Logical Proof of the Lands un-reality ?

[peter]

I really wanted to post this in the Close as it really pertains to the branch of philosophy mentioned above as much as to the Chrons - but here is the question

I've seen/read popular books on philosophy where a short introduction to the subject of 'Logic' is given and invariably before half a page has passed they begin to start expressing statements in mathematical looking formulae full of U's, >'s and ='s etc. The upshot is that Logic is at it's heart a formalised system for making, proving or disproving statements without the ambiguity that comes (naturally) into everyday speech. The following occured to me. If this system was applied to the statement "The shared language of Thomas Covenant and the denizens of the Land is proof that the Land exists only in TC's mind" would it stack up. (nb The statement may have to be tweaked a bit to bring it into a form where the analysis could be carried out - but I expect you get the idea of what I'm trying to get across).

It seems to me that there is no rational explanation of the fact that TC can instantly communicate with Lena in a shared language other than the figmental nature of the Land - but that doesn't make it right by any means .

There are subsiduary questions pertaining to language in the Land that don't necessarily relate to the above but are interesting in themselves. Did TC have the 'gift of toungs' like the Giants - he always seemed to be able to communicate with everyone straight away (as did every-one else in fact). Would TC have been automatically able to speak to any-one any-where in the Land at his point of entry (I guess so - he had no problem with both Foul and Drool).

(Apologies if this has been covered before but what I'm really interested in here is if the problem of Covenants being able to converse with Lena et al is a game changer in respect of the real/imaginary debate if it is subjected to the rigorous rules of logic.

[wayfriend]

You're noticing that there's no rational explanation for a magical world?

There are really three worlds you need to consider. Ours, Covenant's, and the Land. Covenant's world is not ours - in Covenants world, people can pass out and go to the Land; in ours, not so much. This makes Covenant's world as arational as the Land, when you get right down to it.

In my opinion, this makes the search for 'rational explanations' a misguided task before it even starts. There need not be a rational explanation for what happens to Covenant - his world is arational to begin with. Another way of saying it is, if you allow that people can be transported to another world and have an a life-changing adventure there, why do you demand a rational explanation for anything else?

If the Land is 'real' (it's not, actually, but we are wondering if it's real in Covenant's world) then a magical language fix-up is no more 'unreal' than being able to go there in the first place, right?

[Zarathustra]

I know that Donaldson has stressed the arationality of the Land (and fantasy in general, as opposed to s.f.) in the GI, but that doesn't mean his creation has no rules or basic truths (axioms) whatsoever. Any system with axioms and rules can also have some valid deductions from those axioms. For instance, if the Creator were to interfere in his Creation, it would destroy it. Or, if there is a magical act, there is someone who wielded the magic, in a process that arises from their life/being, employing their Lore, usually through a means of articulation. This comes straight from Donaldson himself. He can try to make it sound "organic," but it's still the structure of his world.

So even if we're going to use magic as a universal explanation for anything inexplicable that happens in the Land, I think we still have to play by the rules. If Covenant can only speak their language by an act of magical intervention, who gave him this gift? Was it the Creator? Would such an act violate the nonintervention rules? Seems so to me. We know the Elohim can give the gift of tongues, but that seems like an ad hoc intervention at the moment of Covenant's translation. They usually don't bother themselves with the details of what's going on, unless it's a catastrophic event without which their intervention would threaten them personally (or the Earth generally ... pretty much the same thing since they're the Heart of the Earth). And the Elohim usually require an explicit payment for their gifts, or an explicit renunciation of that requirement.

So was it Earthpower itself? Well, that seems to violate the "rule" that specific acts of magic require a wielder (and Lore and means of articulation). Giving someone the gift of understanding speech is an intelligent, specific, intricate act of magic. I don't think it could merely be a product of Earthpower in general. That also rules out Covenant himself, through the wild magic, because his control over it is far from specific or intelligent.

So the question is indeed a good one, if we're going to take Donaldson's "rules" seriously and not merely toss them out the window. I don't think arationality gets him off the hook at all. In fact, it seems downright contradictory to account for the ability to understand meaning in a bunch of sounds that would otherwise seem gibberish, by referring to a principle of the absence of logical meaning. The act of understanding itself seems to preclude this line of reasoning.

Or ... maybe it says something profound about our own inexplicable and ultimately paradoxical ability to discern meaning. Maybe it's Wittgenstein's disappearing ladder.

