Kevin's Watch

I just finished reading <i>Runes of the Earth</i> today. I have deliberately avoided reading this forum, to avoid spoilers. So I have no idea what the general consensus is.

My general reaction is one of disappointment.

I had just finished reading the first six books before launching into Runes. The drop in quality of writing is striking.

At times, I felt the quality had fallen to such a parody of Donaldson's writing in the first six books that I seriously considered the possibility that it was ghost written. (If so, it is a very good ghost writer, who manages to misuse words like "sojourn" in the way SRD does.)

At even worse moments, I found the book comparable to fan fiction.

I'll read the next books, of course, but I hope they are more rigourously edited and more carefully written.

I didn't keep careful notes of things I didn't like, and it's hard to point to general things like weak plots and poor dialogue. But some specific things spring to mind:

<ul>
Kevin's <i>Dirt</i>? Such a poor name lowers the tone of the Chronicles

I'm no prude, but I feel the tone is also lowered by Linden's swearing

The dialogue between Linden and the Foul-possessed Anele (before the hurtloam) was particularly poor, and cheapened Foul's character for me

I hope it's just an accident that "Anele" is "Elena" reversed, and that "Esmer" is an anagram of "Meres"

At several points Linden's conclusions are not supported by the text, or at least I couldn't figure out how they were. How did she conclude that Joan summoned her? When she first saw Jerimiah's sculptures of Kiril Threndor and Revelstone, why did she instantly assume Foul was after him? Why did she think, when in Revelstone, that she "now knew" where to find Jerimiah?

Like someone else, I thought that "The Mahdoubt" was disturbingly similar to "The Shadout Mapes", and apparently simple servant with hidden abilities
</ul>

And not criticisms, but questions:

Why did Hami call Stave "Bloodguard"?

And if the Masters are so opposed to Earthpower, why do they still revere the Ranyhyn, which are "Earthpower made flesh"?

Don't flame me too harshly!

OK, now to read the backlog of forum posts, where my points have probably already been discussed to death!

Berenford wrote:I'm no prude, but I feel the tone is also lowered by Linden's swearing

I couldn't agree more.

The dialogue between Linden and the Foul-possessed Anele (before the hurtloam) was particularly poor, and cheapened Foul's character for me

And again.

And possibly not a criticism: Why did Hami call Stave "Bloodguard"?

My guess would be (and I think I'm not the only one) that since the Masters consider the actions of their predecessors distinctly unwise, calling current Haruchai "Bloodguard" is considered some form of insult.

I'm no prude, but I feel the tone is also lowered by Linden's swearing

I wouldn't have really thought it lowered the tone, but it did seem somehow out of place...

I hope it's just an accident that "Anele" is "Elena" reversed, and that "Esmer" is an anagram of "Meres"

When posed the question on the GI, Donaldson said that Anele was a coincidence. Dunno about Esmer - I hadn't though of it. It just seems like a good name, that fits him somehow.

How did she conclude that Joan summoned her?

Joan was summoned minutes before the others, and Joan had White Gold. Linden theorised that Foul's lightning was used for the specific purpose of summoning Joan, so that Joan could summon everyone else (did Foul have enough power to summon that many people together without help?).

When she first saw Jerimiah's sculptures of Kiril Threndor and Revelstone, why did she instantly assume Foul was after him?

Only thing I can think of is - always assume the worst. Also, there was no way Jeremiah could have known the shapes unless there was something in the Land causing him to - and Foul is probably the only person in the Land interested in things outside of it.

Why did she think, when in Revelstone, that she "now knew" where to find Jerimiah?

She made the assumption, however unfounded, that there was a reason Jeremiah built those specific places, and that it was telling her where to go. Well, she's been to the others - only Mount Thunder is left.

Like someone else, I thought that "The Mahdoubt" was disturbingly similar to "The Shadout Mapes", and apparently simple servant with hidden abilities

Donaldson has said that the name 'Mahdoubt' was an intentional reference to the Shadout Mapes.

And possibly not a criticism: Why did Hami call Stave "Bloodguard"?

My guess would be (and I think I'm not the only one) that since the Masters consider the actions of their predecessors distinctly unwise, calling current Haruchai "Bloodguard" is considered some form of insult.

I'd say also an association of the term with the grudge - it was as Bloodguard that the Haruchai rode Ranyhyn to their deaths.

And if the Masters are so opposed to Earthpower, why do they still revere the Ranyhyn, which are "Earthpower made flesh"?

