Kevin's Watch

In TPTP when Covenant was fighting Foul, do you think that if Covenant had delt the final blow the Despiser would never have returned?

Now I know you'll say that Covenant didn't do it because he thought it would make Foul come back quicker and more powerful; but there is no evidence for this (or I just cant remember it). And in the second chronicals we find out that it may have been more to do with Covenant not wanting to feed his "inner Despiser"

so Do you think it would have made a difference; if so for better or worse?

Definitely. Covenant should have kicked his A when he had the chance. woof woof woof! Considering Foul's activities between Chronicles, it suggests to me that Foul had an existance beyond a connection to TC's inner Despiser. So following that reasoning he might very well have ended things pretty nicely had he completely destroyed Foul. That of course is not in Covenant's nature. He did not believe that the Despiser could genuinely be destroyed by force. And resigned that if he had it would only make matters worse. As it turned out it made matters worse anyway.

isnt the despiser a representation of the seed of despite in everyone waiting to grow, not just covenant? if so then it would be impossible to destroy the despiser, hence destroy the possibility for despite without destroying the whole land

jedi_gms:

isnt the despiser a representation of the seed of despite in everyone waiting to grow, not just covenant? if so then it would be impossible to destroy the despiser, hence destroy the possibility for despite without destroying the whole land

That was Covenant's belief, but I've never been convinced that
it was the right one. Foul was too much the individual to come
across to me as being the personifcation of inner despair.

I think that destroying the Despiser would mean destroying free will. Everybody would go around being cheerful and kind and giving and loving every moment of their lives. Yeah, it sounds nice. But if you don't have the choice of being bad, then you're a robot.

But as KaosArcana's argument points out, we just don't know Foul's true nature. It could be that those things would still exist without Foul.

I don't agree that people that are only happy are 'robots', Fist, and I certainly don't think that destroying despite would be a bad thing.

~-Hierachy-~ But I don't think LF would have been killed by Covenant, either.

I always thought that the first chronicles were mostly about Covenant's redemption. Let's just say that for the sake of argument Covenant could have destroyed the Despiser completely had he chosen to. What would that have done to Covenant? I agree with the idea that he didn't want to feed his inner Despiser, but regardless of whether Lord Foul would be strengthened by TC "feeding his inner despiser," Covenant would lose. I think he made the right decision because to give in to his hatred by crushing Foul with the wild magic would be tantamount to allowing Foul victory anyway. Maybe not over the Land, but certainly over Covenant.

I dont think it was ever possible for TC to destroy LF ..

LF is an immortal being .. I dont think his destruction was on the cards.

Clearly when ever TC battled him or even when Kevin Landwaster's Ritual of Desecration was inflicted on FOUL and the Land .. this did not destroy him! He always came back .. from insubstance to substance over time.

He's a little like Sauron .. per the whole re-emergence factor.

Any blow TC dealt would not have served to destroy LF .. maybe diminish him a lot .. but not destroy him.

The first time I read TPTP, yes, I wished Covenant had delivered the final blow. Now it's been established that you can't "kill" Despite. But TPTP was meant to be the end of the story--SRD had no thought of a Second Chronicles at the time. So he could have had Covenant "destroy" Foul, and we the readers would have accepted and relished the victory as a fitting conclusion to an awesome saga.

That he chose a different, less conventional manner of victory over Foul is testament to SRD's ingenuity. The idea of Foamfollower's laughter defeating Foul was nice, and certainly made peaceniks everywhere happy...but there's no denying I would have liked to have seen the wild magic really rip into the Despiser.

Bearing in mind that at this point the Second Chronicles did not exist yet, let me ask a "what if": what if Covenant, through whatever means, saw the future of the Land and saw the horror of the Sunbane? Would he have held back against Foul then? How would you have coped in his place? And is this another variation on the "fundamental question of ethics" asked of Covenant by the old man? Is it cowardly to seek a violent solution by attempting to destroy Foul utterly, or is it cowardly to seek a nonviolent solution that in the process squanders the one possible chance to destroy Foul utterly? Of course, the Second Chronicles renders all this moot. SRD would find this silly "what if" conjecture terribly amusing, I'm sure...

How would you have coped in his place?

If I knew about the sunbane, I most certainly would have ripped Foul a new one with the wild magic, but then I also would likely have done the same without the knowledge of it either. I don't see myself as being as strong as Covenant and being able to resist the temptation to simply rip Foul apart. Think about it, by not giving into his anger, by defeating Foul as he did, he saved himself from despite and literally healed the emotional wounds of all the Dead who came to witness Foul's defeat. In my mind, healing the Land and giving redemption to its dead protectors is at least as important as Foul's defeat itself.

Yes, that emotional strength is part of the reason only Covenant could defeat Foul. So: If I knew about the Sunbane in advance, would I give Foul a kicking? Yes, I think I probably would. As Urlord said, I suspect I would have done that anyway, but how could I do otherwise if I know that a nightmare such as the Sunbane was coming?