Thomas Covenant - Does It Get Better?

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

One thing I'll say about Donaldson is that he is sui generis. There are Tolkien clones and GRRM clones and C.S. Lewis clones and Eddings clones and on and on, but I've never heard of anyone even thinking of trying to write something "like Covenant" or "like the Gap". It's too unique and daunting, I think.

They have a strange and inexorable power, the Covenant books. He taps into something very deep and primal.

Erikson cites Donaldson as a key influence, but I'm not sure there's a hugely notable influence in the books, beyond some morally reprehensible protagonists (Karsa immediately comes to mind). Cook is probably a much more overtly noticeable one.

I don't know if Bakker is influenced by Donaldson, but there are probably more direct similarities there, including the expansive lexicon which sometimes stumbles into purple prose and favourite obscure words.

Maybe a more direct line from Donaldson to Stover, although Stover's ability to meld prose styles to differentiate individual volumes of his work is more formidable.

[hauberk]

21 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Erikson cites Donaldson as a key influence, but I'm not sure there's a hugely notable influence in the books, beyond some morally reprehensible protagonists (Karsa immediately comes to mind). Cook is probably a much more overtly noticeable one.

I see the Seguleh as the closest Donaldson-esque element - the very much feel like haruchai with swords. 

[Maltaran]

27 minutes ago, hauberk said:

I see the Seguleh as the closest Donaldson-esque element - the very much feel like haruchai with swords. 

The Crimson Guard seem closer given the similarities between their vow and the Bloodguard

[hauberk]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

The Crimson Guard seem closer given the similarities between their vow and the Bloodguard

Great point!  

[JGP]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

The Crimson Guard seem closer given the similarities between their vow and the Bloodguard

Don't get me started yo

[IlyaP]

5 hours ago, Jussi said:

Ran, can you name some of the GRRM clones?

If I recall correctly, Daniel Abraham wanted the first 100 pages of The Dragon's Path to intentionally feel a bit like the first ASOIAF novel, to give readers something they'd recognise, not unlike the first 100 or so pages of The Eye of the World reminding people of The Fellowship of the Ring - before both novels, in both instances, veered off to do their own thing instead. 

Abercrombie's Shattered Sea trilogy, it has been argued, is an intentional tip of the hat to Martin. But other books that come to mind that are perhaps playing in the same kind of sub-genre that come to mind include Karen Miller's Falcon Throne, Kings of Paradise by Richard Nell (maybe?), Sons of Darkness by Gourav Mohanty, Acacia by David Anthony Durham, The Tales of Durand by David Keck, and The Godless World by Brian Ruckley all come to mind as well. 

I think calling them "clones" might be a bit mean spirited, and it would be fairer to say that given the interest in Martin's books, it gave them the chance to try playing with darker themes and tones, not unlike the ASOIAF books, to capitalise on the marketability of books of that style once they really started to capture the wider market's attention (viz the launch of the HBO series).

[IlyaP]

I should add: Abraham's Dagger and Coin series is goddamn awesome and has some of the best structural editing I've ever seen in a book series. I want to personally thank his editors, as they impressed the hell out of me, and I would love to one day have dinner with them to talk editing shop. I really do wonder if those same editors were involved with the Expanse books, as they feature a few similar editorial decisions that really pleased me as a reader. 

[IlyaP]

(Sorry for the tangent, @Ran!  Bad Ilya! No biscuit!)

[Jussi]

IlyaP: Thank you. I really should read The Dagger and the Coin. Abercrombie's The Shattered Sea didn't remind me at all of Martin. The first book had only one PoV character, and the whole trilogy felt like a lighter/YA version of The First Law. I have read Ruckley's The Godless World trilogy, but it made me think about David Gemmell, not Martin.

I believe Durham read A Game of Thrones only after Acacia: The War with the Mein was published.

