How bad is it?

[Vraith]

OTOH: I think it's absurd/requires substantial justification to claim [not you Z, someone else, different thread] AATE is "all about family and gender roles."

That wasn't me, was it? I'm pretty sure SRD said some years back that one of the themes of the 1st Chrons was the individual; for the 2nd Chrons, relationships; and for the 3rd Chrons, family. That's one of the reasons he waited 20 years to tackle the 3rd Chrons -- when he was writing the 2nd Chrons, he wasn't a parent yet. But "gender issues" as a theme is kinda stretching it, imho.

No, wasn't you. And I'm not even objecting to family being a theme. It's the reducing and dismissing implied by the "all about" statement in the context it was made [which I probably should have quoted more completely].

[Atrium]

This is novel 9 of 10. How much more world-building do you need? There was a big gap between the 1st and 2nd Chrons, too, and not a lot of discussion about when the Clave took over, iirc.

More than he is giving us at the moment. Not necessarily inventing a lot of new places, powers and characters. I could be happy with some creative recycling. But if youre writing in a fantasy setting youd better be ready to try to bring that alternative reality to life with all the creativity you can muster. This used to be one of Donaldsons strenghts.

As i noted in my comment, the apparent lack of history in the second chronicles was a bitter pill to swallow. But i could live with that, even appreciate the dramatic effect after a while. It fitted with the story. This device coming back to haunt us yet again in the last chronicles begs disbelief. If Donaldson didnt feel like inventing a credible history for the Lands last 3000 years, why not summon Linden a lot earlier? I could live with it if she returned 300-400 years later and found out that things were almost like she left them.

But a number of the factual statements made/questions asked are actually in the text.
And to say the purpose is to explore Linden's psychology is the same as saying "a rose by any other name" is about botany.

Maybe they are. I never bought Runes, it was that bad in my opinion. But as i recall, nothing happening in 3000 years is explained as the Masters controlling and in effect censuring everything interesting that could have happened. Maybe you feel comfortable with this explanation. I dont. Obviously we take away very different things from the Last Chronicles, but i dont see how anyone can deny that the bulk of the text so far revolves around Lindens reactions, feelings and thoughts - her psychology.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

Adding to Zarathustras excellent post: One part of this 2-dimensionality of the Land is its apparent lack of history. I mean, 3000 years (or 3500?) has passed since Linden saved it and restored earthpower and Law. And we are to believe that nothing really interesting happened in those 3000 years? Just Anele loosing his staff early on, and the Masters mastering. WTF? When did Kevins Dirt appear? The people of the Land must have had at least a couple of milennia to rebuild their civilisation, give birth to new heroes, find new lore or research the old Lords wards, before they were neutered by the invisible farts of SHE.

Whats with these people? Are they even worth saving? They seem to just sit around in their little villages and wait for the next appearance of the Heroes From Beyond, come to save the day. Didnt anyone even try to challenge the Masters in 3000 years? They must have been aware of earthpower at least for part of that time. I could swallow that pill in the second chronicles, even if it tasted bitterly. It sort of fitted with the utter disaster of the sunbane. It bent every Law and made even the Land itself a mockery, only logical then that it totally destroyed the spirit of the people too. But once again?

I see this lack of history as another sign that Donaldson lost interest in his fantasy worldbuilding. Everything picks up where we left, 3000 years ago. Which of course is very convenient if what you really want to explore is Linden Averys troubled pshycology, without much interference.

One could reply that Donaldson only adds those elements to the story that he requires to tell it. That is a common enough GI response, and I believe most of them are made in such a hurry that the GI is rife with such formulaic responses.

But I at least am not in such a big hurry at the moment. If we are not told most of the history of the last 3500 years or so that doesn't mean something didn't happen. Maybe something irrelevant did happen. But we only know that lately the Masters have come along. And what are the people of the Land like? Ramen are a bit more than Plains Indians, the rest are like Am. Indians who live in stone dwellings instead of tepees, or they build tree houses. So it's like you're asking about the last 3000 years of Am. Indian history. Or the last 3000 years of Australian aborigine history. Without someone exciting such as the Lords of Revelstone, the people of the Land don't progress, they don't grow, they don't go on any exciting adventures. They're just sitting around living and waiting for Donaldson to tell another story.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

That's not fair at all. The Land isn't old and crumbly. It's boring. It's not tortured (like in the 2nd Chrons), it's neutered. No one is expecting the Land to be perfect and beautiful as it was in Lord Foul's Bane (and pretty much in no other book since then).

