What is the Land?

[Zarathustra]

Okay, maybe some of you regulars have talked this one to death. But something got me wondering again: the glossary at the end of the Covenant books (am I the only one who reads them?).

The definition of The Land is: "generally, area found on Map."

This is just about the funniest damn thing Donaldson has ever written. I'm serious. The area found on the map!?! Really, Mr. Donaldson? How enlightening! I never would have figured that out, given the big "THE LAND" written at the top of the map!

This is so preposterous, that I'm having a hard time believing SRD isn't trying to make a point--or rather, to not make one. He is purposely being ambiguous and cryptic. Why else would he be such a smart-ass in the glossary? He's purposely being noncommittal in his definition of the Land, because this is the one thing he CAN'T define. If he were to define what it is, then he'd reveal whether or not the Land is real (in terms of the story), or if it's all in Covenant's head.

The very fact that he goes out of his way to refrain from defining it is itself a clue that this issue is not straightforward, and is problematic.

So what do the rest of you think? Is it real, or not? Or something in between? Does it make sense to ask the question, or are we supposed to "dismiss" the issue as Covenant later does?

My personal opinion is that the Land is a myth-world, a metaphor for certain features of reality in which we all partake. This is why it makes sense to say it's all in Covenant's head, but it is also in Lindin's head--it is a place they can share. Their sharing of this mythical world is itself a metaphor for how we all face these same existential issues.

[Warmark]

Does SRD even write the glossaries?

[Reisheiruhime]

You aren't the only one who reads them... I was reading the one in Runes, and I found a bunch of junk that wasn't even mentioned in the books (I checked all (Gods, I have too much free time...) of them) and yet they were there. Now, if this were Harry Potter, we'd be up to our ears in "What if" fanfiction. That being said, I think he writes the Glossaries, but sometimes he forgets what book he's thinking about.

And, sometimes, I forgetted what this post was about. Hmm...

[lurch]

..The Land...is a major and necessarily answered request to suspend disbelief by the author. If one is unable "to go there",,then, it is indeed only that which is on the map....Like most etheral, abstractions, nontangibles, its what you make it. Most great fiction begs the reader to contemplate that which the reader is making of it. In other words..The map is a "tool Aid"...its only meant to get one started, or ones bearings. It is rather crude. For a Landsat rendition consult your imagination....

..This brings to mind..i just realized this...I was brought up with the once a week occurance of Rod Serling introducing " The Twilight Zone" or one of his dirivitives. There was also the " The Outer Limits". These shows made it clear and easy to recognize that there is this place , between sight and sound etc, in the viewers mind. True, due to lack of trying, i have to ask, is there anything equivalent today,,besides Twilight Zone marathons on Sci Fi channel, ?..
...Fiction, 99.9 percent of TV,,is just splashed up onto the screen..its even presented as Reality. Is it no wonder that there are problems with discerning The Land? There have been posts that indicate the applying of real world propertys to a fantasy situation. Do we miss, a once a week proclamation and introduction to the place between sight and sound?.........MEL..ps..Turi..i noticed same in Glossarys,,but saw the unknowns as indications of what is to come,,notice the definitions don't even rise to "spoiler" level in their generality...MEL

[hierachy]

The Land is real.

[CovenantJr]

No

[Alynna Lis Eachann]

Er... based on the amount of influence its chief good guy and bad guy (the Creator and Foul) exert on people other than Covenant and Linden's close associates/family, I'd have to say it is real. I mean, that's a hell of a mental disorder to have, if you're affecting complete strangers with it (because, really, wouldn't a ficitional land in your head be a mental disorder?).

Nevertheless, although SRD says that whether the Land is real or not becomes irrelevant as you progress through the story, I don't know that he has ever said it is real. I may be wrong, though - I have yet to read all the intervies and the GI.

[CovenantJr]

The whole point of the First Chronicles is that Covenant realises he doesn't need to know whether it's real or not, because the experience is real enough to him to be worth saving. It's another example of the recurring theme of the eye of the storm/paradox that runs throughout the first series. The Land couldn't be real, but it couldn't be unreal; Covenant had to find the balance between the extremes.

[lurch]

...The Land is the Local where Hope and Despair vie for a human's Passion..........MEL

[bossk]

According to the Elohim Postal Service, The Land proper is everything included in Mr. Donaldson's original map. Seareach is considered a suburb, but the giants took out a P.O. Box in Revelstone for all their junk mail.

