The Illearth War: Book Review

What's up morons? I just finished reading The Illearth War by Stephen R. Donaldson. This is the second book in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, in both the original trilogy and in the overall ten book series. This is the second time that Covenant has been dragged to this world, and he finds himself in yet another situation where he is responsible for the existence of The Land. In this entry, he is both the same and different all at once. We get to see the subtle influences that his prior adventures have brought onto him, and also the continued bitterness that his leprosy has battered into him.

So, what did I think of it? Let's find out.

No Spoilers

Covenant's Influence and Role

I

The first thing that I think is worth talking about is Covenant's impact on the story from a world building and plot-based perspective. I'm actually asking myself questions about the focus of the story. While the series seems to be about Thomas Covenant, as the series is named after him, the story doesn't actually focus on him and his exploits. The series introduces another perspective in this book and the meat of the story seems to come from the second perspective. Covenant is honestly sidelined to a certain extent. And even when Covenant is on the page, the real story seems to be centered on the characters around him. This does not mean there is nothing there, but I am asking questions about Donaldson's long term goals with regards to his character.

He is not given a leadership role in any respect. He may as well have no powers. It's like we are still waiting for him to come out and take the helm, even though we are in the second book. This sounds like a negative, but this isn't necessarily how I see it. First, we do follow a central driver of the plot in the story. Second, Covenant provides great characterization, just like the last one, which I will get into in more detail in another section. His inner turmoil and his mindset in relation to the Land and story he is in is well built.

There is one event in the story that he does influence at the end, and I think this is the one major exception. The question is whether this is wholly relevant to his character. For all the interesting discussion of his character, I don't think this one major plot beat depended all that much on who he was as a person. Basically, you could swap him out for another and achieve the same outcome. You could make a case that his actions are downstream of his cynical attitude, but I am not so sure. This is one real complaint.

I think something is coming up in the third entry, so I feel like I cannot say too much just yet. Though, I do have a theory based on what I have discussed above. I think Covenant is a red herring, in a way. I think the real story is about the people around him, and he has some other relevance. I don't know what, though I might touch upon that later in this essay.

II

With regards to Covenant's impact on the story, relative to the last entry, a lot of his impact is more indirect. His unforgivable act ends up destroying and creating the lives of countless people, and the overall impact remains to be seen. Some of it seems to be fairly positive, actually, but it also has the potential to be very negative depending on how the story continues.

At the very least, it shows just how much impact Covenant's controversial act has had on the story up into the second entry. Ironically, many of the people who take the stage from Covenant are actually downstream of his actions, which might say something for the future of the story.

Covenant and Troy

The most fascinating aspect of this entry is the presence of another character in the story, a man who is also from Covenant's world. He was brought here by another character from the previous book, someone who's life was essentially ruined by Covenant's previous actions. The circumstances surrounding the summoning are tortured but ultimately good, as Troy (this new character) takes up his role in saving the Land with sudden zeal.

Naturally, Troy is the opposite of Covenant. They differ in multiple ways that are all bound up with Troy's optimism and Covenant's pessimism. While Covenant denies the reality of the Land, Troy believes that it is real. While Covenant eschews responsibility for the Land, Troy takes up the greatest responsibility he can. And this completely changes the nature of the story, throughout. Troy essentially steals the show, while Covenant feels more sidelined.

But there are certainly other factors worth commenting on. While Covenant is still convinced that this world is not real, the vibe that I got from his attitude seems to have changed as a result of the first entry, and also because of his discoveries about his impact on this world. He becomes more fixed on the moral question about whether it is right to be forced to take up this responsibility of saving the Land. Ironically, this actually seems to be a fallback after the first book, where he seems to be coming to accept the humanity, and the reality, of the people in the world. He is starting to care about the lives of the people, which is a major development.

Indeed, Covenant actually starts to believe that there is a connection between the two worlds:

If he did, he would soon come to resemble Hile Troy - a man so overwhelmed by the power of sight that he could not perceive the blindness of his desire to assume responsibility for the Land. That would be suicide for a leper. If he failed, he would die. And if he succeeded, he would never again be able to bear the numbness of his real life, his leprosy.

