What happened to Hile Troy?

[Variol Farseer]

Providing details is illegal, confirming employment is not. Otherwise it would be impossible for potential employers to check references. In which case, there's no sense in bothering to try to do a good job at work, since you can always quit your job, and when the next potential employer calls the previous employer that you just screwed over, the former employer would be required by law to deny your existence.

I'm not positive, but I think what was meant is that it was illegal for the Department of Defense to confirm employment in a classified installation. That could well be true, without having any effect on what you said about references in general.

[ur-bane]

If you have the time (I don't today) look through SRD's October and November gradual interview post's. I think he addressed the issue of whether Hile Troy was "real" in the "real world"; I think he said he intended for him to have indeed been "real".

Yes, Hile Troy was briefly discussed in the October GI:

Hilary Reynolds: Dear Mr Donaldson,

Thank you so much for this interview which I have dubbed in my own mind "The Desultory." I find it to be an almost unparalleled insight into the creative mind. And a creative mind may I say, without the least sycophancy, I consider to be one of the best of it's age. I have found the desultory no less compelling than the First and Second Chronicles of TC. I have also read the Gap books which while I admired the work itself, I found too bleak and the characters too irredeemable for me to truly enjoy. I have so many questions to ask which range from the facile to the somewhat less facile. Let me start by asking two.

1) Was Hile Troy from the "Real World"? Covenant's telpehone calls seem to indicate that he did not exist, though given the nature of agency he was phoning, this may have been a cover up.

2) In some of your responses there seems to be a contradiction when talking about your writing processes. In one place in the desultory you were asked about Nom and you replied "I, of course, knew what was going to happen years before I actually wrote it." Elsewhere when asked about the Last Chronicles you say "but I couldn't tell you the story: it still contains vast unspecified areas which I will discover as I tell the story." The first implies a good deal plotting before hand whereas the second connotes less complete plotting. Which of these is true, do you plot a great deal beforehand or sketchily and fill put the details as you write?





1) I've always assumed that Hile Troy was indeed from Covenant's "real world."

2) All of my statements about how I plot are true. As a general rule, I now do less detailed *conscious* plotting than I did when I was younger: I trust the unconscious part of my creative impulse more. But there are enormous variations, not only from book to book, but from year to year in my life, and from detail to detail within a story. When I said that "The Last Chronicles" "still contains vast unspecified areas," I did *not* mean to suggest that it doesn't also contain vast *specified* areas. For example, there are specific characters whose complete stories I *could* tell you right now; but I couldn't necessarily tell you how those stories interact with and catalyze *all* of the stories of specific other characters. Whereas when I wrote the first "Covenant" trilogy, and much of the second, and large parts of "Mordant's Need," I did have more of the details planned in advance.

(10/21/2004)

SRD did not really elaborate on Hile Troy, but certainly he assumed Hile Troy was from Covenant's real world.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Dear god I hope the department of defense doesn't confirm or deny the employment of people in classified operations! How easy would that be for intelligence agencies... they'd have a 1-800-catchspy. It'd be great.



This post is to cover for the fact that I definately didn't just mean the department of defense...and instead just being dumb about the whole confirm-deny thing. Sorry about that

[Reynard Ashmelayn]

If SRD assumes, that means even he doesn't really know. How the (expletive of choice) are we supposed to figure it out?

*goes on a killing spree*

[Variol Farseer]

If SRD assumes, that means even he doesn't really know. How the (expletive of choice) are we supposed to figure it out?

If the author assumes a thing to be true of his creation, and the text does not contradict his assumption, then it's true. There isn't any higher authority. As Ursula K. LeGuin said, you can't 'tell it like it is' in fantasy, because there is no 'it' until it's told. And sometimes (for all successful fiction writers are skilled illusionists) there is less to a picture than meets the eye.


'What a wonderful view you have from here! What's on the other side of those mountains?'

'Nothing, sir.'

'Nothing?'

'That's right, sir. They're just a backdrop. Lath and plaster, mostly.'

'Oh, come now! I don't believe a word of it. I'm going up to look for myself.'

'As you wish, sir, but have a care. If you run into 'em sudden-like, you'll knock the whole set over.'

*goes on a killing spree*

Hey! None of that around here! Write your own dam' fantasy world, and have your killing spree there! (Then we'll all make popcorn and watch!)

[Myste]

Just a quick note re: where Troy might be from--he's definitely not from the Land, and VF says

Hile Troy is a different case, because he was summoned to the Land from somewhere. That may or may not have been Covenant's 'real' world, but he obviously wasn't a native of the Land.

But if I'm remembering correctly (I don't have the book in front of me), Troy actually tells Covenant that he (Troy) has heard of him (Covenant) and even had TC's book read to him. Of course, it's still possible that the two aren't from the same world, but only if one accepts the multiverse theory....

[dlbpharmd]

From SRD's GI:

Lord Fool: I recently read the "Second Chronicles", and a question popped into my mind.

I always assumed that the accident by which Hile Troy was transported to the Land did eventually kill him. I can understand his body could've survived for the relatively short time he spend in the land as the Warmark. However, Troy didn't die in the Land until the "White Gold Wielder", after ten years' time in the "real world". I understood that when one dies in the "real world", he also dies in the Land (as happened to Thomas Covenant). Even though Troy as Caer-Cavernal wasn't entirely human, he wasn't Dead (as Covenant in the end). So, how was it possible for Troy's body to keep living for such a long period of time without his mind present?

