I don't normally comment, but this book was so particularly terrible that I feel the need to save others from making the same mistake I made. Let me first say that I only read the first one, and I'm aware that many people think the series improves eventually. But let me be clear: I WOULD NOT READ MORE OF THIS FOR ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY. Folks, the book is no fun at all. The only positive involves Donald's understanding of psychology. Covenant's struggle with acceptance is (kind of) interesting, but that detail doesn't even begin to save this onerous tale from utter opprobrium. The writing is mostly terrible; Donaldson feels compelled to use contrived similes every other line in order to get his point across. They suck and they're tedious. The characters are starkly boring, not there's much room for them to be anything else. With almost nothing to do but travel and fight villains, it's a miracle Donaldson managed to even keep their names straight. As for the plot, it's horrible and stodgy. Covenant is thrust into a strange world and soon learns that he must play a part in saving it from a dark lord. Oh yeah, and there's a magical ring that holds the key to everyone's salvation. Eh. For anyone thinking about reading this drivel, please reconsider. Some books are best left closed.

These books made a huge impression on me and I was always surprised they were not better regarded outside of the fantasy world. From reading comments I do have a slightly different take than many who defended them. I loved the series, from the start, *because of the Thomas Covenant* character, not ever in spite of. At the same time I didn't find the Land he created so great or vivid though it seems others did.

The introduction with the detailed description of the reality for life as Lepor, VSE, his social alienation etc was fascinating. Putting a lepor who's been repeatedly told he can't afford distractions from reality into a fantasy world as a hero was a remarkable invention. The rape is intended to make him repugnent and to fuel his self loathing, and the excuses offered (reversed impotence, unbelief) are intentionally not sufficient. But this doesn't mean you should let him burn and no longer care, people can do awful things, the worst possible things imaginable, and then choose to change. Instead the impotence excuse is part of his theme about power and powerlessness. In the latter you can do no evil but equally you can do no good, and with his first taste of potency he does evil, but *eventually* he discovers he can also do good.

I loved the internal dialogue that covenant has, his self doubt, self hate and his stuborness. There are times when I think Donaldson is being overly pretentious and makes a few comments which he regards as deep and meaniful but seemed like empty rhetoric. For the most part, though, I think he is exploring really interesting ideas.

Regarding the Land, while covenant is a startlingly complex and shaded character, the general wholesome goodness of most (but *not* all) of the Land's inhabitants seemed simplistic and pale by comparison. I guess thats the point because the immediate and obvious nature of the cause (the standard fantasy set up, and in this respect with "Lord Foul" it's as hackneyed as it gets, maybe deliberately) draws his reluctance and refusal to help to an extreme. Nonetheless I was a bit bored by them at times and while others seem to have been drawn ito the beauty of the land, I wasn't much of the time and initially had to work hard to get the sense of that loss, which is of course essential to the books.

And one final remark, the part in the third book after Lena dies, when he is wandering, half mad with his leprosy spreading matching the decay of the Land is one of the best bits of writing I have ever read, so for those who gave up, after book one, I really suggest you try again.

I like the anti-hero nature of the protagonist. That really is the point, the world is rich and very well fleshed out. The flawed heroes make great counterpoint to the fantasy forces of good that are in the "land". It is written in an eloquent and erudite style that some will not like. The themes are mature, rape, power, powerlessness, etc... and if you want a light read... probably not the right book for you.

I have been enjoying this series since I began reading them in the late seventies, or was it early eighties, I forget now. Nine books in to the story, I am still enjoying it. I found his Mordants Need books better overall, but this series is one I am glad I read through.

As a disclaimer, I've only read the first book in the series, but I felt like it was enough to form a strong opinion of it, so here goes...

First of all, I'm not quite sure why so many people are offended by the rape scene. (I'd love to hear what these delicate readers would think about R. Scott Bakker's books... ) It's very tame by today's standards - Donaldson doesn't describe it in detail and you have to remember that the main character, Thomas Convenant, thinks he is dreaming when he commits the act. In that regard I see it as forgivable, or at least understandable.

Ok with that out of the way... I thought Donaldson was an exceptional writer. Reading this book will really expand your vocabulary! The story itself puts a cool twist on the high fantasy style of Lord of the Rings, a book which it clearly borrows a lot from.

What put me off wasn't the rape scene, or anything related to the plot or world. It was Thomas Covenant. This guy is such a cynical, contemptible, obstinate idiot that by the end of book one I had lost all respect for him and grew to hate him more than most villains in other stories. I get that he is supposed to be an anti-hero, but even anti-heroes should have likeable qualities and justifiable motives that the reader can appreciate and relate to. Covenant has neither, and as a result is downright loathsome.

So what's so bad about him? Without giving too much away, I'll just say this: It makes zero sense why a person whose life is defined by pain and suffering (he is a leper in "real" life) would continue to cling to his miserable existence when presented with a fresh start (even if only in an alternative fantasy world). Covenant's refusal to accept a chance at happiness on the grounds that "it isn't real" is ridiculous and unbelievable, given his horrible condition. He is a man who hates his life, yet is utterly unwilling to allow hope or alleviation... oh just kill yourself already and save us the trouble of having to read about you!