I think some here have expected to see a perfect, beautiful Land. But let's not forget the plot-line of the First Chrons. This context involved Covenant struggling with the beauty of the Land. This beauty did not exist for its own sake, it was relevant to Covenant's character arc.

As far as fantasy is concerned, a lesser author would have used the tired ploy of a beautiful maiden, queen, or princess as the attractive lure. In this case, Donaldson brilliantly used the world itself as the "attractive nuisance." I know there was more to it, but that was a major part of Covenant's inner battle with Unbelief. If Covenant's first journey to the Land had been during the Sunbane, why would he have cared to save the Land which to him would have been just a hallucination nightmare?

Everything is the way it is for a reason.

[Atrium]

Without someone exciting such as the Lords of Revelstone, the people of the Land don't progress, they don't grow, they don't go on any exciting adventures.

To be fair to the people of the Land, they did manage 3 high cultures: the one in Doriendor Corishev, the old and the new lords. And the people we met in the first chronicles were in no way clueless, not even the villagers. They made for interesting characters all in their own right.

Everything is the way it is for a reason.

Im sure there is a thought behind everything. What im questioning is whether Donaldson has made the right choices. I would be curious to know what his earlier conflicts with his publisher, Del Rey?, were about. Maybe his influence was what made Donaldson make the right decisions in the earlier books.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

Without someone exciting such as the Lords of Revelstone, the people of the Land don't progress, they don't grow, they don't go on any exciting adventures.

To be fair to the people of the Land, they did manage 3 high cultures: the one in Doriendor Corishev, the old and the new lords. And the people we met in the first chronicles were in no way clueless, not even the villagers. They made for interesting characters all in their own right.

They made for excellent cannon fodder in the First Chrons, and fuel for the Banefire in the Second Chrons.

Everything is the way it is for a reason.

Im sure there is a thought behind everything. What im questioning is whether Donaldson has made the right choices. I would be curious to know what his earlier conflicts with his publisher, Del Rey?, were about. Maybe his influence was what made Donaldson make the right decisions in the earlier books.

Del Rey was a publishing genius as well as a thoughtful editor. He forced Donaldson to make some hard decisions in the First Chrons; in the Second, he rebelled against TOT but apparently let it get published unscathed. Yet nobody I've seen complains at great length about the latter (I myself have complained about the depressing end of TOT, that's about it).

The choices Donaldson has made have been, in my mind, logical ones for the story-line as a whole. They haven't necessarily been logical or even pleasant from the reader's perspective. For example, as I said, this is no longer the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, therefore it is no longer necessary to shove the Land's beauty down our throats as was done during the First Chrons. It is no longer crucial to the plotline or to anybody's character arc, so it is not emphasized.

[peter]

the mere fact that we're allowed to go to the Land at all is a privilege

Thats just my point - we haven't been. This place is most emphatically not the Land of Chrons 1 and 2.
Sorry WOTWE, what you say above is like saying "We know this restaurant can produce great food, so it doesn't matter if they serve us up a plate full of crap because they want to try and go in a new direction".

And in my opinion, the moment you start thinking about 'charachter arc's', or 'narrative structure', or the 'mechanics' of creating a story while you are actually reading the story - then the author has failed. After you put the book down by all means, but during it - never; and this is what happened to me during AATE. I (because of my deep love for Chrons ! & 2) started making excuses for what I was reading, as I had done all the way through ROTE and FR, and trying to justify it with theorys of tying up the earlier Chrons re it's history, or getting deeper into the psyche's of the protagonists (as many here are I think still trying to do) - and then all of a sudden the realisation hit me 'Hold on, cut the bull sh*t - you are struggling to like these books not because they are beyond you, but because they are crap'. Sorry Guys - it had to be said.

(p.s. Inever once felt in the first Chrons that the Land's beauty was being 'shoved down my throat'. I loved every richly described inch of it!).

[Damelon]

I'm not bothered with the Land not being the Land of the first two chronicles. If it was the same as it was, why would there be a need for TC or Linden? No, this is a grey November Land. One that results from leaving the single minded, power distrusting haruchai in charge. It got sick because no one, except for the haruchai (who knew but didn't care), realized it was becoming so.

