Page 2 of 2

Re: I'd guess it's the Ranyhyn!

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:40 am
by Seareach
Illearth wrote:
Remillard wrote: She's his MOTHER.
By adoption.
So does that mean because it's "by adoption" her love for Jeremiah is less than if it were her biological son? I'd seriously debate that. He's been with her for ten years! Vacant or not, she loves him (at least, that's my take on it).

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:49 am
by sherifffruitfly2
The only *literally* fatal revenant I recall thus far is/was Kevin. Am I missing any?

Re: I'd guess it's the Ranyhyn!

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:51 pm
by Remillard
Seareach wrote:
Illearth wrote:
Remillard wrote: She's his MOTHER.
By adoption.
So does that mean because it's "by adoption" her love for Jeremiah is less than if it were her biological son? I'd seriously debate that. He's been with her for ten years! Vacant or not, she loves him (at least, that's my take on it).
I concur. If Covenant is all about passion and Linden is all about law, Jeremiah is the bridge. Her feelings for Jeremiah are all about passion, feral, irrational and unrequited love. I suspect as she comes to terms with that, that will be the key to unlocking her ability to trigger wild magic from the ring in herself.

Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:10 pm
by Mighara Sovmadhi
The Wraiths are the only gnat-like creatures in the text, so I'm guessing them.

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:38 pm
by woodzter
I agree that her willingness to damn the land to save Jerimiah is anoying. It's the way SRD creates tension- there were always anoying things about TC in the other two trilogies, but he always seems to resolve them by the end of each chronicles. For example, his bargain so that he didn't have to be a hero in the first trilogy. Now it's Jerimiah for Linden, but LA has not actually chosen Jerimiah over the land- not yet- and probably not ever. Of course she is the mother but still that does not explain it completely. I like the idea of Jerimiah putting Lord Foul in a box- i never thought of that-SRD has some fun ahead for us in the next two books- i just hate the waiting. What's up with all these Insequent and where the heck where THEY during the sunbane? Guess SDR hadn't thought of them yet, huh?

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:45 pm
by Orlion
woodzter wrote: What's up with all these Insequent and where the heck where THEY during the sunbane? Guess SDR hadn't thought of them yet, huh?
Pretty much, but one could argue that the Insequent are pretty self-centered, and if the Sunbane didn't affect them, they're not going to care. They're a lot like the Elohim in that respect (just don't tell either of them I said that, they'd kill me if they knew!)

Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:47 am
by woodzter
I think SRD's effort to give the Insequent history in The Land, so far is all about the Theomach being the guardian of the one tree and being defeated by Brin. His "you know my real name Lady" is a clever way to say that the Insequent were there all the time. I guess, with two more books to go it's too early to say how well that works to give credibility to the Insequent being there the whole time. And Yes as Orlion says, "Insequent are pretty self-centered, and if the Sunbane didn't affect them, they're not going to care." Still, they are all seperated from each other and are we to believe that out of this "race" of people not one of them was interested in the sunbane or the white gold ring that was being paranded accross The Land! Hmmm, that's hard to believe.

Suddenly we got the Madoubt, the Harrow, the Theomach, mention of the Vizard, so yeah, it might be that they were all just busy, not alive yet, not in possession of so much knowledge or whatever, but it just seems a little strange- and they are so darn powerful. I mean the Harrow beating ALL the Viles and overwhelming LA so that she needed rescuing sort of took me down "Oh-No-You-Didn't" lane. I just thought that if he was that powerful and he just shows up, all color coordinated and all- I just shook my head and thought, "too much man too much" although I kinda thought if the madoubt was not there the white gold woulda erupted at the last second and kicked his Destrier ridden a$$ back to where ever he came from.

Then again, suddenly he isn't that invincible and LA rescues him from the Ceasure that Esmer set upon him- so, once again, SRD shows me that I don't know what's up yet and he will work it all out so that I can be comfortable suspending my disbelief once again.

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:48 am
by Cord Hurn
Who is the Fatal Revenant?
Zahir wrote:Methinks it is deliberately vague, but in terms of obvious plot, Thomas Covenant.

I believe this is correct. Covenant is the fatal revenant. Not just because his dangerous son is impersonating him, but because his resurrection by Linden is fatal to the Land's world, as the Worm is now awakened.

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 3:31 pm
by wayfriend
In the Gradual Interview was wrote:I read in one of your interviews (and in a comment from another reader) that Fatal Revenant has two different meanings depending on which half of the book you are in. I was able to figure out the first one way before reaching the critical point. However, once I was finished with the book, I was not able to determine how it was different in the latter portion of the book.
  • Both the nature of the "fatality" and the nature of the "revenant" change during the course of "Fatal Revenant". Roger, appearing to be a revenant, is fatal in a very different way than his father (an actual revenant).

    (01/01/2008)

Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2016 4:26 am
by Cord Hurn
So the apparent Thomas Covenant is the fatal revenant in the first half of FR, and the real Thomas Covenant turns out to be the fatal revenant at the end of FR. Makes sense to me!