Theories
Moderators: Orlion, kevinswatch
-
I'm Murrin
- Are you?
- Posts: 15840
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:09 pm
- Location: North East, UK
- Contact:
-
A Gunslinger
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 8890
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 6:48 pm
- Location: Southern WI (Madison area)
-
Furls Fire
- Lord
- Posts: 4872
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 10:35 am
- Location: Heaven
YEP!! Exactly!!!!
And I believe in you
altho you never asked me too
I will remember you
and what life put you thru.
~fly fly little wing, fly where only angels sing~
~this world was never meant for one as beautiful as you~
...for then I could fly away and be at rest. Sweet rest, Mom. We all love and miss you.
altho you never asked me too
I will remember you
and what life put you thru.
~fly fly little wing, fly where only angels sing~
~this world was never meant for one as beautiful as you~
...for then I could fly away and be at rest. Sweet rest, Mom. We all love and miss you.
-
wayfriend
- .
- Posts: 20957
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
Can't you take this "everything is everything" thing a bit too far? If you do, you don't really have a story, just an undifferentiated blob floating in space.
If the Land is destroyed, and the Arch is destroyed, then TC is destroyed, and Foul is destroyed, and Time is destroyed, and the Creator is destroyed, and everything that ever was never was.
Not much left.
If the Land is destroyed, and the Arch is destroyed, then TC is destroyed, and Foul is destroyed, and Time is destroyed, and the Creator is destroyed, and everything that ever was never was.
Not much left.
.
-
Furls Fire
- Lord
- Posts: 4872
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 10:35 am
- Location: Heaven
That's the point, Wayfriend. He wants to end the story. The end of the Land, would definately be the end of the story...
Okay..here we go, I've quoted this before but it seems appropriate to quote it here now, since this is what I was drawing my previous post on...
Okay..here we go, I've quoted this before but it seems appropriate to quote it here now, since this is what I was drawing my previous post on...
And how is the universe made new? By losing the old. Hence, the title The Last Chronicles of Thomas Covenant and not The Third Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. There will be no more after this...SRD in [i]Variations in Fantasy Traditions, Stephen R. Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant[/i] by, W.A. Senior wrote:Ok. In a hundred words or less. In the First Chronicles, Thomas Covenant faces Lord Foul and defeats him. In the Second Chronicles, Thomas Covenant surrenders to Lord Foul. In the Last Chronicles, Thomas Covenant becomes Lord Foul. Following the psychological paradigm through, what happens at the point that you become your own other self is that you become whole, and the universe is made new.
And I believe in you
altho you never asked me too
I will remember you
and what life put you thru.
~fly fly little wing, fly where only angels sing~
~this world was never meant for one as beautiful as you~
...for then I could fly away and be at rest. Sweet rest, Mom. We all love and miss you.
altho you never asked me too
I will remember you
and what life put you thru.
~fly fly little wing, fly where only angels sing~
~this world was never meant for one as beautiful as you~
...for then I could fly away and be at rest. Sweet rest, Mom. We all love and miss you.
In the prologue that was posted a couple weeks back, Roger is approaching his 21st birthday. I can't recall what age he was when Joan took him away from TC, but he was just an infant wasn't he? If that's the case, then it's probably about 10 years since the 2nd chronicles, maybe a bit less.Wayfriend wrote:Hasn't the gradual interview established that the span of time is about the same as between the first and second chronicles?
-
wayfriend
- .
- Posts: 20957
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
I haven't given up on this thread; I've just needed time to cerebrate.
My problem is that my guts are telling me things that my higher centers don't know how to put into words.
Here's one thing that bubbled up:
Thomas Covenant doesn't have the means of becoming whole. Nor does he have the desire. He is dead.
If the Land is a manifestation of Covenant's mind/psyche, well, it's gone now. Even if it were not sustained by Covenent's life, it would have no reason for continued existance, nor a link to the real (Covenent's) world through which one might gain access.
But we know that isn't true. We have the old man. We have Linden Avery. We have the Final Chronicles. The ergo sum is left to the reader.
I understand (and have taken to heart) that the reality of the land is supposed to be ambiguous. But how can we put aside those questions when at the end of the story we're asked to believe that it was all a psychological exercise, and then swallow that it became unnecessary ten years earlier?
Do I think that the Final Chronicles will explore all of these issues? Yes.
Do I think it can be wrapped up as everything is everything? No.
Do I think that some people are yanking our chains (including the author)? Yes, although I am sure it is not in their words but in the spirit that they are used.
My problem is that my guts are telling me things that my higher centers don't know how to put into words.
Here's one thing that bubbled up:
Thomas Covenant doesn't have the means of becoming whole. Nor does he have the desire. He is dead.
If the Land is a manifestation of Covenant's mind/psyche, well, it's gone now. Even if it were not sustained by Covenent's life, it would have no reason for continued existance, nor a link to the real (Covenent's) world through which one might gain access.
