Convenant the Unbeliever, worth it?

[yurana]

So I have a question to all of you, who now their fantasy. Should I keep on reading Lord Foul's Bane?

I have heard from several people that it is just the classic of fantasy literature you have to have read. So I finally went to see, or rather read for myself. The problem is, I'm really really bored. I'm on chapter 10 right now and I have to pretty much force myself to go on reading:

I find the prose overly complicated: having to look up words every so often would rip me out of the story, if i would have been interested in it in the first place.

I find the main character at times disgusting in his actions, at times anoyingly whiny, though I understand this is more a feature than a bug?

That would't be so bad however, if any of the other characters were actually likable. But they seem hardly human. They're just reverent of one thing or the other and make longwinded speeches.

So, does it get better? Am I giving up on this book to soon? Or should I just resign myself to the fact that this is not a book for me and find something else to read?

[Seli]

There are no books you need to read. Life is just too short, and there are too many books.

I haven't ever finished this book, so I cannot comment on its qualities. But it might be worth it to just leave it to the side and read things you enjoy.

[MinDonner]

Speaking as someone with a Donaldson username, even... I'm pretty much "meh" on the first Covenant chronicles. The second trilogy is a lot better and has more inventiveness than just standard-fantasy-world-with-a-bit-of-subversion, but the language (which is deliberate and specific to the Land) doesn't get any less thesaurus-gobbling. Characters are more likeable though.

[awesome possum]

I could never get through the first 100 pages. Great premise, terrible execution.

[Shryke]

The style never really changes. I made it through both and while there are some good moments, the series is pretty "meh" imo.

[Howdyphillip]

I read the first several chapters as an adolescent and was absolutely sickened by rape scene. I remember really enjoying the book up until that point, but I could no longer care for the protagonist at that point.

[yurana]

There are no books you need to read. Life is just too short, and there are too many books.

I haven't ever finished this book, so I cannot comment on its qualities. But it might be worth it to just leave it to the side and read things you enjoy.

Generally I agree that life is too short, especially for bad books, bad food and bad wine. ;)

That is pretty much why I'm asking wether I should spent more of my time on this book. But from what people are saying, I guess I'll might put in on hold and try again later. EDIT: ... or never

@Howdy: That's what I meant with being disgusted by his actions. Though I would be willing to read a book with a protagonist I don't care for, if it had an interesting story or other characters that were interesting.

[Frog Eater]

I am currently ready this book, and am towards the end. I usually keep reading a book once I start, sometimes forcing myself (Sanderson's Mistborn). Once in a while I just stop and walk away (Bakker).

So while I am towards the end if this book, I dont know if I will pick up the next one. I am thinking about starting "The Black Company" instead.

[Ormond]

_{I've only read the first Chronicles. Personally I found it to be "worth it," and I do hope to live long enough to get to the second and third trilogies some day, but I don't think Donaldson will ever be my favorite. I think in some ways he's considered a "classic" simply because he was one of the very first post-Tolkien writers to "make it big" with a fantasy trilogy, and so sort of set the pattern for the future in the genre.}

_{He sure loves to use obscure vocabulary words, though. After reading those books I will never forget what "inanition" means -- I know I had to look that one up in a dictionary repeatedly before it finally sunk in. :)}

[dietl]

I read the first and second trilogy and my favourite is Illearth War (2nd of first trilogy). The second chronicals very differnt, but I don't think that you will enjoy the books at this point. Never force youself through any books. Maybe if you give it a rest and try it again later.

Edit: If you're into SF, try Donaldsons Gap Cycle. If you get past the first book its pure win (okay the first one is also win ...but ....'pure' is definitely not the word to describe it...).

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I can't remember which book it was, but in one of them, Covenant's only line of dialogue-- endlessly repeated -- was "don't touch me" for at least half the book. I understood the whole "anti-hero" concept, but he was just too annoying for me to truly enjoy those books, though I did make it through the first two trilogies. Pickings were kind of slim back then....

[Inigima]

You guys should think about spoiler tags. This thread is likely to attract people who want to know the answer to the question, not just people answering it.

My $0.02: The Covenant series is a not-very-enjoyable series that's worth reading once. Very few books go where it does and it is not an experience you can have in many other places. But the actual story is generic and uninteresting and the writing is mediocre at best. This is a series you read for the ideas.

[JonArryn]

I am actually reading the last book in the first chronicles at the moment. And I love it. As many have said, the premise is great. And regarding Thomas actions, you are meant to hate him and despise him. That is one of the main points. Yet he is very human and we wonder if he can be redeemed?

The first book is the weakest so far. The plot hasn't really started and it drags a little but has some great moments, and Illearth War is better than LFB. The characters get more interesting the further you go. The first book may make many seem cliched, but in the second and third book they become really interesting. Especially the bloodguard, Mhoram and Foamfollower (you've probably only meat Foamfollower so far).

