[sarlinspellweaver]

Apologies if I have inadvertedly repeated something that has already been done - but I couldn't actually see a Donaldson thread around here...

I'm just wondering how many people have actually read the 'Chronicles' and what they thought of them.

For those who haven't read any Donaldson, his books are set in a high-romantic style fantasy world (Tolkien-esque in tone) populated by a kind of pre-fall race of humans (divided into three principle groups: those who work with stone, those with wood and those with horses), a few groups of noble giants, magical* horses, a race of martial-arts experts who are always of the same fixed number and are near-impossible to defeat, and a few Donaldson-only creations that really don't conform to any standard fantasy race. The Chronicles follow the tale of Thomas Covenant - a resident of our world in the United States - who 'visits' the land at various points. So far sounds a bit like Narnia, but the similarities end there: Covenant breaks nearly every established convention on fantasy protagonists. Donaldson deals with several adult issues (not 'adult' as in sex-crazed though) in an extremely complex but adroit manner, and his books are challenging on multiple levels, whether it be psychology, the nature of faith, theology, combat and pacifism, and the old favourite: right and wrong. With this last one many of the conclusions that Covenant comes to sit uneasily with mainstream fantasy. As a result the Chronicles are a series that are challenging but astounding in their insight, crafting, and depiction of the characters and the 'Land' that ties them together.

Unfortunately that's just touching the tip of the iceberg: there is a vast amount more to the books, and I really can't do it justice without posting spoilers. There are very few fantasy series that I think deserve literary credit (most are just good 'light' reads with very little depth - the Dragonlance series and the latest Feist offerings being the perfect example) but this would have to be one of them. Genuinely on a par with the giants of Fantasy.

[Murrin]

Donaldson's First and Second Chronicles of Thomas Covenant were among the first fantasy books I read back when I first got into the genre in a big way. I've since read all his other work (except the short story collection Daughter of Regals, which seems almost impossible to find), and though many are better writers than him, he remains among a long list of my favourite authors.
In the Chronicles his prose may have been a little overwrought, and he's very found of obscure - and occasionally obsolete - words, but his characters are what really appealed to me. Thomas Covenant, and later Linden Avery, go through so much psychological drama/trauma, and I find their stories quite compelling, and more so in the Second series than the first - The Wounded Land was a brilliant and excruciating return to the Land. Though I'll admit it can occasionally be slow - The One Tree being the worst example of this, I'd say.

His work since then - Mordant's Need, the Gap - has been good, and his writing has pared down and simplified over time, but while I consider the Gap sequence his best work, nothing quite lives up to Covenant.
The Runes of the Earth, his latest novel and first of five in the Last Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, has quite a different style than the earlier Covenant books, and felt a little lacking, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.


(Pssst: You might be interested.)

[sarlinspellweaver]

Have been lurking at Kevin's Watch for quite some time now - but thanks anyway!

I agree that the complexity of his language undermines some of the earlier work - and I also found the Second Chronicles to be more compelling than the first (with the possible exception of Mhoram's stand in the final book of the First Trilogy )

[Dolorous Menhir]

It always bugged me how he picked such obscure words for things. Like roynish.

But I do like the various levels with which you can consider the books. You can reduce everything to symbols of Covenant's struggle with leprosy (isn't that strange, that you can write a long post about Covenant and not mention that HE'S A LEPER, it is the defining fact of the series) or elevate everything that happens in the Land to a reality that Covenant falls into.

By the end of the third book, you do want the second to be true, for the Land to be real.

Though I found (spoilers)

Spoiler

the rape of Lena and the suggestion of incest with Elena, his daughter, who totally offers herself to him for reasons I didn't understand

to be a little too much. Effective, though.

[MecnunK]

Read them long time back as one of the first fantasy series I ever read. I enjoyed them at the time but would not put him in the upper echelons of high fantasy writers group. First series was better than second IMO and I havent read the third.

[sarlinspellweaver]

Dolorous Menhir said:

It always bugged me how he picked such obscure words for things. Like roynish.

But I do like the various levels with which you can consider the books. You can reduce everything to symbols of Covenant's struggle with leprosy (isn't that strange, that you can write a long post about Covenant and not mention that HE'S A LEPER, it is the defining fact of the series) or elevate everything that happens in the Land to a reality that Covenant falls into.

I did that deliberately - it wasn't some massive stupid oversight...
Personally I prefer knowing as little as possible about a book before I read it, so I was attempting to grant the same to another

Spoiler

I didn't mention Lord Foul either - or the Lords, which are a pretty integral part

[Astra]

I tried to read chronicles and could not. The worst fantasy I have ever tried to read. Usually, if I start to read a book I never give up, even if I don't like it, such as Redemption of Althalus or The Wind-Up Bird Chornicles or Unbearable Lightness of Being. However, I could not get past 1/2 of the first book of the chronicles. Some 6 years ago I have ordered all 6 books on amazon.com and then donated all of them to a local library. Could not read it. Sorry for being so negative.

[sarlinspellweaver]

No need to apologise - in the case of 'Chronicles' I can understand why you gave up. I can easily see how it could be not everyone's cup of tea! I tend to like books that develop literary depth - that's not to say they're better than books that are lighter and are largely plot-led it's just my preference. Obviously it helps that I'm studying English Literature for choice...

The strength of Donaldson's work will always be the fresh way he presented what might otherwise have been another Tolkien rehash. I love Tolkien, but I have rarely found any of his imitators to be as enjoyable, even if they are technically as proficient. Donaldson, on the other hand, provides a far darker world - and yet not a world that is visually or materially dark. If anything the portrayal of the Land is very similar to Tolkien's Middle Earth in style. It is the 'spiritual' (not really the right word, but I can't think of a better one right now) conflict, the challenges to the characters' natures, that makes Donaldson's work so brilliant to me.

[Dolorous Menhir]

Sorry, didn't realise you deliberately left out the leprosy thing. I don't understand why though, it's not a spoiler, you find out immediately. It's probably on the back cover of most editions.

[sarlinspellweaver]

True - oversensitivity on my part.

[Valgard]

I agree with astra lestat on this one I read book 1 though it was ok not brilliant. Book 2 I could read half of. Thomas covenent just made me want to scream with rage his endless whinning just got to me. I also didn't find the worls that interesting or original or even to alive. It is not close to middle earth in my opinion. I believe that Erikson has created a much better world that feels more alive and real to me as i read about it.
The books were well written if a little over the top in places but I couldn't care about covenent he said nothing to me and all these people that were relying on him and he just didn't care.

[Dr Trouble]

Valgard said:

The books were well written if a little over the top in places but I couldn't care about covenent he said nothing to me and all these people that were relying on him and he just didn't care.

Spoiler

... Did you not realise that maybe that was an underlining part of the book, the fact that he "Didn't care"? He is a Leper, A leper who thinks he's in a dream where if he lets down his boundarys that he has created he will surely die.

That is my opinion anyway. I can understand why you didn't like it.

However, I loved the books. My first read through was tough as I faced alot of problems with it that some of you are displaying, mainly getting frustrating and throwing it down in disgust. But in the end I perservered and I am glad I did, though not the best, definatly some of my most precious reading.

[PannionDude]

I liked the Thomas Covenant books, especially that the "anti-hero" is not a villain, but a cynic.

I'm curious as to how future books will deal with the fact that TC has basically found a balance to his unbelief. That has been the fundamental question of the series till now, so what will come from this point?