All of this could still make for a compelling protagonist... if there was any character growth to speak of! As it is, it is frustrating and somewhat depressing to read over 450 pages centered around a man who remains hopelessly pessimistic. By the end of the book, Thomas Covenant is still just as unlikable as he was at the beginning, and from what I've read from other reviewers, this trend continues throughout the entire series.

That's why I haven't picked up book 2. Although I may someday in the future, for now I've got too many other good books to read.

Before people mistakenly criticize me for reading book 1 and then rage-quitting, I actually read the first 5. My Barnes&Noble doesn't carry the second series, and I couldn't even be bothered to order "White Gold Wielder". Don't know why I even pushed myself through 5 books.

Thomas Covenant is the only character who is really explored, and he spends most of his time being useless (books 1-3) or unconscious (4-5)

The naming system in the book is an absolute JOKE. It's really almost comical.

All the minor characters are one-dimensional cardboard cutouts. When they die, it makes no impression on me. They are too bland and generic for me to care about them.

Obviously, the books only get good reviews because 90% of people who read book 1 and don't like it quit.

The rest just give these books praise, which I don't and probably never will understand.

"And please, before you leave a comment trashing this series, read the ENTIRE series first."

Glad you added that. 90 % of the criticisms, without fail, come from people who have not read beyond the first book; and I think you cannot have an unbiased opinion on it until you've finished the first trilogy. I hate saying that about any series normally because that's the kind of argument apologists come up with, but that's exactly how it is with this series. The story, characters, the land etc, it all evolves with each book.

honestly the first book, yeah it was a bit irritating and, yes the rape scene did put me off a bit but if you keep going by the end of the third book i actually liked thomas covenant and i think that what he did in the third book of the second series was just flatout awesome and the last chronicles......Wow

Read the first book, found it amateurish. Didn't sympathize with any of the characters, thought the plot was derivative, the descriptions of landscapes and the character development are poorly executed. There's no "there" there.

I have to admit the rape scene really put me off. I see how it is important later in the series, but really, it destroyed much of the sympathy I had for the character. I think it would have been better had Lena seduced him, and, being a leper, he resisted, thinking he had no feeling and thus wouldn't be able to consummate. I suspect that in 1977 (I was 10 at the time) attitudes towards rape were much different than they are today. I still couldn't shake my revulsion, though.

Another thing that really put me off was Thomas's constant whining about how he was a leper and not capable of doing anything productive. I would think that it would have occurred to him that maybe his leprosy was in remission while he was in The Land, so why not play along? I suppose that's what made this novel unique among others of its type (such as Three Hearts and Three Lions), but it seems to me that at some point he should have realized that his situation was real, or at least, seemed quite real. But I guess he wouldn't be the "unbeliever" then, would he?

Other than that, very well-written book.

I find it funny that so many people bash Matt for trying to defend the rape scene, but it really does serve as an important plot point for the next two books.

Covenant gets her pregnant, and her daughter, Elena (original name, considering her mother is 'Lena'- just like Lord Foul is a good name for an antagonist) becomes the High Lord.

Elena dies because Covenant f--ks up.

Lena's delusional love for Covenant comes into play in book 3, when she foolishly joins them on their quest.
And then, she is impaled on a spear by a minor character from book one, and dies.

Clearly the series would be radically different if the scene had not occurred.

"the rape of the 'little' girl (16 is little is it?... ...The leprosy made him impotant, and with the sensation of it being cured brought feelings he has suppressed for years, try and have some empathy."

Really Matthew? Try and have some empathy for the RAPIST because the girl was 16 and he had been impotent? Didn't realize that made a violent act like rape okay. Would you have the same attitude if it were your mother/girlfriend/sister? If they were in their thirties than it really wouldn't be a big deal at all huh?

Your ignorance is astounding. Rape is never okay no matter the circumstances or age. As far as empathy goes you have got to be kidding - it's called self-control. I don't give a damn what your situation the desire to rape is sick in of itself. I say this as a male, I shudder to think of you as a father and an influence on others in your life.

Get a clue and grow up, man.

Donaldson somehow managed to write LFB around the most indecisive and boring character ever percieved. The supporting characters offer no depth, and the world is weak and unimaginitive. To top it all off, about once a chapter he throws in a word that is either made up or three people on the planet know the definition of.

