In response to malik. I appreciate the time you took to provide a reasoned response. [mod edit - deleted]
Sure, he’s crafting a story and has certain things he needs to do in order to keep it moving along—such as not giving TC too much power too soon. This isn’t a “deus ex machina.” It’s a basic necessity of story telling.
The only difference between TC and a greek tragedy is that instead of a god intervening once problems become insurmountable, god had TC intervene. Of course the struggle is the story, in this case as in any other work of fiction, but no matter what happens, what kind of struggle ensues, the reader knows that white gold will intervene in the end and everything will turn out peachy, just like a greek tragedy.
Whether it’s Superman or Jedi, they have to have a limit on their power or you have no conflict. No conflict, no story.
If you want to point out examples of good story telling, then why did you mention superman? Come on man, superman's a poorly crafted propaganda tool to indoctrinate children. Also, the jedi weren't enabled with all powerful instruments. They were no more powerful than the sith, so that example isn't applicable.
TC’s limits aren’t like kryptonite. It’s not arbitrary. It doesn’t arise solely from “author-necessity.”
Not until the second series. At that point, they were nothing if not arbitrary. How many times was covenant unconscious or catatonic? Then at the end, when lack of consciousness was becoming stale, he made yet another vow akin to his vow never to kill- his vow never to use power.
Aside from that, a point I never even mentioned was how many times SRD used the stephen king-esque strategy of his characters lapsing into deep introspection every time immediate action was required of them (ostensibly to create suspense, but which really just creates annoyance). That is a thoroughly annoying tool of pulp fiction that's on par with people breaking out into song in musicals. People, in reality, don't lapse into deep speculative thought when some immediate action is required of them. I don't care how much that trick is utilized in contemporary pop fiction, it's lame and completely unrealistic.
TC’s central conflict is his own alienation from his passions, because (as a leper) he thinks hope is a destructive illusion. He has sealed off this aspect of himself in order to protect himself from feeling pain or misleading hope. And by doing so, he has cut himself off from his own humanity.
Yes, I understood that at 12 when I first read the series.
That's pure speculation on your part. You don't know that the Unfettered wouldn't exist if Linden hadn't been there.
Fair enough. However, she caused hundreds of people to live that would have died. Those hundreds of people would have had tens to hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of descendants in the course of 7,000 years, so pretending that she could have caused changes of that degree without destroying the arch of time suggests a lee-way to do just about anything if SRD can manage to either avoid mentioning the repercussions or attach an implausible explanation to them.
Perhaps the Theomach originally provided the idea of the unfettered himself, by doing exactly what Linden did: heal Berek’s men.
Or perhaps all those people that were healed were killed in battle shortly afterward. Or perhaps they all established a town in some other part of the world and passed out of this history. Or perhaps whatever or whatever. I could go on forever bringing up objections, and you could spend just as much time countering them. The point is that once time travel is introduced, it becomes much more difficult, if not impossible, for the reader to suspend disbelief.
You haven’t proven a single point about Donaldson by spoiling Star Trek for everyone.
If I could "spoil" a star trek movie for you, you've got deeper issues to worry about than SRD's books. If you don't go into a star trek movie with the assumption that it'll suck, you need therapy.
I’m not completely closed-minded to the idea that Donaldson manipulates the story for his own reasons.
Good, because every author does.
One final point. I can be an asshole.
[mod edit - deleted]
you might actually find that you like some of the people here
Who says I don't? Just because I like to argue doesn't necessarily mean I dislike anyone here. And I've already said that I like the new series and think it shows a remarkable maturity in the writer.
many here have met Donaldson numerous times—some even know him personally
[mod edit - deleted]
Until you put in the time and effort to try to understand these novels, you're just making yourself look closed-minded
If I ever do come to "understand" these novels, then I'll have to figure out more than what you've said, because you've said nothing that I didn't already know by 13. You see covenant's inner turmoil as the point of the story (as SRD intended you to) and I view it as a poorly created psychology in order to prohibit the use of white gold. Covenant's complaints and reasoning throughout the first two series (as well an linden's) is just meaningless psycho babble. You think I don't understand it when in reality- I'm just not buying it.
It has been shown that this is false. . . I'll link you to the biography that disproves this theory as soon as I can locate it again.
I'll take your word for it. TTLG is a good book whether LC was moe-lestering kids or not.