For's vs Against's [and 'Real World Protagonists]

[peter]

I have noticed that those who are 'for' the Last Chrons tend to respond to the criticisms of those who are 'against' with the accusation that 'you just don't get it - It's all metaphysical, psychological, self refferential, allegorical etc, etc'

Those who are 'against' the Last Chrons, on the other hand tend to see those who are 'for' them as stuck in a rut of adoration of SRD and anything TC related he writes, to the point where they just cannot admit to themselves, let alone the rest of us that the Last Chrons were way below par and dull stuff by any standard of judgement.

These are the extremes of the viewpoints of the two opposing factions and tend to be only fallen back on in the case of extreme cornering of an individual by one side or another - by and large the debate to date has been well worthy of the lofty ideals of the Watch as a whole and a whole lot of fun to boot.

Just thought I'd say that, but while you're here - in one of the other threads a poster made refference to a comment of SRD's at the beginning of 'Gilden Fire' that all 'scenes' in the Chrons occur in the presence of individuals from 'the real world' [TC, Linden, Jeremiah, or Hile Troy]. Gilden Fire was taken out on the basis of this lack of a real world protagonist [ie only Bloodguard and Lords present] because it did not 'fit' on this basis and undermined the 'real or unreal' dichotomy of the way the reader viewed the Land. My question is why did SRD persist with this even in the face of the apparent conformation of the Lands reality at the end of series 1 and even harder conformation at the end of series 2. Do you think he always had in mind he possibility of doing a re-take and throwing it back into the realms of a 'dream'?

[Savor Dam]

Actually, even in the First Chronicles, there are considerable portions (essentially everything that happens at Revelstone other than the abortive summonsing during the snakebite) that take place with no "real world" character present. There is also one chapter in TIW that I seem to recall was set in Mhoram's POV.

[dlbpharmd]

There is also one chapter in TIW that I seem to recall was set in Mhoram's POV.

IIRC, this was the chapter when Covenant comes back to Revelstone after spending time with the Unfettered One of Glimmermere, and shows up at Mhoram's living quarters.

[iQuestor]

Gilden-Fire was indeed removed since it did not include Covenant as the POV character. SRD had said this a few times.

There is a scene in TIW where Mhoram contemplates the Marrowmeld scultpure made by Elena and realizes it represents both Bannor and TC, opposite sides of the same coin, and he infers that the Oath Of Peace is the counterbalence of the Ritual Of Destruction; In essence, the Oath Of Peace holds the Lords back from an enduring defeat of Despite. In the gradual interview I beleive SRD said he lobbied to keep this part in at the protest of LDR. But its one of the few scenes where TC or Hile isnt the real POV character.

[Iolanthe]

There is a scene in TIW where Mhoram contemplates the Marrowmeld scultpure made by Elena and realizes it represents both Bannor and TC, opposite sides of the same coin, and he infers that the Oath Of Peace is the counterbalence of the Ritual Of Destruction; In essence, the Oath Of Peace holds the Lords back from an enduring defeat of Despite. In the gradual interview I beleive SRD said he lobbied to keep this part in at the protest of LDR. But its one of the few scenes where TC or Hile isnt the real POV character.

Doesn't that scene occur in TPTP? I've got to the Garrotting Deep bit in TIL war and, unless my memory is severely playing me up, don't remember the Mhoram/marrowmeld incident. I seem to remember that Mhoram's discovery disturbed the other Lords in TPTP as he didn't share it until much later.

[dlbpharmd]

That scene is in TPTP.

[Condign]

My question is why did SRD persist with this even in the face of the apparent conformation of the Lands reality at the end of series 1 and even harder conformation at the end of series 2.

Actually, I never thought there was a confirmation of the Land's reality at the end of the First Chronicles. Although he could have taken the Creator's voice at face value, he also could have subconsciously overhead a nurse mentioning horse-derived antivenom.

I thought it was still nicely ambivalent.