[wayfriend]

Donaldson has always said that he strives for consistency and having rules that can be followed. Which is why I would never say that there aren't rules. Just that there are no perfectly valid measures of 'real'.

If we're going to discuss 'rules' rather than 'reals': The Creator has spoken to Covenant, and Linden. He's tested them. He (somehow) has allowed their going to the Land, or contrived it himself (it's unclear). How is doing something to solve a language issue out-of-bounds when these other things are permissible?

Conceivably, the Creator could have created the world in such a way as to ensure Covenant could understand the language. Built the world "for" him. He certainly interfered with his creation during the creation phase. He gave it gravity Covenant could cope with, air Covenant could breath, food Covenant could eat, germs Covenant could resist, temperatures Covenant could be comfortable in, etc. Why is giving it a language Covenant could understand out-of-bounds?

That all being said, the whole point of Covenant's real world being "realish" is that we can make certain assumptions about how it works, and be comfortable thinking in it's terms, and even hold it up as deserving the same commentary as ours ("scenery"). Therefore, it's fair to say that Donaldson would strive to make the differences between the real world and Covenant's real world the minimum necessary. But there's plenty of leeway in 'minimum'.

What would be served if Covenant couldn't speak the language? What would be lost? And is it worth preserving verisimilitude at that cost?

[Zarathustra]

It's a good point about the gravity, air, food, etc. I was coming here just now to post a similar point: how did it happen that the Land became populated with genetically compatible breeding partners for "real-world" humans? Not only do these people look human, act human, and speak a recognizable language, but their physical make-up down to the genetic level is pretty much identical to humans, otherwise Elena never would have been born. Was that an act of magic, too? Doubtful. I wouldn't expect that everyone in the Land was genetically altered by Earthpower just in case Covenant wanted to rape someone. Nor would I expect that Covenant's sperm was magically modified upon translation, just in case he wanted to have children in this place.

No, I think we're going to have to assume that the Land was made with people who are genetically compatible with Covenant's world from the beginning. So the Creator created both worlds with this intended parallelism? Maybe. That would account for a lot without violating his rule against nonintervention. On the other hand, he could have merely copied the Earth's lifeforms, but that's not as satisfying to think of his lack of originality.

Complicating matters is the fact that He made lots of other creatures, too, with languages Covenant can't understand and with wombs where his seed can't find purchase, presumably. So why these similarities, in the face of all the other differences? Creator's whim?

In the end, the real answer to all of this is that Donaldson wouldn't have a story without it. Covenant couldn't have had his adventure if he couldn't immediately understand people who thought he resembled their ancient hero. And he couldn't have committed a crime of passion that would haunt him later if he couldn't breed with Lena. It's all author contrivance after that. Donaldson needed Covenant to be surrounded with (and embraced by) his own people, given than he was on the verge of losing his connection with humanity. If *everything* was alien, there would be no contrast with his real world alienation.

[Tangential thought experiment: Linden should have had sex with someone from the Land, to see if she could have gotten pregnant and carried that baby to term in the "real" world. That would have some mind-blowing implications.]

[Vraith]

Ok...I gave a thanks to Z for his penultimate post [without comment cuz it didn't seem necessary] for two reasons...the majority of it was an excellent approach/viewpoint to examine things, and the closing comment insightful...even though I didn't agree with the entirety.

But now we're in the territory of things I hate: the tendency of some writers and lots of commentators to try to describe a "physics of magic" [in a general way...though there are lots of offshoots/variations.]

The Midi chlorians or whatever it is in Star Wars is a well known and annoying example.

It comes down to this: Most really good Fantasy, and much really good SF has a common feature...the attempt to answer the question "WHY?"
This, IMO, means one thing: These works will ALWAYS, by necessity, have nitpicky rational contradictions...because they require integrity of some kind to be a story, yet they require actual, literal [internally] effects on the "world" born from the ir/a/non-rational.

As if, in the "real" world generating electricity required PASSION [desire, despite, whatever].
The attempt to answer [or even NOT answer...just to seriously and deeply ASK] WHY will always, inevitably, result in inconsistencies in what/where/when/how.
The whole point is how we [real people] can best answer the troubles of "why" without denying the strict reality of the others.
Because even someone like me who thinks the supernatural and things like "god" are just euphemisms for false/untrue/lies knows that life, for intelligent beings, has no "value," or "worth" without the ir/a/non-rationals of love, hate, desire, beauty. [all of which are real unmediated "forces" in this kind of work...beauty, for instance is an attribute of certain being/existant "objects/bodies/beings"...not an interpretation of the conjunction of other attributes that folk decide are "beautiful"...or not.]