And when Thomas really makes a stand it becomes all the more sweet. Since his badass moments are so far apart it makes it the sweeter when he does something. Anyway, I just really like these books. They are pretty pshycologically heavy and at times outdrawn, but that is the style. And the language may be a bit too much at times, but that shouldn't make the story less compelling. I think you should at least try 150 pages of book 2, then I think you might want to read on.

Everyone has different tastes, but I am one who like it very much. And The Unbeliever might be the best name in fantasy, ever.

[JonArryn]

I can't remember which book it was, but in one of them, Covenant's only line of dialogue-- endlessly repeated -- was "don't touch me" for at least half the book. I understood the whole "anti-hero" concept, but he was just too annoying for me to truly enjoy those books, though I did make it through the first two trilogies. Pickings were kind of slim back then....

That is probably the first one. He don't like people touching him :D

[Eponine]

One of my favorite least favorite authors - that is, I have some very specific complaints and like talking about them. The two main ones have already been mentioned -

in one of them, Covenant's only line of dialogue-- endlessly repeated -- was "don't touch me" for at least half the book.

I don't find Donaldson to be a subtle writer with respect for his readers' intelligence. I'm sure some smart people don't mind having everything spelled out for them OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I much prefer books where the author relies on the reader to remember things from the past, piece some things together, and even have to think a little. The problem isn't that Covenant is bitter, depressive, sometimes nasty and one time terrible, but that Donaldson keeps reminding us of WHY, even though he told us very very clearly in the first chapter.

Second, what the OP has observed so far:

They're just reverent of one thing or the other and make longwinded speeches.

Reverent was a good word. I find almost all the secondary characters intolerable, and while I don't know that Donaldson wanted to make them likeable exactly, I do think he wanted the reader to feel an attraction to or connection with the land, and part of that would be through feeling the same respect for it that its inhabitants felt. My attitude of - I wish Lord Foul would just blow this awful place up already probably didn't help.

ETA: With unlikeable characters/characters you're meant to hate - I find that having at least one of two things helps the story - the character is extremely interesting despite being loathsome, or the plot is such that finding out what the character will do next is suspenseful. The possibility of finding Covenant's character interesting was ruined by the author's aforementioned lack of subtlety, and I found the plot totally contrived.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

That is probably the first one. He don't like people touching him :D

I do remember the second book of the first trilogy being my favorite. Hile Troy was a great character, and a great mirror for Covenant.

[Mark Lawrence]

I enjoyed the first three books 30 years ago. I've a feeling I would enjoy them less now. At the time they seemed original and fresh.

[yurana]

One of my favorite least favorite authors - that is, I have some very specific complaints and like talking about them. The two main ones have already been mentioned -

I don't find Donaldson to be a subtle writer with respect for his readers' intelligence. I'm sure some smart people don't mind having everything spelled out for them OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I much prefer books where the author relies on the reader to remember things from the past, piece some things together, and even have to think a little. The problem isn't that Covenant is bitter, depressive, sometimes nasty and one time terrible, but that Donaldson keeps reminding us of WHY, even though he told us very very clearly in the first chapter.

You just reminded me of something else I found extremely annoying in the chapters I have read so far: The constant pointing out of how healthy the Land is to the point that I wanted to scream at the book 'Yes we get it, the Land is healthy and Lord Foul is some kind of anthropomorphic personification of Convenant's leprosy (or maybe sickness in general)!'

I might be wrong, but still. This is not subtle writing by a long shot.

Anyway, I guess I've build up to much rage, that reading will do any good at this point. Maybe later :P

[JonArryn]

I enjoyed the first three books 30 years ago. I've a feeling I would enjoy them less now. At the time they seemed original and fresh.

Or maybe you'd enjoy them more since you're now old enough to understand the concepts?

Of course a kid could enjoy this series, but I think you would benefit from being a little older, since some things things and dilemmas are pretty complicated.

Maybe I'm biased because I really like these books, but I don't really get the flak they are getting in this thread.

Although if I would give it some critique it is probably the worldbuilding. Some cultures are nice and the enviroments are greatly described, but it feels kind of small and simplistic. It would be great if the world was more fleshed out. But maybe that comes in the later chronicles. That said, he is great at characters and the whole POV-concept. You really get into the head of the characters.

[PetrusOctavianus]

It's a series that's hard to get into. But halfway through Lord Foul's Bane I was hooked and loved it.

I couldn't really enjoy Malazan even after four books, or Prince of Nothing after two books. Unlike those series, the Chronicles actually make me feel something, even if it's often sadness, and a sense of loss.

That the main character is not the typical Hero type appealed to me. It was refreshing. When he raped Lena, I knew this was going to be different and worth reading, just like, but to a lesser degree, when prettyboy Royce was killed in the prologue of ASOIAF.