AATE is the most stationary book of the Chronicles. All the other books involve some great journey, most manically the around the Land's world in ninety days pace of TOT to early WGW. Only late in AATE is there any traveling that doesn't involve instant teleportation. And until late all the traveling is over well covered ground. I took it for granted after FR that there would be some great journey after the introductory chapters in AATE. There was not.

My problems with the book are ones that Z pointed out very well. The major characters taking turns in going unresponsive to their surroundings. An over used device, IMO. Also, the underwhelming nature of the mid-book threat. Nothing like the mid-book confrontation in FR which forced me to stop reading and come up for air when I finished it. In AATE I felt more like "come on let's get this over with". Yet the action at the end of the book does go a great ways in redeeming it.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

the mere fact that we're allowed to go to the Land at all is a privilege

Thats just my point - we haven't been. This place is most emphatically not the Land of Chrons 1 and 2.
Sorry WOTWE, what you say above is like saying "We know this restaurant can produce great food, so it doesn't matter if they serve us up a plate full of crap because they want to try and go in a new direction".

Um, no. I'm saying that it is no longer necessary for Donaldson to emphasize the Land's beauty and perfection as forcefully as he did in the First Chrons. But that doesn't mean it isn't there, and that doesn't mean it isn't worth saving or that nobody cares about it. Caring about it is no longer a problem, and Covenant's Unbelief is no longer at issue. Linden was never an Unbeliever anyway. The reason for emphasizing the Land's beauty and perfection was to force Covenant to take action in its defense, to force him into caring about it. Nowadays, the Land's beauty is just sitting there waiting for someone to rescue it like a beautiful princess in a tower.

And in my opinion, the moment you start thinking about 'charachter arc's', or 'narrative structure', or the 'mechanics' of creating a story while you are actually reading the story - then the author has failed.

Luckily, I didn't start analyzing AATE until after reading, while reading I focused on the story being told.

After you put the book down by all means, but during it - never; and this is what happened to me during AATE. I (because of my deep love for Chrons ! & 2) started making excuses for what I was reading, as I had done all the way through ROTE and FR, and trying to justify it with theorys of tying up the earlier Chrons re it's history, or getting deeper into the psyche's of the protagonists (as many here are I think still trying to do) - and then all of a sudden the realisation hit me 'Hold on, cut the bull sh*t - you are struggling to like these books not because they are beyond you, but because they are crap'. Sorry Guys - it had to be said.

You're just not used to the changes in the story. You'll get used to them eventually.

[danlo]

I'm about to wrap the book up today, I do have to read it faster than usual: to jump over repetitive whining. But I am enjoying it, even though it now seems like a 350 page book, rather than close to 600...

[Atrium]

They made for excellent cannon fodder in the First Chrons, and fuel for the Banefire in the Second Chrons.

They also gave us characters such as Atiaran, Trell, Lena, Triock, the ramen, the people of Soaring Woodhelven... Not to mention the whole council of Lords and other inhabitants of Revelstone.

Second, he rebelled against TOT but apparently let it get published unscathed.

Very interesting! The book i cared least for in the old chronicles was TOT. But i would still hold it higher than any of the books in the Last Chronicles.

Im with Peter on this one: Ive also done a fair share of excusing on Donaldsons behalf, because i very much wanted him to come through and deliver a great story. Ive also had a solid faith in him as a writer. Now, with just one book to go, i cant do that any more. AATE was the first Donaldson book ever that i really had to struggle with myself to finish. And im a diehard fanatic. This cannot be explained away by "Donaldson needing to follow the logic of the story". If the general story structure was somehow dictated by earlier events (which i would challenge) it could have been executed differently.

And i think some of you have misunderstood my point about the Land as protagonist: its not that i demand that Donaldson return us to the Land from the first chronicles, beautiful and seductive. As longs as he brings to life some kind of Land. I would prefer another sunbane to the grey, dull backdrop we get in the last chrons.

Interesting debate btw! I envy those of you still getting what you want from the books. Since we are debating tastes here, i guess its a debate that noones ever going to win. But you all bring interesting insights!

[thewormoftheworld'send]

They made for excellent cannon fodder in the First Chrons, and fuel for the Banefire in the Second Chrons.

They also gave us characters such as Atiaran, Trell, Lena, Triock, the ramen, the people of Soaring Woodhelven... Not to mention the whole council of Lords and other inhabitants of Revelstone.

Second, he rebelled against TOT but apparently let it get published unscathed.