Another major juxtaposition between Troy and Covenant is how they respond to setbacks, given how they view the world. After a major disaster in Troy's efforts to fight, Troy seems to break down in a brief moment, and then he faces the unthinkable, falling into sheer desperation that spells out his character for the rest of the entry. And this is quite different from Covenant in his approach. From the very first chapter, we see Covenant return fairly easily to his real world, eventually adopting his old practices that he never truly lost. And this is seen throughout. He is convinced that the Land is a kind of suicide that would lead him to lose his necessary practices for staying alive in the real world. Nothing captures this more than when his company arrives at a picture of a battered but smiling woman in the landscape. He tells a story about a leper woman who was too caught up in the thrill of life and loses everything. Troy threatens to fall into this, and he struggles as a result.

Elena and Covenant

While the relationship between Troy and Covenant brings out the different ways in which one's attitude can influence their behavior and their relationship to the world's that they occupy, Covenant's relationship with Elena takes the ideas in a completely new direction. Elena is actually Covenant's daughter by blood, a result of his actions in the first entry of the series. Due to aging in the series, she is now about Covenant's age, and they are immediately shown to have a complicated relationship, the details of which I will leave out save to say that they are quite disturbing. I have looked through a number of reviews, and some are suggesting that the relationship nearly or outright ruined the book for them. I can understand why, but I actually thought that this relationship was an interesting exploration of morality in the context of a world with endlessly selfless people trying to save the Land.

The main question is simply a carry over from the last book, where Covenant has committed an unforgivable act that the characters seem to just brush over as if it were nothing. However, these attitudes are contrasted with the reactions to those related to the victim and with the character of Troy. Only they seem to see the true awfulness that Covenant has done, and they are left alone in their outrage. None of this is brought about by malice or outright dismissal. Instead, Covenant plays an important role in the story that forces them to prioritize. They know that they cannot hold him accountable because that would hold back their ability to save the Land, and it seems to make one of the more heinous actions in the series seem trivial. This is fascinating to think about, and I hope that Donaldson keeps pushing this throughout the story, and I hope the story takes an even sharper direction in the third entry.

But there is another dimension that I hinted at before that is more controversial, and which I have a harder time understanding. I do have thoughts, though. Elena is Covenant's daughter, but she did not grow up with him, due to his absence. She explicitly states this, hitching herself to another adoptive father instead. At the same time, she has an important connection to Covenant. One part is that Covenant has a certain obligation to her, something that builds to a much sharper connection between them by the end. Another part is that she seems to love him sincerely, and not in a healthy manner. Elena has a strange and disturbing attitude that has resulted from her family life. The reader is forced to step back to show how the Land has been deeply affected in the wake of his first summons. I think there is something that I still do not grasp, but I am willing to wait and see what Donaldson has in store, as I think all of this is connected to Covenant's role in the story overall.

Major Plot Points

The major plot points are something that I can only briefly touch upon for obvious reasons. What I can say is that they help build serious stakes for the story, making you understand that Donaldson is willing to make his characters suffer in the course of these events. The first book tended to have a more "whimsical" feel to it. (That is probably not the best word to use.) And this book quickly shows that there is more to the story than that.

At the same time, there is one major twist that I was hoping would happen. Indeed, it might still happen, though I think that ship has sailed. The problem is quite glaring too. It ought to ruin the story, even. I still enjoyed it, but I really have nothing to say to the hypothetical critic that brings up this critique. As usual, I will talk about this in the spoiler section.

Ending

One of the greatest parts of this entry is that the ending seems rather conclusive. There is the actual war that the entry is named after, and then there seems to be the conclusion. At the very least, I am wondering how the series is supposed to continue. At best, we have ominous warnings about what could happen in the future, but there is no concrete trajectory. So, to say the least, I am looking forward to continuing into the last entry.

Indeed, if Donaldson is as clever as I hope he is, maybe that one plot hole I mentioned above is the path forward. We will have to see.

Assorted

I mentioned before that there is this question of responsibility. There seems to be this question of whether the Lords of the Land are acting morally by bringing Covenant into the world and making him responsible for the lives of everyone in the Land. Just imagine yourself in the position of Covenant. Being the chosen one in a fantasy world is fun, but the notion of it happening to you in real life is honestly terrifying. Knowing that your failure will kill millions is horrifying. And you don't even have a choice. What if this happened to you? Would you put this on another person?

