The Gradual Interview

[Revan]

Revan, that was a great question. I hope you also post it, and the answer, in that wonderful old "What is evil?" thread kicking around in the TC forum.

I don't believe in evil Duchess. So to me it has no real connection.

But feel free to post it if you feel it will contribute to the discussion.

[wayfriend]

Some interesting bits about Donaldson's vocabulary and entymology:

Ian: Really quick question on pronunciation. How do you pronounce Coercri? I see it as "care-cry" bur am not completely sure... thank you for your time.
__________

As far as I'm concerned, you can pronounce things any way that suits you. But personally, I pronounce it COOR-cree. I was thinking of the French word for "heart" (coeur [sp?]) and added "cry," but I made some mental adjustments while I thought about it.

(02/27/2006)

COOR-cree? I never would have imagined that one. I'm partial to COOR-CRY myself, equal emphasis on both syllables.

Lindsay Addison: Hi Steve,
You've been thanked/praised/blamed many times over for your written work, so assuming that is an understood, I'd like to thank you for your humor and tolerance in responding to questions. I doubt I'm the only one, but I follow the GI as much for a good laugh as anything else.

And so, in a spirit of some facetiousness, but with sincere puzzlement, I would like to ask what the heck did you mean by the word "latias"? I have looked in all concievable sources and have come up empty. This is quite a feat in and of itself, since I've found entries even for roynish (thanks, OED).

For reference, here's the quotation in which it appeared.

"It appeared to be a dwelling of some kind, a tall, open-sided construct planted in the grass. Bare poles at the corners, and at intervals along the sides, supported a latticed ceiling of smaller wooden shafts like LATIAS; and sod had been placed over the lattice to form a roof of deep grass."
(RotE 256, U.S. hardcover)

Help! <G>
__________

Well, OBviously you didn't consult your Spanish-English dictionary. <grin> Or maybe I made that part up. The text describes "latias" pretty well. A "latia" is a long stick, typically about as thick as a wrist, and as straight as possible, used to support a roof of some kind. Of course, they don't necessarily form a lattice. Usually they're laid side-by-side to form a platform on which roofing materials (sod, leaves, tar-paper, whatever) can be placed. Latias are not uncommon in the US Southwest, even in up-scale homes (they aren't really practical for commercial structures).

(02/27/2006)

I like the emphasis on OB-viously. So we can conclude that anyone not living in New Mexico has no guarantee that they'll understand anything SRD writes ...

Anyway, I always thought Latias was

• 

However, I now see that sticks are a better choice for building.

[Prom_STar]

Clearly SRD intended that Pokemon reference.... just like, though he always claims he's no polemicist, his entire point with the Covenant books is actually to promote tree-hugging (oh and Foul is Hitler too)

Seriously, I laughed aloud seeing that, Wayfriend.

[dlbpharmd]

COOR-cree? I never would have imagined that one. I'm partial to COOR-CRY myself, equal emphasis on both syllables.

Co-ER-kree.

[Warmark]

Co-er-cry

[KAY1]

I agree I always thought of it as Co-Er Cry

It's funny how people see a word and imagine completely different pronunciations to other people.

It doesn't help when you get stupid words which are pronounced in no way similar to how they are written.

[I'm Murrin]

I've always gone with Co-er-cree.

[Nerdanel]

I've pronounced it in Finnish: Koerkri. (In fact I still do.) Explaining to English-speakers how to pronounce Finnish is however a task I don't wish to engage in. Finnish spelling is very simple and logical but English is most definitely not, and that's not national pride talking.

[KAY1]

It's true, a lot of languages are said how they look, whereas english has many stupid words where the pronounciation has nothing in common with the spelling and words can mean many different things, although pronounced and spelt in the same way.

[Prom_STar]

I'm pretty sure a lot of that has to do with English being a mutt of languages. There's all sorts of French, German, and Latin thrown in there--all of which have their own pronunciation rules.

[dlbpharmd]

Talon: This could be a spoiler for Runes..

Taking into account hints (or bits of text my delusional mind has taken as hints)..

1. ... was Foul truly betrayed at the way things turned out at the end of the Second Chronicles or was someone else...?

2. Linden Avery's hole in her shirt from being shot sure would fit a krill blade nicely... (Does that count as a question or a statement?)

1. Wait a minute. Who says that Lord Foul was "betrayed" at the end of "The Second Chronicles"? I thought he was "defeated," which may be the same thing from his point of view, but which is not the same thing at all from everyone else's point of view. But was there *some* kind of betrayal hidden away in Lord Foul's defeat in "The Second Chronicles"? Or even in the first trilogy? Hmmm.

2. You're visualizing a different dagger than I am. The one that I have in mind has a flat double-edged blade, so it isn't likely to produce a circular hole.

(03/01/2006)

"Some kind of betrayal?"

