Most Helpful Customer Reviews
28 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A decent start, but the series gets better, December 26, 2002
3 1/2 stars Having reread Lord of the Rings in anticipation of the films last year, I recently also paid a visit to another fantasy series that I enjoyed while in middle school: Thomas Covenant. Nearly 20 years later, I appreciate the books more. The themes are very adult and while I enjoyed the books as a child because Donaldson creates a great fantasy-world that will interest and draw in readers of all ages, I am better able to understand what Donaldson was trying to accomplish now that I'm older.
In some ways, I think this particular book is more enjoyable when you're younger. Donaldson was just getting a grip on his writing style with the first book, and I find it to be noticeably less of a quality read than some of the later installments. Donaldson doesn't quite have his "flow" yet, and he does not quite develop Thomas Covenant enough to paint him as anything more than an annoying crank. You see what he is *trying* to do, but the overall effort falls kind of short.
Furthermore, there are simply too many similarities between this book and Lord of the Rings for comfort. In both series, we have a quest story of a reluctant hero who is the bearer of a powerful ring (even the talisman is the same!) that neither can use, which is coveted by a "dark lord," who lives in the East (the bad guys always live in the East; an allusion to Cold-War era politics?) and for whom physical form is an uneccesary addendum to their existence. And in both books, if the bad guys ever get the powerful rings, it will mean the end of the world. The minions of the bad guys in both Middle Earth and The Land are genetically created life forms (Orcs and Ur-Viles/Cavewights), and the Thomas Covenant series even goes so far as to re-create the Gollum character in the Cavewight Drool Rockworm. Drool even talks in broken English like Gollum, and is described as looking very much like him as well. Like Gollum, a power that was not meant for him has twisted him physically, and, like Gollum, he has selfish, child-like qualities (though he is two-dimensional; whereas the conflicted Gollum was pitiable, Drool is simply evil). There are even living forests in both books, although the specific characteristics of them are somewhat different. Of course, there are lots of differences, too: Frodo is heroic enough that his infrequent bouts of weakness are forgivable; Covenant is annoying, self-pitying and pathetic enough that his infrequent bouts of positive, decisive action come off as teases and aberrations. Also, there are metaphysical components to Lord Foul that do not exist with Sauron, and the Ravers are much more interesting "lieutenants" than Tolkien's Ring-wraiths are (although they don't play a large role in this first volume). What ultimately makes this book worth a recommendation (besides the fact that you need to read it before getting onto the more superior later books) is the twist Donaldson puts on the series insofar as to the reality of The Land. Is it a dream? Is Covenant simply living out a Freudian wish-fulfilment, or is he actually a chosen weapon by the Creator of the Universe to keep His archenemy at bay? These issues are always playing in the mind of the reader, and they push this occasionally otherwise-derivative book into a worthy standing.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
63 of 78 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Best modern fantasy I've found, January 7, 2000
"Lord Foul's Bane" has many strengths to recommend it. It also has a number of shortcomings I would be remiss in not mentioning. I personally loved the series, moreso the second time around. Donaldson's hero, Thomas Covenant, is a leper and an outcast in his own world. He has resigned himself to his life of disease (there was no cure for leprosy when this was written) and solitiude, and desires nothing more than to be left alone to live out his sentence. After an accident in town, he finds himself transported to a fantastical place known only as the Land where his disease is cured, and the most evil being in the Land challenges Covenant to stop him from destroying the world. Much of this first book in the series is spent on making Covenant as contemptible as possible, making him cowardly, a rapist, selfish, and inconsiderate, but most of all disbelieving in the world he has found himself in. Although Covenant just wants the nightmare to be over, he finds that people see him as a reincarnation of a long-dead hero, and put their faith in him. But in his contemptiblity, Covenant is pitiable. It's hard not to feel bad for him at times when people blame him for things that aren't his fault, or refuse to understand his remorse at things that are. The weaknesses of the story lie in Donaldson's reliance on his Thesaurus and the fact that a contemptible character scares a lot of readers off. As to the language, he does at times go into a pointless string of synonyms, using words that no normal person uses in conversation. I think of this as a weakness in the novel, but not one that affects my overall view of it. More of a quirk of the author. I've thought about the question of whether or not Covenant was actually taken to a fantasy Land or just imagined it in his diseased brain. Most readers I've spoken with believe that we, the readers, are to accept that the Land exists independently of Covenant and that he is simply taken there because he is their legendary hero. I feel, however, that there is no evidence to back this up, and there is a great deal of evidence to support the idea that the Land is all in his head, and all the people and parts of it are metaphorical representations of aspects of Covenant's mind. Either way, the story is a great epic fantasy series, and I encourage people to put personal judgement of the character aside (he's SUPPOSED to be despicible!) and enjoy the series for its own merit.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
206 of 270 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Lord, what a Foul Bane, May 28, 2008
After the first 50 pages of this book I felt that it was living up to or even surpassing its reputation, and I was completely enthralled. But as the story veered from the modern world into "the Land", there followed perhaps the greatest train wreck I've experienced in any novel I've ever read.
