Kevin's Watch

MsMary--I cannot find my ancient post about the Frontline article of an event that happened 8 or 10 years ago in an small American town where, based on one child's hearsay during a missing girl case the town accused 2 very poor families of a satanic ritual slaying. The policeman investigating the case was accused later of being the leader of the "cult" and his career was utterly ruined. Not 2 mention the lives of both families. Not one shred of evidence was EVER found. But this is just a small example of how misinformation and ignorance can ruin someone.

I agree we don't kno that much about Joan and TC's relationship. But anyone who had such a deep understanding and care for horses would, I assume, apply those same principles to her lifemate. It's just the way she packed up Roger and the horses so quickly and never did any followup on TC that indicates not only intense fear but a marked degree of superficiality. You can care deeply about someone and have precieved intimacy but that doesn't mean the other person is reciprocating in their heart...

I disagree, danlo. I don't think that her packing up Roger so fast indicated superficiality - it was fear. She felt her child was at risk, and a mother may do irrational things at that time, even in the face of scientific evidence. The risk of contagion was small, but perhaps even that small risk was more than she could bear.

~MsMary~

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!! **fires wild magic back @ MsMary!** (but what about the intimacy question?) **runs and hides!**

Yeah, you better run and hide, danlo.

What about the intimacy question? People change and do strange things under stress. I am unwilling to condemn the woman without knowing more about her relationship with TC and what motivates her.

~MsMary~

Donaldson never allows us to find out what's going on in Joan's head. We find out in The Wounded Land that TC IS devoted to her, but we NEVER are told anything about her thoughts or emotions. People will interpret her actions through their own life experiences. Happy baggage, happy marriage between Tom and Joan. Unhappy baggage, unhappy marriage between Tom and Joan. We know the "what", Joan packing up the baby and fleeing, but never the "why". If anyone runs into Donaldson at a conference or something, it would be a wonderful question to ask him...

I have only today discovered this site, but I am glad that I have and look forward to returning. Maybe I can contribute a little in some small way. I have just finished rereading the first Chronicles this past weekend after an 18 year absence from The Land and will soon begin the Second. I have always loved these books, but I am a bit more critical as well as appreciative the second time around.

I just have a few comments, some general and some pertaining to the appropriate chapters.

1. I agree with Ms. Mary regarding the behavior of the town folk. It is difficult for me to believe, also. I grew up in small towns in Texas, so I consider myself familiar with the environs. Imo a much more believable setting in which this could occur would be a backwards arse little hillbilly hideaway of a town full of inbreds. Think Deliverance. That's the only way that I could get the story to fit in my mind.

2. There really isn't much information regarding Joan, Roger, family & friends because the book is, to say the least, shallow and lacking with regard to this very important area. The book could have used a few chapters at least to further flesh out these relationships as well as the manner in which they changed from before the diagnosis to after, as well as showing us the emotional change that TC underwent in response to these very traumatic events. It definitely would have helped the reader to more easily empathize with TC's emotional state. I had forgotten how much I disliked him throughout much of the first Chronicles. However, LFB is long enough, and I'm sure that a publisher would have wanted a more detailed rendition condensed. Maybe that's what happened - it happened in TIW.

3. For the most part, I really enjoy SRD's writing, but he becomes a bit too enamored with vocabulary and tries too hard at times. For instance, the use of words such as: inanition, gelid, inchoate, just to name a few, become repetitive and a bit annoyingly predictable. At times I would just chuckle because I felt like it was time for him to throw a nice jazzy vocabulary word in there, and he rarely failed me! hehe

I hope that I don't sound too critical because I really do love the books. It's just that with their recent completion, they are fresh in my mind, and I am curious to know if anybody else shares a few of these "irritations" with me.

Turint

For a relatively harsh critique - go to www.theonering.net/features/notes/note7.html

Scroll down to I started "The Chronicles…" and read on.

[/url]

Vain, thanks for the link. I really enjoyed the review in a sad way. It was well thought out and well written, and I agree with it whole-heartedly. Still, I look forward to beginning the Second Chronicles as well as following the discussion here.

Thanks,
Turint

This little nugget came to my mind again. I had already in the past posted it on this site but in case you missed it here it is again.

Macht in Joan Macht Covenant is German for... (drumroll)... covenant!

By the way, I am of the opinion Joan was definetely in love with her husband, although possibly not to the degree he loved her. Then Covenant's doctor probably didn't tell her anything much about leprosy, except that Covenant had it. I think Joan was likely the hard-and-brittle type who would run Covenant's life just by the force of her will, but break suddenly when put under too much stress. So she ran away with Roger, absolutely terrified. Later the guilt of that act and her soft side Covenant was attracted to would prevent her from picking up the pieces again, but she wouldn't learn about leprosy or go back to Covenant because she was too proud and too terrified and strove in vain to just forget about it all.

Nerdanel, I wanted to mention, with regard to your leprosy post above, that the modern day leprosy, now called Hansen's disease, is not generally considered by experts to be the same leprosy which is mentioned in the Bible. The leprosy in the Bible is known as tzara'at in Hebrew, and experts are not exactly clear on the exact nature of the disease.