Very interesting! The book i cared least for in the old chronicles was TOT. But i would still hold it higher than any of the books in the Last Chronicles.

Im with Peter on this one: Ive also done a fair share of excusing on Donaldsons behalf, because i very much wanted him to come through and deliver a great story. Ive also had a solid faith in him as a writer. Now, with just one book to go, i cant do that any more. AATE was the first Donaldson book ever that i really had to struggle with myself to finish. And im a diehard fanatic. This cannot be explained away by "Donaldson needing to follow the logic of the story". If the general story structure was somehow dictated by earlier events (which i would challenge) it could have been executed differently.

And i think some of you have misunderstood my point about the Land as protagonist: its not that i demand that Donaldson return us to the Land from the first chronicles, beautiful and seductive. As longs as he brings to life some kind of Land. I would prefer another sunbane to the grey, dull backdrop we get in the last chrons.

Interesting debate btw! I envy those of you still getting what you want from the books. Since we are debating tastes here, i guess its a debate that noones ever going to win. But you all bring interesting insights!

What can I say? The plot of the LC is character-driven, and the Land itself is no longer an active character. But you will still miss it when it's gone, your expectations of bringing back some kind of living Land will necessitate this. Perhaps that is part of Donaldson's authorial intent. It's not necessary for him to create a Land as victim to sympathize with, when your longing for the good ole' days is already there for Donaldson to dash to pieces.

Donaldson is slowly eroding away at my predictions for the LC. It's not as if the baddies are going to win this one. It's more like there is no distinction any longer. Good and evil don't matter. The forces wreaking havoc on the Earth are not evil, they are simply as inevitable as a law of nature. But in the end I think Donaldson will put the pieces back together. Life entails death, but death also entails new life.

In TIW I believe Caerroil Wildwood mentioned the Law of Creation. In order to make this story work, I think Donaldson has to break one last Law: the Law of the Earth's Unmaking.

[Zarathustra]

For example, as I said, this is no longer the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, therefore it is no longer necessary to shove the Land's beauty down our throats as was done during the First Chrons. It is no longer crucial to the plotline or to anybody's character arc, so it is not emphasized.

Again, as several of us have said, we don't necessarily demand that the Land be beautiful, just interesting and there, not boring or vacant or irrelevant. More than a gypsum ridge.

But let's ignore that distinction and just assume your statement is true for a moment. If so, then that would be exactly the problem here! If the Land's beauty isn't crucial to the plotline or the character arc, then why the heck are they all there?? Why waste our time in a place that isn't necessary to the plot or the characters? Couldn't they have just resolved their problems in the real world, where things are nearly as drab and mundane and uninteresting?

I'm quite sure your assessment is untrue, but it has inadvertantly struck the nail on the head: that's exactly what it feels like. And that's the problem. The Land feels like an afterthought--beauty or no beauty, it's hardly even there. Like I said before, it's little more than a collection of parking spots for wordy dialog and inner angst. I don't care if this is dictated by the story and the characters, it's an excuse for mediocrity.

However, I seriously doubt this is Donaldson's intention, because of what Donaldson has always said about the Land:

In realistic fiction, the characters are expressions of their world, whereas in fantasy the world is an expressions of the characters. ... In fantasy, however, the ultimate justification for all the external details arises from the characters themselves. The characters confer reality on their surroundings.

This is obviously true in "The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant."

...

In fantasy, the outside is an externalization, a metaphor, of the internal.

It's impossible for the external details to arise from the characters, and simultaneously not matter to the characters. If this isn't true anymore, then it's not fantasy anyore ... according to Donaldson's own definition. So either Donaldson has changed his mind about the one of the most definitive aspects of fantasy literature, or he hasn't pulled it off this time. If the external details arise from the characters, and yet Donaldson fails to present the Land in a detailed, vivid presentation, then this means the characters, too, are poorly done. Or, he has just failed to present an external reality that vividly captures them. Either way, it surely doesn't mean that this linkage doesn't matter any more to Donaldson, or he wouldn't still be writing fantasy. He couldn't have intentionally decided that the Land didn't matter as much anymore as a story element. No, it's an execution problem.

And in my opinion, the moment you start thinking about 'charachter arc's', or 'narrative structure', or the 'mechanics' of creating a story while you are actually reading the story - then the author has failed.

Luckily, I didn't start analyzing AATE until after reading, while reading I focused on the story being told.

