In the Last Chronicles, Covenant isn't driven by any need resolve anything personal, as he has been in the first two Chronicles.
And I am starting to think, that isn't bad writing, that is an important clue.
Another clue is the way Covenant seems to lack any concern for whether his hands get charred to a crisp by the krill or not. Well, okay, he does care, but not for reasons of his own well-being.
And this is another clue:
The past made us who we are. I cannot help but wonder how Donaldson would apply this sentiment to Covenant's resurrection.In the Gradual Interview, Stephen R Donaldson was wrote:Life is process. The word "mended" sort of implies "returned to its original state". About that I'm skeptical. Everything has moved on. And the whole notion of "mending"--or even "healing"--broken Laws troubles me: it could so easily have the unintended effect of diminishing the significance of the earlier stories. "Well, the Land was in trouble, but now everything is fine. No problem. Ergo: no reason to read the previous books. Or even this one." The past made us who we are. I like to think that I can find a better solution to the dilemma.
(08/30/2006)
Because in the Second Chronicles, Covenant gave his life, and giving his life in the way he did was the meaning of his life. I think Donaldson would consider resurrection a way of diminishing this meaning, at least if it's not handled properly. We've all played video games, so we know that dying in a game isn't significant when you re-spawn in a few seconds. Does self-sacrifice mean anything if it can be erased?
So I suspect that there's more to Covenant's resurrection than being alive again. I think that, in some way, Covenant 2.0 doesn't consider his new life to have the same purpose as the old. Specifically, his new life isn't for himself - it's not for finishing any unfinished business he had in his first true life, nor is it for a second chance of getting a better result. In this way, the meaning he found in his old life isn't touched.
This explains the crispy hands. This explains the missing personal issues.
But this seems, at first, to raise as many issues as it settles. What, for instance, is Covenant's new life for, then? And what is Donaldson trying to say this way?
Well, we know that Covenant has lots of things he "needs to do", and that he is "responsible" for many things in the wide Land. That's a clue.
And he's missing entirely from the first half of the Last Chronicles. Again ... I am starting to think that this isn't bad writing, this is an important clue.
I see something, but it's hard to describe.
As we go from the first Chronicles through the Second to the Last, we see more and more that the Land itself is a reflection of Covenant - everything he does, which is in turn a reflection of who he is. The destruction of the Staff, the emulation of the Humbled, Joan's insanity, Elena's unforgivenness -- all are just different guises of Covenant.
I think as Covenant becomes more god-like, or at least more Creator-like, Covenant's journey is becoming less of a personal journey and more of a journey for the Land itself. Things are less about Covenant, and more about Covenant's Creation. Something that is perhaps slightly reminiscent of the Arthurian notion that the king and the land are connected, except in a Donaldsonian way. Covenant's concerns are far wider now than they were; his personal journey is over, what is left is the Land's journey.
Or -- better -- the Land's journey is now his personal journey. Everything Covenant is, is the Land.
His leprosy, like his hands, are now only things he needs, needs in order to fulfill his responsibilities to the Land.
This explains the extensive set-up before Covenant actually arrives in the narrative. The story really is about Covenant, but it's about Covenant reflected through the state of the Land, and the state of it's peoples, that Linden finds. (Even Linden herself is shaped the way she is shaped because of Covenant.) And this explains why Covenant 2.0's needs and concerns seem more impersonal than before.
These thoughts are ill-formed, but I think it's a good direction to explore anyway. I was hoping people could share their thoughts on this.