Kevin's Watch

Zarathustra wrote:...And I think we all know that Donaldson has elevated the fantasy genre to Art.

But there are lots of things that are Art that people can still say, "You know, that's not my thing." Art doesn't automatically mean Objectively Good to Every Human--You Must Agree Or You're Uneducated. People are still allowed (in most places) to have differing opinions on various works of art. I would even be so bold as to claim that Art is subjective, both in evaluating its quality and in choosing its definition.

MJB, I thought your post was well-written, funny, and worth reading. Don't let unfriendliness or judgmental attitudes scare you off or keep you from posting your opinions.

I could not agree more with all of the above and IMO Z, there's nothing "bold" in your assertion I put in italics above. A reaction evoked in an individual by Art is necessarily and inevitably subjective precisely because it's personal... indeed, how could it be anything other than subjective?

MJB, loving your "I own the only valid palantir to gaze upon SRD" line. That was a true laugh out loud moment and could not have hit the nail more squarely on the head. Sadly, it'll go straight over the heads of those who are flagrantly fervid and fanatical, or mistakenly manic and messianic (gee, alliteration...), since they'll always believe that they and only they are "the way and the truth and the life" and that "no man cometh to SRD except through them". Anyone else detecting traces of a Jesus complex here?

I also entirely agree that if one finds nothing whatsoever to critique in a work of art, then one must be blinded by unrealistic adulation. Are we really to believe that TLD has reached the unsurpassable heights of some Platonic ideal of literature? Oh please... that's fanboi-ism taken to a laughable extreme.

As I keep repeating in these types of threads, obviously the only reasoned and mature thing to do is to acknowledge the truth within the exhortation vive la différence... not that this recommendation ever changes the self-important self-righteousness of those hell-bent upon avowing the existence of the Emperor's new clothes.

lurch wrote:To bad the self appointed egos didn't take the hint and bone up on what makes Literature, Art. Hey, you got the rest of your life. There is plenty of time.

The massive amount of unwitting self-irony variously present in the above quote is quite literally staggering... self-awareness, anyone?

Ok, let's get back on topic. I'll rephrase the question: if the gradual interview was still open, what would you ask?

dlbpharmd wrote:Ok, let's get back on topic. I'll rephrase the question: if the gradual interview was still open, what would you ask?

Mr. Donaldson: How much do you absolutely love anchovies?

SRD. how do anchovies contribute to your Art? Can you explain the secret metaphor hidden in Chapter 15 of Fatal revenant where if you read the first character of a line and then the last of the next it spells little fishes?

I don't know where this ought to go. Slipped in a question about the name meaning of my too-obviously-favorite Swordmain while SRD signed the books, so it did not get filmed, unlike the two other topics.

Grue = gore, entrails; "burn" refers to rope burns and injuries the sailors sustain aboard Giantships while for instance falling down from the masts. "Grueburn" would refer to a gory personal accident with the rigging. Hence not a warrior name in the lines of "burning for the fear-shivers [of enemies]", etc.

Yes Frosty, on matters technical SRD seemed more free to discuss during the Q&A. His " I write with my ear" response to the Alliteration question is another example.

On the other side of the coin is SRD's opening remarks..When Jenn is done with the video and posts it, I suggest all view it. Unprompted, Donaldson admits to saying things in the GI that may have not been the case. He lied. Of course Donaldson explained how it became to be to " misdirect "or "mischaracterize" in his answers. He wanted the reader to find the answer rather than being given the answer.

In any case what followed was still enlightening . Yet as Cindy put it, " I think you are way to humble when discussing your books." , seems quite apropos.

lurch wrote:Unprompted, Donaldson admits to saying things in the GI that may have not been the case. He lied.

He admitted to doing so when pressed for spoilers. (And has said the same in the past.) Let's not get carried away.

In the Gradual Interview, Stephen R Donaldson wrote:Some days I simply can't resist my impulse to tease. I get an entirely malicious pleasure out of creating misleading expectations. Of course, that's one of the keys to my writing in general. I work hard at setting up expectations which I intend to both frustrate and fulfill in unforeseeable ways.

