The Gradual Interview

[CovenantJr]

ut he's giving me visions of Linden the Zombie plodding over to take the ring from Covenant's corpse ... I'd rather have an "immaculate transfer"

SRD's answer suggests to me that either option is valid, according to personal preference. What I take from "sympathetic magic" is that the two worlds are so fundamentally entwined that something as significant as TC handing over the ring and all accompanying power and responsibility to Linden simply causes the same to be true in the "real" world. If you want to focus on the mechanics of it, you can - but that's not the bit that's important.

[matrixman]

I see your point, CJ, and I accept what Fist said, too. It's just that if it was such an un-mysterious process, why didn't SRD plain explain it in the first place 20 years ago? Why leave poor readers like dlb and me in the dark about it? I even thought there might be some big explanation in the Last Chronicles. So forgive me if I sound like some ungrateful reader, because I'm not. I just feel like an idiot, that's all.

Speaking of which: so, anyone still want to join me in the Idiot Club? Dunce caps with FREE embroidered initials for the first 10 members!

[dlbpharmd]

Sign me up!

SRD has, as I said earlier, always refused to answer this question, and even implied an explanation would be forthcoming in the LC.

[drew]

It didn't have to Linden the Zombie-SRD was just giving an example.
You can take a slightly magic aproach to this scene:
It could have fallen off Covenants Real World body (by some Magical Force Mind you) When he gave the ring to Foul, Linden's body was practically right on top of TC's, the amount of time Foul had the ring, would translate to about a-half-a-second in the Real World, and only wbout Three minutes later is when Linden woke up, with the ring in-or-near her hand.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

CovJr, I agree with your interpretation complete, in fact I was about to post the same thing. The worlds are entertwined inseperably, and major events from either find a way of appearing in the other.

[wayfriend]

Jim Melvin: I am a writer/editor with a bachelor's degree in English. I have a relatively large vocabulary and am well-read, especially in fantasy literature. I don't say this to brag but only to put my comments and question into context. This is not meant as a complaint -- because I'm a big fan of your work -- but I find about a word per page of your novels that I have to look up. Have you received any negative reaction from your readers about the sophisticated structure of your style and language?

Once again, a purported English major with vocabulary problems appears in the GI. What are we turning out of our schools? I mean, okay, there are many obscure words in TCTC, but only a few are downright stumpers. One per page? Yeek.

[Believer]

One per page is a lot, but he's probably exaggerating. I probably had about 30 words per book I didn't know, and most of the time I didn't bother to look them up... *shrug* Never did know what roynish meant.

I do wish SRD were more well known.... Referencing another of the questions he answered recently.

[drew]

...Question today from a partially blind person, who wawnted audio books for SRD's earlier works...Unfortuantly they are unavailable...

This is the second time I've seen a simalar problem mentioned on the GI.

Donaldson's only suggestion was to try to download the books and print them in a larger type.

It's unfortunate that this is the only option.

Are Braillle books not available?
Does anybody know where/how they can get them?

If so, perhaps Mr Donaldson should be let known about them (...Via Romeo... or Danlo..?) Perhaps he could add it to the news section of SRD.com

I'll try to do a little research myself--but if anybody knows already if Braille books can be made available, they should let somebody know.

[Variol Farseer]

Well, if Ricardo Castano is blind enough to need Braille, he probably has a Braille display for his computer. He could use that to read the pirated e-texts, which fortunately are stored as straight ASCII with no special formatting.

I have sent this suggestion in via the GI, because Mr. Castano's email address was not displayed there. If someone can tip off SRD's webmaster that this information is in the queue, he can forward it to Mr. Castano and SRD need not waste any of his valuable time on this bit of clerical work.

[Variol Farseer]

Never did know what roynish meant.

The only dictionary I ever found roynish in was the great big, 12-volume Oxford, which gives it as a Scottish dialect word meaning approximately 'ruinous'. The applicability of this word to ur-viles is, as Hashi Lebwohl would say, imprecise. I think SRD used it because the sound of the word was so suitable. Whatever it means, it sounds nasty, alien, and something you'd want to keep at a safe distance.

[I'm Murrin]

roynish

\Royn"ish\, a. [F. rogneux, from rogne scab, mange, itch.] Mangy; scabby; hence, mean; paltry; troublesome. [Written also roinish.] [Obs.] ``The roynish clown.'' --Shak.

Was a little surprised the first time I found out what it meant.

[Variol Farseer]

Ah! The Oxford I had didn't trace it back to French. Thanks.

[dlbpharmd]

Interesting Q&A from SRD:

Charles Adams: Thank you for many hours of joy reading and re-reading your works.

I have had thoughts that Foul's ability to manipulate the people and situations extends beyond simple manipulation. For example, manipulation itself doesn't explain how Foul was able to "encourage" rape which lead to pregnancy which lead to Elena which lead to breaking the law of death, all as a known outcome.

I have a theory/understanding that I would appreciate you confirming or rejecting, if it leads to no spoilers.

I envision that Lord Foul (being a creature from outside of the arch of time) has a vision of events that span time (perhaps even his existance spans time). His vision allows him to manipulate minor events into vast/major events that he can use to his advantage. His vision, however, is bound by the necesity of freedom from other outside participants (Linden, Covenant). The effect is that he cannot see past their choices that impact him directly. Thus, he doesn't see his defeats, because those defeats are a result of choices made by free individuals. As far as Foul is concerned, the "blankness" of his vision could easily be the result of his victory (the breaking of the arch of time).

