Kevin's Watch

In the first chronicles Thomas Covenant claimed the Land wasn't real and might be just a series of intricate hallucination he had.

Then in the Second Chronicles we had a much stronger evidence for its reality: Linden was seeing the same things. But that's from our POV. To them its no proof. Thomas Covenant's theory on Shared dreams is such a ludicrous explanation. How would they get the same dreams without having the same memories? To them each could believe the other's presence in the Land was an additional part of the hallucination. Just as Hile Troy didn't prove it to Covenant, Linden and Covenant couldn't prove it to each other by their presence. It's either really real or it's wholly not. Shared dreams is self contradictory.

Could it be that Thomas lost interest in the subject and Linden never had big doubts about this subject?

Why has Covenant spouted his bizarre theory about shared dreams when he had a perfectly good explanation for Hile Troy's presence? It must be that he really wished Linden to be really with him and so subconsciously tweaked his explanations to make option: the Land is real and even if it isn't Linden is still as real as can be, damn it! inevitable. He really wants human contact.

As for Linden, at first her behavior seems a little strange. She doesn't show any interest in Covenant's life outside the Land. She doesn't read his books or try to find anything about his childhood for example as far as we know. But I think this is intentional. Looking into these things might shatter her belief that what happened in the Land was real. If he wrote books after being in the Land, there should be clues in the books about his experiences in the Land. His bio should match the man she grew to know in the Land But what would happen if she read them and there's no sign of that in them? What if she studied his past and discovered in it a man that was nothing like the Thomas Covenant she grew to know and love in teh Land? It would make her whole experience in the Land a hallucination. A sign that she broke under the strain her parents left on her and built a phantasm to escape into. It would mean she was a pathetic delusional that couldn't handle reality just like her parents were. That can't be risked.

..how is it you find it ludicrous?...This is fantasy. The author's dogma sets the stage. Its his rules we have to read by..not ours. How can you apply your logic an reason to a authors imaginated " reality."? If the author says there is no gravity in the Land then there is no gravity in the Land.

In fantasy writing the Figurative becomes primary and it subjugates the literal. The fantasy world is NOT of logic and Reason so why does every one apply logic and reason when reading fantasy? Maybe because those are the only tools folks have been taught to use,,as if they are the Only tools to think and perceive with. Well, they are not the only tools people have to think and perceive with. Intuition is another...and just for schitts and grins,,allow me to introduce the idea that.." Love" is another possible way of "thinking and perceiving."

Any way.. Shared Dreams is just an explanation offered by one character to another of an unexplainable phenomena . That the phenomena of The Land is largley unexplainable is just as it is; a dogma of the author's that has to be accepted. Without a suspension of disbelief then the rest is also ludicrous.

The reader can find the analogous and metaphoric in what appears ludicrous in order to bridge to the understandable. Then , what is presented as the " understood" by the reader, is a reflection of the reader , not the author. This is how it should be. Perhaps TC and Linden are halves of a whole entity. You know, the male and the female side that makes up each of us, including the author...as in Yin and Yang,,X and Y chromozones...etc etc etc etc etc. Point being,,TC doesn't have a hard explanation for the LAND...because there is none. The Land is of the ethereal Fantasy realm,,not of the tangible earth reality. There is a fine as silk humor involved here by the author,,in calling this ethereal fantasy realm.ironically,,.The Land.

Really, this is not about the reality of the Land. This is about the logic Covenant and Linden use to explain what happened to them. The world they live in (the town) is analogous to our own and the logic of shared dreams is based on the rules of that world, not the rules of the Land.

Explaining things away by saying that the fictional world of TCTC works in mysterious ways is ignoring aspects of the story and blinding ourself from understanding the characters of the two main characters more deeply through it.

I totally disagree with your sentiments on perspective blinding ourselves from understanding character development. Again, there is no hard explanation offered for the Land phenomena. The only offered explanation is in the ethereal " dream" realm and that is offered between characters. Take the hint.

If one's mind is open to it.. a characters " arc" is fully traceable in each trilogy. A character's " development" is fully recognizable and appreciated in each trilogy. Finding something as ethereal, abstract, dreamlike,,as a a "means to a Hope" that allows the character to rise above his or her human Flaw , which is the characters cancerous source for despair and despite,,creates much opportunity and expanse for the author to define and give depth to both. IMHO, the author is hugely successful.