I can't speak for Peter, but it seemed to me Peter was saying that he'd like to have focused on the story, but the mechanics of the story creation are so conspicuous, that they get in the way of that view. And I believe the mechanics are prominent because the story feels so contrived. The author's hand is very evident. The author calls attention to his own writing, rather than the world he's writing about, by what he chooses to emphasize and de-emphasize. It's not a personal flaw of Peter that he couldn't help noticing this while he was reading. It's a criticism of the way the story is written.

You're just not used to the changes in the story. You'll get used to them eventually.

I think it's very presumptuous to tell other people what they are feeling or thinking, especially when you're doing this to dismiss their criticisms as mere personal failings. Don't you think someone can have a valid criticism of this book without it being their own fault? How do you know if he'll get used to it? There is no need for this to be personal. It is not necessary to use the word "you," "you're," or "you'll" when defending an interpretation of a book. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, without being criticized personally for having it, or being psychoanalyzed for their motivations. It's very condescending.

Interesting debate btw! I envy those of you still getting what you want from the books. Since we are debating tastes here, i guess its a debate that noones ever going to win. But you all bring interesting insights!

Well said. I agree.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

For example, as I said, this is no longer the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, therefore it is no longer necessary to shove the Land's beauty down our throats as was done during the First Chrons. It is no longer crucial to the plotline or to anybody's character arc, so it is not emphasized.

Again, as several of us have said, we don't necessarily demand that the Land be beautiful, just interesting and there, not boring or vacant or irrelevant. More than a gypsum ridge.

But let's ignore that distinction and just assume your statement is true for a moment. If so, then that would be exactly the problem here! If the Land's beauty isn't crucial to the plotline or the character arc, then why the hell are they all there??

Well, as I have been saying, the Land's beauty and perfection is not being emphasized. I don't think you read the message where I stated the Land is still important to the characters. The Land's beauty literally threw itself at Covenant in the First Chrons, and this was important for his character development. This is no longer the case, although it is still relevant. Notice however that it is not even as relevant to Linden who is devoted more to saving Jeremiah.

As Donaldson stated, the first Chrons was about the individual. However, it was also about relationships: the relationship between Covenant and the Land which had intense emotional impact on Covenant's Unbelief. The Last Chrons is not about that, its focus is obviously more on the value of family, with the Land playing a secondary role, its purpose for the story-line has changed because Covenant no longer has the same personal dilemma which revolved around his leprosy in the "real" world.

Why waste our time in a place that isn't necessary to the plot or the characters? Couldn't they have just resolved their problems in the real world, where things are nearly as drab and mundane and uninteresting?

I'm quite sure your assessment is untrue, but it has inadvertantly struck the nail on the head: that's exactly what it feels like. And that's the problem. The Land feels like an afterthought--beauty or no beauty, it's hardly even there. Like I said before, it's little more than a collection of parking spots for wordy dialog and inner angst. I don't care if this is dictated by the story and the characters, it's an excuse for mediocrity.

However, I seriously doubt this is Donaldson's intention, because of what Donaldson has always said about the Land:

In realistic fiction, the characters are expressions of their world, whereas in fantasy the world is an expressions of the characters. ... In fantasy, however, the ultimate justification for all the external details arises from the characters themselves. The characters confer reality on their surroundings.

This is obviously true in "The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant." In fantasy, the outside is an externalization, a metaphor, of the internal.

Yes, and Foul is still an expression of the side of Covenant that hates lepers. The Land is still a battleground for internal, psychological-moral conflict. Note the part where Vraith stated that the Earth is reflecting back Linden's internal struggle with herself. Even if I am utterly wrong, why wasn't that, along with the rest of Vraith's response, sufficient to dispel your doubts?

...

It's impossible for the external details to arise from the characters, and simultaneously not matter to the characters. If this isn't true anymore, then it's not fantasyanyore ... according to Donaldson's own definition. So either Donaldson has changed his mind about the one of the most definitive aspects of fantasy literature, or he hasn't pulled it off this time. If the external details arise from the characters, and yet Donaldson fails to present the Land in a detailed, vivid presentation, then this means the characters, too, are poorly done. Or, he has just failed to present an external reality that vividly captures them.

You're mixing the ideal of beauty and perfection presented in the First Chrons with the struggle represented in the Last Chrons. But it is simply not going to be as important as saving the entire Earth, or for Linden, saving Jeremiah. And who knows what Donaldson's ultimate response will be? Perhaps in the end it will be necessary to sacrifice the Land in order to save the Earth as a whole. After all, the Chrons have centered around the Land itself, therefore it is not necessary to lose the entire Earth in order to make this the Last Chrons.