Modern-day leprosy, or Hansen's disease, is still found in the American south and southwest; armadillos have been found to be carriers of the disease, and some people get it through contact with these animals. I am not sure about the incidence of leprosy in the rest of the world, maybe someone else knows.

~MsMary~

Another topic I wanted to bring up was TC's decision to start shaving himself with a blade, as opposed to an electric razor, in spite of the danger of cutting himself. It seemed to be an odd choice.

What do you all think of this?

~MsMary~

There used to be a lepers 'colony' in Molokai Hawaii. See:
www.islandroutes.com/articles/leprosy.html

Nerdanel,
I think that SRD writes about Joan just enough so that every reader can fill in the gaps according to his/her inclinations. That's why we are having such a debate here in this thread, and that's why I like SRD so much .
My tendency is to agree with you...

-pitch

It's clear to me when reading this forum, and the books, that Tom dearly loves his wife. It's not clear to me if she loves him. Some people do get married without "being in love" with the person they marry. I've known some women who, when they get to a certain age (midthirties) seem to panic about never getting a chance to experience marriage or child raising and take the first offer (I am a woman and speaking of friends, so please don't call me sexist). I've known other people, of both sexes, to marry for financial or emotional security issues. Some people marry for physical infatuation and suddenly come to the realization a year or so later that "I don't love my spouse". I've known a couple of men who have married the most attractive woman that they can find, in sort of a trophy bride sort of thing. I'm not saying that any of these apply to Joan or Thomas, but I would like to point out that it IS possible for a marriage to exist for reasons other than love, and for only one side to feel deep love for the other party. I'm not sure that their ages are ever stated, but for some reason I've always thought of them as being thirtyish, and they haven't been married all that long when Joan makes the decision to become pregnant. Maybe she was one of those women who start planning their wedding when they're twelve, and took the first good offer? Maybe she married because her biological clock was ticking? Who knows???

I think that Donaldson kicked ass all over tolkien

Just an FYI to all of you. Hansen's disease or Leprosy is now cureable. There are two different types of Leprosy, one can be cured in about a year and the other takes around 6 months.

My understanding is that if you wait too long and the nerves die in any part of your body, well your screwed there, but the disease that caused those nerves to die can be killed. You'll never get those nerves back tho cause nerves don't regenerate.

Also I read the review mentioned above, and well, I've read this kind of review before and I just don't get it. Most of the review is overwhelmingly positive and paints the books in a beautiful and intricate way. Which they deserve because they are beautiful and intricate. But then the writer of the review gets lost in his own inability to understand SRD's use of the english language. I can understand how that turns people off but for me it makes the books richer and more detailed.

In many of Stephen Kings books he gets lost in description thats so boring I find myself only reading the first sentence in each paragraph until the action starts up again. In SRD's work I never do that. I can't wait to read the next senetence of description because it brings the Land to life in my head as if it were a real place that I had visited once, long ago.

For me, SRD is a master story teller in a league all his own. I wait from year to year with anticipation for any mention of new SRD writing just so I can see where a genius writer can take me next.

And his short stories are some of his best writing!

Oh well, as always the above is just my humble opinion!

Take care,
Matthew

You make good points about SRD's writing, FaTeke. SRD is capable of very detailed description, but it's always done in the service of the story. That's why I feel his writing is in fact quite efficient: you won't find a lot of padding in SRD's words.

..

Question: is the man's behavior courageous or cowardly? This is the fundamental question of ethics.

Rivenrock wrote:

Skyweir wrote:The note I have never been able to appreciate .. for one I have questioned whether such a scenario is indeed 'the' fundamental question of ethics' .. so if any one can explain that to me I would be truly grateful ..

Though my first thought on this was the same as yours - THE fundamental question??? - my take on this is that the fundamental question of ethics is whether or not you will act rightly, according to your understanding of right and wrong, EVEN IF you are in a situation you believe is not real. Will you act rightly even when you think it doesn't matter, or that the result will hurt no real person? I would have thought that was the fundamental test of integrity myself, but I can see how someone might label it the way SRD has.

For the first time, I've just thought of this from the other side. The first part is the question, is the man's behavior right or wrong? Maybe, just maybe, it would have been cowardly for him to pick up a sword or shield at the last second, and defend himself against the other world's champion. Because that would have meant he did not have the courage of his convictions. He knew it wasn't real, but still needed great courage to ignore what his senses seemed to be telling him. It is clearly courageous, in my eyes.

The question is, can I tie that stance in with the second part about this being the fundamental question of ethics? And I'll think on that a little, because I'm alone with the kids now, and can't sit here thinking and typing any longer.

This is just perfect! I started to reread LFB in the weekend and in this thread I find answers to my questions and (perhaps when there are no answers to be found?) also the fact that others have been wondering over the same things as myself (like why Joan never calls and what the note from the beggar really is meant to achieve).

And I also fell back upon the old question of what exactly Lord Fouls Bane is... The illearth stone (one of many potential banes) seems so far more appropriate to be Drool Rockworms Bane, but I will keep an eye out for all possibilities...

Anyone out there who have recently started anew on the chronicles btw?

..