Kevin's Watch

There's no need to let this get out of hand. The intention of fora like this is to discuss openly, honestly and with civility. Let's remember that we're all SRD fans, and post accordingly.

..yea well,, what passes for criticism by the OP turns out to be just as proved..not about the author but about anybody who isn't going along with The Jeremiah act by the OP.. That it ends up as a ad hominem attack on me shows how weak his criticism is of the author. Its unsustainable. It falls apart for its false equivalencies.

I offer my views as a choice. Its there. If you want to get into it, its researchable and a positive experience. The more you know of Surrealism the easier you will see the parallels in Donaldson's work here. Thats not me,,in my saffron robes...thats Donaldson and he ain't no Henry Winkler.. TCoTc is not a TV situation comedy. Its a work of literature done in Surrealism like the TV show LOST was done in Surrealism ..like the show Happy Days was NOT DONE in SURREALISM.

I'm just not playing along with the Jeremiah impersonation here. Apparently Jeremiahs talkin with other Jeremiahs wasn't good enough and not enough, so now the OP has to make it outside the box of Jeremiahs issue. Has to insult the non Jeremiahs of the site inorder to make his views stronger amongst the Jeremiahs..

Look,,I'm not playing silly games here. I'm not out to win anything. You can play like you have the creds to be taken serious for your criticism. You can play whatever games you choose. But since you seem to be good at the Jeremiah impersonation..I can't wait for you to find the smarts to kick your raver out of your being and join the adults.

I know what I have found in TCoTC. I know what I enjoy about the TLD, I offer it as a choice here. And just as said by TC..its all for the unknown of the future,,I discuss it here to be further enlightened and to build on it. Okay, so now I kno who is who and what each is saying and their perspectives held. Fine. Really nothing new. How unfortunate when you consider the Last Chrons are so much about exploring and creating a new future.

It seems to me that Donaldson had reason to fear writing the Last Chronicles. He was not quite equal to the story.

However, I'm still glad he made the attempt. I did not feel that the 2nd Chronicles was an ending and wished for a long time for a 3rd Chronicles. I'm grateful that we got them. And they certainly aren't bad. We met some great new characters and got to see a lot of the things that were only hinted at in the first two Chronicles.

I think the big challenge for SRD was that the Last Chronicles were event driven rather than character driven, and that's not his comfort zone. The first two Chronicles were basically Covenant and his allies vs. Lord Foul and his minions, whereas the Last Chronicles featured all of the great powers of his world involved in the storyline, powers that dwarfed the characters and who all had their own agendas, requiring tons of deus ex machinas to get them out of trouble.

The last third of The Last Dark read more like your average fantasy novel than an SRD work. It's almost as if he handed it off to Terry Brooks to finish. It was good action and suspense, but a bit jarring given the way SRD normally resolves his stories.

All that being said, I did enjoy the experience of the Last Chronicles overall. And again, I'm very glad he undertook the project.

The best part is that SRD now leaves us a HUGE world with a 10,000+ year history. I hope he allows other authors to write books about his world and creates a franchise of it. Frankly, he shouldn't be possessive anymore. The Last Chronicles, while not a shark-jumping moment, I believe demolished the "sacredness" of the work due to the change of tone. It should not hurt to let other authors fill out the world he has created. There are still a lot of stories to be told.

Well, that's a little better, but only in places, Lurch. At least not quite so much vertigo from that high horse you were previously sitting on.

lurch wrote:..yea well,, what passes for criticism by the OP turns out to be just as proved..not about the author but about anybody who isn't going along with The Jeremiah act by the OP.. That it ends up as a ad hominem attack on me shows how weak his criticism is of the author. Its unsustainable. It falls apart for its false equivalencies.