Oh, by the way: thank you. The "Second Chronicles" were the most satisfying read; the Thomas Covenant saga has really rooted itself in my heart. I'm eagerly looking forward to the Last Chronicles - meanwhile, I've the time to check out your other works as well.

In the most literal sense, death in the "real world" for a character like Hile Troy, or Thomas Covenant, simply means that character can no longer return to his/her "real" life. But of course the implications go much farther (and are explored more fully in "The Last Chronicles"). Literal death in the Land as well is a significant possibility. But neither Troy nor Covenant actually died in the Land: rather they were transformed; became beings of an entirely different kind. In Troy's case, a series of transformations were involved, resulting in a new Forestal. In Covenant's case, the destruction of his mortality freed his spirit to support the Arch of Time (the fact that he retains some form of sentient identity is demonstrated by his ability to speak to Linden during her translation back to her "real" life). In both cases, huge powers were required to cause transformation instead of literal death. So: literal death in the "real world" does not *necessarily* impose extinction in the Land. In the "real world," Troy's body suffered literal death not long after his accident.

(11/21/2004)

[matrixman]

Awesome! SRD's answer solves that long-running mystery over Troy's death. We were simply too strict in adhering to the rule that death in the "real" world means automatic death in the Land. So...if you are able to supply the necessary amount of power, then you can countermand that rule! Death in the real world is not necessarily the final word!

I now appreciate even more the depth of the Forestals' might. When Caerroil Wildwood transformed Hile Troy, there was no flashy display of power, but I can imagine shockwaves on a metaphysical level, reverberating between worlds.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Excellent.

I had been confused because of how injuries in the land always occur to mirror injuries in the real world. For instance, I had assumed Troy would have been burning at the time of his death in the land....

[Steve Hurtloam]

Hello all.

I'm a newbie (again)... I was on this website a few years back. Very happy to be back due to the new series! (I'm halfway through!)

Hile Troy was always my favorite enigma in the first series. He seemed to be the linchpin to me whether The Land was "real" or not. I think now that "Runes" is out, and Linden's traveled back, the point is moot? (Hope that's not too big a spoiler). She's not Covenant, you can look her up in the phonebook in the real world, and she's got the ring here and there. Maybe the point's not moot, though, but I digress...

Anyway, my point is, even if SRD said he always "considered" Hile real, I need to know, where did he get the name "Hile"? Is there really ANYONE in the real world first name Hile??

I sometimes thought he, good ole Hile, just flipped his names around to sound cooler. His name in the real world could have been "Troy Hile".

I mean, come on SRD! Landwaster's first name is KEVIN... such a normal earthly name. But the guy from Earth... his name is HILE????

[MrKABC]

Case in point, Lord Foul. If I were Kevin, and somebody introduced himself to me as "Mr. Foul," I'd think there was something afoot there. It would be like if someone walked into my workplace and introduced himself as Sam Hitler. Yet, SRD intentionally named the antithesis Lord Foul, and I don't think it was a simple lack of creativity--witness all of his other books, SRD has plenty of creativity. Foul is named Foul for a reason.

Even beyond the willing suspension of disbelief that is necessary of every reader, we're not meant to accept everything in the series as exactly what it seems.

Well, we are assuming that Lord Foul actually called himself that when he "contrived his way into the Council" and became a Lord. Lord Foul, like the Ravers, had many names and many identities. It's entirely possible that (no evidence to back this up however) Lord Foul was a name attached to the Despiser *after* the Desolation, or *after* High Lord Kevin finally discovered his true nature.

For example: the Waynhim dharmakshetra "to brave the enemy" became dukkha "victim". Manethrall Gay became Manethrall Rue. Names changed in the Land due to circumstance, it is logical to assume that Lord Foul's name had also.

[jelerak]

Note this question that I submitted in the gradual interview about the naming of Lord Foul.



Stephen Allange: Stephen...thanks so much for answering my previous question. This question is pertaining to the naming of Lord Foul. The name in itself is something that doesn't quite fit with my imagination of the various names associated with the Land. His other names given to him by the various races seem to be better fit for origin in a society like that I imagine that would populate the Land. (The Gray Slayer, Corruption, Fangthane, A-Jeroth of the Seven Hells, the Despiser). It just makes me wonder why such a being would be named as Lord Foul. Did he give himself this name? I cannot imagine that was his name when he gained Kevin's trust and infiltrated the Council of the Lords. Was there another name that Kevin knew Lord Foul by? And why such a mundane name for such a powerful and malignant being?

Steve






I'm sorry to say that the best answer I can give you is: I was young. From my present perspective, "Lord Foul the Despiser" seems like a crude and overly-obvious choice. But at the time, way back in the early 1970's when I was first planning the story and characters (more than half my life ago), I particularly wanted to emphasize the archetypal nature of the character. I didn't want to go the Tolkien route: pick a name like "Sauron" and *pretend* he isn't Evil Personified. Because of the themes around which the first trilogy in particular revolves, I felt I had something to gain by--in a manner of speaking--putting my cards face-up on the table. After all, Milton wrote about Satan explicitly. Why shouldn't I be equally daring, since my ambitions were certainly comparable to Milton's?

Nowadays, of course, I'm used to the name, so it doesn't bother me. But if I were starting the first "Chronicles" today, I would take a more subtle approach.

(12/09/2004)

[MrKABC]

Well... I think in the real world "Lord Foul" is a pretty stupid name... but in the context of the story... <shrug>

What's in a name?

After all, in the story there is a sword named after a fish...