[Derfel Cadarn]

Jv Jones’ Sword of Shadows has similaritiea to ASoI&F, particularly the North. Both have a “Long Night”

[Gaston de Foix]

18 hours ago, IlyaP said:

If I recall correctly, Daniel Abraham wanted the first 100 pages of The Dragon's Path to intentionally feel a bit like the first ASOIAF novel, to give readers something they'd recognise, not unlike the first 100 or so pages of The Eye of the World reminding people of The Fellowship of the Ring - before both novels, in both instances, veered off to do their own thing instead. 

Abercrombie's Shattered Sea trilogy, it has been argued, is an intentional tip of the hat to Martin. But other books that come to mind that are perhaps playing in the same kind of sub-genre that come to mind include Karen Miller's Falcon Throne, Kings of Paradise by Richard Nell (maybe?), Sons of Darkness by Gourav Mohanty, Acacia by David Anthony Durham, The Tales of Durand by David Keck, and The Godless World by Brian Ruckley all come to mind as well. 

I think calling them "clones" might be a bit mean spirited, and it would be fairer to say that given the interest in Martin's books, it gave them the chance to try playing with darker themes and tones, not unlike the ASOIAF books, to capitalise on the marketability of books of that style once they really started to capture the wider market's attention (viz the launch of the HBO series).

This is a bit of a (continued) thread derail, but of the novels named here that I've read (highlighted in red) I wouldn't recognize any of them as GRRM clones in either a positive or pejorative sense. 

True, many of them have "darker" themes and some of them have sophisticated politicking.  One of them even has POV chapters from various family members.  Surprise is used more effectively as a story-telling technique nowadays.  But none of them combine all (or most) of those characteristics, and the other story-telling techniques GRRM pioneered or mastered in ASOIAF largely go unemulated.  But that's a conversation for another thread...

[polishgenius]

The most obvious asoiaf clone is probably the way Raymond E Feist tipped Westeros on its side, split King's Landing into two cities, called it the Kingdom, then took the Starks and recreated them as the ConDoins. Although as well as cloning, Feist invented time-travel and got the clone out first. 

 

 

On 1/7/2023 at 9:40 PM, Werthead said:

beyond some morally reprehensible protagonists (Karsa immediately comes to mind).

 

One difference there is that as far as I know - I've not read all the Covenant books, though- Donaldson never forgets Covenant is supposed to be reprehensible or has done reprehensible things, whereas Erikson seems to give Karsa a bunch of character growth that makes him less horrible, if still destructive, and then rather than deal with the rape he commits early on in a sensitive manner or have it blow back on him in any way, has Karsa just go 'oh well I don't regret it coz my daughters are cool'. Like fuck you dude. I mean maybe that was the intent but it really didn't feel like a 'reminding us the character's supposed to be a dick' moment. 

SE's biggest problem by far for me. There are three rape plotlines that happen in the series and all of them are handled miserably badly. 

[SpaceChampion]

The Covenant novels aren't a deconstructed Hero's journey.  The first chronicles is a straightforward pitch-perfect king's journey.  The King represents the sickness in the kingdom.  That's literally what TC is.  He is one with the Land and the Despiser both.  The King is faced with Rebels who fail to heal the kingdom no matter what they try.  Only the King can do it.  They, as represented by Mhoram and Foamfollower and everyone else, are antagonistic to what the King must do, because they want him to use his power and fight for the Land like they do.  But he can't win that way.  It's only through their failures that TC realizes he has no other choice.  The end of the King's arc is giving up power and sacrificing himself to save the kingdom.  TC gives up the power of his White Gold, and delivers himself to Foul.  His willingness to sacrifice himself is what fully unites him with the Land. 

On top of the basic King's journey Donaldson adds the whole question of whether the Land is real or not.  If the Land ain't real, then his sacrifice is just suicide, and he's not a king but a fool.  The suicide of the fool doesn't save the Land.  The Ritual of Desecration is there to turn the King into the Fool, to desecrate the sacrifice so it is just a suicide.  It didn't matter whether the Land was real or not, since if it was a delusion the Rebels still represented parts of himself that wanted beauty, life and vitality, even as a mental construct.