[wayfriend]

[Tangential thought experiment: Linden should have had sex with someone from the Land, to see if she could have gotten pregnant and carried that baby to term in the "real" world. That would have some mind-blowing implications.]

[Linden would have to be restored to her original condition before returning back to her real world.]

The attempt to answer [or even NOT answer...just to seriously and deeply ASK] WHY will always, inevitably, result in inconsistencies in what/where/when/how.

Agree. The whole point of a fantasy is to accept magic so that you can move on to other cool what-if scenarios that ARE worth thinking about. If you get stuck at the magic part, you don't make it to what's worthwhile.

So if you remember that Covenant's world is a bit magic, as well as the Land, you can move past the details of how/why he gets to the Land, and think about what he's doing when he gets there.

[Zarathustra]

I don't want to get too side-tracked with this, because the thread subject is fascinating enough on its own, but I'm not entirely sure that Linden would have been returned to the real in her original condition. Appearance, maybe, but internally, too? Wouldn't that also wipe her memories, since memories are alterations in our brain's neurons? And would such a "law" punish another innocent being? Would the Land really force Linden to have an abortion merely so Covenant could sustain his doubt? Honestly, I don't know. That doubt has already been violated in other ways.

The attempt to answer [or even NOT answer...just to seriously and deeply ASK] WHY will always, inevitably, result in inconsistencies in what/where/when/how.

Possibly. I do think reality is paradoxical at its core. However, I don't think it robs fantasy of its wonder to explain its magic. There is enough mystery within reason itself (e.g. Godel, Wittgenstein, paradox, etc.) that a rational explanation for magic can still contain mystery.

I think that Donaldson's approach to fantasy and magic are merely one way to think about it. He wants to symbolize parts of the human experience: life (Earthpower), passion/will (wild magic), order (Law), chaos (Worm). And I think he wants to talk about these metaphorically in order to relate what they mean to us as people, not as scientists. But scientists are still people. Knowing about neurons and pheromones doesn't make me any less of a person. I think it deepens our appreciation of life similar to healthsense.

In the real world, we used to explain things with magic. Magic wasn't real, it was just a placeholder for knowledge. A substitute for understanding. The things it described were indeed real (lightning, volcanoes, etc.), but the metaphorical/mythological accounts were merely ways we could relate to things we didn't understand, and still express our wonder and respect for them in the absence of accurate knowledge. However, some people mourn the loss of "magic" in our world and think that science/reason robs it of meaning. But this is ludicrous. That's trading ignorance for the illusion of meaning. It's religion.

So why should our fantasy stories reverse this? Why should they mimic a process that would be nothing more than deluded ignorance in the real world? Only for metaphorical purposes. So, if the explanation robs the metaphor of its literary purpose and legitimacy, then the story has been undermined.

But magic doesn't have to be only a metaphor. You can talk about magic in a fantasy world in a different way entirely, using it in a different role. And then explanations don't necessarily undermine the story, but instead do the same thing they do in our world: elucidate the wonder of our human existence.

Midichoreans sucked because they were easy and ad hoc. They didn't explain anything. They literally took the magic out of the Force for no payoff whatsoever. They didn't elucidate what it means to be human .. but then again, neither did the Force. It was ad hoc, too. It was nothing like Earthpower or wild magic, which were metaphors for specific parts of our human experience. The Force was just a prop to allow Jedi to move things with their minds, and do other "cool" tricks. It was all for show, not enlightenment. In my opinion, Midichloreans didn't hurt it; they just sucked in a different way.

[Vraith]

Yes, or course, and that's my point...you CAN talk about magic in a different way. The good work tends to do exactly that [and, at the same time point at how we can engage our world in a different way. Because if you are an intelligent being you simply can't ignore the facts...yet if you are an intelligent being the facts are just the bare ground of essentials that potentially open up a whole "magical" universe of possibilities for living, learning, loving.]

Explaining a worlds magic is one thing, no problem if well done.
REDUCING it is something else entirely.
I return, in a slightly different way, to what I said...as if electricity depended on passion, gravity was amenable to desire...what if we could SEE the health and goodness of a forest bleeding away and dying as we mowed it down with chainsaws, and the sterile emptiness of the land once it was gone?

