Thoughts on re-reading

[deer of the dawn]

But all through the Chronicles, there is intervention from a higher power: there is some kind of kismet that arises from the nature of the Land. It is not ascribable to the Creator as such, but from the way he created the Land. SRD is very careful to avoid referring to it in any but the most veiled way, but you have to admit there is something going on that guides the main characters from event to event that is more than their cognitive decisions playing out. There is a definite sense of things "meant" to happen. It may not be the "point" of SRD's story, but it is there and does come into play.

[wayfriend]

Certainly predictions, whether overt like "You will place the ring in my hand," or implied, like Vain, create a perception of predestination. But, althouugh it is less pronounced, Donaldson does let us know from time to time that chance always has a hand in things, whether overtly like the Creator saying exactly that, or implied by characters which we feel can go "either way".

It's a hodge-podge of preordained suspense.

The Creator is certainly a higher power. No one expects him to help, though.

[Vraith]

Certainly predictions, whether overt like "You will place the ring in my hand," or implied, like Vain, create a perception of predestination. But, althouugh it is less pronounced, Donaldson does let us know from time to time that chance always has a hand in things, whether overtly like the Creator saying exactly that, or implied by characters which we feel can go "either way".

It's a hodge-podge of preordained suspense.

The Creator is certainly a higher power. No one expects him to help, though.

Yes...but it is more/greater than that.
I hate to keep saying this [or maybe I don't, cuz this is the third or 4th time in various threads...]
Many things are predestined, will occur.
Many more things have greater or lesser probability of happening.
But saying they are "meant" to happen is tricky...because the thing that is "meant" to happen [like handing over the ring] does not, in the end "mean" what people think it will beforehand, even those with the longest, clearest sight and greatest potency.
Partly that's related to the tropes of prophecy...it's misunderstood [due to wording or other device] till it happens, or they make it happen by trying to avoid it, etc.
But, the significant variation [my repetition] is: the weight/importance/effect...the MEANING is not fated/destined even if the event/incident is.
Because the intentions, the ethical/aesthetic/passion, has literal force, literal effect.
I mean love and hate, in the Land, are not merely emotions, they are a form of KNOWLEDGE, as much as logic is.
The outcome is not determined/set in place/fated by a higher power/guiding hand even if the event is [or even if it is merely the logical nature of the world that certain things must happen] It is driven, no matter the hows/whats, by the WHY they do it.
It is bottom-up, it is choices matter...but why a choice is made matters more.
A simple way of saying what I mean, maybe: a bit as if two equally talented/skilled weaponsmiths crafted precisely identical blades...but one became Excalibur and the other broke in its first battle simply and only because of the makers whys.

[Zarathustra]

Covenant repeatedly states that if he does his part some power will intervene to make what he wants possible. Maybe this incident is a more stark example of this than other incidences but it fits his stated beliefs like a hand to a glove.

Damnit, I've said twice now that I was done debating this issue, but you guys/gals keep dragging me back to it with your reasonable points.

You're right, Covenant has many times expected "higher" powers to intervene in order to save him from action. This is seen in his 1st Chrons bargains he makes, explicitly with the ranyhyn and then implicitly with Elena. However, these were flaws of his early stages of development, ways to avoid his responsibility. It wasn't a way to "do his part," as you say. They were inauthentic ways to get out of acting. Thus, they were part of his character's main conflict, that which he had to overcome in order to have a complete character arc--which he did, in PTP.

So, if you can somehow convince me that Donaldson has turned this 1 Chrons weakness into a 2nd Chrons strength, that this was part of his thematic plan and not merely a DeM, then that would be the one argument that could change my mind. Donaldson certainly turned the "fight" solution on its head with "surrender." But it's really hard for me to believe that he wanted to give up the idea of personal responsibility for one's own growth.

But all through the Chronicles, there is intervention from a higher power: there is some kind of kismet that arises from the nature of the Land. It is not ascribable to the Creator as such, but from the way he created the Land. SRD is very careful to avoid referring to it in any but the most veiled way, but you have to admit there is something going on that guides the main characters from event to event that is more than their cognitive decisions playing out. There is a definite sense of things "meant" to happen. It may not be the "point" of SRD's story, but it is there and does come into play.

Well, if you subscribe to the interpretation that the Creator is just as much a part of Covenant as the Despiser, the opposite side of that coin, then this isn't intervention ... it's self-healing. And, as WF says, the Creator can't intervene, because that would destroy the Land, his creation (which may just be another way of saying that Covenant's Creator-side can't be separated from himself--in order to intervene from the "outside"--any more than the Despiser can be separated from himself, in order to be killed).