[Zarathustra]

based on the amount of influence its chief good guy and bad guy (the Creator and Foul) exert on people other than Covenant and Linden's close associates/family, I'd have to say it is real.

HOWEVER, if the Creator and Foul are archetypes, mythic symbols, then each of us has our own Creator and our own Foul. Or, to put it another way, the Creator and Foul can operate as symbols for ANYone's love/despair.

To say that the Land has to be real because it's not logical for two people to experience the same "vision" is not entirely convincing when you're talking about a fantasy realm where magic is a reality. There's nothing logical about the Land to begin with. Besides, our "every day" reality is also a shared holographic representation within our heads--we don't see the real world beyond our senses, we see a mental construction of sensory input. So just because people can share a world doesn't mean that it is literally real. People share false worldviews all the time

The Land couldn't be real, but it couldn't be unreal; Covenant had to find the balance between the extremes.

Yes, I agree. So what's the balance? Ignore the paradox? Does Covenant ever find that balance, or does Donaldson just stop talking about it?

...The Land is the Local where Hope and Despair vie for a human's Passion

I like that.

[Alynna Lis Eachann]

For something to exert force, it must exist. This doesn't necessarily mean the Land is "touch-and-feel" real, but that it exists, whether in a mass subconsious or in a metaphysical reality. I am firmly convinced that the Land is, that it exists in some form or another, because if your mental disorder causes people to form strange churches and put their hands in a fire, it's exterting enough influence to have become some type of "real."

Whether the Land is or is not becomes irrelevant once Covenant makes his choice to save it, I agree with that. To me, the question of the Land's existence can be asked independent of Covenant's choice.

[CovenantJr]

To say that the Land has to be real because it's not logical for two people to experience the same "vision" is not entirely convincing when you're talking about a fantasy realm where magic is a reality. There's nothing logical about the Land to begin with. Besides, our "every day" reality is also a shared holographic representation within our heads--we don't see the real world beyond our senses, we see a mental construction of sensory input. So just because people can share a world doesn't mean that it is literally real. People share false worldviews all the time

Nicely said.

The Land couldn't be real, but it couldn't be unreal; Covenant had to find the balance between the extremes.

Yes, I agree. So what's the balance? Ignore the paradox? Does Covenant ever find that balance, or does Donaldson just stop talking about it?

From my interpretation of the books, combined with some of SRD's answers in the Gradual Interview, my view is this: In essence, Covenant knows he's being basically a total berk most of the time if the Land is real, but he refuses to believe it's real because he percieves a real Land as a threat to the qualities he has had to develop in order to survive as a leper. But he ultimately comes to the realisation that the level of emotion he feels, however unwillingly, for the Land and its people makes the whole thing real enough. If the Land suffers and dies, he will feel horror and despair and overwhelming guilt regardless of whether it's real or not. That's the balance, to me; he can never know for sure, but doesn't need to. The Land, whether real or imaginary, is so potent and so fundamentally entwined with him that it makes no difference. If it's real, it's real; if it's a dream, he has a beautiful, vivid dream world he loves and needs to save.
After the end of the First Chronicles, SRD considered the question of the Land's reality done and dusted, so he never raised it again, except during Covenant's brief explanation to Linden on Kevin's Watch.

[NightBlaze]

Ok, I have to say this. The glossary referring to the land was like the warning on a bottle of alcohol.
"Use of this product may impair your ability to operate a vehicle or heavy machinery."
Its just the way it is......LOL

[Zarathustra]

But he ultimately comes to the realisation that the level of emotion he feels, however unwillingly, for the Land and its people makes the whole thing real enough. If the Land suffers and dies, he will feel horror and despair and overwhelming guilt regardless of whether it's real or not. That's the balance, to me; he can never know for sure, but doesn't need to. The Land, whether real or imaginary, is so potent and so fundamentally entwined with him that it makes no difference. If it's real, it's real; if it's a dream, he has a beautiful, vivid dream world he loves and needs to save.

Yeah, that sounds right. It's been over a decade since I've read these books (I'm currently rereading them now), but that sounds like the conclusion I got from them.