Does this closely reflect your conception of Foul and his abilities?

I want to emphasize that you can think about what you read in any way that works for you. The way that *I* think about what I've written is "right" only in the sense that it works for me. So you shouldn't pay too much attention to the fact that I disagree with you.

Two points. 1) From my perspective, being trapped within the Arch of Time means, well, being trapped within the Arch of Time. Whatever perceptions of infinity Lord Foul may once have possessed (since he was originally a being whose existence transcended time), they were severely truncated when he was forced to live in "real" space/time. And as a being forced to live in "real" space/time, he has no supernatural "vision of events"--and no particular blank spots in his vision (except those that are inherent to the way he thinks). He is defeated, not because he can't see past "choices that impact him directly," but because he believes that people like Covenant and Linden will not make those choices. Which brings me to--

2) I certainly never intended to suggest that Lord Foul "planned" the rape of Lena, Lena's pregnancy, Trell and Atiaran's effective abandonment of Elena, or Elena's resulting mental instability. Of course, Lord Foul does what he can to manipulate events. Sending armies to attack the Lords probably counts as an attempt to manipulate events. But (and this is especially true in the first trilogy) he doesn't do so on the "micro" level. He doesn't--indeed, he can't--"make" Covenant rape Lena. On that level, his plans depend on Covenant's character rather than on the micro-manipulation of events. He chose Covenant because he believes that Covenant--by his very nature--will become a Despiser himself. And just in case there's a chance that Covenant might fall on the other side of the fence, Lord Foul exerts as much pressure as he can (macro-manipulation of events: armies, the genocide of the Unhomed, the maiming of the Bloodguard, changing the weather, etc.) to break down Covenant's resistence; to punish and (ideally) destroy the part of Covenant's nature that might not actually *want* to be a Despiser. My point here is that Lord Foul's plans depend, not on his (in)ability to control such details as the rape of Lena, but rather on his perception of Covenant's true nature.

As I see it, therefore, Lord Foul had no idea that Covenant's first significant action in the Land would lead to the breaking of the Law of Death. He simply worked very hard to encourage something like that--and to take advantage of any signs of weakness in Covenant (of which there are many).

In "The Second Chronicles," of course, Lord Foul's plotting becomes far more detailed (e.g. Marid's venom, and everything Lord Foul does to exacerbate that problem for Covenant). He's learned from his previous mistakes. But my central point remains: Lord Foul's plotting still revolves around his perception of character (Linden's as well as Covenant's in this case), not around his ability to foresee and manipulate events on a micro level.

(05/23/2005)

[wayfriend]

My point here is that Lord Foul's plans depend, not on his (in)ability to control such details as the rape of Lena, but rather on his perception of Covenant's true nature.

Which seems to say either one of two things: either Lord Foul's dead-on accuracy at predicting the future is more fortuitous than informed; or his "macro-manipulation" techniques exceed anything we might imagine being possible.

What worries me about this better-to-be-left-unanswered answer is the relation to Runes. Esmer is timeloose; he avows that the Elohim are as well. Which implies that not all things contained in the Arch are as 'truncated' as Donaldson describes. And I find it difficult to credit that Foul cannot do anything that Esmer can, although it must be a possibility.

[High Lord Tolkien]

My point here is that Lord Foul's plans depend, not on his (in)ability to control such details as the rape of Lena, but rather on his perception of Covenant's true nature.

Which seems to say either one of two things: either Lord Foul's dead-on accuracy at predicting the future is more fortuitous than informed; or his "macro-manipulation" techniques exceed anything we might imagine being possible.

What worries me about this better-to-be-left-unanswered answer is the relation to Runes. Esmer is timeloose; he avows that the Elohim are as well. Which implies that not all things contained in the Arch are as 'truncated' as Donaldson describes. And I find it difficult to credit that Foul cannot do anything that Esmer can, although it must be a possibility.

Except that Esmer and the Elohim are being of Earthpower.
Foul is not.
Maybe there are things "timewise" that Foul can not access or manipulate like the Elohim can with their earthpower.
And even if he can, which I also believe, neither Esmer nor the Elohim can break the Arch and that's Fouls *only* goal so no skills or power they have are any good to Foul.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

They can drive covenant along, or other characters. They can be part of the macro planning, right?
As they are, obviously with that 'shadow' on their heart or whatever.

[dlbpharmd]

Yet another interesting Q&A from today's GI:

Hod: Steve
Many thanks for a superb book.
One question...Given the number of laws that have now been broken, and the failure of the creator to "turn up" at the start of the latest journey...Is the creator walking in the land?

I look forward to the next installment.
J

It won’t surprise you to hear that this falls under the heading of RAFO. <grin> But we all have to ask ourselves: how many broken “Laws” does it take to make the entire system collapse?

(05/29/2005)

[wayfriend]

... I'm asking myself, how many GI questions does it take to make SRD slip out a spoiler?

[kevinswatch]

Ooo. Interesting... Maybe. Heh.-jay

[Warmark]

... I'm asking myself, how many GI questions does it take to make SRD slip out a spoiler?

783.
Thats my prediction.