BTW...a " real" world of dirty old man in ochre robe casting oracle like wisdom on a leporous character..?? or a demonic abstraction demanding the soul of a character to be sacrificed by a controlled cult.. or the same demonic abstraction controlling a character to drive the intended target to a situation of bolts of lightning blasting death as bullets do the same..uuumm..sorry..The TC saga is all fiction. There is no "Real World" about it.

You're concentrating on the Land-part of the story to the exclusion of other parts. The lack of interest Linden has with Covenant's life outside the Land is a thing to be noticed. I gave a reason but you ignore this whole aspect of her character-arc.

True, from our perspective there's much evidence to the validity of the Land, but from Linden all she really knows is that she met some strange acquaintance of Covenant near his house, that his wife belongs to a devil-worship cult and that she is insane. It looked like enough to be convinced but it wouldn't be surprising if she still had some hidden doubts.

And Covenant, why does he come up with the shared dream idea? Maybe it fits but it is just as much an act of faith as his alternative option (that the Land is real) perhaps even more so. It tells us more about Covenant than it does about the Land.

..as i recall.. her involvement had to with her being a doctor,, and her mentor telling her of the "special case " out there in Haven Farm..from which she was basically told to go away by TC..but due to her parental experiences,,refused to be turned away and her belief ,that she must apply her doctoring skills where needed..got her involved. Lack of Interest? Her Interest was Her self centered " needs" , and that is her starting point. But none the less..her need to do Good,,be a Doctor,,is what got her involved. That " need" is as ethereal, untangible, abstract, as the whole realm of the Land. As the trilogy progresses, TC fills in Linden on the Land,,and on the situation TC has had with Joan and son. So by the end,,Linden comes to an understanding of sacrifice, redemption and Hope..By example, TC rises above the whole conflicted landscape, escapes the paradigm of his existence; a lesson not fostered into the future by Linden, as we see in the Last Chrons.

shadowbinding shoe wrote:You're concentrating on the Land-part of the story to the exclusion of other parts. The lack of interest Linden has with Covenant's life outside the Land is a thing to be noticed. I gave a reason but you ignore this whole aspect of her character-arc.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but doesn't it become clear why Linden doesn't have any interest in TC's life outside of the Land? She doesn't want to know about his past because she doesn't want him having the right to know about hers.

..excellent point blinky eyes...IMHO, that whole aspect is a jaundice twist on the " by what right, do you have, to tell me what to do" or..people who live in glass houses. That TC rises above this " conflict" in example, is what is so powerful.

shadowbinding shoe wrote:And Covenant, why does he come up with the shared dream idea? Maybe it fits but it is just as much an act of faith as his alternative option (that the Land is real) perhaps even more so. It tells us more about Covenant than it does about the Land.

By the end of The Power that Preserves, Covenant has decided that whether or not the Land is real outside of his own imagination is irrelevant, so to me the illogic of his argument makes sense. He doesn't want Linden to believe in the Land, hence the "shared dream" explanation, but he doesn't want her to not believe in the Land (and so come to not care about the Land), hence the weakness of the "shared dream" explanation.

variol son wrote:

shadowbinding shoe wrote:And Covenant, why does he come up with the shared dream idea? Maybe it fits but it is just as much an act of faith as his alternative option (that the Land is real) perhaps even more so. It tells us more about Covenant than it does about the Land.

By the end of The Power that Preserves, Covenant has decided that whether or not the Land is real outside of his own imagination is irrelevant, so to me the illogic of his argument makes sense. He doesn't want Linden to believe in the Land, hence the "shared dream" explanation, but he doesn't want her to not believe in the Land (and so come to not care about the Land), hence the weakness of the "shared dream" explanation.

Agreed. And to add to what's already been said, TC is trying to give Linden some hope, something logical (given the circumstances) to hang on to. TC has been through the same thing - he wants to lessen Linden's pain by giving her reasons, no matter how far-fetched they may seem to us.
TC spent most of the First Chronicles denying the land - he's trying to give Linden reasons not to make the same mistakes he did.

Mysteweave wrote:

variol son wrote: By the end of The Power that Preserves, Covenant has decided that whether or not the Land is real outside of his own imagination is irrelevant, so to me the illogic of his argument makes sense. He doesn't want Linden to believe in the Land, hence the "shared dream" explanation, but he doesn't want her to not believe in the Land (and so come to not care about the Land), hence the weakness of the "shared dream" explanation.

