The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant The Unbeliever

Anyone read these two trilogies? Any comments? I loved the first trilogy more; in fact, it's the first work of fantasy that I ever read, when I was at University in 1984. (The ONLY other fantasy saga I read was Tolkien's. I read nothing else in Fantasy.) Although Covenant's whinnings are annoying, this work was quite moving, very rich in its writing and description of characters. Many hate this work. Others like it a lot. Seldom saw grey areas in opinions about it...

I´ve only read the first book and I do not remember much. One thing I do recall is that I thought it was too much like the Lord of Rings. So I did not read the other ones. Perhaps I should give them another chance.

I have found that most fantasy I read reminds me somehow of LOTR. Usually the problem is, it doesn't live up to it. Once I remember that Tolkien basically invented the fantasy genre, it makes it easier to continue.

I liked the second trilogy better, as he developed some of his own ideas. The first three, imho, were too derivative of LotR.

I've heard good things about them. I haven't read them yet, but they're on my list.

(my list of stuff to read is getting way too long)

Donaldson said if he made a third trilogy, it would really be the last, and Covenant would now take on the role played by Lord Foul... That would be quite weird. Hope he writes it!

The end of the first trilogy made me swear off Donaldson forever. What a let down! Made me think Disney.

Hmmm... I'd like you to expand on that thought.
The first trilogy didn't end in a so goody-goody way.

The "bad guy" does die as such.
The "good guy" isn't miraculously healed.
The people of the Land are throwing away the only way
they knew how to live, to try finding a new one.

Not Disney at all.

Ok, it's long winded and cryptic, but not Disney.

I was speaking of the way in which they defeated Foul (such an original name for an Evil Tyrant!) I would normally not give away the ending of a book in a post but I am about to. If you haven't read them and wish to be suprised, as I assure you I was, don't read any further.

THEY LAUGHED HIM TO DEATH! Come on! "If everyone can just be happy, it will defeat the evil one! He thrives on unhappiness! If we all just chuckle he will weaken him! And if we can all clap our hands Tinkerbell will come back to life!" I'm sorry. I loved the world, well thought out with interesting races and history, but he gave up at the end, IMHO. Very Sad Ending. TRH

Firstly, there was a typo in my last post. It should read: "doesn't die as such".

They did ask Covenant to destroy Foul (yes, Donaldson had a weird way to name things, sometimes anglo-saxon, sometimes clearly Hindu); they asked him to kill the "bad guy".
But he didn't.
Covenant replied that Foul couldn't be killed, that "he" always came back, somehow.
Don't forget that Covenant isn't still sure of the reality of that world, he thinks that world and all its inhabitants are somehow a product of his imagination, including Foul. For him, killing Foul makes as much sense as killing himself.
Also, more importantly, asking the "ghosts" and Foamfollower to laugh is Covenant's way of NOT being the big hero YOU and THEM wanted him to be!
A lame ending? Well, an ending that suits well the anti-hero that is Covenant.
You wanted him to be the big Foul-slayer, as the "ghosts" (Kevin, Berek, etc) wanted him to be the great hero they always had wanted him to be. But he didn't give up, for the sake of his sanity, for the sake of his real life.
So, they didn't laughed Foul to death. He just regressed to his infancy, and then to oblivion.
Covenant himself knows at the end that Foul isn't gone for good, but at least is gone for a long time.

I hope this clears things up a bit. Otherwise, so be it. It's just another story!
(BTW, the second trilogy would irritate you more! I myself didn't like it as much as the first. And the ending... well, of course the "bad guy" loses again... but that ain't the point of Donaldson's stories...)

Sent you an icq recently...
My cold clearing out...

Juntel!!! Where have you been hiding?

Now this started out fairly well, and I remember thinking, "Not as good as Tolkien, but not bad."

I didn't finish the second trilogy. I just got bored, which is unusual for me, once I've invested in 4 or 5 books. I gave them away.

Really though, it did start well and as a first trilogy was not bad at all.

Donaldson's long-windedness doesn't always help him.

I did learn many more english words and expressions reading him though!

Haven't read his 4 or 5 parts SF series, "The Gap"; I heard it was well built as a story: the first book practically tells all the story, then the successive books, in turn, dissect in their own ways that original story, letting us see everything "behind" the apparences.

That does sound interesting! Donaldson has the tools to tell a good story...

Apart from the fact he'd take 3 days to explain eating his breakfast (the word melodrama springs to mind), Donaldson is rewarding as a novelist. I'm on my 3rd of the first tril., all is going well, and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens.

I ignored the earlier posts about the ending so it wouldn't spoil things for me!

Also reading Goodkind right now, and the difference is unbelievable. Goodkind is alright, but as far as authorship goes, Donaldson is far better. It's like reading a Mills and Boons book with Goodkind sometimes. His handling of romance is DIABOLICAL. Still, good storyteller.

I think the trilogies are great!

I've no time now to answer the question in full though, cos my lunch is waiting to be eaten

I'm back!

Psychologically speaking, the Chronicles are the best fantasy series I've read so far (be real guys: Tolkien's characters have not that much psychological depth). On the whole, they are my favorites right behind Tolkien's writings.

Btw, for all you TCC fans out there: here's a MB for Covenant discussion.

Holy Shiite!

thanks for that board... will look on it...