationship to Lord Foul. It's clear that LF holds an underlying contempt for his servants/chattel/dupes (as evidenced by his wholesale expending of their lives in pursuit of his strategies), and it seems logical to conclude that this contempt extends to the Ravers. Have the Ravers worked this out for themselves? If so, would they be capable of deciding, on the basis of rational self-interest, to disobey LF's orders if following them placed them in a situation where they ran the risk of rending or some other threat to their existence?
|
Since your first question falls WAY outside the text, my answer is pure speculation. But I suspect that Covenant or the First or Cail would simply have been possessed in turn by the Raver; and the whole dilemma would continue. Nom is a very different *kind* of being than the characters you cite. One of the attractions--and potential weaknesses--of fantasy is that it allows the storyteller to write about "pure" characters, characters without the usual mix of conflicting thoughts and emotions. Archetypal characters. The Ranyhyn, for example; or the Sandgorgons; or the Bloodguard and Saltheart Foamfollower early in the first trilogy. Well, I've always thought of the Ravers as "pure" minions: thinking beings so completely subsumed by Lord Foul that they no longer have any independent reality. And while we're on the subject: what have the Ravers *ever* done that could be justified by "rational self-interest"? (09/06/2008) |
Robert Bush: How long did you think about the land, before you wrote the first word of the actual story.
|
3 1/2 months of intensive, full-time concentration. I was young, undistracted, and excited to the point of ecstasy. (09/06/2008) |
Suzanne Gillies: Hi Stephen,
I've always wanted to ask you how you mentally prepare for writing The Chronicles. Not only before, but during and after. From the first word of every book the emotions that come to my mind are dread, and an extreme sadness. I wonder what you must go through to complete your works and I wanted to thank you for all your enduring hours of emotions put forth in each chapter. I also am an artist (musician and actress) and wrote a journal of my life spanning 10 years. I honestly haven't read it since I wrote the last chapter as I don't want to bring back all of those memories. I just wanted to thank you for sharing with us all of your talent and for some reason I wonder if you really have become Thomas, in a sense? How can you not be after all these years.
Thank you,
Suzanne
|
How I "mentally prepare" is one of those how-do-you-do-what-you-do questions that I can never answer. All I can tell you is that pressure builds up inside me until I simply have to get going on the story. But what is the "pressure"? It feels like anxiety. Maybe I'm afraid that I'll cease to exist if I don't do the work I was born to do? I suppose that's possible. It's certainly true that writing these books (*any* books) takes a great deal out of me. But the draining effect is counterbalanced by an obscure form of excitement (it sure wouldn't *look* like excitement to an outside observer), and by a--I'm not sure what to call it--a sense of "fitness"; of doing what I'm supposed to do with my life. Have I "become Thomas" in the process? Not a chance. I've written too many other books--and too many other points of view--for any one character to dominate my identity. (09/08/2008) |
Ryan Harkins: I have a quick question about how you approach the revision process. Of the authors I've read who comment about writing, most advise separating the writing and revising process, and only one (the late James Rigney) saying he revised as he wrote.
I've found that I'm not the type of writer who can revise as I write--I tend to be a faster destroyer than creator--but once I pound out a first draft, I flounder trying to revise. Part of the problem is that I see a passage that needs reworking, but in order to rework it, I'll have to also make substantial changes to the next X paragraphs, pages, chapters, so on, and the task of such tweaking is daunting. I think part of the problem is the worry of breaking the draft I have in front of me.
As an attempted solution, I'm trying a method in which I retype the whole story and incorporate the changes as I type. In some places, I'm writing the whole scene completely anew, and others I'm just copying off the old draft.
So specifically, how exactly do you revise? I found an old post from 2004 stating that you only type the manuscript once and then just type in the changes, but then I'm curious as to how you tally your daily page count (I believe you said something like 3-4 pages/day on first draft, 5-6 on a revision).
