Kevin's Watch

No TC first noticed the ward, birinair then walked into it and im sure covenent pushed him through by contacting the white gold ring to destroy the ward

Drool needed Fouls lore to use the stone and it was only cut into slithers three

No factual basis to confirm this, but what if the IS started out smaller, and then simply "grew" as it was used for more and more ill purposes?

dw

Didnt someone say to TC you have mastered a great power and yes the staff was threwn in and covernant grebed it and the wild magic and staff destroyed the ward

jackgiantkiller wrote:No TC first noticed the ward, birinair then walked into it and im sure covenent pushed him through by contacting the white gold ring to destroy the ward

Drool needed Fouls lore to use the stone and it was only cut into slithers three

No, you are confusing the Word of Warning on the bridge that TC warned the Bloodguard about. TC didn't see the Forbidding guarding the Second Ward till after Birinair walked into it, then it was visible to everyone. Prothal used his staff to knock B through the wall but could not reach him because the fire threw him back. THEN TC grabbed Prothal's staff and the power of the ring overcame the Forbidding.

Drool Rockworm used the Staff of Law and Lord Foul controlled him with the power of the Illearth Stone.

No he didn't, Foul never had control of the Stone till after Drool died...that was why he manipulated events to get the Lords to try to take away the SoL from Drool, as long as Drool controlled both Staff and Stone, Foul was completely at Drool's mercy and whims.

hyarmion wrote:Something in the First Chronicles has always bugged me, how big was the Illearth Stone? I am assuming the Stone was approximately spherical. In my imagination I think of it as being spherical but multi-faceted. Like a giant sized cut gemstone.

These questions are at least easily answered. In Karen Wynn Fonstad's "Atlas of the Land" (proof read and verified in it's final form by Donaldson himself - he actually refers in the forward to the hours he spent checking the final product) the stone is shown to be hemi-spherical, smooth of surface, approximatly 10 feet in diameter and resting on a raised hexagonal plinth before Foul's throne in the Thronehall of Ridjeck Thome. That the problem of Drool's handling of the stone (or indeed a piece of it) remains, I am aware - but at least we know what we are dealing with.

Wow! I seem to have stopped this thread dead in its tracks - and I was really pleased with myself that I had demonstrated beyond argument (hem hem) 'the size if the Illearth stone'. Perhaps thats it - perhaps when all questions are answered there remains nothing left to say!

I am with DukkaWaynhim theory that originally the IS was of a smaller size and over the forty years LF used his mystical might to greatly enhance it's size, not unlike a 'grow your own crystal' chemistry set.

This also could have been how LF got the three pieces for the ravers.

My assumption is that the IllEarth Stone can grow or shrink as its wielder desires.

I think that the fragments the Giant-Ravers used were rather large-- the Giants were 12-15 foot tall as I recall. In "Lord Mhoram's Victory" The Giant-Raver held the Stone over Mhoram's head with both hands.

In The Wounded Land the Stonemight fragment was large enough to fit comfortably in a human hand.

peter wrote:Wow! I seem to have stopped this thread dead in its tracks - and I was really pleased with myself that I had demonstrated beyond argument (hem hem) 'the size if the Illearth stone'. Perhaps thats it - perhaps when all questions are answered there remains nothing left to say!

Sorry, but I can't buy into Fonstad's claim for the size at all. There is no textual support for it whatsoever. Drool could not have lifted such a stone, nor could Covenant have wrapped his arms around it.

wayfriend wrote:Sorry, but I can't buy into Fonstad's claim for the size at all. There is no textual support for it whatsoever. Drool could not have lifted such a stone, nor could Covenant have wrapped his arms around it.

But surely if it was approved by Donaldson himself in its final form.....? Or is this just evidence that either i) Donaldson was not really all that interested in visual representations of 'his' Land etc, but was contracturally obligated by Del Ray books to make some nice noises at the beginning of Fonstad's Atlas, or ii) that this is indeed evidence (ie the stone size problem) of a rare 'breakdown in continuity' in the otherwise tight structure of the books. Perhaps for Donaldson in writting the books the Illearth Stone was more of a concept of Evil than a physical object to be looked at, and it is only in the cold light of being read by a (particularly observant I have to say) third party that the 'error' comes to light (though surely a good proof reader would have spotted it).

Donaldson has written many times that he cannot think visually at all: that's got to cause problems in some way. And there are times when he mentions specific dimensions that just make me say: that's impossible. (Like the Revelstone tower being 1000 feet tall - that's like 70 stories!)

And signing off might not mean that he agreed with every detail.

And Donaldson would be the first to say that everyone's vision of his story is as valid as anyone elses, even his own.

It may be that any literary work of scope is doomed to present inconsistencies of one kind or another if it is picked apart line by line - almost like the inherent presence of uncertainty at the quantum level of matter. I read an essay on the prolems of this nature in WS's Hamlet on one occasion and it made you wonder why anyone would ever bother to read it. (I love it by the way).

The discrepancy is between Fonstad's book about Donaldson's book, and Donaldson's book. So it's not an internal inconsistency.

Ive actually got a illearth stone, I got it off a man in bar fo £40($60), he promised me it was real and just like the one in the land, he had gone back in time and dug it up, its a big rock twice the size of a football, and is bright green, it loooks painted but he said that was magic covering, it doesnt do much but thats cos i havent got the magic words yet, he going to give me them for a price. then i will rain terror on you all ahahahaha

wayfriend wrote:The discrepancy is between Fonstad's book about Donaldson's book, and Donaldson's book. So it's not an internal inconsistency.

Fair point - but are we not discussing whether or not there is an internal inconsistancy within Donaldsons book (and if not, how the 'apparent' discontinuity is to be explained).

peter wrote:

wayfriend wrote:The discrepancy is between Fonstad's book about Donaldson's book, and Donaldson's book. So it's not an internal inconsistency.

Fair point - but are we not discussing whether or not there is an internal inconsistancy within Donaldsons book (and if not, how the 'apparent' discontinuity is to be explained).

Sorry. I took "any literary work of scope is doomed to present inconsistencies" to mean that we were.

Perhaps, Wayfriend, I need to clarify myself (not for the first time in my long and absurd life I assure you! )
I do not believe that the apparent discrepancy in the size of the IES exhibited in the CTC is deliberate, and explainable by some reasoning hidden from us, or at least not set down on paper in the stories. On the contrary, I believe it to be a case of literary inconsistency (what in films would be called a break down of continuity), explainable by Donaldson's more 'metaphysical' than 'physical' vision of his world. In fairness I (like yourself I believe) don't really think that Donaldson scrutinised every tiny aspect of Fonstad's Atlas - It seemed (I'm asamed to admit) like a fun thing to say at the time.

p.s. LOVE the new Avatar!

peter wrote:p.s. LOVE the new Avatar!

Thanks!

It's not the size that matters, it's how you use it.

dANdeLION wrote:It's not the size that matters, it's how you use it.

Yes - but you never heard an evil demi-god with a big stone say that!