Kevin's Watch

Fist and Faith wrote:"Dark and Hung"

I don't know, I've always considered myself fair-skinned, but who am I to argue?

At first, I thought Fist was dipping into the ol' diamondraught again, but I just read the interview and I get it now. FUNNY!

He answered my second question! WOW! Again... it is true that the question was as devoid of intellect as the first... But i'm still happy. Hopfully... he'll consider my third question one that contains any measure of intellect. Which is the same question I asked in this topic. kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1649

Peter B.: First of all, let me thank you for all of your creativity and imagination through the years. Your stories and characters, especially those in the Chronicles, continue to touch me.

What are your thoughts concerning Joseph Campbell's The Hero's Journey and stages as it relates to the writing process? Author Neil Gaiman once said that he stopped reading Campbell's explanation of the steps because he didn't want to consciously be limited by them.

I don't actually have any thoughts on Campbell because I've never read him. I did, however, read an article in which he was quoted as saying something to the effect that there are no heroes in literature after World War I, and that if we want to understand "The Hero's Journey" in modern times we have to watch movies. I have nothing against movies, of course; but Campbell's assertion (always assuming that I understood it) was such rampant bullshit that the man lost all credibility with me.

I have no idea who Campbell is or what this is really about - but the last line of SRD's answer was so surprisingly funny that I had to pass this on.

So if Covenant resists his dark side in the first series, and embraces it in the second one...

Anybody else see SRD making Covenant the new Foul? Maybe directly merging with him or something, i dunno.

Oh yes, Seppi. SRD himself said it...

SRD wrote:Ok. In a hundred words or less. In the First Chronicles, Thomas Covenant faces Lord Foul and defeats him. In the Second Chronicles, Thomas Covenant surrenders to Lord Foul and accepts him. In the Last Chronicles, Thomas Covenant becomes Lord Foul. Following the psychological paradigm through, what happens at the point that you become your own other self is that you become whole, and the universe is made new.

So, in some way...Covenant does become Foul. Not sure what the implications of that are. It's been touched on in other threads tho....

We also know, that this will be the "end" of the Land as we know it. I'll have to find that quote again....

and he has answered mine! thanks for that, Mr. SRD!
Oh, if only he popped in here at the Watch from time to time; there would be some interesting conversations...

Yeah, the Campbell thing is a riot!! He's usually spoken of with such reverence, it's great to see another pov. I only know of him, myself, and that he's done tons of stuff along the lines of comparative mythology.

I haven't read any Joseph Campbell either. I only came to know him through the interviews he did with Bill Moyers on the TV special, The Power of Myth. I guess his biggest "claim to fame", if you will, was that George Lucas openly acknowledged Campbell's writings as a central influence on the shaping of the Star Wars mythology. I can see how people would revere Campbell, since he seemed to be a sincere chap who knew what he was talking about. (He died in 1987, by the way.)

Actually, I found Campbell's ideas--at least as he presented them in his interviews with Moyers--to be quite illuminating. For myself, I'm not ready just yet to dismiss Campbell's assertions as total BS. But, wow, what a smackdown by Donaldson! This is why I respect SRD, too: the man doesn't mince words when something (or someone) annoys him! I sure hope I never come to write anything that he would view as rampant BS. I'd go find a rock to hide myself under for a very looong time...

Ah, that Donaldson guy's a 2-bit hack.

Well, now we know how SRD feels about Campbell and the Hero's Journey. I most assuredly won't be asking any more questions along those lines! Sheesh! I vaguelly remember Campbell saying something about fiction and heroes, but dismissed it as misguided. My one criticism of Campbell, who I admire greatly, is that he tended to overlook modern book fiction as a source of heroes and myth. I can understand how SRD would take umbrage over a contention that all modern fiction characters are in some way inadequate. That would after all, include SRD's own characters, which are very real, and in the case of the Chronicles, very mythic. That said, I'm a little disappointed that SRD would dismiss Campbell and his whole body of work on the basis of one comment without even reading anything he's written.

You know what they say about first impressions. We don't take a road unless it seems inviting.

there are no heroes in literature after World War I

sounds pretty iffy to me, too.

Good advice! That makes sense Joy. And I certainly can't fault Mr. Donaldson for his honesty.

Does anyone else think that the original chapter breaks for the Second Chrons seem depressing as heck?

Book 1 ends after the Soothtell
Book 2 ends after the flight from Elemensdene (sp)
Book 3 ends at the sinking of the One Tree
Book 4 is WGW

Books 1 2 3 would all be severe downers.

1) Hey, it's your fault the Land is all screwed up
2) You're not that important. And you can't do anything now. <Nelson>ha, ha</nelson>
3) Yeah... your bright idea failed

I mean... Geez.

LOL!! Isn't it the truth, though! That would have better underlined Covenant's plight, and made the decision he made in the end sound even worse.

In the Gradual Interview Mark Jeffery wrote: But you're quite right about the "shared identity" theme. I was explicitly thinking of the Creator, the Despiser, and wild magic as aspects of Covenant himself.

Okay --- Covenant == Creator? This rather stunned me, as I had not expected it. Did I miss some clues here?

(P.S. Does this mean that Covenant == Worm of the Worlds End?)

"Quantum physics teaches us that observers contribute to the results of measurements that they make. Since the Universe is a quantum system, some distinguished physicists have argued that, in a sense, we create the Universe by observing it. "

"Participatory philosophy is the realisation that we create the universe in our own image."

What he said

"participatory philosophy". I never knew it had a name. I just knew it as "You create your own reality."

Actually, it's mostly the other particles that create the universe -- it isn't just an observer, but simples photon, that resolves the quantum states...

Still, it's a nice, silly idea I guess.