Anyway, thank you for such great stories, and thanks for the GI. If not for it, and all the questions that piqued my curiosity, I would never have attempted the GAP series or the Man Who mysteries, and I loved them.
|
As I've often said, there are no right answers to such questions. Every writer has to find his/her own path. I know writers who revise as they go. I can't do that because all that second-guessing would paralyse me; and I'm absolutely dependent on a sense of forward momentum. I also know writers who simply retype the entire book whenever they feel something needs to change. I can't do that because I'm such a ^@$^&#% slow--not to mention inaccurate--typist. So I put the whole book on paper, and then I work my way back through it sentence by sentence until I reach the end again. Of course, problems often have snowball effects, so a change in one place necessitates dozens of changes elsewhere. And the reverse is often true: a problem that appears on, say, page 521 may be incurable without changes to 411, 386, 305, and 253 (a sort of reverse engineering). But I say (speaking purely and solely for myself): so what? Such challenges--if I may be permitted to mix my metaphors--are just part of the cost of doing business. I simply take notes on my changes, and work backward as well as forward as needed, until I reach the end of both my notes and the book. I'm not sure why tallying a daily page count matters, except as an attempt to convince ourselves that we're actually making progress. Knowing how many pages I've written in a day is easy (especially when you consider that I print out hardcopy obsessively). Knowing how many pages I've revised in a day is easy because I have the hardcopy right in front of me. (I used to do all my revisions longhand on paper. But now I flip back and forth almost randomly between looking at paper and looking at the computer screen. Some problems are more easily solved one way, some the other.) (09/08/2008) |
Anonymous: Mr. Donaldson,
A recent post to the G.I. questioned the use of capital punishment in your Gap books, noting that many nations have currently “outlawed” the practice. You noted that the Gap ‘universe’ is governed by corporations, not societies, thus capital punishment is still allowed, as corporations look out for what is in their interest. The poster to the G.I. also suggest that executions are “less civilized”, to which I would ask, ‘who defines the term “civilized”, and how and why do *they* get to define it?’ A rhetorical statement/question on my part….
It should be noted that even though many nations have outlawed capital punishment many who do still support it in certain circumstances, namely the execution of war criminals. Does Angus fall under this category for his actions in dealing with the Amnion? I would think so.
You wrote “I think it was Joseph Conrad who once wrote, ‘There are worse things you can do to a man than kill him.’” I think it was in the movie Unforgiven where Clint Eastwood’s character says killing a man is the worst thing you can do to someone because you take away everything he’s ever had, and everything he ever will have (I paraphrase, because I can’t exactly remember the line). After having delt with people who are incarcerated for the remainder of their natural lives, one thing left to them, however unrealistic, is their ability to dream. And hope.
Sorry, no questions here, just a few random comments.
|
I don't have anything to add. We all have to come to our own conclusions about such things. But I believe they're worth thinking about. (09/08/2008) |
John: Stephen,
You posted in the "news" section, "the University of St. Andrews in Fife, Scotland, has just announced a desire to offer me an honorary degree, Doctor of Letters, in June 2009. I sure hope nothing goes wrong!"
First of all, congrats!
Second, how exactly does this happen? What I mean is the details. Does one person at the university decide to submit a person for this award? Do universities usually do this? Is such an honorary degree decided upon by the faculty of a specific department? Just curious as to how this process might work... specifically in your case (but please don't take this to mean I question the validity of what is being bestowed upon you or whether or not you deserve it)!
Thanks.
|
First, thanks! And second, I have no earthly idea. The whole concept leaves me feeling completely flummoxed. The letter says that the "Senate" (whatever that is) of the University of St. Andrews "unanimously agreed". But what does that actually *mean*? I assume that someone must have put my name forward--and then done some exhaustive lobbying. But I have no actual facts. None. (09/08/2008) |
Luke Macnamara: I must apologise if this question, or similar, has been posed previously - I have only just found this site and have been gradually working my way through it.
1) You say in one of your responses (7/12/08) that the Last chronicles are called the LAST chronicles of thomas covenant because you are not writing any more in the series ever again. However, I have seen where authors have, later on, written additional books in a series and called them things like preludes or whatever....
Will there be any chance that this might happen with the chronicles or are you absolutely adamant that the LAST chronicles of thomas covenant will be the ABSOLUTE LAST chronicles - Why must this be so - its a great epic/saga that should go on - its entertaining - and just a darn great read - why don't you want to do more? I, and I am sure I am not alone would love it if you did do more books in the series.
It puzzles me why things must end, eventually everything must end, I know that, but if they don't have to presently then they should last as long as they can if they are good shouldn't they?
|
Yes, "The Last Chronicles" will be the ABSOLUTE LAST. Why should this be so? I can offer several answers. 1) *Everything* ends. Why should stories be any different? 2) I'm approaching the end of my story. If I don't have more story, what can I possibly write? 3) Aren't 10 books *enough*? How much more can people stand to read about the same setting and (approximately) the same characters? Take your pick. Or read elsewhere in the Gradual Interview for more information about how my imagination works. (09/10/2008) |
Charles K Moak: Mr. Donaldson,
I heard recently that the option that had been taken out on the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant had expired and, not being renewed, the entire idea of a film has dissipated and returned to creative limbo. I would like to offer my condolences for that lost project. It is most certainly the studio's loss.
