Kevin's Watch

Also remember that in WGW it was said that samadhi was "rent" not "slain". We don't know what the implications of that are. Maybe Nom wasn't able to consume all of him. Maybe that now gives him the ability to exist in the "real" world, thereby giving him the ability to control Roger. Somehow, I don't think we've heard the last of samadhi.

*blows dust off things*--Hmmm...it's a little silly but I'd still consider it the 1st chapter thread--for novelty, if nothing else... -ok Caam, you're up next.

Sheesh, Fist got off easy huh?

--A

I think Fist should have to do another chapter then!

Fist should be boiled in oil--but he'd probably like it...

Well, if this chapter counts, I'd like to re-open this thread for some discussion!

Some discussion points I'd like to raise:

Is it significant that she drives the same car as she did in TWL? If it's SRD, it is. In many ways, Linden seems to cling to her memories of Covenant in ways that perhaps she does not even recognize.

I still don't know the significance of being 21. Maybe that gets Roger the Farm. But do we ever find out what he needs the farm for? He certainly doesn't need to own it in order to visit a certain plane of rock.

"Who hit her?" Roger doesn't know about Joan striking herself. Considering the significance of those forehead blows, I wonder what this means?

Why does the ring calm Joan? At first blush, it seems simply like she needed it. But later on, when we learn what Joan having the ring implies, you have to say, whoa, if that's true, why does she get comfort from the ring?

"At the time, she had believed that [the eyes like fangs in the fire] held malice. But now she thought that emotion in them might have been despair; an emptiness which could not be filled." I think that this is hinting at the "Sympathy for the Despiser" angle that I feel the story will lead to.

Do we ever find out what Joan failed at? What place Roger will take that frees Joan? (And did he take her place yet?) I am certain that there are too many backstory questions laid here like easter eggs, which assures us that if they are not answered in Runes, they will nevertheless be answered.

- - - - -

There's really not a good chapter to discuss something that didn't happen in the book. So why not here? It came up...

Murrin wrote:One wonders which of them out of Joan, Roger, Linden, and Linden's child will see the old man before they cross over...

I hope by now we all know the answer to this question!

In the Gradual Interview was wrote:Would you care to illuminate your readers, however slightly, as to why, for the first time, the Creator did not appear to presage the transition into the land in Runes?

Sorry, no. That would be the great-granddaddy of all spoilers.
(01/07/2005)

I have a theory.

Spoiler

No one is supposed to travel to the Land this time. Anyone who does will endanger it. Can you say "Linden is screwing everything up?"

Wayfriend, you referenced some points I wanted to make myself, and touched upon some of the very same things I thought were significant about this chapter. Point-by-point:

I'm not sure the significance of the car, but I LOVE the sentence: "If she had wanted to be a woman who fled whenever her job became difficult, she should have bought herself a more reliable vehicle." I wonder if SRD included the car detail just to have that line in there? Writers can be overly fond of their sentences, sometimes. In this case, it would be justified.

Roger needing the farm: perhaps the significance is no deeper than he's taking Covenant's place--but that he's not equiped to do so. There are many comparisons in this chapter between TC and his son, and how his son doesn't live up, perhaps resulting in disastrous consequences. The idea of Roger taking Joan and living on the farm at her side--and that this will "comfort" Joan--is creepy in itself.

"Who hit her?" The only thing that strikes me odd about this is his apparent dispassion when he asks; yet another in a string of strange reactions. Perhaps he asks this dispassionately is because he already knows, but he's keeping up a fascade of ignorance for Linden's benefit?

Ring calming Joan: thanks to Plotinus, I'm thinking of the ring as freewill lately. Or you can think of it as empowerment, or passion. All these things might be calming to someone who has had their freewill, power, and passion taken from them. Though she is too far gone to make positive use of it just yet, the ring is potential for escape of her fate.

"At the time, she had believed that [the eyes like fangs in the fire] held malice. But now she thought that emotion in them might have been despair; an emptiness which could not be filled."

I read this as Donaldson revising his already published work. In the GI, he has admitted to wishing he'd written things differently, structured things differently, or stressed different things. When I read this passage, I was immediately struck by how convenient this was as a writing device: blame it on Linden. He didn't write it wrong--Linden interpretted it wrong! I think he wishes he'd focused on despair more than malice, because malice is too simplistic and cliche of Big Bad Guys. And despair more closely matches his themes.