I offer my views as a choice. Its there. If you want to get into it, its researchable and a positive experience. The more you know of Surrealism the easier you will see the parallels in Donaldson's work here. Thats not me,,in my saffron robes...thats Donaldson and he ain't no Henry Winkler.. TCoTc is not a TV situation comedy. Its a work of literature done in Surrealism like the TV show LOST was done in Surrealism ..like the show Happy Days was NOT DONE in SURREALISM.

First off and to provide what's very clearly a necessary clarification for you, I am not drawing nor have ever drawn a parallel between the LCs and Happy Days, so you're again mistaken to take me to task for this. Let me disabuse you again. Sure, I used the idiom "jumping the shark" to express my dissatisfaction and sure, that idiom originates from Happy Days, but I'm drawing no correlation with it. That's now clear for you, I trust.

As to the Star Trek episode, thematically speaking - what with the fusing with one's dark side - this could not be more clearly a valid comparison to draw - it's tritely blatant, for God's sakes, for all that you seem to find such an analogy with pop culture in some way offensive. I'm sorry, but no "falling apart on false equivalencies" there.

lurch wrote:I'm just not playing along with the Jeremiah impersonation here. Apparently Jeremiahs talkin with other Jeremiahs wasn't good enough and not enough, so now the OP has to make it outside the box of Jeremiahs issue. Has to insult the non Jeremiahs of the site inorder to make his views stronger amongst the Jeremiahs...

...But since you seem to be good at the Jeremiah impersonation..I can't wait for you to find the smarts to kick your raver out of your being and join the adults.

Tsk tsk. I do suggest you consider dlp's advice in his post at the top of this page and do try to avoid the cheap shots you're so quick to accuse others of. It's a little mean-spirited and unnecessary for you to bang on about those who disagree with your opinion, labelling them as "jeremiahs" - that's amusingly enough exactly the sort of needless and small-minded ad hominem insult which you've accused me of. As I stated in my last reply, it really is allowable to have a differing opinion, a differing take on the LCs from your own. To get so peevish again in your response comes across as, forgive me, a little immature and certainly hardly a mark of that "adulthood" which you unwittingly ironically lay claim to above - it's hypocritically ad hominem again and makes me wonder with a smile as to exactly who needs to "find their smarts" and "join the adults". However, let's draw a veil over such pettiness and move on.

lurch wrote:I know what I have found in TCoTC. I know what I enjoy about the TLD, I offer it as a choice here. And just as said by TC..its all for the unknown of the future,,I discuss it here to be further enlightened and to build on it.

Also as I said before, I'm truly pleased for you that you've found both enjoyment and a deeper meaning in the LCs. I'm even more pleased that you're now offering your opinion as "a choice" - because, just like my opinion, a choice is all it is - and it's encouraging to see you've now changed tack. That's far more reasonable than your previous abruptly telling people who hold a differing view to yours that "they just don't get it". As others have already tried to point out to you in other threads, such supercilious and peremptory dismissiveness on your part solely serves to inject a stark element of negativity into what to date had been healthy, enjoyable and illuminating discussions before you steamed in with your unfortunate "you just don't get it" - and yes, discussions among adults.

If you could check your animosity at the door for a second, I think you'd find that my take on the LCs doesn't differ from yours totally. Yes, I have irritations at and problems with the narrative level within TLD, as I've expounded - I expected more narrative effort and seamless "finishedness" from a best-selling author who has after all described himself as "first and foremost a story-teller". However, this is not something that bothers you, and that's fine. There's no reason why it should - subjective responses, remember? - and unlike me, you're more than satisfied just by the message that you've gleaned within the LCs. It suffices for you - but not for me.

Nevertheless, it's on this message that I think we'd largely agree. Whether viewed in a psychological Jungian light or from a Surrealist viewpoint - unsurprising given, as I've elsewhere stated, the close connection between the two. In broadest brushstroke terms, it seems to be about the transcendent nature of unification and the fusion of disparate and often polarised aspects of the Self. It's about what it is to be human.

There. That wasn't so difficult, was it?

I've grown tired of the needless bickering on this. Locked.