However, I am somewhat relieved because I have always hoped that once I have finished film school, a passion that has fueled my entire life, I would have the chance to be a part of bringing your amazing series to life onscreen. This may not be a question that you will be able to answer for me, but how exactly does the option process work? I would love to get an idea of how to get started in this direction.
Thank you,
Charles Moak.
|
I'm not exactly an authority on the subject. But in general someone who wants an option approaches the rights-holder (author, agent, publisher) and offers money to purchase the option for a specified period of time (6 months, 12, 18, whatever). (Remember that an option only gives, say, you the legal right to pursue making a movie; and it precludes the rights-holder from doing business with anyone else during the period of the option.) If an agreement is reached about money and time, an *extremely* intensive negotiation begins because the option contract also covers every conceivable outcome, ranging from "Can the option be renewed at the end of the specified time?" to "Does the option include rights to more than one book?" to "How much does the rights-holder get paid if a film *is* made?" to "Who controls the script?" to "Who gets the money and has the final say on merchandising rights?" When all of that has been worked out, contracts are signed, money changes hands--and then, 99 times out of 100, the option purchaser is up a creek because no one wants to *pay* for making the movie. Not my idea of fun. (09/10/2008) |
Nathan Eddy: Mr. Donaldson,
Earlier in the GI, you said:
“Knowing the essential story of ‘The Last Chronicles’ before I ever started working on ‘The Second Chronicles,’ I took great pains to plant the necessary seeds throughout those earlier books.”
(11/09/2004)
At the halfway point in our journey through The Last Chronicles, are there any of those seeds you can specify for us without giving away too much for the next two books? I’m sure that the end of The One Tree contains quite a few, for both the Haruchai and for the Theomach. Would you mind pointing out a few more that have already paid off, in your eyes? Some that have already produced the fruit which you intended? Or do these seeds still have some potential growth left that you’d rather not give away?
Thanks!
Nathan R. Eddy (Malik23)
|
Hmm. I'm willing to say this much: the breaking of the Law of Life, and the resurrection of Hollian, were absolutely critical to both "The Second Chronicles" and "The Last Chronicles". And the fact that Linden's Staff is not informed by the lore of the Old Lords is no accident. (09/10/2008) |
dlbpharmd (Don): "I appear to have no "literary groupies"."
Hey, wait just a minute here....whattaya mean, "no literary groupies?" As a proud member of KevinsWatch, I ask you - what are we? Chopped liver? We buy all of your books and even buy the audio versions, we analyze your writing down to the most minute detail, we kill more time talking about your work than we do working at our jobs! I think that qualifies us a groupies! What do you expect? Do you want a throng of rabid fans to wait at the door to try to rip your clothes off? I'm sure we can find people to do that, and that's not even talking about the women of the Watch! And no one's waiting for you to throw your underwear at us, because we all know it would just end up on eBay like your ARCs have. So I say, be grateful for what you have!
|
You are not the first to correct me on this point. Perhaps I mis-stated the facts: when I wrote "groupies," I should have instead written "gropies". (09/10/2008) |
Torbjörn Andersson: You mentioned that you have been "proofreading Orion's upcoming edition of the GAP books". I'm curious... does it mean you are fixing inconsistencies (which I imagine are almost unavoidable in a story of that size) in the old release, or does it mean making sure they haven't accidentally misplaced parts of it?
I know you've mentioned (and I have seen for myself) that you sometimes change things between the hardback and paperback releases, but do you also change things between different editions of the book?
(If this ever gets into the gradual interview, feel free to skip the rest. You shouldn't have to defend yourself against nitpicking in public.
In fact, maybe I shouldn't even have written this in the first place.)
Apart from a section that was removed from "This Day All Gods Die" between the hardback and paperback, I had two minor "*what* did it just say?!" moments while reading the books, though only one of them was big enough to briefly jolt me out of the story.
(Nitpicks follow. Skip to the last paragraph, if you don't want to see them.)
One was in "This Day All Gods Die", in one of the Koina chapters. She has reached Suka Bator for the emergency session, but she is still fretting over whether or not to carry out Warden's orders. It says that "Then she might find herself praying for Punisher to fire down ruin on the island. Death would be easier to face than her culpability for a disaster of such magnitude."