The first warning was the naming and language. Unlike Tolkien, Donaldson's attempts to create names are laughable--quite literally. I can't imagine how someone could read sentences like "Berek Heartthew's son was Damelon Giantfriend, and his son was Loric Vilesilencer, who stemmed the corruption of the Demondim, rendering them impotent" with a straight face. And here you also see more of Donaldson's weaknesses: the overuse of fantasy Capitals and the wretched abuse of compoundwords. In this book, when someone speaks of weighty Matters, you shall have the Knowing of it, for its Importance will be telegraphed to you with Capitals. We're always in the Hills, never the hills; people rarely craft but that they Craft; after all, it's all Stone and Sea to them. Does the mere Fact of this capitalization convey Depth to you? And do you accept it as a substitute for depth conveyed through, say, the power of the writing itself? If not, search well for another Book, for Off you this one shall surely Cheese.
And oh, those compoundwords. Are you a friend to Giants? No no, you're a "Giantfriend". Did you silence Lord Vile? Then "Vilesilencer" you shall be. An ocean lover, perhaps? Then as "Saltheart Foamfollower" shall ye ever be known! Are those berries to treasure? No, they're "treasure-berries". A "vital brew"? Let's call it "diamonddraught". Looking for stones? Nay, you're "stone-questing." Dirt that heals wounds? That's why we call it "hurtloam"! "Rockbrother", "proud-wife", "Earthfriend"--it's relentless. When you take an eyerest from longreading you'll think, hey, maybe I should have some tastyfood so I'll feel tummyjoy. And to be crystal clear, it's not just the fact of the compounds themselves, but the hackneyed mundanity of them; Donaldson unerringly settles on the most obvious and uninspired combinations, apparently convinced that they resound with exotic mystery, when in fact they're almost universally uncreative eye-rollers.
These may seem like nits, but they're a constant annoyance, and in any case there's far worse. The story of dragging Thomas Covenant over the Land does just that--drags, and drags, and drags. The universally one-dimensional characters (including TC himself) sojourn across the one-dimensional Land, page after page after page, with little to make the journey worthwhile. The exposition is lengthy and yet still shallow, and increasingly mind-numbing as it plods along. What tension there is comes mainly from TC's continual tantrums and peevishness. If this doesn't exactly sound like compelling reading, you're right, it's not.
Also, to say this book is "derivative" of Tolkien is a serious understatement; it frequently feels like out and out plagiarism. A ring of power, Nazgul substitutes called "ur-viles", large creatures who take days to tell a story and feel our protagonist is too "hasty", a perilous journey to a council of the wise, Mount Doom vs. Mount Thunder--it goes on and on. The borrowing is frequent and overt. This isn't just surface similarity based on the fact that both are epic fantasy, but the wholesale lifting of major elements. Donaldson does embroider the story with some of his own additions, but I found them stereotypical and uninspired.
Even the most derivative work might still be worth reading if it's done well, of course, but Donaldson is far less concerned with telling a good story than he is about rubbing our noses in his protagonist's vileness, starting with the signal event of the book: his rape of a child. I hold authors responsible for their choices, and Donaldson never comes close to justifying his decision to ornament this turgid, plagiarized fantasy with the rape of an innocent young girl. Worst of all, later in the book he attributes this self-righteous thought to his rapist: "[Lord] Foul! The Wraiths were helpless! What do you do for an encore, rape children?" When I hit that sentence it was all I could do to keep myself from throwing the book to the ground and stomping on it. Was this dark irony, or foreshadowing, or perhaps just unintentional self-mockery? I couldn't care less. It was a repellent inclusion, given the author's cavalier willingness to commit sexual violence against one of his own characters.
Despite the length of this review, I've only touched on the major faults of the book (and I've omitted others entirely). If there's a prize lurking at the bottom of the remaining 1000 pages of this cereal box I won't be finding it; there are far too many better books in the world, and life's too short. If you must read it, do yourself a favor and get it from the library rather than paying for it, so you'll have wasted only time and not money.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
