OK, awesome Spoiler: Spoiler Alert Yes, in book 1, he raped a girl. That girl falls in love with him still. He leaves her at the end of book 1 to come back to our world. Now in book 2, he returns to the fantasy land, only decades have passed, the girl he raped in book 1 is old, insane, and madly in love with him. But we don't meet her in book 2. Instead we meet her daughter, whom Thomas falls in love and has sex with, and then finds out that she is actually his daughter. And yes, they are IN love, like, I-want-to-bone-you in love. And then at the end of the book she dies.
What is up with fantasy novels and rape/incest? That is some Lannister - Targaryen messed up shit. Gay or str8, your siblings are off limits, and your kids... Just thinking about thinking about that totally makes me turtle.
Thank God my fantasy doesn't require any of that shit. The moment I see one of my characters thinking it, I'm going to simply erase them from the story. I'm not so demented enough to write...that!
Ah, then good, you got the point. It's supposed to be slow, I guess, I remember when I first read it I found that bit just very interesting. It wasn't a reason to be put off for me, mind I was 14 - I wasn't likely to be put off with much when I got that far into a book. I've read it a few times since then. Goldstein was basically the Leon Trotsky to Big Brother's Stalin.
You don't have to read that bit of 1984. I don't think I did, though I was 1984 generation, and Orwell ruined me for ten years, even read Burmese Days. What a waste of life, his arid something. My great shame is not appreciating 'The Hitchhiker's Guide...' I found the voice 'pratty' - a weakness I must resolve. Stephen King, enjoyed the early stuff as a small child, we still call him our Rowling - but my wife bought his dome book, ridiculously poor prose, Sven Hassel standards, sadly my point lacks any evidence at all, trust me though. Try reading some of Bernard Cornwell's early books, they are quite formulaic, makes me wonder why he's rich, I am poor. That boat thriller, then Agincourt, crap. Antony Beevor - 100, 000 words, I found at least three usages of the 'ing,' when 'ed' would be more effective. I shouldn't buy those books, a secret five pounds in WHSmith - his history of WW2, one source for the entire Soviet section, I was disgusted. [ARSE WAFFLE] Spotted Dick's nice btw, custard, sponge, raisin. So is bread pudding, lardy cake, bread & butter pudding, not trifle, so much.
On that note, though I like Orwell, I thought I found a real gem in Aspidistras at the thrift shop since I never heard of it. Now I know why. Neither did I finish Salem's Lot. I'd mail it to the first person who PMs me, but I don't know what the international rates would be. "Here I stand. I can do none other." -- Martin Luther
Keep the Aspidistra Flying is profound because the hero, Gordon Compstock, the embittered, failed writer, is the great role model and inspiration.
I'm now curious - what's Aspidistras about? And Salem's Lot? Heard of Salem's Lot but don't know what it's about either.
Salem's Lot is by King. It was the first attempt I made of anything of his (disclosure: I can count the # of horror books I've read on one hand). But I heard of people shitting their pants from his writing, so I was not impressed by what seemed like a drawn out love triangle for more than half the book. The Orwell book is probably best described by someone else, but it's faults go beyond the absence of mass surveilance and livestock stratification.
It's about an MC who is a writer returning to his hometown to find that everyone is turning into vampires. Fast forward a few years.... Tommyknockers It's about an MC who is a writer who discovers a spaceship in her home town and everyone starts turning into aliens.
Heart of Darkness. I know, I know, symbolism for days. Doesn't matter if it puts me to sleep. Also, Confessions of Nat Turner. Seriously, how was that thing a best seller?
Anytime I hear someone go on and on about symbolism or how something is a commentary I always harbor the secret belief that they are just repeating what they have been told and want me to join the club of those who suffered through the work.
I can't help but feel Martin is going for straight up shock value , and on a side note, after seeing this picture of game of thrones I'm not quite sure how anyone can watch it without cringing.... But, back to Thomas Convenant series, I'm hoping @Steerpike , whom I'm assuming has read it or at least heard about it, might have more input than I do. My opinion is that Donaldson wasn't just doing it to do it. He had a purpose, whether that purpose was fully effective or not is a different question. It's been a while since I read the first two books, but my suspicion is that Donaldson was trying to show us a world devoid of hatred and full of love- even for a man who raped her mother. Enter Covenant, from our world, who is pretty much the opposite. Then of course there's the dark lord antagonist, who wants to destroy this world. By making (or trying to) us love this fantasy realm, and hating Covenant, by the time it's up to Covenant to save it, maybe Donaldson can force some strong emotions in us. It's an ambitious move, and arguably unsuccessful, considering I never read the third book.
I can understand the appeal for Anna Karenina (I hated it myself, I had to put it down a third of the way through). But I cannot understand the MASSIVE appeal for Anna Karenina. To me Tolstoy is like the Beatles. Certainly important, but way overrated.
Interesting, my opinion of the Beatles is basically the same. A few songs that I love, a bunch of songs that I really like, and a multitude of songs that are okay. (And I realize that has nothing to do with books. ) As for books, I have never encountered a book that I genuinely cannot understand why it is popular. It may not be to my taste, but I can always see what readers might get out of it.
It has been a long time since I read it. I liked the books. They're antithetical to most epic fantasy, and Thomas is pretty much the opposite of most fantasy heroes. Remember, he has leprosy, which is considered unclean and a cause for shunning people. The fantasy land that he travels to reflects a lot of his own disease in many ways. And you're right @123456789 that Donaldson had a point in writing it the way he did - actually quite a few points and a lot of comments to make about both fantasy writing and the modern world. He's written on it since those books were published. I should note that I also liked his Gap books. As for the rape...well, one can argue the propriety of having the scene there, but whenever the scene is mentioned people tend to forget that at this point in the novel, Thomas (the Unbeliever, afflicted with leprosy and suddenly healthy and whole in a fantasy world) is operating under the belief that he's trapped in a delusion. A lot of what happens in the book is impacted by the fact that he believes he's suffered some kind of mental break and that nothing he is experiencing is real. I don't think the Thomas Covenant of the real world (pre- or post-affliction) would commit rape, but the Thomas Covenant who thinks he's experiencing a delusion where nothing is real and nothing he does matters might very well do anything (and the fact that what he does actually does matter, though Thomas the modern man believes it does not, might be considered a comment on nihilism).
Well, then perhaps it's just me coming into this series of books without (and I mean this honestly) the backlog of history of having read the rest of the canon and knowing the length and breadth of where Fantasy as a genre had been up to that point. So, I can chalk this up to lack of contextual grounding in the genre. I can see similar paradigms at play in Science Fiction, a realm I know much, much better.
Or you just hated the books, which is cool They are slow, and I can see where some people would find the writing tedious. Partly, I think that's the style of some fantasy of the time (which I like OK, but a lot of people hate). On the SF side, Donaldson's Gap series moves much more quickly (it was written later), but the first book doesn't pull punches and I was really hoping one character would die a horrible death because he was a nasty person.