Agreed. And to add to what's already been said, TC is trying to give Linden some hope, something logical (given the circumstances) to hang on to. TC has been through the same thing - he wants to lessen Linden's pain by giving her reasons, no matter how far-fetched they may seem to us.

Good point. Telling her that:

1) she's a figment of his dream-imagination

or alternatively that:

2) he's a figment of her dream-imagination

would not be very reassuring.

Surely that's better than the third option - that's she's insane?

I think Cov offered Linden his outmoded "explanation" because for him it was his defense against insanity when he first arrived in the Land. I don't think he really believed it, but he was worried about Linden losing it completely and this was a way to frame what she was experiencing in a "safe" way for now.

As for why she had "no interest" in Cov's live outside the Land, I agree with "Blinky" (cute) that the more she knew, the more she felt knowable, and she wasn't ready for that (until that night on Starfare's Gem). She hadn't read his books maybe (just a wild guess here) because books about guilt and suicide maybe didn't interest her??? Anyway, it isn't as though she had time in the few days between meeting TC and being summoned to the Land.

deer of the dawn wrote:I think Cov offered Linden his outmoded "explanation" because for him it was his defense against insanity when he first arrived in the Land. I don't think he really believed it, but he was worried about Linden losing it completely and this was a way to frame what she was experiencing in a "safe" way for now.

I completely agree. Covenant, didn't worry any more about reality/dream. Finding Linden at his side in the Land, he could only offer her the same ideas he once had long ago, as a starting point -- so that Linden could reach her own conclusion. (Notably, he didn't tell her it was real, and he didn't tell her it was a dream; he left it to her.) The "shared dream" was merely an off-the-cuff way to make it plausible. Covenant felt that she NEEDED to have the dream theory be plausible.

wayfriend wrote:

deer of the dawn wrote:I think Cov offered Linden his outmoded "explanation" because for him it was his defense against insanity when he first arrived in the Land. I don't think he really believed it, but he was worried about Linden losing it completely and this was a way to frame what she was experiencing in a "safe" way for now.

I completely agree. Covenant, didn't worry any more about reality/dream. Finding Linden at his side in the Land, he could only offer her the same ideas he once had long ago, as a starting point -- so that Linden could reach her own conclusion. (Notably, he didn't tell her it was real, and he didn't tell her it was a dream; he left it to her.) The "shared dream" was merely an off-the-cuff way to make it plausible. Covenant felt that she NEEDED to have the dream theory be plausible.

Yep, he was giving her something to mentally hold onto.

deer of the dawn wrote: As for why she had "no interest" in Cov's live outside the Land, I agree with "Blinky" (cute) that the more she knew, the more she felt knowable, and she wasn't ready for that (until that night on Starfare's Gem). She hadn't read his books maybe (just a wild guess here) because books about guilt and suicide maybe didn't interest her??? Anyway, it isn't as though she had time in the few days between meeting TC and being summoned to the Land.

I was talking about the time between her return from the Land at the end of WGW and the beginning of the third chronicles.

Were his books about suicide? I thought they were about dealing morally with the consequences of your actions, and not falling into guilt-fests and suicide-binges.

Shadowbinding Shoe, we have a diverse community here, and every unique individual approaches this subject differently (we've argued it many times over the years). In our own ways, we are Covenant and Linden, trying to come up with explanations for the nebulous connection between fantasy and reality. That's part of the reason we're here, on this site. Both literally (fans of a fantasy book interacting with other fans) and figuratively (conscious minds struggling through our own personal Land).

I feel you aren't getting the answers you seek because you haven't talked to enough people yet. We need more input in this thread. Luckily, I'm here now.

Shared dreams is self contradictory.

Here's where you are going wrong, as Lurch hinted. For you to draw this conclusion, you are applying a metaphysical interpretation that is your own invention. You are making an assumption about this reality, and then trying to apply it to Donaldson's book.

But--and I mean this literally--who are we to say that this life and this world isn't a "dream?" (Or hallucination, or virtual reality, the Matrix, God's dream, etc.). Granted, I don't seriously doubt the reality of this world in my day-to-day life. But TC's question can be equally applied to our own existence . . . and I believe the Chronicles are a symbol for our existence, a metaphor. We could all be sharing a dream, for all we can determine beyond our own subjectivity.