The midchlorians and the force suck exactly because they aren't [as they are mostly used] anything other than a better mousetrap, but the folk who did Star Wars clearly WANTED them to be something else, something more.
White Gold and Earthpower clearly are successful at being something more.

[Zarathustra]

what if we could SEE the health and goodness of a forest bleeding away and dying as we mowed it down with chainsaws, and the sterile emptiness of the land once it was gone?

How can you not see it? I think that either Donaldson or his readers make too big a deal out of Healthsense and his "scenery" comment. We can detect beauty and health. Maybe it's not magnified to magical proportions, but it *is* magnified by understanding. I think Covenant's "scenery" comment comes out of his bitterness and leprosy. It's an unfair indictment of our world. It's like believing that our world only has only emptiness because we're listening to a glass half-empty kind of guy.

One thing that Healthsense does, in addition to being able to detect "hidden" objective truths like the seasons or health, is the promotion of subjective values to the status of objective truths. In reality, evil is in the eye of the beholder, not the object being viewed. But Healthsense treats these things like qualities for which any viewer would find agreement. I think that's inauthentic, not true to the world. It denies our role as judges and valuers, and hence demeans and diminishes us. I prefer our perception.

Of course, I suppose things in the Land are objectively good or evil, so Healthsense isn't really to blame. It's only seeing them how they "really" are. So I guess my real issue is the unambiguous nature of good/evil in the Chronicles. It doesn't translate to our world ... one important failure of depicting What It Means To Be Human. And perhaps that's what people are relating to when they wish we had Healthsense. Healthsense would be hell in any place that wasn't a natural paradise. People want life and the earth to be perfect, and long for us to treat it like a vast garden. But that's merely Eden projected universally. It's not real.

[peter]

Wow - full of great arguments and insights. Well done Wayfriend for setting me right on what must be a common mistake when thinking about the Chrons - to forget that TC's 'real' world is not actually ours and won't necessarily play by the same rules. Vraith points out that if you take a fine tooth comb to any work (particularly of fantasy or SF) that the core inconsistancies can be exposed - and that sometimes these just have to be accepted to allow the story to progress into more fertile grounds for thought. I had never considered health sense in the way Z puts it and yes - this rings very true both in the nightmare potential it posseses in anything other than a Utopia (ref Lindens problem in the 2nd Chrons as the only one with healthsense in the world of the Sunbane) and more specifically in it's power to diminish our own (perhaps limited but present never the less) ability to percieve the health of our own environment when confronted with it in it's full glory. And the isdea of Linden coceiving in the Land (sepparate thread possibility here as to proposed candidates for that job ) and birthing in her own world - surreal possibilities indeed.

I feel almost a cheat in saying this but of course if the Land is imaginary - and we may be set to find it so in October - then all of the problems of language compatability (not to mention the genetic/evolutionary and others) raised will dissapear at the drop of a hat. If that is the case then when SRD faces the inevitable backlash of fans who are unable to cope with the idea that after 30 years of loving the land and it's people, it all turns out to be hogwash, then he will have the perfect defence. "C'mon Guys! He could talk to these people - dammit, he could even breed with them. Get real!"

[Vraith]

what if we could SEE the health and goodness of a forest bleeding away and dying as we mowed it down with chainsaws, and the sterile emptiness of the land once it was gone?

How can you not see it? I think that either Donaldson or his readers make too big a deal out of Healthsense and his "scenery" comment. We can detect beauty and health. Maybe it's not magnified to magical proportions, but it *is* magnified by understanding. I think Covenant's "scenery" comment comes out of his bitterness and leprosy. It's an unfair indictment of our world. It's like believing that our world only has only emptiness because we're listening to a glass half-empty kind of guy.

One thing that Healthsense does, in addition to being able to detect "hidden" objective truths like the seasons or health, is the promotion of subjective values to the status of objective truths. In reality, evil is in the eye of the beholder, not the object being viewed. But Healthsense treats these things like qualities for which any viewer would find agreement. I think that's inauthentic, not true to the world. It denies our role as judges and valuers, and hence demeans and diminishes us. I prefer our perception.