Was she thinking of Calm Horizons? (If I remember the sequence of events correctly, Punisher still hasn't arrived yet.)
The other, much smaller, one was in "Chaos and Order". Early in the book, Mikka uses Trumpet's forward lasers to try and cut an asteroid out of the way. Later in the book, Morn is studying Trumpet's weaponry: "Trumpet wasn't equipped with lasers. They were problematic in any case: vulnerable to EM distortion, as well as to the jolts and line-fluctuations of the ships powering them."
(End of nitpicks.)
But whether or not these are inconsistencies, I'm impressed that anything this big can be brought into semblance of order at all. I helped proofread a technical manual once, and I absolutely couldn't believe how many things I missed the first time through it. Clearly, the brain often sees what it expects to see, not what's actually on the page. Thankfully, I wasn't the only proofreader.
|
I won't be surprised to learn that you've identified legitimate inconsistencies in the GAP books. But that's not what I was working on when I went over Orion's text. Orion produced their text by scanning a previous edition of the book and then using OCR software to generate print. Well, most OCR software sucks; so the process introduced MASSES of typos. And the "previous edition" scanned was itself not accurate. I almost went crazy just trying to make Orion's text approximately readable. And I shudder to think what may have happened to Orion's "Mordant's Need," which I was *not* given a chance to proofread. (09/10/2008) |
Tim Koupe: I was reading a review of the Gap Cycle after reading the series myself, curiously searching for a Ring Cycle comparison piece since I'm not
familiar with Wagner at all, and I ran into this comment:
_______________________________________________
Orson Scott Card has commented on the fact that SF is often criticised for having cardboard characters: he says that these critics have missed
the point. According to Card, novels are primarily "about" one of four things: milieu, ideas, character or events. One of those four elements will be dominant, and everything else in the work will be subordinate to the service of that element.
Applying Card's taxonomy, then, Donaldson's body of work is primarily concerned with ideas (although a case could be made also that the
Chronicles are milieu novels, and Card himself is of this opinion. Still, what would he know.)
_________________________________________________
I guess I'm just a little stunned. I thought it was clear your dominant element would be "character". But then after a little more thought, I must admit "ideas" is plausible since you seem to like your characters wrestling philosophical ideas.
So, my question is...if this 1-of-4 element theory has standing, what dominant element do *you* think drives the Gap Cycle (and Covenant for
that matter)? Do you even consciously review these kinds of fundamentals when you work?
And for an easier, lighter question: Why are your characters always "baring their teeth"? Are you spending a bit much time with man's best friend?
FYI - Here's the link to that particular review, if for some reason you're curious (Personally, I found he didn't have much of a grip on POV, nor an appreciation for the oddities of human behavior):
http://www.reviewsbygavrielle.com/gap.shtml
|
My opinions might be more germane if I actually agreed with Card. But I think he takes a reductive view of literature in general, and of sf in particular. In my view, great stories are "about" milieu *and* ideas *and* character *and* events. (By "events," I assume he means plot or action.) Of course, all writers are human, even great ones: therefore they all have limitations: therefore they usually aren't equally brilliant at all four elements. Dickens isn't the first name that comes to mind when I think of a novelist of ideas. McKillip isn't the first name that comes to mind when I think of a novelist of events. Yet Dickens' novels are full of ideas (and milieu, and character, and events), just as McKillip's novels are full of events (and milieu and yougettheidea). To the extent that "The Chronicles" are (primarily) milieu novels, or that the GAP books are (primarily) idea novels, I've fallen below my aspirations. "Baring their teeth," huh? I guess I've seen too many real people grimace, especially when they want to smile and can't. Or maybe I've spent too much time sparring: those mouthpieces make EVeryone appear bare his/her teeth. But if you think the baring of teeth recurs excessively (?) in my works, try counting the number of times my characters drop to their knees. <sigh> (09/10/2008) |
Erik: The other day I was in a book store and picked up "The Riddle-Master of Hed" trilogy written by Patricia McKillip which had been re-released in one book. I had read them many years ago and remembered liking them. Your mention of her on the GI had triggered a memory. Much to my surprise, she had written "For all those who waited, and especially for Steve Donaldson, who always called at the right time." Was this in the original set of books that was written in the late 70's or was this added when the Riddle-master series was re-released. Anything else you care to share on the subject? Thanks again or taking the time to submit to the GI.
|
Yes, that dedication was in the original edition of "Harpist in the Wind". Patricia McKillip and I have been friends since 1977. In fact, I like to pretend that I introduced her to the man who became her husband; but it probably isn't true. (09/17/2008) |
Tim Harris: In response to:
> I can't speak for Lester; and he isn't here to
> defend himself. But if I had to guess.... He
> might say that the "bane" in "Lord Foul's Bane"
> has a double meaning. It refers to both the curse
> or doom which LF intends for the Land and the
> curse or doom which Covenant represents for LF.