As for the predestination points ... Lord Foul wasn't predicting, he was noting the conditions of TC's entrance to the Land, which determine the conditions of his exit. TC had already surrendered himself for Joan at the bonfire. There was no getting out of that decision, because of the knife to his chest. Therefore, TC would have to surrender in the end, because you can't fight your own mortality ... you can only choose how to face it: with despite or with love.

[Rau Le Creuset]

Im now re-reading the second chronicles and I have to say I really don't like them near as much as the first or third chronicles.... i see the words "Like Leprosy" every other page now and "Raver!" every other chapter.. its almost like he didn't know what to make happen other than a series of venom relapses.. (imo it gets better when they reach the elohim and stuffs) Just saying to me it kinda feels like SRD tried to write these to quickly.

don't get me wrong i still luv them <3 but im trying to look past my love in the eyes of a different reader and i am seeing some things i think other readers would deem unnecessary

[Zarathustra]

Poliwrath, I echo your sentiments of still loving these books, despite criticism. My comments are more a study of the art of story-telling than a reason to stop reading Donaldson. I wouldn't be here if I didn't love his writing. I've supported him with my dollars since The Real Story came out (when I was first old enough to start paying for things myself), buying every book in hardback as soon as available. I don't regret a single purchase.

My criticism only deepens my appreciation for how difficult it is to create works of such complexity ... that all of us are human and capable of mistakes ... that none of us should think we are more than we are (a message echoed in my current reread by Linden's judgment of Stave, in her first real conversation with him in Mithil Stonedown).

[Orlion]

Poliwrath, I echo your sentiments of still loving these books, despite criticism. My comments are more a study of the art of story-telling than a reason to stop reading Donaldson. I wouldn't be here if I didn't love his writing. I've supported him with my dollars since The Real Story came out (when I was first old enough to start paying for things myself), buying every book in hardback as soon as available. I don't regret a single purchase.

My criticism only deepens my appreciation for how difficult it is to create works of such complexity ... that all of us are human and capable of mistakes ... that none of us should think we are more than we are (a message echoed in my current reread by Linden's judgment of Stave, in her first real conversation with him in Mithil Stonedown).

Yeah, recently, I think I understand what you two are doing... since I was pretty much doing the same thing in the General Literature forum. One can criticize or even acknowledge that something is not "high literature" and still enjoy the work in question and even find it significant.

[Rau Le Creuset]

@ Zarathustra

I agree with everything ur saying man writing stuff like the stuff he writes is not easy and I really do appreciate every page of these books..

Sometimes I go "I can't let my love blind me, I have to read these as if I was a newcomer" and I do try which is where my criticism is coming from

I remember when I was a newcomer it was grade 9 or 10 when my dad was like "John read these books I think u'll really like them" and I was like "cool". I hated them so much.. I re-read them maybe a year or two later and now I can actually say that the first chronicles are my favorite books. now I just re-read the first chronicles cuz I heard the last dark is coming.. and im halfway through the second.. does anyone know when its actually coming out?

[Savor Dam]

The public release will be in October. Order through Amazon (or your favorite online bookseller) and it will arrive on release day. If you prefer a brick-and-mortar store, then make sure you show up on that day and buy.

(Having read it, I can assure you it is worth it!)

[Vraith]

I heard the last dark is coming.. and im halfway through the second.. does anyone know when its actually coming out?

Dude, every Chron fan but you knows that.
[heh..or not.. ]
Official release date is 15 October. [heh...I see savor dam is posting that as I write this].

On a different note...but inspired by trends recent here and other associated threads...

I've spent so much not-posted thought time putting together [and dropping in hunks here in some threads] Grand Chron's TOE, and posting here oppositions to criticisms that bug me, I've never actually posted/argued about the stuff I think DOESN't work.
So much so that a couple folk have said "when you say people are wrong, you're insulting them." Apparently that means I'm calling them stupid cuz they read the same words and thought something different.

Maybe my "No...that's not how it works, you're neglecting BLAH" arguments will carry more weight if I post what I think sucks/fails/shows the author bones instead of the story" stuff.

[which I might soon have time for since so much of the "tank" stuff is devolving into "I assert as fact everything that resembles my ideology" lately. which didn't used to be so so much, and is starting to annoy me.]