They oppose the use of Earthpower by those who can't use it wisely (in their opinion, anyone), not Earthpower itself - the Ranyhyn are naturally Earthpowerful, and not likely to cause any damage by existing.

Murrin wrote:

And possibly not a criticism: Why did Hami call Stave "Bloodguard"?

My guess would be (and I think I'm not the only one) that since the Masters consider the actions of their predecessors distinctly unwise, calling current Haruchai "Bloodguard" is considered some form of insult.

I'd say also an association of the term with the grudge - it was as Bloodguard that the Haruchai rode Ranyhyn to their deaths.

Good point, I forgot the grudge.

I've never noticed that anagram Esmer/meres either, but like Anele/Elena it's probably coincidental.

Berenford, as you make your way throught this forum you'll find others who've expressed disappointment, so you're not alone.

The name "Kevin's Dirt" doesn't really sit well with me either, but I'm not sure what else it could've been called - Kevin's Fog?

I suppose that Linden did swear more in Runes than she did in 2nd Chronicles, but it did not bother me personally.

dlbpharmd wrote:The name "Kevin's Dirt" doesn't really sit well with me either, but I'm not sure what else it could've been called - Kevin's Fog?

Kevin's Halitosis?

I suppose that Linden did swear more in Runes than she did in 2nd Chronicles, but it did not bother me personally.

I think, for me, it's simply because there was no profanity to speak of in the first six books - the odd "bloody" and "hellfire", but that's all fairly family-friendly. There's something coarse about Linden's propensity for bad langauage that seems at odds with the feel of the Chronicles. Refrain from the profane, Linden!

There was the occaisional godd--- in both 1st and 2nd Chronicles. When Megan Roman first said s--t, I have to admit that it stood out like a sore thumb, as did Sheriff Lytton saying f--k.

I didn't mind the swearing. It helped make Linden more distinct from Covenant; his curses were always so archaic ("Blood and bloody ashes," "Hellfire and damnation!") and distinctive, it was nice to have somebody let lose with some real world vituperative language.

Linden swore in TWL... she said she wanted to meet the son of a b***h that stabbed Nassic...

The reason there was so little foul language in the First and Second Chronicles is that Lester and Judy-Lynn del Rey, as editors (but not, I believe, in private life), were extreme prudes. Back in 1977, the idea that fantasy meant twee little fairy tales for the kiddies was still extremely prevalent, and there was a good deal of puritanical editing in consequence.

The effect in this case, actually, is rather incongruous. Covenant can be a rapist, a killer, and an utterly selfish manipulative bastard, but he must never, never, never drop an F-bomb.

Obviously, standards have changed since 1977. And the del Reys, who were unusually old-fashioned in some ways even at that time, are no longer with us. Hence a certain freedom of scatological expression that was missing in the first six books.

I think that the differences that lead you to wonder about the quality are more intangible than language. (For example, the Gap series is well done, but there is foul language aplenty.)

One of the intangibles that I pointed out in another thread is that the danger seems distant and less important.

Many are hoping for a shift back to the ole Stephen R in the next book, because Covenant will be back in the game.

BTW: has anyone dared to express this opinion in the GI?

SRD said in Manchester that (in his opinion, naturally) one of the major differences between good writers and great writers is the stretch. Great writers stretch themselves; they try to do things they're not sure they're capable of. I do find myself wondering, in light of this discussion, whether the requirement for SRD to refrain from more coarse language actually contributed to the way he writes in general?

Meh, just a random musing...

Berenford...I can only suggest at least another read,,and or some time spent thinking about what the author has done in Runes. The more contemplation the more certain things may occur to you.

The author has repeatedly emphasised that alls he does is tell a story. The rest is in the mind of the reader. The more I think about Runes, the more I want to compare it the Gap series than the first two chrons. Yet, it is a beast of it s own and my mind is having a grand time with it. I find it unfortunate that you are finding fault with it where you are and on what grounds that you are.

