Does morality
matter to each of us, at an individual level? Or does morality only
matter if our beliefs in (and about) this world are real and true?
As I turned to the last page of The
Power that Preserves, the final book to The First Chronicles
of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, I walked away, feeling
inspired to further explore this dynamic question. Most importantly,
I just can't believe that despite a troublesome start at book 1, book
2 and 3 managed to turn around and grabbed my interest. I am so glad
I persevered with this series after the first book, and read the
entire trilogy. Today, I would like to review The Power that
Preserves, this book provides a satisfying conclusion, to this
very unique fantasy epic.
Synopsis:
Thomas Covenant has been twice
summoned to the fantastic world of the Land, to aid the Lords at
Revelstone, and combating the tyranny of Lord Foul, who is the physical
incarnation of Despise.
However, Thomas Covenant found it
hard to believe his experience at the Land was real. As a result,
Covenant was reluctant to aid the Lords in their quest. Furthermore,
Covenant's unbelief behaves as a double edged blade, cutting both
ways. While his unbelief occasionally thwarted Lord Foul's advance, but his unbelief, leading to inaction, also harmed
many people who came across his path in the Land.
Now, Covenant has been summoned to the
Land for the third time. Upon his arrival, he found 7 bitter years
has passed in the Land. During these 7 years, Lord Foul has mastered
the power of Illearth Stone, and had become even more powerful
through some mysterious, devious means. With his great power, Lord
Foul brought an ever-lasting, harsh winter upon the Land, murdering
this once fantastic world and its populace with blood chilling claws
of icing death. Covenant is the Land's last hope to stop Lord Foul,
he must discover, the power to preserve.
However, Lord Foul is the incarnation
of Despise. What power can defeat Despise?
What I think about this book:
While The Power that Preserves
provides a satisfying conclusion to this trilogy, but it is not a
flawless book. I found the pace of the book uneven, and I felt this
book would have been just as good, if it was shortened by 50 pages.
This is because Stephen Donaldson's writing style is verbose, and the
use of vocabulary in this book (and this series in general) is overly
expansive. My opinion is, while this type of writing style does weave
an atmosphere of intelligibility around this book, but after a while,
a reader may find, that deciphering Donaldson's writings prove to be
a nuisance than a stimulating exercise.
Having said this, I must say, that the
style of writing in this book (and book 2) is still more
approachable, in comparison to Lord Foul's Bane, the first
installment in this series. However, Donaldson's verbose, flowery
writing style hinders the pace of the story at several places, making
this book (and the series in general) hard to sit through.
Despite its flaws, I did enjoy reading
this book, because I think this book (and the series in general) is
probably one of the most interesting creations in the genre of
fantasy literature. While this is a story about good versus evil, but
in the eye of the storm, it takes its readers on a journey to
explore the boundaries of human morality. The protagonist in this
series, is Thomas Covenant, a 20th century American author
who contracted leprosy at the height of his career and personal life.
From there, as a leper, Covenant was shunned and rejected by the
society and his family, attached with labels such as outcast and
unclean. Then one day he was transported to a fantastic world called
the Land, where he was forcibly thrown into a quest to combat an evil
overlord. But Covenant's problem was that he did not believe his
experience was real, hence calling himself “Thomas Covenant, the
unbeliever”. Therefore, just as Covenant struggled with his mounting bitterness and self contempt from his life as a leper, he was also
uncertain whether if he should bear the moral responsibilities for
his actions (or lack of actions) in what he perceived to be a dream world, making him a
reluctant anti-hero. i.e. Covenant was told he had the power to save
the Land, but he did not know what that power was, and he lacked the
conviction to try to save the Land. As a result, in the previous 2
books, Covenant inevitably hurt many people in the Land because he
was reluctant to do anything.
In The Power that Preserves,
Covenant was summoned to the Land for the 3rd time. This
time, Covenant bore witness to the fruits of his past doings in the
land. Lord Foul, the incarnation of Despise, was gradually killing
the Land and its people, because Covenant did nothing to help in the
past. This is an interesting parallel between Covenant's leprosy
which was gradually killing him (bodily and emotionally), and the
Land being gradually killed by an evil entity which physically
represents despise. Covenant was tormented by the sights of the suffering people due to the inactions of his past, and he was loosing
himself just as the Land was lost. In this book, Covenant finally
came to the realization, that he had to stand at the eye of the
paradox between his unbelief and moral responsibilities, to discover
the power that would preserve his very own nature, as well as the
Land even if it was not real, because it mattered to him.
In my opinion, this premise made this
book (and the series) worth reading for. The final showdown between
Thomas Covenant and Lord Foul (AKA Despise) was probably one of the
most captivating showdowns in the history of fantasy literature. It
revolved around a question that everyone should be able to relate to:
How does one defeat despise?
I think The Power that Preserves
ended the journey of Thomas Covenant in a grand fashion. Despite the
fact I did not appreciate Donaldson's writing style, but I do feel
inspired to further explore and expand (or even alter) my current
view on human morality. I would like to share here, that personally,
as I closed The Power that Preserves, I walked away with a new
found understanding, that I should act morally NOT on the grounds
that my existing beliefs in (and about) this world are real or true.
Instead, I should act morally regardless of any ground, because if I
don't, then I cannot be.
Thank you for reading this review.
No comments:
Post a Comment