[deer of the dawn]

Well, if you subscribe to the interpretation that the Creator is just as much a part of Covenant as the Despiser, the opposite side of that coin, then this isn't intervention ... it's self-healing. And, as WF says, the Creator can't intervene, because that would destroy the Land, his creation (which may just be another way of saying that Covenant's Creator-side can't be separated from himself--in order to intervene from the "outside"--any more than the Despiser can be separated from himself, in order to be killed).

I know you are right because of what SRD has stated about externalizations. I've just never been able to buy into that as I read. To go along thinking, "Okay this character or event is an externalization of Covenant's inner process" just never interested me and I never got on board with that. Which is my problem, of course, not SRD's.

As for the predestination points ... Lord Foul wasn't predicting, he was noting the conditions of TC's entrance to the Land, which determine the conditions of his exit. TC had already surrendered himself for Joan at the bonfire. There was no getting out of that decision, because of the knife to his chest. Therefore, TC would have to surrender in the end, because you can't fight your own mortality ... you can only choose how to face it: with despite or with love.

Which amounts to a kind of Law. Theologically, Law (i.e., biblical law, the 10 Commandments, Leviticus, etc) is the expression of the moral image of God. The "conditions" that must be met could be seen as part of the moral image of the Creator; imprinted on the Land when he created it. (Not to "Christianize" the Chrons, I'm just using the definition to make a point.)

But saying they are "meant" to happen is tricky...because the thing that is "meant" to happen [like handing over the ring] does not, in the end "mean" what people think it will beforehand, even those with the longest, clearest sight and greatest potency.

That is exquisite, Vraith, as an observation and as an element of the Chronicles. And again, so like life.

[Vraith]

Well, if you subscribe to the interpretation that the Creator is just as much a part of Covenant as the Despiser, the opposite side of that coin, then this isn't intervention ... it's self-healing. And, as WF says, the Creator can't intervene, because that would destroy the Land, his creation (which may just be another way of saying that Covenant's Creator-side can't be separated from himself--in order to intervene from the "outside"--any more than the Despiser can be separated from himself, in order to be killed).

I know you are right because of what SRD has stated about externalizations. I've just never been able to buy into that as I read. To go along thinking, "Okay this character or event is an externalization of Covenant's inner process" just never interested me and I never got on board with that. Which is my problem, of course, not SRD's.

As for the predestination points ... Lord Foul wasn't predicting, he was noting the conditions of TC's entrance to the Land, which determine the conditions of his exit. TC had already surrendered himself for Joan at the bonfire. There was no getting out of that decision, because of the knife to his chest. Therefore, TC would have to surrender in the end, because you can't fight your own mortality ... you can only choose how to face it: with despite or with love.

Which amounts to a kind of Law. Theologically, Law (i.e., biblical law, the 10 Commandments, Leviticus, etc) is the expression of the moral image of God. The "conditions" that must be met could be seen as part of the moral image of the Creator; imprinted on the Land when he created it. (Not to "Christianize" the Chrons, I'm just using the definition to make a point.)

But saying they are "meant" to happen is tricky...because the thing that is "meant" to happen [like handing over the ring] does not, in the end "mean" what people think it will beforehand, even those with the longest, clearest sight and greatest potency.

That is exquisite, Vraith, as an observation and as an element of the Chronicles. And again, so like life.

Well, on the first [to Z]...you don't have to do that thinking thing. Cuz the external comment about the nature of such things is really only talking about "what is the nature, how do you tell, a story of this kind."
With time and thought I could probably say it better than I'm about to, but:
Externally, Creator/Despiser are, "literally" externalizations of TC.
But internally that is only meta-literally [or literarilly...a clunky word, but I'll claim it cuz I think I just invented it. I'm sure "the bard" invented some clunkers, too] true as TC expresses it saying he and LF are the "same." They are not "literally" internally the same, nor metaphorically, externally the same. The "identity" of them all [TC/Creator/LF] is wholly a function of the viewpoint one assumes in reading the story.
But, we're people...and one of our most amazing attributes is, if we choose to use it, the ability to intentionally alter our viewpoint/frame.
All three are the same, all three are separate, all three are different levels/expressions/ideations...everyone is all and can choose to go up, down, or try to balance in the middle...there are more possibilities, but I'm boring even myself.
Skip the middle, I have nothing to say..
On the last [to me]:
I'm extraordinarily pleased you think so. I feel kinda gooshie, cuz I disagree so completely with things you believe/have faith in, yet have this long-abiding impression that you're among the best of people...so I like the successful connection/communication.