Of course, I suppose things in the Land are objectively good or evil, so Healthsense isn't really to blame. It's only seeing them how they "really" are. So I guess my real issue is the unambiguous nature of good/evil in the Chronicles. It doesn't translate to our world ... one important failure of depicting What It Means To Be Human. And perhaps that's what people are relating to when they wish we had Healthsense. Healthsense would be hell in any place that wasn't a natural paradise. People want life and the earth to be perfect, and long for us to treat it like a vast garden. But that's merely Eden projected universally. It's not real.

Somewhere among my very early posts on the Watch is one talking about how we DO have healthsense in ways, [You even said "I like the way you think" about it]...so I somewhat agree on that part. Though it is a state of mind/awareness that as a whole we don't cultivate...that many many people laugh at/make fun of, or relegate to "scenery."...so no, I DON't think we see it, really...though we could.

But I think objectifying such things is a great way to enable different ways to talk about things human...just as talking about a sunset in physics terms is one thing, but talking about it in poetry/metaphorical terms is something else. The "frame" itself generates value/meaning/potentials as much [or nearly as much] as the thing being framed.

Because I don't see it most importantly as Good/Evil so much as Healthy/Sick.
AND because choice is so important. [it is much more dynamic and illustrative/demonstative/revelatory of truth to KNOW right/wrong and choose than to just make a guestimate.]
AND because intention is also a kind of force in its own right. [all the a-rational parts of the human as effective instead of only affective]
[those things as among the fundamental forces]
BECAUSE of the literal differences in the real/fictional frames, we can speak of things in worthwhile/informative ways...much like Schrodinger's Cat is a piece of fiction that enables thoughts on physics. [though not exactly like that].

But, like any other "system," the frame will always generate inconsistencies and some of the knowledges it generates will preclude other knowledges.

[Linna Heartbooger]

You're noticing that there's no rational explanation for a magical world?

There are really three worlds you need to consider. Ours, Covenant's, and the Land. Covenant's world is not ours - in Covenants world, people can pass out and go to the Land; in ours, not so much. This makes Covenant's world as arational as the Land, when you get right down to it.

I don't think this necessarily has to be true.

Covenant himself, throughout a number of the books, was convinced that he was in fact, not going to the Land, but dreaming of the Land.

I tried posing the argument to my husband once, "But Covenant should know it's not a dream, because dreams aren't that detailed, internally-consistent, and covering that long of a time span!"
So then I learned that apparently some people do.
Plus, Covenant was an author, presumably someone who has intentional practice in creating internally-consistent worlds in his imagination.

At least insofar as any book can be written within "our world" (you know, it's always modulus various details like the character existing)... at least the first three, I think, could be set in our world, if Covenant is just having very vivid dreams.

(sorry for responding kinda late to something rather far upthread..)

[Orlion]

Something else: we do not know the content of the books Covenant wrote to begin with. Could be they were fantasy books

[Zarathustra]

Hell, I've written stories in my dreams. I've written (and played) songs in my dreams that I can't even play when I'm awake. I've experienced emotions in my dreams that are more powerful than any I've experienced awake. And I've had many lucid dreams that are more vivid than life itself. I've even had recurring dreams that take up where the last one left off and complete a long story.

Saying that there is no rational explanation for a magical world (and therefore lack of rational explanation can't disprove it) assumes the very thing in question ... i.e. whether or not there are such things as magical worlds to begin with.

[UrSteve]

It's a good point about the gravity, air, food, etc. I was coming here just now to post a similar point: how did it happen that the Land became populated with genetically compatible breeding partners for "real-world" humans?

I consider it a technical convenience of fiction. In most SciFi aliens are characterized as humanoid and speak English fluently. It would have been the shortest chronicles ever if Covenant choked to death on an incompatible atmosphere after his first summoning and the longest chronicles ever if he had to struggle to learn the inhabitants' language.

[Tangential thought experiment: Linden should have had sex with someone from the Land, to see if she could have gotten pregnant and carried that baby to term in the "real" world. That would have some mind-blowing implications.]

Although not 'someone from the Land', she did have sex with Covenant while in the Land. Would have been equally as mind-blowing if she returned and found herself pregnant with his offspring.

[Linna Heartbooger]

I think in some ways we're approaching 'backwards' from what Covenant's concerns are, but anyways...

It's a good point about the gravity, air, food, etc. I was coming here just now to post a similar point: how did it happen that the Land became populated with genetically compatible breeding partners for "real-world" humans?

I consider it a technical convenience of fiction. In most SciFi aliens are characterized as humanoid and speak English fluently...