This is without a doubt the greatest thing I have ever read, the way that the language complements the story is staggering. Do not judge this sereis after only the first book, you have to read all three books and see how his actions effect the land and the contrast at how people treat him in the real world and the land.
And probebly the best thing about the book is if you read between the lines, with each passege Donaldson seems to say about five things at once, its amazing.
Oh and Angela, if you understood what you were reading, the rape of the 'little' girl (16 is little is it? I shudder to think on what you would make of A song Ice and Fire), The leprosy made him impotant, and with the sensation of it being cured brought feelings he has suppressed for years, try and have some empathy. As for his whineing, HE HAS LEPROSY, imagane everybody hating you for somthing you cannot help, you have now family or friendsto lean on, you are completly alone. Have some empathy and learn to pay attention and think of what you read, if you cannot do that go read some happily ever after rubish like Shannara

I utterly regret buying all three books at the same time. One would think that such a "great" fantasy series would be a least slightly good. The main character has ZERO redeeming qualities. How is one supposed to get behind a "hero" who whines, rapes little girls, then whines some more? Even IF one lacks the morals to get past that, there isn't much else to look foward to.

Donaldson was the author who hooked me on fantasy in the first place. Hard to find good fantasies that require some thing. And I am sick to death with the old sword in the stone boy approach. Along with Donaldson I would add Tolkien, Cook and Erickson for an adult audience. Hobb is also good and I hope to find more authors that require some thinking

First off, anyone who has read only the first book (Lord Foul's Bane) should not comment on the series. The first book is somewhat of a rough read and explains little about the main character’s greater dilemma and self-discovery.

To be fair, like many other people have commented, I almost did not continue reading the series after the first book. In the end, I am ecstatic that I chose to continue.

Do not expect a Lord of the Rings type fantasy in this series, the book delves much deeper into the human psyche. The books main Character, Thomas Covenant, is an anti-hero to the fullest extent. He is stubborn, unwilling to help anyone, and hates the situation he is in. I will try not to give away more than you will learn in the first 100 pages of the first book, but suffice it to say that Covenant sets down a path of self-discovery along his many adventures. He is a complicated man, much like we humans are, and has a difficult time letting go of old habits.

Keep in mind this series is not just about following a grumpy old man around. If you are looking for battles, this series has plenty of them. Following the trend, the first book has the least amount, but enough to convince you to read on (if only barely). The following books have dramatic battles that draw you in due to Donaldson’s vivid descriptions. The battles are amazing, simple as that. You will enthralled by the “Blood Guard” and their ability to do some damage, that I guarantee.

In addition, the support characters are superb. At points in the book I began to admire the support characters much more than the main character (some people commented this is what drove them away from the book, for me it provided a unique twist not found in many other fantasies). The inhabitants of “The Land” are rich people who have a bright sense of loyalty and duty that the main character does not. It is quite pleasurable to see the way Donaldson combines Covenant with amazing support characters/companions that are ever ready to put their life on the line to serve Covenant, even when Covenant would not do the same. Basically, the people of “The Land” are your typical fantasy hero types and Covenant is reminiscent of a person born from “the real world”. It’s a great contrast, which causes a lot of reader resentment toward Covenant, at the start. You will constantly scream at Covenant to step up and be the hero. It is quite a different experience than your typical main character that, predictably, is the hero and always will be the hero.

If you decide to try this series, buy the first two books and promise yourself you will read both before you decide to continue. If you are not drawn in by the end of the 2nd book, “The Illearth War” then this style of fantasy might not be up your alley. Do not put the series down after the 1st book; it’s not a fair assessment of the series, not even close.

This man is a genius. His understanding of the human condition is without equal. The Thomas Covenant books are a Literary gift to the world.
Perhaps one has to have know metaphysical suffering to understand his contribution.
This is Art not fiction for consumption.

I hated book one as well. I read on and when I was on the third one, I was relieved I kept on. The third book is where all the effort pays off - believe me.
My rating for the first book would be 2-2.5/5
For the third book it would be 4.5/5

Book one sucked. Point blank this was the most boring and worse book I ever read in my life. Can't believe I jumped the gun and brought all three books.

as for the language, I dont find it any more difficult read than wheel of time. In fact wheel of time is harder to read because of its tedious descriptions of attires, rooms, furniture, interior decoration etc. I felt the style was more natural than forced. LOTR has a more complex writing style and structure compared to it. And dont even get me started on white dwarf; if you're read the fighting fantasy gamebooks by the magazines editor(s), you'll know their language is simplistic at best.

what are you talking about dude...these are two entirely different series (except that they have the same protagonist) with two entirely different endings. And in no way did any of them suck. Reading your words its hard to believe you've actually read all six.

Read all 6 of these books when they first came out. It was like snail racing on cello-tape. My main issue with Donaldson was that he couldn't stay away from Rogets Thesaurus. Instead of "He walked down the street" it had to be "The male homosapien perambulated in a northerly vector." An apple tree was a fructificating column of nature. He just seemed incapable of not trying to be the next best author and doing so by using clever words.
Reading it changed from enjoyment to literary labour. It was so bad in fact that the RPG magazine White Dwarf too the mick mercilessly.
To cap it all, after wading through all the books the final confrontation just sucks and is one of the worst finales I have ever come across.
Liked the characters, liked the world, hated the end, hated the authors technique, want the time wasted reading this verbose garbage back please.