Joan's failure: she failed to make Covenant give up. Sure, he gave himself as a sacrifice for her, so it seemed like the plan worked. But in the end, Lord Foul misread Covenant's sacrifice: it wasn't despair, but acceptance. Covenant didn't give up, he just gave in. LF didn't see the smile, maybe.

The end of this chapter is very disturbing. The way Roger scolds Joan. The way he seems to know exactly what's going on. How Joan responds to Roger. "I've been good." How has she been good? By trying to destroy herself? "It's been so hard." What exactly has been hard? Sure, her catatonic state my be hard, but I think she's referring to whatever it is that is causing this state. "Make it stop." Make what stop? Again, I think she's referring to whatever has caused this state; thus, all the trauma of the past can't be what caused her condition. It wasn't a one-time thing, but a continuing process. It's still happening, whatever it is.

"Of course you can bear it. That's what you do." What is it about Joan that makes "bearing it" what she "does," as if it is part of her essence?

"You really have no choice. You have to let her go with me." No choice? I don't think it's coincidence that he phrases it like this. Sounds like the despiser talking to TC in the 2nd Chronicles.

"The sooner you release her, the sooner I can free her from all this." Why does Linden have to release Joan in order for Roger to free her? Why can't he do whatever it is he does right there? It has to be more than the fact that he wants some privacy. In addition, I can't believe taht there is actually something significant about the farm or "that rock." There is something about Linden's care that is preventing him. Combine this with: "I can see why you're reluctant for anyone else to take care of her." The fact that Linden gave Joan her ring impresses Roger, gives Roger an insight into the special relationship between Linden and Joan--a relationship he resents because it interferes with his intentions.

Malik23 wrote:"Of course you can bear it. That's what you do." What is it about Joan that makes "bearing it" what she "does," as if it is part of her essence?

Ah, I forgot about this line. This one, like the one I pointed out in the next chapter, is eerily familiar, but used in such a different circumstance. I know the author intended it to be a connection between this story and the last one. Anyway, compare that quote with this one:

"Are you not Thomas Covenant, ur-Lord and Unbeliever? That is the grace which has been given to you, to bear what must be borne."

Has Joan been given grace? Or is Joan a foil of Covenant?

I'm still not sure about Joan -- not enough has been revealed yet.

But I was sure from the first time I read the chapter that Roger was bad news. He knows too much, he drops too many odd hints, and he really doesn't seem to have any <i>compassion</i> for his mother. It's like he's a puppet trying to say the right things, and failing to get any affect across behind the words.

As for why Joan's hitting herself in the head, that one's simple: she's trying to punish herself. Again. And when she gets the ring back, she goes unconscious, because

Spoiler

she's in the Land now and hitting herself in the head <i>there</i>.

Wayfriend wrote: Why does the ring calm Joan? At first blush, it seems simply like she needed it. But later on, when we learn what Joan having the ring implies, you have to say, whoa, if that's true, why does she get comfort from the ring?

I saw the reason for this as the same reason people get comfort from cutting themselves. It's a release of sorts. A catharsis. It doesn't matter that it hurts you, (it may even be better because it hurts you), it's a matter of getting it out. Before the ring, the only means was the blows to the head. After it, a much more thorough release was possible.

--A

The old man in the ochre robe didn't show up because Covenant is dead. His subconscious can't astral-project itself out to Linden this time.

Joan is Kevin. Joan desecrated their marriage; Kevin desecrated the Land. And who has borne more than Kevin? He did the RoD; he was brought back and forced to fight for Foul; he watched others succeed where he failed...

Having just re-read the 1st and 2nd Chronicles, which left me wondering why by the Seven I hadn't done this long ago, I now hold a copy of Runes in my hand...

Time to get re-acquainted, ten years on, with everyone's favourite slightly messed-up, matricidal, health-sense-possessing, Giant-healing, Raver-overcoming, Dead-berating, Land-saving, wheaten-tressed, Covenant-beloved physician/Sun-Sage.

I' m guessing Linden is going on a pleasant tour of the Land for four books, everything will be absolutely perfect and she will think "Yep, did a pretty good job healing the Land/banishing the Sunbane/forming new Staff of Law etc."









Or am I wrong?

You went wrong at "Linden".

Yes, it's my first time reading Runes...I first read the Chronicles about 12 years ago, but hadn't really thought about them much until I found them again when unpacking a load of books last year and re-read them. So the Last Chronicles had, I'm ashamed to say, passed me by - did I Rave, you might ask?


I need to think a bit more deeply about ROTE before posting my opinions - I don't think I had appreciated how remarkable the 1st 2 chronicles are until I revisited them, and the emotional excoriation of WGW is surely one of the hardest acts to follow....