So forget about fantasy worlds for a moment, and whether or not the characters are asking logical questions for their situation. You can ask the very same question about our world, and there would be nothing illogical about it. To claim that it's illogical means that you've already answered the question definitively, which is impossible. In other words, if you claim it's illogical, that's because you already believe this world is objective and independent of our minds. Yet, we have no more proof of that than the alternative (i.e. the world being an inter-subjective "dream"). In fact, through quantum mechanics and relativity, we're getting pretty strong evidence that the world is NOT entirely objective and independent of observers. But that's for another thread . . .

Here's another way to think about it. Donaldson has suggested (in the Gradual Interview) that the Land is actually more real than Covenant's "real" world, but not in the sense that his previous life was a dream. No, the relationship to Covenant's "real" world and the Land is like Plato's Forms and our own world.

Plato's Theory of Forms[1] asserts that Forms (or Ideas), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality.[2] Plato spoke of forms (sometimes capitalized in translations: The Forms)[3] in formulating his solution to the problem of universals.

In other words, Forms are like the perfect, universal archetypes of the imperfect, specific objects of our daily life. For instance, Plato would think there exists one perfect mountain, and all the others are imperfect copies, which we can recognize as "mountains" only by their resemblance to this One Mountain. You can say the same for trees . . . a One Tree.

And Forms exist in a realm that we can all access through the intellect, but it is removed from our daily world, which is a shadowy, pale reflection of the world of Forms.

Basically, I think Donaldson considers the Land as a place of universal architypes where our own personal psychological "truths" exhibit their universal truth through being personified and externalized. Lord Foul is Covenant's personal self-despite, for instance. But this goes for Linden, too. It goes for all of us, because the capacity of self-hate is universal, even though we all experience it individually . . . like our dreams. There are universals, Jungian archetypes perhaps, in our subconscious. And the Land is a place where the author can make those archetypes external characters and places for the characters to confront, rather than repress.

And really, we share dreams all the time. We've all read the Chronicles, after all . . .

shadowbinding shoe wrote:

deer of the dawn wrote: As for why she had "no interest" in Cov's live outside the Land, I agree with "Blinky" (cute) that the more she knew, the more she felt knowable, and she wasn't ready for that (until that night on Starfare's Gem). She hadn't read his books maybe (just a wild guess here) because books about guilt and suicide maybe didn't interest her??? Anyway, it isn't as though she had time in the few days between meeting TC and being summoned to the Land.

I was talking about the time between her return from the Land at the end of WGW and the beginning of the third chronicles.

Were his books about suicide? I thought they were about dealing morally with the consequences of your actions, and not falling into guilt-fests and suicide-binges.

I can absolutely see her as wanting to maintain her memories of the man she loved as he existed in the Land, NOT as he existed prior to her meeting him. Why should she go back and read his opinions of this world, when their time in this world was not what was important to her?

I read TCoTC precisely because it is not logical. It's an escape from the "real" world (which at times is not very logical either, but at least obeys the laws of physics). If the books I read don't surprise me, I will stop reading them. I don't care what Linden thinks about Covenant's past. I don't give one whit about TC's development of his theories about the Land or anything else. I'm not interested in analyzing any reasons SRD might have had for writing any of it. All I know is, when I'm done reading, I sit the book down, and say, "Dang, that was awesome." I care about nothing else. I know, I'm shallow. Shallow people buy way more books, you know........

Malik

I think you misunderstood my objection to the 'shared dream' concept. It is not the Dream part, it is the We part.

You could imagine that everything you experience is an illusion of some sort or another. Many philosophers use arguments in that direction. But if you go that way, what is your basis to believe that others you see in your hallucination are as real as you and not more hallucinations? Once you start doubting some things there's no reason to make an exception of them. They just complicate matters. Why for example doubt your toothbrush which you come (hopefully) in close contact with twice a day and not your neighbor from across the street that you barely exchange a word with every couple of days? Once you start doubting things, just because, you have no excuse to exclude others from your doubts.

I'm not sure if Covenant's viewing of Lord Foul as an expression of his self-despite fits into Plato theory of Ideals. An Ideal is more than an expression of a particular feeling you have. It is extrinsic to you. At best you could say that Covenant's feelings of self-despite are a reflection of the purer independent-unto-himself Lord Foul. Covenant didn't have this view.