The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! š
deimosremus's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
TW: Sexual assault
I get what this novel is going for completelyā I think that to call Thomas Covenant an anti-hero isnāt quite accurate. Characters like Moorcockās Elric or Leiberās Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser are anti-heroesā that despite their allegiances or physical constraint, theyāre still capable of being powerful figures in the heroic tradition or may employ dubious means to carry out otherwise heroic acts. Covenant is a complete inversion of the fantasy hero by being not only physically impotent and damaged, but mentally fractured and embittered as well. A character defined by his constant pain and anguish as a leper, which shapes his morality and his relationships. When pain is of such normalcy to him, he reciprocates by inadvertently inflicting pain on others. I think this creates a very fascinating kind of protagonist, having the main character in a genre known for its larger-than-life heroes, as a misanthropic, weak-willed cynic. Unfortunately, thatās where my interest in Lord Foulās Bane kind of stops, and I think these ideas/themes could have been conveyed with a different impetus than that of the rape of an underage girl.
Iāve read other reviews on here, decrying Covenant as an intensely unlikeable character, and how that makes the novel bad. Thatās not what I have a problem with-- unlikeable heroes are something of a draw for me. However, by making this vile deed his first major act as a character, Donaldson mustāve known that any of his redeeming qualities were going to be very hard to convince the reader of, and I really donāt quite think the story succeeds as a redemptive one, and I donāt think it ever could (whether this was intentional on Donaldsonās part, I donāt know). Covenant acknowledges that he is beyond forgiveness, but it still begs the question of why the event occurs in the first place. Lenaās rape is even framed as a āsacrifice that had to be made for the greater goodā which left a really sour taste in my mouth right from the get-go. Itās not that the material in this novel is too dark, too grim or too unsavory, itās that (from what I understand of later novels) I feel the rape scene seems to be a device to later punish Covenant as an exchange of karmic blows, when the novel couldāve easily used a different and lessā¦ wretched way of introducing the reader to not only the themes surrounding the main character, but the world in which the characters inhabit (seeing as though itās the first thing of consequence that happens in āThe Landā). It fosters this dilemma where it could easily become a series known for how much the characters suffer more than anything else, and I ultimately donāt see much of a point in reading that.
As for the fantasy elementsā as Iāve said in past reviews (notably in my review for Steven Eriksonās Gardens of the Moon), Iām not a huge reader of very world-building-centric SFF, as the world has to be exceptionally interesting (Dune, Hyperion, Left Hand of Darkness for example) for me to invest time and effort into fully retaining those details. Lord Foulās Bane is yet another fantasy that carries the tradition of detailed worldbuilding, and while I can commend the effort it takes to form a fully-realized fantasy world, it doesnāt make for the most engaging stuff when a good chunk of the dialogue is spoken in lore-dumps and when a lot of it is the homogenous details found in most high-fantasy, Tolkien-derived novels of this type.
In the end, despite all my objections, I wonāt say itās a bad novel necessarily, but definitely an unenjoyable oneā Donaldsonās writing quality is generally high, I can appreciate what he was trying to do with a character like Covenant as a reaction to heroic fantasy, and the lingering idea that āthe Landā could be a coma-induced dream-like stateā¦ I can also chalk up some creative choices as a fantasy novel as not being my thing rather than being objective flaws (I like my fantasy to be either much weirder/more solitary or more subtle with fantastical concepts). However, I definitely feel that itās a product of its time. Iām not very likely to read the sequels, as while itās not my least favorite thing Iāve read this year (that still belongs to GotM), I donāt think it quite reached that threshold of enjoyability for me to invest the time into reading further.
I get what this novel is going for completelyā I think that to call Thomas Covenant an anti-hero isnāt quite accurate. Characters like Moorcockās Elric or Leiberās Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser are anti-heroesā that despite their allegiances or physical constraint, theyāre still capable of being powerful figures in the heroic tradition or may employ dubious means to carry out otherwise heroic acts. Covenant is a complete inversion of the fantasy hero by being not only physically impotent and damaged, but mentally fractured and embittered as well. A character defined by his constant pain and anguish as a leper, which shapes his morality and his relationships. When pain is of such normalcy to him, he reciprocates by inadvertently inflicting pain on others. I think this creates a very fascinating kind of protagonist, having the main character in a genre known for its larger-than-life heroes, as a misanthropic, weak-willed cynic. Unfortunately, thatās where my interest in Lord Foulās Bane kind of stops, and I think these ideas/themes could have been conveyed with a different impetus than that of the rape of an underage girl.
Iāve read other reviews on here, decrying Covenant as an intensely unlikeable character, and how that makes the novel bad. Thatās not what I have a problem with-- unlikeable heroes are something of a draw for me. However, by making this vile deed his first major act as a character, Donaldson mustāve known that any of his redeeming qualities were going to be very hard to convince the reader of, and I really donāt quite think the story succeeds as a redemptive one, and I donāt think it ever could (whether this was intentional on Donaldsonās part, I donāt know). Covenant acknowledges that he is beyond forgiveness, but it still begs the question of why the event occurs in the first place. Lenaās rape is even framed as a āsacrifice that had to be made for the greater goodā which left a really sour taste in my mouth right from the get-go. Itās not that the material in this novel is too dark, too grim or too unsavory, itās that (from what I understand of later novels) I feel the rape scene seems to be a device to later punish Covenant as an exchange of karmic blows, when the novel couldāve easily used a different and lessā¦ wretched way of introducing the reader to not only the themes surrounding the main character, but the world in which the characters inhabit (seeing as though itās the first thing of consequence that happens in āThe Landā). It fosters this dilemma where it could easily become a series known for how much the characters suffer more than anything else, and I ultimately donāt see much of a point in reading that.
As for the fantasy elementsā as Iāve said in past reviews (notably in my review for Steven Eriksonās Gardens of the Moon), Iām not a huge reader of very world-building-centric SFF, as the world has to be exceptionally interesting (Dune, Hyperion, Left Hand of Darkness for example) for me to invest time and effort into fully retaining those details. Lord Foulās Bane is yet another fantasy that carries the tradition of detailed worldbuilding, and while I can commend the effort it takes to form a fully-realized fantasy world, it doesnāt make for the most engaging stuff when a good chunk of the dialogue is spoken in lore-dumps and when a lot of it is the homogenous details found in most high-fantasy, Tolkien-derived novels of this type.
In the end, despite all my objections, I wonāt say itās a bad novel necessarily, but definitely an unenjoyable oneā Donaldsonās writing quality is generally high, I can appreciate what he was trying to do with a character like Covenant as a reaction to heroic fantasy, and the lingering idea that āthe Landā could be a coma-induced dream-like stateā¦ I can also chalk up some creative choices as a fantasy novel as not being my thing rather than being objective flaws (I like my fantasy to be either much weirder/more solitary or more subtle with fantastical concepts). However, I definitely feel that itās a product of its time. Iām not very likely to read the sequels, as while itās not my least favorite thing Iāve read this year (that still belongs to GotM), I donāt think it quite reached that threshold of enjoyability for me to invest the time into reading further.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Rape and Sexual assault
The rape CW isn't graphically described, but is a major moment in the book.
More...