(01/20/2006)

easy Way..I also said..misdirect and mischaracterize..which is close to "creating misleading expectations"..I think his.." impulse to tease" and "malicious pleasure" says it all. An example ..somewhere during the evening I asked Donaldson how much of an influence Andre Breton's work may have had on TCoTC..His response was.." I never heard of him".....Now..for some one involved in " Modern Literature"..holder of a MBA in Lit..and aged in his life and experiences and thus profession..to say " I never heard of him" even after bringing up the meta-physical attributes of TCoTC in the Q&A..yeeeaaaa I couldn't help but feel he was putting me in the Land where everything is upside down and inside out. ..

The author has already written the book. After the release of it to the public, its all about the readers. I can understand why any author doesn't look forward to " explaining" so much of their work. Much of the " explaining" is nothing more than validating any one of the readers povs. I can understand that any author shouldn't have to serve as a validator. The reader is either confident of his or hers own perceptions or is not. So,,I hold no more enmity in my.." He Lied"..than SRD holds in .." Some days I simply can't resist my impulse to tease."

Consider..that SRD wouldn't affirm Frosty's perception of the source of the Skurj or The Worm,,or confirm that he had input to the Cover art of TLD..or..etc,,etc..As I think about that..if true..then the Universal of his work becomes more obvious. The Surreal, The Other Reality, of his work is made even more infused into the work. If he had no input on the Cover Art..the Cover Art still exists..it still illustrates what was going on while Tom and Linden consummated their marriage..That the word " climax" is also on the Cover Art..then becomes Surreal in a whole other direction if the author had nothing to do with it..Same with Frostys nordic serpents. If the author is totally unaware of any mythology of such..then his Skurj and The Worm become a " connectivity" of universal surreal proportions that touches thru Time and Space.

But its about what the author brings Us,,the readers to. How can he say one readers pov is any more or less valid than anothers? He can't ,and he will not go down that path. His job is to lead us to the water. What we taste when we drink ,is ours.

lurch wrote:somewhere during the evening I asked Donaldson how much of an influence Andre Breton's work may have had on TCoTC..His response was.." I never heard of him"

Given SRD's repeated statement in the GI and elsewhere that he's interested in "schools of psychology", asking him how much of an influence the theories of Jung may have had on TCoTC just might have led to a fractionally less short conversation.

lurch wrote:But its about what the author brings Us,,the readers to. How can he say one readers pov is any more or less valid than anothers? He can't ,and he will not go down that path.

It's a relief to see this apparently understood at last. If the author himself won't invalidate any one reader's POV (no matter how bizarre or off-planet), then certainly no one reader should ever have the arrogance to even contemplate doing the same.

As I've said repeatedly, reaction to art is personal and subjective and thus inevitably bound to differ between individuals - so, as always, vive la différence.

Donaldson has validated and invalidated many different reader POVs in the GI. He doesn't shy away from saying, "No, that's not what I was going for," no more than he shies away from saying, "You're free to have your own interpretation."

SRD has listed his influences and inspiration many times. If he claims he never heard of Breton, I'd take that at face value. There's no reason--and certainly no malicious pleasure--in creating misleading impressions at this point, after his magnum opus is complete. How can one expect something at this point?

Maybe someone should have asked to see his armpits, to know for sure.

(Just a little teasing, Lurch. Your interpretation is still one of the most original/interesting here, even if not validated by SRD himself.)

In the Gradual Interview, Stephen R Donaldson wrote:Some days I simply can't resist my impulse to tease. I get an entirely malicious pleasure out of creating misleading expectations. Of course, that's one of the keys to my writing in general. I work hard at setting up expectations which I intend to both frustrate and fulfill in unforeseeable ways.

(01/20/2006)

Yes.

I would ask why there Was mention of providing the people of the new land with Kevin's wards. Surely the intention would have been for the people of the land to relearn the lillianrill and rhadhamaerl talents that had been lost.
I was hoping they could rebuild a tree city like Revelwood .
The same question for the book where Linden is trying to convince the Masters they are wrong to hide the existence of earthpower to people of the land. She mentions that they could be taught to be gravelers, etc.
I know she surely didn't want them to bring back the sunbane so they could learn that talent?