In a way, it's not very satisfying. It's basically saying: I don't care if it's unreal--it feels real to me, so I'm going to treat it as if it were real. It reminds me of Cypher's choice in the first Matrix movie. He would rather have a pleasant illusion than an unpleasant reality: as long as he couldn't tell the difference, it didn't matter to him that it was unreal. This is quintessentially inauthentic, which runs counter to Donaldson's theme of "be true."

Whether or not something is real HAS to be an issue for us if we are going to live authentic lives. The criteria for something being real CANNOT be "it affects me with emotions just as strongly as something real." If that were the case, then all sorts of false beliefs which peopel cherish could be treated as if they were real--to the detriment of us all. If we went this way, on what conceivable basis could we ever say someone is delusional? How could the word "hallucination" or even "dream" remain meaningful terms distinct from "reality"?

Yet, on the other hand, the predicament is virtually the same for what we usually call "reality." Our dilemma is the same in this world as if is for Covenant in the Land: we have no objective proof that this world is real or a dream. (But this doesn't relieve us of the responsibility for our lives within it.)

Even though this is the case, could an argument be made that we are responsible for what we do in our dreams? If we commit a crime in our dreams, should we be held accountable? Should we go to jail? It sounds silly, but the question is perfectly analogous to Covenant's situation. No one would stand for the cops hauling them away for a dream crime, yet many of us here are willing to accept Covenant's "solution" to the Land. I've read some posts here where people blame Covenant for raping Lena EVEN IF the Land were a dream. This is crazy. If you follow that line of thinking, isn't SRD just as guilty, if not more? After all, he's the one who "dreamed up" this rape sequence. He MADE Covenant rape Lena. For SRD, the Land is also ". . . potent and so fundamentally entwined with him . . ." so can we say that the Land is real for Donaldson in the same way (if not more so) than for Covenant? Donaldson IS the Creator, literally.

You can see how quickly we fall into confusion and absurdity going down this path. The Land can't be real for Covenant just because it feels real. His "solution" is insufficient. Yet, we have the same dilemma in our own lives.

[CovenantJr]

Our dilemma is the same in this world as if is for Covenant in the Land: we have no objective proof that this world is real or a dream. (But this doesn't relieve us of the responsibility for our lives within it.)

Exactly. Covenant has no objective proof either way, but that doesn't relieve him of responsibility.

If we commit a crime in our dreams, should we be held accountable? Should we go to jail? It sounds silly, but the question is perfectly analogous to Covenant's situation. No one would stand for the cops hauling them away for a dream crime, yet many of us here are willing to accept Covenant's "solution" to the Land.

I think a closer analogy would be "Should we be held accountable in a dream for a crime committed within that same dream?" My answer would be "Why not?" It seems about as logical as is possible when dealing with dreams. Covenant committed a crime in a "dream" and he had to deal with the consequences in the "dream" - not to mention the internal consequences stemming from his own conscience.

[hierachy]

The land is real. If it's not then it's pretty weird how what Foul does can affect what happens in the 'real' world.

[Zarathustra]

. “Covenant committed a crime in a "dream" and he had to deal with the consequences in the "dream" - not to mention the internal consequences stemming from his own conscience.”

Yes, but the guilt branches out into this world, too (when he's here). So he's not just paying for it within the "dream." Do you ever feel guilty for things you do in dreams? I don't. If you don't either, then you've got to admit that Covenant's solution is inadequete, or else we both don't take our dreams seriously enough.

The land is real. If it's not then it's pretty weird how what Foul does can affect what happens in the 'real' world.

Ah, but does he affect real objects in the objective world, or does he just affect people's perceptions? If so, then he is still "in their heads." Sure this may cause them to perform certain actions in the real world, but this could be described as their own internal Despite affecting reality, not a magical being from another dimension.

[amanibhavam]

I know that texts can have their own life and their author's own interpretation might not necessarily be the true and only interpretation, but SRD does say something to the effect in the GI that the Land is essentially a projection of Covenant's psyche.

[Avatar]

For something to exert force, it must exist. This doesn't necessarily mean the Land is "touch-and-feel" real, but that it exists, whether in a mass subconsious or in a metaphysical reality. I am firmly convinced that the Land is, that it exists in some form or another, because if your mental disorder causes people to form strange churches and put their hands in a fire, it's exterting enough influence to have become some type of "real".

Good post Alynna. I agree. The Land exists, regardless of the physical reality thereof.

--A