However, at the end of the Second, where Linden wakes up with the ring in her hand - there's no ambivalence here. It seems quite real, and the fact that they are 'sharing a dream' would also be in the Land's favour.

[I'm Murrin]

A full half of TPTP is from Mhoram's PoV.

As for the first post, I enjoyed it, I think it's a good book but not a great one, and has its flaws. And I don't pay attention to all the comments about it being allegorical.

[ussusimiel]

I think that SRD has made it very clear in his different interviews that while he sustained the 'Land as a dream' theme for the first two books of the 1st Chrons (which is why Gilden-Fire was removed from TIW), by TPTP he had dropped all efforts to maintain this. The reason for this is that the reality or not of the Land was no longer an influence on TC's behaviour. Much of TPTP is from the POV of people of the Land.

Personally, I haven't really considered that the possibility of the Land being a 'dream' as an important factor in the Chrons since the end of TIW.

u.

[EDIT: to fix typo.]

[Joe the Lion]

It was me who posed the POV query in another thread (I'd never heard of Gilden Fire till I read it here)

The lack of POV from the natives of the land lends them a certain unreality and makes it easy for Donaldson to despatch them without much thought. I suppose this problem is related to some of my complaints - just an emotional response cut and pasted together, haven't given it too much thought, but that's the point, a gut reaction to something I didn't really care for and was dissapointed by..

· The fate of Joan and Roger bother me. They were his wife and son. In an alternative universe I can imagine Covenant expending as much empathy and effort on them as Linden spent on Jeremiah. But Donaldson had his character abandon them too easily - why? Because Joan broke the 'through sickness and in health' vow. Anyway, Foul/Covenant tormented her at length then killed her. Nice. What about Roger, he was your son Covenant, more of a victim than just about anyone.

· The Lurker has been ruined for any subsequent re-reads 'I used to be bad, but I ain't bad no more'. Same for the Sandgorgons - maybe they were from a lesser branch of the family than those we originally encountered. Remember Nom? (It’s O.K., I never said it out loud)

· Covenant, Linden and Jeremiah were seemingly the only ones that mattered. They frequently shed tears for fallen comrades but ultimately didn't have to face the loss of one of the other two. We all have to face the loss of loved ones – Frodo had to leave Sam – one of them should have fallen.

· The Giants lost friends left right and centre at the end - oh, there goes another into the chasm, never mind, the heroes are still alright - onward and upward. Phani lost Liand but was just expected to get on with it. Imagine if Linden lost Jeremiah. From everything she's said and done previously 'the needs of the many outweigh those of the few' means nothing to her.

· Pages and pages taken up with soul searching and slaughter while major character moments and revelations are given short shrift.

· Names obviously derived from adjectives (Dast, Ard and Feroce) smacks of a ‘can’t be bothered’, ‘that’ll do’ attitude.

[Condign]

I must admit, for a few chapters I was thinking that Panhi would try and assassinate Linden with her garrotte. Or maybe take Jeremiah hostage... And then Covenant would have to try and stop her, lose control and kill there, then the company would be divided, and, and...

... welp, that didn't happen!

[lurch]

...The difference in readership comments is the difference between.....judgmental and appreciative...,,linear and spherical..inside the box and perhaps, no box at all.

I understand readers' views. I do agree with or do not not agree with. I try not to say the way I perceived TCoTC is the only way. I try to put down what I found in the work and hope for similarity or expansion on the observations. I have found..that being positive and forward tends to create more positive and forward from other readers and soon we all are taken to higher level of appreciation..Some times..we create Art ourselves.

The care.. needs to be in the comparison. Judging requires comparison and its just too easy..too human..to be using a standard that is non sequitor to the Work. By following what I appreciate,,discovering and exploring paths of appreciation I find other " modes" to appreciate, other aspects, traits, devices, ..just plain " fun" about the work. When I encounter something that doesn't work i think about it,..maybe,,just the opposite,,clear my head of it and don't think about it at all.,,Out of nowhere a perception is realized giving me understanding. Even so,,coming here creates grand opportunity to be helped and help others. But that becomes more difficult if folks are being judgmental. If I have difficulty with a part of the work,,I consider its my failing.