Interesting! I'd always assumed "Lord Foul's Bane" was the Illearth Stone he was seeking and used to poison the Land throughout the first Chronicles.
|
The advantage of Lester del Rey's title is that it has so many possible meanings. (09/17/2008) |
Bob Benoit: Stephen - I've just started listening to the LFB audiobook (which brings my total "readings" up into double digits at least), and I wondered at one of Foul's comments when he first speaks to Covenant - specifically how Kevin had befriended Fould and made him a member of the Council before Foul came out and opposed him. Did you ever mention (or might it be a part of the two remaining books) what Foul's "name" was at that time? It seems that strange that Kevin would admit someone named "Lord Foul the Despiser" to the Council of Lords. Thanks.
|
Hasn't this come up before? I believe it has, somewhere in the GI. But in any case: I think it's safe to assume that Lord Foul did not call himself "Lord Foul" when he seduced or manipulated his way into Kevin's Council. Even an archetypalist of my deep-dyed hue isn't *that* naive. (09/17/2008) |
Rigel: Recently, we've had a discussion on the Watch concerning the nature of the Fire Lions of Mount Thunder.
Myself, I hold the position (backed by the glossary in the books) that it's just poetic language for the lava flow from the mountain.
Others think they FLs are actual creatures resembling Lions that are made out of either lava or fire.
So first, what exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?
And second, who actually wrote the glossary, and are the descriptions given in it considered "canon"?
|
I'm entirely responsible for the Glossary. But I have always intended it more as a kind of mnemonic device than as any form of real definition. Otherwise it would be ridiculously long--and rife with spoilers, since so many names, characters, etc. change during the course of the stories. With that in mind: "What exactly *is* the nature of the FLs?" Your question is either a "RAFO" or a "Some things are better left to the imagination of the reader" or a "Why do you suppose the people of the Land call them *Fire-Lions*?" The Glossary does use the word "living". (09/17/2008) |
Joe: Hi Steve,
I was wondering what was the inspiration for Linden Avery's character? I realize a good part of Thomas Covenant came out of your background with lepers, and I'm curious as to where Linden came from.
Thanks,
Joe
|
Well, she *is* a doctor--as was my father. And her early approach to illness and death has some points in common with his. More than that I choose not to say. (09/17/2008) |
Will: Hi Steve,
It's been a while since I posted any questions, mostly because I can't think of anything insightful that someone hasn't already asked!
Maybe I am grasping at straw here, but is there any significance to the grass stains on Linden's jeans? They seem to have been mentioned in passing several times in both Runes and Fatal Revenant.
thanks
|
Gosh, I hope so! Otherwise I've been wasting a lot of words on the d*mn things. <rueful smile> (09/28/2008) |
David Welch: Stephen,
thankyou for your work and the great enjoyment and inspiration I have gained from your books.
I have just finished reading Fatal Revenant and found myself thoroughly immersed at the end and desperate for more. However in stark contrast I found I struggled with much of the Runes of the Earth and the first third of Fatal Revenant - I couldn't seem to connect with the narrative the same way I have with the first two series. I believe in taking personal responsibility for my failings!! so I thought over this and realized that it was not until Earthpower began to came alive for Linden (ie with Berek, the words of power, under Skyweir, Andelain etc) that the story (or maybe Linden) came fully alive for me. Apart from committing to re-reading the novels in a new light it brought home to me the "lifelessness" for its residents of the land under "Kevin's Dirt" in a fairly direct manner. I would appreciate any comments you might have. Also, I know you are fairly firm on the subjective experience of writing and reading (and therefore my "revelation" is just that, "mine") but I was wondering how your experience of what you are writing about affects your emotional state and so in turn your writing.
Thanks again and best wishes.