[I'm Murrin]

The defeat of Foul - the very act of fighting him - could be called a betrayal of self, if you take the 'dream' view.

[dlbpharmd]

Runes spoiler:

Spoiler

Guy Andrew Hall: Is it my imagination, or is Lord Foul actually much weaker in this chronicle?

Since his defeat was of his own hand, and seemed to be so utterly complete, I would think he had to have actually did more damage by expending all of his essence in attacking Thomas Covenant at the end of "The White Gold Wielder" then occurred in the ritual of desecration or the battle between him and Covenant in TPTP. As such, he would simply not be as restored as in the other two chronicles.

Oh, and I like how you've lowered the tone of despair and doubt in this chronicle. It shows that what had transpired earlier did indeed result in the personal growth of Linden.

However, I have a bone to pick with you. You make several mentions of Covenant being dead, even by Covenant himself, then turn around and have him appear at the end of the book. That is just not nice. Not nice at all. Because I was really enjoying the development of the story. I could shake my head yes, that makes sense for this or that to happen.

I had no problem with Anele being the son of Sunder and Hollian, and even thought such at the first mention of Linden perceiving his Earthpower. Having Cail’s son be a character was flat out ingenious.

But to bring Covenant back? I should have listened to my little voice at the back of my head that said "He does protests too much." But no..... I had to enjoy the book too much, get into it's flow, care about the characters and find myself railing at the Masters for being so incredibly pig headed and narrowminded. So, I was caught off guard when you supposedly brought Thomas Covenant into the story.

Now, will you please hurry up and get the next book out! I can’t stand the wait.

Sorry, this will have to be filed under "spoilers."

Someone (Einstein?) defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results." By that definition, Lord Foul isn't weaker: he's smarter. Sure, he's keeping more of his cards hidden these days--which may give rise to the impression that he has fewer of them. But (if you'll forgive a violent change of imagery) I think he's simply seen what happens when he relies on cannon-fodder (literally in the first trilogy, metaphorically in the second), so he's changed his tactics: now he's brought in the battleships and is using his long guns. In other words, he's manipulating some very powerful proxies instead of risking himself more directly. Does that make him *weaker*? Well, from some perspectives smarter *is* weaker. But if you were Linden Avery, and you looked at Lord Foul that way, you would be in real trouble.

As for your objection (?) to Covenant's appearance at the end of "Runes": what have I ever done as a writer to give you the impression that you can't trust me?

(03/01/2006)

[Prom_STar]

I've got to say, I really liked that last line (of the above spoiler).

[KAY1]

I think the 'betrayal' of Foul came from the fact that he believed he had won. he believed Covenant was finally giving him what he wanted because he had bettered him, but Covenant fooled him, which I guess could be called a betrayal. Perhaps suggesting somone else was betrayed means that Covenant's reasons for giving up his ring etc will turn out to be false and he in fact was fooled, making things even worse.

[wayfriend]

Hey SgtNull!

It probably isn't fair to say that "Power [always] corrupts," but it is certainly true that "Power tends to corrupt." (Some interesting studies have been made about the effect of being prison guards on otherwise-decent people.)

Just thought it sounded like your department ... comments?

[I'm Murrin]

(Some interesting studies have been made about the effect of being prison guards on otherwise-decent people.)

Ah. "The Experiment". Infamous, that - even been some movies made about it.

[Prom_STar]

In the GI, someone submitted the german names of the covenant books--can't say I like them too much

Die Runen der Erde (Runes)
--this is ok. it literally is "the runes of the earth"
Die Macht des Rings (First Trilogy)
--not so good. literally is "the power of the ring." Seems like giving ammo to the "Covenant is a LOTR clone" folks
Der Bogen der Zeit (Second Trilogy)
--I'm divided on this one. translates as "the arch of time." But is that the best they could think of to sum-up the second chronicles? I mean, the AoT plays an important role in every covenant book--and it is not the main focus of the SC.

On a side note, I'd be curious to see a copy of these books. After all, so much of the power of SRD's writing comes in his use of words---ie the way he utilizes the english langauge. I don't think that necessarily translates. At the very least, German is far more structured than English. A German-reader might have a very different view of SRD than we do--assuming everyone here read the english version, which I suppose might not necessarily be true.

[Avatar]

There are numerous threads on the various translations, and I think they're generally accepted as being fairly atrocious. Particularly the French version. Search the forum, there are some funny mistranslations.

--A

[Nerdanel]

Arch of Time? It sounds like it's meant to evoke the vastly inferior Wheel of Time. Argh.

I have to wonder about the covers too. Unlike they suggest, none of the books contain dragons, and I have no idea what that mask thing is supposed to be. It looks like one of those death masks from antique royal graves.

First Chronicles cover

Second Chronicles cover

Runes cover