I know what I am getting out of the work. I am good with it. It connects me to my humanity,,something Donaldson truly intends to happen for all of us.

[TheFallen]

I have noticed that those who are 'for' the Last Chrons tend to respond to the criticisms of those who are 'against' with the accusation that 'you just don't get it - It's all metaphysical, psychological, self refferential, allegorical etc, etc'

Those who are 'against' the Last Chrons, on the other hand tend to see those who are 'for' them as stuck in a rut of adoration of SRD and anything TC related he writes, to the point where they just cannot admit to themselves, let alone the rest of us that the Last Chrons were way below par and dull stuff by any standard of judgement.

That's nicely and bluntly put, Pete

I'd submit that there's a third school of thought, namely mine.

I'm on balance "against" the Last Chrons. I don't find it irredeemably bad at all - how could it be, because SRD has proven himself before now a writer of supreme talent and this shines through on more than one occasion. However, I find it seriously flawed, because I think it devolves into the self-indulgent. As I've said elsewhere, SRD ever-growingly abandons those oh so important demands of narrative, plot and characterisation - they're the crucial elements that draw the reader into a work of fiction in the first place. Instead he focusses - ever more exclusively as the work draws to its damp squib culmination (dramatically speaking) - upon delivering his philosophical view of the world (or Weltanschauung, to use the poncy term).

Frankly, this pisses me off, because I, like all of us here, have years of emotional involvement invested in the entire Chrons of Thomas Covenant and I react badly to such a forced "allegorical" ending. I say "allegorical" in inverted commas, because it's not really. Successful allegory works on multiple levels - to put it simplistically, a great and involving story but with a deeper underlying meaning, for example. In TLD, SRD abandons the "great story" part in an attempt to ram the "meaning" part down our throats.

The reason I've put some considerable thought into why SRD disappointed so many of us - or to put it less kindly, but every bit as accurately, how he screwed up as badly as he did - is because I wanted (in fact almost needed) to find out what he was trying to say. Hence I've come up elsewhere with a Jungian interpretation of the last Chrons, based on fairly blatant clues given by SRD in various interviews. To me, such an interpretation hangs together and thus I think I understand SRD's objective, even if I don't agree with the usefulness of his philosophy, nor do I find anything new in it (see my "Star Trek: The Enemy Within" episode from 1965 comparison to TLD elsewhere - this thread also has all the Jungian claptrap in it). HOWEVER, the fact remains that his authorial methodology in attempting to convey his message irritates the Hell out of me.

Lurch maintains that the LCs should be viewed in a surrealist light - unsurprising, given that the surrealism movement owes a lot of its birth to the theories of Freud and Jung - and proffers that as an excuse. Well okay, not an "excuse" in his eyes, but more a valid yet entirely different take on the LCs. BUT I'm not buying that either, for the simple fact that surrealist literature cannot "work" and permanently flirts with the cliff-edge of self-indulgence. Literature - or reading, if you'd rather - initially requires an intellectual act. Your eyes see the letters, your brain assembles them into words and thus you understand them. It's completely unlike music or visual arts that hotwire themselves into your emotions, bypassing your intellect. Yes of course you can get emotionally involved in a book - as with the 1st and 2nd Chrons where throughout we're spell-bound by the drama of the plot and truly care about the characters that have been so well depicted - but it's your intellect that is the initial gateway. That's why blatant allegory doesn't work, because it abandons detailed characterisation, seamless plot creation and the believable building, then release of dramatic tension. Instead it becomes a preachy puppet show or pantomime. It gets stuck in the gateway of your intellect and thus fails to emotionally involve you. You become estranged from the work - or to get poncy again in terminology, TLD is full of too many accidental -or more likely careless - estranging Verfremdungseffekten... or "clunkers" as I've called them before. These occur because SRD's swapped story-telling for preaching, rather than doing what he's shown himself to be more than capable of before, fusing the narrative and the message seamlessly together.