[Atrium]

Note the part where Vraith stated that the Earth is reflecting back Linden's internal struggle with herself.

I dont see that, as i stated earlier. Could someone elaborate?

The Last Chrons is not about that, its focus is obviously more on the value of family, with the Land playing a secondary role

So basically were saying the same thing here, no? We agree that the Land has been pushed into the background of the story, which is now almost exclusively focusing on the lead character´s internal conflicts? The point of controversy is whether this works or not.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

Note the part where Vraith stated that the Earth is reflecting back Linden's internal struggle with herself.

I dont see that, as i stated earlier. Could someone elaborate?

The Last Chrons is not about that, its focus is obviously more on the value of family, with the Land playing a secondary role

So basically were saying the same thing here, no? We agree that the Land has been pushed into the background of the story, which is now almost exclusively focusing on the lead character´s internal conflicts? The point of controversy is whether this works or not.

Why do you throw in the word "exclusively"? I never wrote that. Why did you?

[Atrium]

Why do you throw in the word "exclusively"? I never wrote that. Why did you?

Maybe because i was looking for some common ground? Note the question marks!

[thewormoftheworld'send]

Why do you throw in the word "exclusively"? I never wrote that. Why did you?

Maybe because i was looking for some common ground? Note the question marks!

Common ground lies in first acknowledging that this is no longer the First Chrons. But I don't see why you ask for agreement on some issue when all that's really necessary is understanding the other's point of view. And my point of view is really really simple. This is not the First Chrons, this is not the same story, this story does not require being told the same way because Covenant is no longer conflicted. He even embraces his leprosy as if his illness were one of the keys to the salvation of the Land, or at least to the task ahead. Whether or not this 'works' is up to the individual reader, because it amounts to asking, "Does this work for me?"

I'll tell you my opinion. Many elements of AATE don't work for me. However, the book not focusing on the Land's beauty was not an issue for me. It never would have occurred to me unless someone brought it up, and even then, it's still not an issue, to me it's not one of its failings.

The only way to write the story you want would be, I think, to take Jeremiah and perhaps even Linden completely out of the story. Substitute for them another Mhoram, perhaps another Hile Troy. Correct? Maybe not.

But if you want a formula writer then Piers Anthony should be your favorite author of all time. Have you seen his latest works? There will be no more Xanth. Instead, Anthony has relocated his stories to another planet completely (let's call it Charm) - one ruled, of course, by magic. Obviously. But since we can't call the new series Xanth, let's call it ChroMagic (which is just another name for the same thing), and then remove the puns to create a more serious tone, all to make prospective readers think there is a difference.

I, for one, don't want that.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

After a bit of reflection, I see that the only possibility of common ground would be for us to have had the same expectations before reading anything.

[Vraith]

So basically were saying the same thing here, no? We agree that the Land has been pushed into the background of the story, which is now almost exclusively focusing on the lead character´s internal conflicts? The point of controversy is whether this works or not.

Maybe at some point I'll get the mood and ambition to go into this at length, but that isn't how I experienced the book over-all. There is more internal than external...but the situation is also larger, more dangerous, and more complicated. Though that's only a tangent.

Every point of "internal conflict" is also directly present, in feature or event or people in the world. Many of them noble or good in intent, yet still forced to oppose each other. Reading it, to me, was, in almost every case, 3 journeys at once, all "visible" in my head. The char's internal struggle chained and reflected in the conflict of other char's/powers, immersed in the glories and disasters of the past.

A related thing, since I saw something about giants recently:
I don't need a new Saltheart or Pitchwife, especially if it will require other things being left out, because one witty exchange between Giants, and the stacking of rocks for a burial is enough to invoke and recreate all that the Giants are, and all they mean to me in an immediate and present way.

And I don't see the boredom/mundane in the Land's circumstance, except maybe in the same way that gently murdering someone with a subtle painless poison is more boring and mundane than setting them on fire.

Even if that were NOT the case however, the simple truth is that nothing from the world is sufficient to save the world, and it never was. And, if the outsiders don't solve the essential conflicts/problems in themselves any solution they enact will, at best, reiterate the whole mess. Or something even worse. And that, I say, no matter how impressive or foregrounded the Land, would be a story that truly sucked.