It is one of those things that you see as "needful" for fiction, and are just gonna give the "authorial license" to do it so there can be a story... for the reasons like the ones you mentioned below!

But in terms of internal consistency... I think better justifications could be worked out...
Before recent times, I don't think that would have actually been a problem.
I know this will sounds disappointing to some, but we don't actually know that highly-intelligent life can take any other form than human.

If nothing else, a migration argument might be a possibility.
Another of my favorite Fantasy/Sci-Fi authors does (what I think is) a decent resolution of such a sticky in-story situation that way.
They did have to learn the local languages though.

...It would have been the shortest chronicles ever if Covenant choked to death on an incompatible atmosphere after his first summoning and the longest chronicles ever if he had to struggle to learn the inhabitants' language.

Haha, good one!

Hell, I've written stories in my dreams. I've written (and played) songs in my dreams that I can't even play when I'm awake. Ive even had recurring dreams that take up where the last one left off and complete a long story.

Yeah, but there's the ones that make sense... like maybe if you've created a song for which actual musical notes exist, but which one person can't play solo on any known device. (right?)
For extra internal-consistency, maybe your mind even invented a device in-dream that would allow you to play it solo.
But I think a lot of that still gets "black-boxed" in dreams... your mind tells you there's a solution, but since it's a dream, maybe there isn't really one..

...but then there's dreams like one a friend of mine had, where she'd found the solution to a difficult math problem; but she discovered on waking that her solution required taking (I think) the square root of Rumplestiltskin.
(I'd put that in the camp of "probably doesn't make sense.")

I think here we may be a bit fuzzy on what "makes sense" means though.

The thing about completing a long story in two separate dreams... I'd suspected that could happen... your mind's probably got the memory saved somewhere, and maybe even intends to work on the problem while it's pushed to the background while you're awake. (esp. since we humans get bothered by or curious about unresolved stuff; same as any story we've witnessed.)

[wayfriend]

Personally, I don't believe that dreams are detailed. I think we experience the sensation that they are, but they are not.

I have a vague recollection (can someone help me?) of someone pointing out that, in dreams, you find yourself in situations that feel rational, but a tell-tale giveaway is that you can't remember what events led up to that situation. (You find yourself naked in classroom, say, but have no recollection of deciding to leave your dorm naked, or of walking across the campus.)

The mind can fake backstory in a dream. You can have feelings that something led to this, without ever having actually drempt what led to this. You can have feelings that you have sung an amazing song, but the song actually isn't amazing, and there may not even have been a song. You can feel like you've walked for weeks without ever having walked.

Then, when you can't remember it, you write it off as dreams being unrememberable. But sometimes, there was never anything there to remember. Just a feeling that there was -- and that feeling you remember.

So ... one could point out that Covenant didn't have a dream, because he actually had coherent continuity from place to place and time to time. This doesn't actually happen in dreams, you only have feelings that you had such coherency. When you wake up, you are sure that there must have been continuity. But if you can actually remember the continuous pieces ... it wasn't a dream.

[Zarathustra]

WF, I think you're right about most dreams not being detailed. Our brains are good at faking it, and "filling in." But lucid dreams are most certainly detailed. When I've gone lucid, I've dreamed of forests where each individual branch and twig is rendered in such detail that the surface of the bark is etched in vivid realism. The difference between one moment to the next when going lucid is like turning on a light, or putting on your glasses. No, it's even more powerful.

Maybe doing a lot of painting helps your brain to create detail in your dreams. I can only speak from my experience. When I draw or paint things that I see, I get used to looking at minute details that mostly escape notice, even in waking life. I start noticing the "negative space" of objects, or how things that we think of as "round" are usually ovals from our typical off-center perspectives ... or how egg yolks aren't actually yellow. They're the color of orange juice. [Edit: actually, I meant to say that orange juice isn't really orange, it's the color of egg yolks. But either way, neither is exactly the color most people would choose if you gave them a box of crayons to draw them.]

Artists/musicians/writers "program" their brains to create detail, so it's not surprising that they are able to do this in their dreams.

[Kevin BeerDrinker]

If Covenant can only speak their language by an act of magical intervention, who gave him this gift?

Lord Foul? Foul was a major player in bringing Covenant to the land, and sent Covenant to Revelstone with a message. So Foul had a need for Covenant to be able to communicate in The Land.