Yes, there will be those devotees of SRD who, even if at TLD's dénouement TC had turned into a giant cockroach all of a sudden, even if Linden's head and upper torso had abruptly morphed into that of a herring, even if Jeremiah had grown an extra nose, two extra ears and three extra eyes, even if the Arch of Time had appeared melting floppily over the edge of Landsdrop and even if the sky had started raining faceless men in bowler hats clutching umbrellas, would have said "Aaaah, but it's all surrealist, y'see - you just don't get it. You're mistaken to judge it as a narrative work." I'm sorry... you have to judge it as a novel, a work of fiction. It defines itself, fercrissakes - moreover, TLD is the tenth of ten, or at the very least the fourth of four... its nature against which it should be judged is equally defined by the series of which it's an undoubted part. But the massive authorial tangent it clunkingly heads off on only goes to prove that you simply cannot combine the conflicting demands of surrealism and narrative successfully in novelistic form. (Surrealist literature can exist, however... you can have surrealist poetry, as it happens, but only because that form doesn't need to pay heed to any narrative demands). Nevertheless, TLD lapses into self-indulgence and to believe otherwise is to risk mistakenly buying into seeing The Emperor's New Clothes.

So, I'm not making excuses for SRD in the least. He blew it and I'm irritated. Irritated because he has delivered disappointment - yes, I know it's his damn novel, but I'm his damn reader. But as a very small slice of cold comfort, maybe I've vaguely understood what he was trying to tell us. I just wish he'd made the attempt a great deal less ham-fistedly. I wish that - after ten damn books fercrissakes - he'd continued to pay due care, attention and respect goddammit to the narrative so we could have still loved it as well. I think he owed us, his readership, that. As native put it rather well in a related thread:-

A week's reflection on the ending suggests it cannot be taken at face value. It was at one level a happy ending, but at every other somewhat implausible....

...None of this is to excuse the bad writing that became apparent in the last two chapters, though the whole chronicle had paved the way. I suspect Donaldson ended in a philosophical conclusion because he'd stopped caring about his characters as people a long time before. He was therefore acting out an metaphysical dynamic that he really hadn't signposted or sold to the reader intellectually or emotionally.

Precisely. I really REALLY wish it wasn't true, but very sadly, I think that in TLD, SRD ended up disappearing up his own ass a little too much. Over-indulgent navel-gazing on his part combined with a resultant desire to philosophize at us led him to let us down.

[dlbpharmd]

· The Lurker has been ruined for any subsequent re-reads 'I used to be bad, but I ain't bad no more'.

I think this goes back to what Esmer said in chapter 2 of FR:

That which appears evil need not have been so from the beginning, and need not remain so until the end.

However, I suspect the Lurker hasn't really changed. His approach was more "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." It was clear in TLD that the Ranyhyn still fear him, and in the new world of the Land, I think he'll still be a threat. He'll have to find some other puny race to serve him, like the skest, but he'll still be the Lurker.

[peter]

In my opinion the debate following the release of TLD has been by far the best [I think I've been on the Watch for three of the four 3rd Chron releases] - perhaps because we now have the whole of the last Chrons to discuss rather than having only a partial understanding of where SRD was heading. I must admit I for one never saw, not so much where TLD would be headed, but the 'tone' it would adopt [not well put but I hope you will follow me]. For me the book was in some almost intangible way different from the others. It seemed to have a different feel to it - almost as though SRD was trying to draw the 1st and 2nd Chrons lovers whom he had thus far lost, back into the fold [but alas it wasn't working.] Any allegory that is written into TLD is alas lost on me [not suggesting for a minute it isn't there - just that I'm not getting it]. Unless my allegory comes as overtly as 'Animal Farm' together with an english teacher spelling it out, it tends to go over my head.