But we know that isn't true. We have the old man. We have Linden Avery. We have the Final Chronicles. The ergo sum is left to the reader.
I understand (and have taken to heart) that the reality of the land is supposed to be ambiguous. But how can we put aside those questions when at the end of the story we're asked to believe that it was all a psychological exercise, and then swallow that it became unnecessary ten years earlier?
Do I think that the Final Chronicles will explore all of these issues? Yes.
Do I think it can be wrapped up as everything is everything? No.
Do I think that some people are yanking our chains (including the author)? Yes, although I am sure it is not in their words but in the spirit that they are used.
.
-
zenslinger
- Servant of the Land
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:34 pm
- Location: San Francisco
As far as time is concerned, there seemed to be a regular ratio of time elapsed in the Land and in the real world. I can't give you quotes, but it seemed that the number of years that passed between the books of the first trilogy corresponded to the amount of time he spent in the real world. Likewise, it was around ten years between the First and Second Chronicles, so around the same amount of time should have passed at the start of the Last Chronicles (what was it, 3000 years or so?) Although time may be manipulated during the story (see below), I think he'd be wise to start by sticking with this scenario when Linden gets to the Land -- pure speculation, of course.
As for what year it is in the real world, it hard to say; it's doesn't follow time in our real world in which the books are published since the second triology was written so soon after the first, yet some ten years had gone by. But he was always careful not to pin things down to a certain year or mention specific technologies or anything. The real world will be described in very general terms again (and we can see this from the prologue.)
I don't have any doubt, however, that time itself will be manipulated. He says that he'll go back to the Old Lords and before, which jibes with the theme of Foul's assault on time itself.
I wouldn't be too concerned that fooling with Time will lead to a poor or hackneyed storyline; after all, Donaldson is more of an evolutionary force in fantasy literature, taking themes of classic fantasy in new directions, rather than a revolutionary one. And themes of time travel do seem to come up of their own accord when you're really digging into ontology, though they do make for difficult narratives, which is probably part of the reason he's mentioned being intimidated by the prospect of writing these books.
As for the reality of the Land in comparison to that of the real world, I wouldn't worry too much about that either. This was an important issue for Covenant's sanity, and his need for unbelief was very much his strength. But the Land always existed very stolidly despite his view of it and didn't act like a dream or fantasy in any way. So I don't think that the Land will be revealed as a psychological phenomenon. I think this is borne out by the prologue; Linden treats her memories of the Land much more matter-of-factly than Covenant ever did. There's also the matter of the events in the Land manifesting on Joan -- a lot of evidence that these are simply alternate worlds that both have reality side-by-side.
Whether the breaking of the Arch of Time would affect the real world or not is anyone's guess.
**
I guess this message is my "hello" to the community -- I just learned that the new books were in the works. I reread the first trilogy a couple of years ago. It's not quite what it was to me back then, but I'm still looking forward to these. Reading the prologue and a couple of interviews gave me confidence that he's not embarking on this out of just a desire to sell more books, although if he does, I'm very happy for him.
Anyway, hello!
As for what year it is in the real world, it hard to say; it's doesn't follow time in our real world in which the books are published since the second triology was written so soon after the first, yet some ten years had gone by. But he was always careful not to pin things down to a certain year or mention specific technologies or anything. The real world will be described in very general terms again (and we can see this from the prologue.)
I don't have any doubt, however, that time itself will be manipulated. He says that he'll go back to the Old Lords and before, which jibes with the theme of Foul's assault on time itself.
I wouldn't be too concerned that fooling with Time will lead to a poor or hackneyed storyline; after all, Donaldson is more of an evolutionary force in fantasy literature, taking themes of classic fantasy in new directions, rather than a revolutionary one. And themes of time travel do seem to come up of their own accord when you're really digging into ontology, though they do make for difficult narratives, which is probably part of the reason he's mentioned being intimidated by the prospect of writing these books.
As for the reality of the Land in comparison to that of the real world, I wouldn't worry too much about that either. This was an important issue for Covenant's sanity, and his need for unbelief was very much his strength. But the Land always existed very stolidly despite his view of it and didn't act like a dream or fantasy in any way. So I don't think that the Land will be revealed as a psychological phenomenon. I think this is borne out by the prologue; Linden treats her memories of the Land much more matter-of-factly than Covenant ever did. There's also the matter of the events in the Land manifesting on Joan -- a lot of evidence that these are simply alternate worlds that both have reality side-by-side.
Whether the breaking of the Arch of Time would affect the real world or not is anyone's guess.
**
I guess this message is my "hello" to the community -- I just learned that the new books were in the works. I reread the first trilogy a couple of years ago. It's not quite what it was to me back then, but I'm still looking forward to these. Reading the prologue and a couple of interviews gave me confidence that he's not embarking on this out of just a desire to sell more books, although if he does, I'm very happy for him.
Anyway, hello!