Fiction,,fantasy fiction,,and especially Donaldson Fantasy fiction is ALL metaphor, analogies, figurative; he does say that his characters do tend to represent ideas. So, my source of entertainment is in the following of a characters arc thru the story..if it represents something ,,watch its evolvement and with what it is in conflict with. What of its final resolution or as with Donaldson,,what is the metaphoric value of the arc traveled by a character...
..An example...if one of the themes of the author is ,,the limitations of Power...giving a main character the white Gold and The Staff of Law, raises eyebrows..but,,on the same theme(limitation of power) the same character has flaws that can be seen in the reverse negative world of what isn't being said or observed..She has been in Love ,,has had a nonrecipicating love affair with Tom Convenant for the last 20 years,,and hes been dead all that time..She hasn't moved on...Talk about Power of Love!,,and the darker undertoned limits of that Power...As I have posted elsewhere..there is some exquisit pain ,,but its not all, Hellfire and Damnation..no..its subtle and delicious just on the underside of the obvious......Stretch yourself to see it........MEL

Yeah, Linden has the right to curse---all things considered. And I can except Roman but Lyton? ahhh...

Wayfriend wrote:I think that the differences that lead you to wonder about the quality are more intangible than language. (For example, the Gap series is well done, but there is foul language aplenty.)

One of the intangibles that I pointed out in another thread is that the danger seems distant and less important.

Many are hoping for a shift back to the ole Stephen R in the next book, because Covenant will be back in the game.

BTW: has anyone dared to express this opinion in the GI?

I did:

Peter 'Creator' Purcell wrote:Why does Linden swear so much?!

It somehow seems incondign in the Land!!

SRD wrote:<sigh> Why do *people* swear so much? We live in profane times. I'm more than a tad profane myself. What other answer could I possibly give you?

Oh, here's one: it's a reaction against her excessively religious (not to mention excessively destructive) up-bringing.

But I'm afraid I just made that up on the spur of the moment.

(05/12/2005)

Possibly one of the reasons for Linden's use of profanity is the times. People use more profanity these days then 20 years ago, and Donaldson might have tried to use that in Runes.

I do not think Runes of the Earth was inferior to the First and Second Chronicles.
I DO think that Stephen Donaldson is holding back a great deal of information, which will come pouring down on us in a deluge in Fatal Revenant.

Go back and look at Lord Foul's Bane. Then reread The Illearth War.
Lord Foul's Bane is darkish, yes. But The Illearth War hits you like a ton of bricks, from which you do not get back up until Covenant defeats Lord Foul in The Power that Preserves.
I think the situation is similar here.

Swearing - I didn't realise that it was such a point of debate. It didn't even register in Runes, with me. People swear, and the big deal is??

Jeez, the day you start to get really upset about strong language is the day you perhaps lose touch with reality.

Sometimes I lose patience with people who take a moral high ground regarding the use of language. For me, swearing is only offensive when it's used offensively - and it's not so much the words, rather the intent. For example I find it much more upsettting to be called "useless" than a "tw*t" especially if it's my wife doing the calling. And I didn't mean twit.

So for those who are getting hot under the collar about the stronger language in Runes, I say chill out, get real and stop being so precious.

Looking back now, I didn't think Runes was as good as any of the previous 6, but it was still Ok. I find the puritanical expletives (there's an oxymoron) in the 1st & 2nd chrons ridiculous - people simply don't speak like that.

It ain't Harry Potter.

I object (slightly) to Linden's increased profanity, not because it offends me - it doesn't - but because, to me at least, it doesn't fit. Covenant's hellfire-ing never seemed odd to me, because my mum and grandparents have always said things like that. Old fashioned perhaps, but not strange. Covenant managed to seem irate to the point of rupture, tortured beyond endurance etc, without even moderate profanity. Linden's more explicit language feels like an "easy way" - a cop out - and also appears to actually detract from the expression of her emotions. Words beginning with f and whatnot are tried and tested, worn grooves with a familiar shape and a predefined range of emotional expression. The more unorthodox phrases and words Covenant used seemed almost tailored to their purpose - just more expressive.

I understand you're point CovJr, but disagree. I found the "normality" of expletives in Runes refreshing. Language in the first 6 sometimes struck me as a little arcane. I think this new series will be more contemporary in its use of language. Depends what you like. I found the LOTR books too florid and overblown, yet still superb. I think the 1st & 2nd chrons use of emotive language was similar, for me at least. I was glad to see perhaps more realistic swearing being used.

All depends how you view expression of intense emotion through language I suppose. Didn't make a large difference to me in all truth.

As I said above, can't say I noticed really.

What I will say is that I hope Fatal Revenant is a step better full stop. Not sure what an objective review (ie outside of this board) of Runes would be like. I'm sure it will be better, as it's unrealistic to make an opinion on a part of a series in isolation.