Whatever impression one might have about ROTE, the undeniable fact is that this first chapter in the prologue is an example of SRD's best writing. Everything from the name "Mr. Covenant" in the first line to "over my dead body" in the last line is perfect.

IMHO, of course.

(re-reading ROTE before FR comes out)

Interesting chapter indeed.

Rereading this again now. Just finished the Prologue. A couple things struck me anew.

The issue of the ring calming Joan.

Wayfriend wrote:Why does the ring calm Joan? At first blush, it seems simply like she needed it. But later on, when we learn what Joan having the ring implies, you have to say, whoa, if that's true, why does she get comfort from the ring?

Malik23 wrote:Ring calming Joan: thanks to Plotinus, I'm thinking of the ring as freewill lately. Or you can think of it as empowerment, or passion. All these things might be calming to someone who has had their freewill, power, and passion taken from them. Though she is too far gone to make positive use of it just yet, the ring is potential for escape of her fate.

Rereading my own thoughts, I'm a little surprised by them. The idea that Joan might have a means for escape is intriguing, and I like how this connects with the ring as a symbol for power/passion/freewill, an interpretation that I believe is fairly certain and accurate. But the fact that she might become responsible for her own escape seems (at first glance) unlikely to me. While the ring certainly empowers Joan--as Wayfriend implies with his observation, empowering her for destruction--it doesn't seem at first glance to restore her freewill or passion (unless that passion is despair, which she already seemed to have without the ring).

I'm disappointed by this, however, because it seems to violate Donaldson's own symbolism about what white gold means. I suppose a tentative explanation could be that the ring can symbolize passion/power/freedom and still be a reflection of how a person uses it. One can always "save or damn." And one can save or damn precisely because one can choose. [When I consider the ring in Joan's hands, I'm reminded of Rush's "... if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" (from the song "Freewill.")]

I think there is some evidence from Runes to support this idea of "choosing not to decide." Let's take a look at the text. I really like how SRD describes giving back the ring in terms of restitution (though I believe that's misleading).

On page 14, SRD wrote:"Now she hits herself, Mr. Covenant. She wants the pain for some reason. She needs to hurt herself. I don't know why . As punishment?" For her role in her ex-husband's murder? "It certainly looks like she's punishing herself.

"And she won't tolerate a bandage. Her own bleeding seems to comfort her. Like a kind of restitution-- It helps her regain a little balance. I tried to think of some way to sustain that. If resitution calmed her, I wanted her to have more of it.

"Her ring," the symbol of her marriage, "was the only thing I had that I could restore."

I like this because when Linden told Roger that she gave back the ring, it sounded like mere plot device. Knowing what we know about what happens later (again, as WF points out), we all know that SRD needed to get the ring back in Joan's hands. But why would Linden do that?

This is Donaldson at his best. He knows how to supply--and convey--character motivations that transcend mere plot and contrivance, while still serving plot. He gives Linden a believable motivation that strikes to the heart of What it Means to be Human. Lost love. Regret. Restitution. It's almost like the beggar giving back TC's ring in LFB and advising him to be true. To not give in to despair.

But then we get something very disturbing:

On page 14, SRD wrote:At the time, Linden had placed the chain around Joan's neck with acute trepidation. The language of that gesture could so easily have been misinterpreted; taken as a reminder of guilt rather than as a symbol of love and attachment. However, Joan had lapsed into her comparatively pliant trance as soon as the ring had touched her skin.

Since then Linden had often feared that she had made a terible mistake: that it was precisely the reminder of guilt which calmed Joan: that Joan's catatonia endured because she had been fundamentally defeated by the touch of white gold. Nevertheless Linden did not remove the ring.

Joan's present trance was all that kept her alive. She could not have survived her battering desperation much longer.

And then there's the fact that all this is agreeable to Roger.

On page 15, SRD wrote:Roger nodded as if Linden's explanation made perfect sense to him. "You did well. Again, I'm impressed." For the first time since Linden had met him--hardly an hour ago--he seemed satisfied.

So Donaldson gives us several reasons to to suspect that this was not the best decision--or at least one fraught with peril (easy for us to see in hindsight, but it's interesting how SRD sets up the character justification right from the beginning). Instead of making restitution, SRD makes sure to let us know that perhaps the ring exacerbates the very guilt which is the cause of Joan's need for restitution. And not only does it fit with Roger's plans, but it also makes sense to him; it's something he can relate to. It satisfies him.