You don't see this arc often in modern fantasy but it's just as mythic and ancient as the Hero's journey, and the best example is one of the most popular stories of all: Frodo's journey to destroy the One Ring.  He gives up power and his whole journey is a sacrifice that destroys his ability to be fully part of the mortal world.  The Rebels were the Fellowship that wanted to make use of the Ring, so the Fellowship had to break.  Tolkien focuses more on the redeeming power of friendship, but it is the same type of story arc.   He also provides many foils for Frodo:  Saruman, Theoden, Denethor.  They are all Kings who represent wrong paths for Frodo.  Surely Tolkien modelled the story on all the stories of sacrifice he knew about in ancient literature.

Ultimately the King's arc is about responsibility, while Hero's journey is about finding purpose.  Power is not given up by the Hero, it's acquired.

 

[JGP]

3 hours ago, SpaceChampion said:

Ultimately the King's arc is about responsibility, while Hero's journey is about finding purpose.  Power is not given up by the Hero, it's acquired.

This is a pretty cool analysis [the whole thing, not merely this cut]

The King's arc, as you say, It isn't really tragedy or triumph unless there's a little bit of foolhardiness. I mean, yeah, the King has to sacrifice and hero must acquire it, or reach it, but

 

Spoiler

did Covenant really understand by giving up he was to become the new Keystone of the Arch of Time? Or was it still, on some level, a suicide? Despite the many delusions we witness him suffer, Covenant half convinced himself he'd met the Creator, no? Linden too.  

I think, at some point, the Hero is also expected to sacrifice.

Spoiler

Brinn, for instance. Even Cail in his own way, honoring the Vow until discharge then returning the Merewives.

Donaldson also plays with heroism and cowardice, and half the time the reveal is they're inverted, though I suppose I should caveat that with that element being more common in the Gap into Conflict. Anyway, the stakes are rarely not perilous in the First and Second Chronicles, but then you got the Land and the people in it, Despite it all. 

I didn't fall in with Donaldson's latest series, but I'll always pick the first of anything he writes. Some of his short story and near novella work are pretty good too [haven't read it all]    

[James Arryn]

On 1/8/2023 at 9:30 PM, SpaceChampion said:

The Covenant novels aren't a deconstructed Hero's journey.  The first chronicles is a straightforward pitch-perfect king's journey.  The King represents the sickness in the kingdom.  That's literally what TC is.  He is one with the Land and the Despiser both.  The King is faced with Rebels who fail to heal the kingdom no matter what they try.  Only the King can do it. .

 

Never read it, but as described here it sounds very Fisher King?

[SpaceChampion]

55 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

Never read it, but as described here it sounds very Fisher King?

Yes, but the Fisher King is often not the main protagonist, but a part of the Hero's arc as the Sick King that the Hero must go on a quest to heal.  I'm not sure Covenant has a comparable hero that finds what he needs to heal.  Heroes often have something else less literal than a literal king they must heal too.  Repairing a broken sword for instance.  These are one time events they want to make happen.  Kings are trying to avoid an event.

 

On 1/9/2023 at 1:05 AM, JGP said:

I think, at some point, the Hero is also expected to sacrifice.

Taking it out of the fantasy genre, where metaphors are literalized, the sacrifice is about their ego.  They cannot grow their ego unless they accept a truth and reject a lie that their ego was relying on to protect the protagonist's self image.  All stories where characters change are in the end about changing their ego.  Sacrificing their self-image is a part of that.

[SeanF]

On 1/7/2023 at 7:30 PM, Jussi said:

 

There is The Way to Babylon by Paul Kearney, which has something common with Thomas Covenant books. The fantasy world feels like Donaldson's The Land. Kearney said in an interview about his first novel:

 

Ran, can you name some of the GRRM clones?

I only know Paul Kearney from the Macht Trilogy, which is some very solid military fiction.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

@SeanF

If you like the Macht Trilogy you'll probably also enjoy his Monarchies of God series, which features military action based off the Italian Wars so you have heavy cavalry fighting alongside pikes and arquebuses among other things.