David Welch, Moe South, Australia
|
The whole of "The Last Chronicles" has been, and will continue to be, a difficult balancing act. Certainly in "Runes" (less so in "Fatal Revenant) I wanted to convey what has been lost since "The Second Chronicles". On the other hand, I certainly was *not* trying to convey a sense of "lifelessness". And, speaking solely for myself, the "Covenant" characters have never seemed as real and alive as they do in "The Last Chronicles". So do I think I've succeeded in striking an effective balance? I have no idea. Time will tell. However, one cannot do work like mine for long without being made aware (sometimes forcibly) that some (many?) readers read more for *magic* than they do for character, plot, or setting. In fact, the argument can be (indeed, has been) made that the success of the "Covenant" books rests almost exclusively on their ability to communicate a sense of magic. Hence (so the argument goes) the comparative collapse of my readership for virtually everything else I've ever attempted. Even "Mordant's Need" makes no pretense of according magic the prominence that it has in "Covenant". Well, if there's any truth to that argument: please understand that I'm not putting it down. I'm entranced myself by writers (Patricia A. McKillip leaps to mind) who can effectively convey a sense of magic. Magic is powerful stuff, both thematically and viscerally. And it *matters*, both psychologically and philosophically. Which is why the actions of the Masters in "The Last Chronicles" have such pervasive and dehumanizing consequences. But still.... Again speaking solely for myself, I can't help wishing that more of my readers were able to see the magic in characters who inhabit settings less inherently magical than the Land. None of which answers your question directly. But there's an oblique answer hidden in there somewhere. (09/28/2008) |
Karl: I have been saddened to see you answering fewer questions recently because I enjoy so much from reading your answers. :)
HOWEVER, if that means that you are spending more time writing the next book in the beloved TLCOTC series, then that is an even better truth!
In fact, you have often been called a Fantasy genre writer, but in many ways even the TC series does not fit squarely in that peg. I have always loved certain types of supernatural/psychological horror (though I have always disliked gore and slashers), and in many ways the TC series appeals to me in similar ways as the better books from that genre (such as Peter Straub, some early Anne Rice - who has gone downhill, and some of the more epic and earlier Stephen King works, such as the Stand, the Talisman, Salem's Lot, with its archetypal evil Vampire). It seems not coincidental that my favorite authors are you and Peter Straub (and ironically, Jon Krakauer, who similarly writes about individual human struggle, such as in "Into the Wild" and "Into Thin Air").
What are your thoughts on this? Do you see yourself at least partially crossing into such other genres? A common theme to many of these works is individual struggle, typically on a psychological level. I almost wish there was a separate genre for such works, just so that I could more easily find those that appeal to me.
|
Here, and in your subsequent (deleted) message, you've put me in some pretty good company, for which I'm grateful. God knows I aspire.... In fact, I've never thought of myself as "a Fantasy genre writer"--or as a genre writer of any kind--in any useful sense of the term. Of course, I'm perfectly aware that I write books which can be given, and which may even appear to cry out for, genre labels. Nevertheless I think of myself as a writer in the same sense that Conrad, James, and Faulkner were writers (although I am *not* trying to claim comparable stature for myself). A writer whose inspiration just happens to fall into the oldest and more enduring of all genres (fantasy), or into a much less ancient genre (science fiction), or into an even more recent genre (mystery). Just as Conrad's inspiration tended to fall into categories like sea stories and novels of intrigue; or as both James' and Faulkner's inspirations tended to fall into studies of social and cultural mores. No creative person gets to choose the nature of his/her imagination. We only get to choose how hard we work at what we're given. (Which may explain why the writers you favor tend to write about individual struggles of one kind or another.) Hence my dismay at the automatic disdain which seems to greet *any* story that attracts a genre label. (09/28/2008) |
Peter Hunt: Mr. Donaldson,
I wanted to let you know that Amazon.co.uk are now advertising the Gollancz reprints of the Gap series. They are due out next month, and they have pictures of the new covers.
Search for "stephen donaldson gap sequence" (without the quotes) on their site and you'll see all four volumes.
Yes, four; Gollancz have combined The Real Story and Forbidden Knowledge into a single volume.
Congratulations on your honorary degree, by the way.
Best Regards,
Peter
|
Just a quick follow-up to the news that Orion/Gollancz is reissuing the GAP books. Incidentally, combining "The Real Story" and "Forbidden Knowledge" in one volume was *my* idea. It wasn't imposed on me by anyone. When "The Real Story" stands alone, it does a poor job of introducing readers to the *scale* of my intentions. (09/28/2008) |