I'm convinced that giving back Joan's ring is the single most important detail of this chapter. The juxtaposition of Thomas Covenant being given back his ring at the beginning of LFB, and Joan being given back her ring at the beginning of Runes, is surely not coincidental. Donaldson is obviously saying something here. Both people are broken souls, but broken for "opposite" reasons. TC is broken because of what has been done to him by his town, his wife, and himself. Joan is broken down because of what she did to TC. ("Her shame was fertile soil for the seeds of despair and madness.") Restoring TC's ring gives him an opportunity to hope; restoring Joan's ring gives her an opportunity to despair.

But don't they really have the same choice? Perhaps it's two sides of the same coin. It is the razor's edge of Choice. Joan has chosen not to decide. She is using her freewill to deny herself freewill. [See Sartre's bad faith: "Bad faith is a philosophical concept first coined by existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre to describe the phenomenon wherein one denies one's total freedom, instead choosing to behave inauthentically. It is closely related to the concepts of self-deception and ressentiment. ... Sartre tells us that by acting in bad faith, the waiter and the woman are denying their own freedom, but actively using this freedom itself. They manifestly know they are free but do not acknowledge it. Bad faith is paradoxical in this regard: when acting in bad faith, a person is both aware and, in a sense, unaware that they are free."]

Joan is in a self-imposed catatonic state because she is denying her freewill (an act which still requires freewill ... i.e. her White Gold ring). We can say this is the Despiser doing it to her, because there's a Despiser living within us all. She is giving in to him, to her own self-despite. She wants Roger to "make it stop," but she's really the only person who can do that:

On page 6, SRD wrote:At its heart, Berenford Memorial existed, not to heal its occupants, but to help them heal themselves.

So SRD first gives us an explanation for the ring calming Joan that is right in line with the "be true" restortation of TC's ring. But then he gives us reasons to suspect that this is the exact opposite of that act.

I think there is still the possibility of restitution. I don't think that Joan's choice is irrevocable. So (coming full circle to my 2006 post) I think she might indeed eventually save herself. And giving back the ring was important for that--exactly as it was for TC--despite what Roger might think of it.

Excellent, Z.
It's gotten me thinking about a bunch of things that may, or may not cohere into something post-worthy. For now it's questions floating around:
Wasn't the title of a TC work "Or I will sell my soul for Guilt?" [total "what if" land, but wouldn't it be interesting if Joan had read it?]
In RL, Catholics are famous, in comedy land, for always feeling guilty...but there are fundamentalists sects [lots of them], and even in the mainstream it's a thread, that being human, you are automatically guilty, always...and it's not enough to admit it, you must suffer it, constantly.
You deserve it...forever [at least until death releases you, and you are forgiven]
Accepting and moving on is a sin in itself.
Your appropriate place is on your knees.
Outside of religion, of course, such a view is pathological. If Joan does not act, she suffers...if she does, she relieves her guilt and spawns a new reason for guilt?
The ring both reminds her of the old [comforting] and enables the new?
Her obvious way out, of course, is to use it for something else.
"You are guilty."
"Nevertheless."
"You will be again."
"Still."

More on Joan and freedom:

On page 16, SRD wrote: [Roger:] "The sooner you release her, the sooner I can free her from all this."

From the next chapter, spoiler tagged for those reading Runes for the 1st time:

Spoiler

On page 19, SRD wrote:"I see." Roger frowned again. "That's a problem, Dr. Avery. I need it. I can't take her place without it. Not entirely. And if I don't take her place, she'll never be completely free."

Spoiler

This is when Roger is demanding TC's ring. (So again, freedom is closely tied with the issue of the ring.) And Roger is saying that Joan needs to be "completely free." While it seems unlikely that Roger is sincerely trying to free his mother--given his disdainful treatment of her--is it possible that SRD had a dual meaning for this language? Could SRD have meant both Roger's "evil" purpose, and an unwitting participation in actually helping his mother? He is, after all, trying to take her place. Wouldn't this free her of the role (and possibly the guilt) of trying to destroy TC? Maybe Roger is trying to use her, but at the same time setting up the circumstances which will enable her to free herself.

Donaldson does give a rather cryptic clue immediately after the above quoted text:

On page 19, SRD wrote:He seemed unconcerned that he had revealed so much. Perhaps he did not consider Linden discerning enough to understand him.

I can almost hear Donaldson laughing ruefully ... does he not consider us discerning enough to understand him?

[Edit: I've tried a couple times to get the chapter 2 text to be spoiler tagged, with no success. I hope a 3 page advanced peek isn't going to be a problem for the newbies. ]