Wow - 'The Emporers New Clothes' comment above made me smile and I'm guessing a hackle or two would be raised by that one if it were widely broadcast.

Can I just return to the second part of the post re the real world 'protagonist' demands that were clearly quite strictltly enforced by LDR on SRD. What was the purpose of maintaining the 'rule' through the third Chrons when possibly it's abandonment might have allowed SRD more scope with the plot and charachterisation [both areas of significant dissatisfaction within these threads].

[ussusimiel]

Can I just return to the second part of the post re the real world 'protagonist' demands that were clearly quite strictltly enforced by LDR on SRD. What was the purpose of maintaining the 'rule' through the third Chrons when possibly it's abandonment might have allowed SRD more scope with the plot and charachterisation [both areas of significant dissatisfaction within these threads].

My best guess is that the only time he actually really needed the multiple POV's was in TIW and TPTP. In the 2nd Chrons he had two characters from the 'real' world, so when important action was taking place in two places he had those two characters to work with.

TIW and TPTP are sweeping books with armies and campaigns going on. Managing all of it through people telling stories would have been a bit limiting (and in the case of Revelstone in TPTP, nigh on impossible). It might have been used to good effect when the two Ramen went to Revelstone to enlist the aid of the Masters, but when Jeremiah arrives on the scene we have three POVs which is more than enough to be going on with.

u.

[peter]

I think the quality of Gilden Fire as a read demonstrates amply what could have been done with the Chrons with more 'freedom of movement' in this respect [not that I had ANY complaints with the 1st and 2nd as they were presented]. I think the 3rd could have been made spectacular if........no - I will leave it at that; I think the 3rd *could* have been made spectacular point blank!

[ussusimiel]

I don't think that was ever the plan, peter. The Last Chrons was never meant to be a glorious sweeping spectacle. For that to have happened the Land would have had to be a significant character (as it was in TIW). Kevin's Dirt ensured that this was never going to be the case and the only look in that the Land gets is when Linden goes back in time.

But, I think you're right in that multiple points of view, especially using the characters from the Land, could have helped the story immeasureably. We would have spent far less fruitless time in Linden's mind and the pacing could have been dramatically improved.

SRD showed clearly in 'Gilden-Fire' that he could represent the unique differences of a race like the Haruchai excellently well (we find more out about the Haruchai in those few pages than we do in the totality of the rest of the Chrons). If we spent time with Liand, Anele, the Ramen, the Giants, Roger (ur-viles/Waynhim, Cavewights anyone?) we would have come to know them much more intimately and thus come to care for them much more.

I think that SRD could have done this and maintained his (as I see it) attempt to keep the 'glory' of the LCs at a much reduced level as compared to the previous Chrons. We would have experienced the characters as different but also much more 'ordinary' than we might have expected.

u.

[Zarathustra]

I just wanted to add a quick point to the tangential debate about reality and POV ... Mhoram's POV chapters don't necessarily undermine the "dream" hypothesis. If these are all part of TC's mind, then Mhoram is just TC in another guise. We've seen direct evidence through Jeremiah that a person can be fractured into "multiple selves," because this is how he was able to hide from his own possessor.

[Orlion]

The Chronicles are character narratives... specifically, they are about Thomas Covenant, Linden Avery, and somewhat about Jeremiah. They (in their respective Chronicles) are the story. All the other characters are only as important as they relate to these characters. There are benefits and weaknesses to this. Essentially, we get a couple fantastic characters, but the periphery ones will, by necessity, be underdeveloped.

And, if you do not like one of the principal characters, it would make the story very hard to read.

Perhaps my ultimate criticism of the Last Chronicles is that, more then the previous two, it tries to blend "literary" writing with "fantasy genre" writing. And, based on the audience, that's an issue. The audience, expecting a fantasy, do not want to read something like Faulkner. Then others, expecting literary, do not want to read something with fantasy genre conventions.

Donaldson tried to mix, say, Titus Groan with The Sword of Shanara... and that can be very disorienting, particularly over the course of 9 years.