I absolutely despise the maps provided in this series. While I love the concept of a map, this map is not only useless, but detrimental. Unless, I just don't understand it, which is a problem in its own right. Oftentimes, I can't find stated locations on the map at all; this seems to defeat the purpose of having a map. And when there is a location, it's hard to see exactly what the label is actually associated with. One example is Garroting Deep, where the place is a forest, though the map hardly communicates that. I legitimately thought the place was a valley between hills and a forest, but no, it's the forest. I also think the placement of locations just confused the plot. The final showdown had armies chasing each other, and the map's labels implied zigzag motion, when the story implied a straight shot. And the map didn't even have geographic barriers to justify the label placement. It was just baffling.

One line that I particularly like was “Ignorance increases ignorance, and knowledge makes itself unnecessary.” Ponder that for a few years.

Conclusion

Overall, I liked the book. It was definitely an improvement over the prior entry. I will give it an 8/10.

Spoilers

Major Plot Points

I

We did not see all that many consequences in the first entry. There were some apparent horrifying events, namely the death of the spirit things when Atiaran was taking Covenant to Revelstone. The problem with that is the reader's connection. I had no notion of any of that, so I didn't really know what to make of it. I can't even remember what they are called.

In this entry, we get to see the massacre of the giants. As I stated in the non spoiler section of this review, this brings actual stakes to the story. The reader has connection to the race through Saltheart Foamfollower. What truly sticks with you is the horrifying fact that the giants never found their home. Their entire culture is built around the idea that they need to find their lost home. They call themselves the "homeless." And now they will never find it. This is something that I think is truly worth emphasizing.

II

Worse, the bloodguard take the Illearth Stone, and now Mhoram has visions of the bloodguard fighting for Lord Foul. They are the endlessly loyal guards that have followed the Lords to the end, and now we have this. We have to wait for the final entry to see that horror.

III

The march sequence in the middle of this story was among the most impactful in the entry. The fighting itself did not live up to the exhausting ruination that was felt throughout this race to Doom's Retreat. I love when writers manage to capture attention through something beyond mere action scenes. It honestly reminds me of a similar march in R. Scott Bakker's book, The Warrior Prophet. It has nowhere near the same impact as Bakker's book, but that is not necessarily an insult. Bakker's books are disturbing beyond comprehension.

IV

For the plot point section, this final comment is the main critique of the whole story, something that I think is so obvious and frustrating that I imagine it might ruin the story for other readers. Maybe the point will be addressed in the last entry, but I have doubts.

The logic of Troy's actions was to draw Lord Foul's army away from Revelstone and toward Doom's Retreat. They were supposed to make themselves look vulnerable, and take advantage of that to slowly wipe out the massive army. Foul's army cannot risk going north, even if he understands the ploy, as he cannot have an army ripping at the back of his own as it marches. He has to address Troy in the Retreat before he can march north. The plan is fine on the surface, save for one massive flaw that is only made more obvious as Troy begins to realize just how big Foul's army really is . . .

Why did Foul not split his army?

If the logic of the plan was to draw Foul away from the north, by moving to the south, where Doom's Retreat lies, then Foul could simply take advantage of that by having one portion of his army deal with Troy in the south, and then have the other half go north. After all, the army is enormous beyond comprehension.

This did not ruin my enjoyment. As an author myself, I understand that this isn't really a structural issue with the book; a few tweaks to the strategies, or even a few sentences suggesting that the army isn't big enough to split, would resolve this problem. And Donaldson did not talk specifically about the size of the army, so maybe he can just handwave it—but this is an incredibly significant oversight, to my mind. I don't imagine I can convince many critics, if this comes up in conversation.

Ending

I

The first thing worth mentioning is the idea of Lord Kevin using the Ritual of Desecration as part of a long term strategy to win the war against Lord Foul. The concept behind this has been used countless times, and it can be appealing, but I also have worries. I know this series as a whole has multiple subseries to it, so the question becomes: what is the long term? I know Donaldson did not plan the second Chronicles, let alone the third and final one, when he wrote this. The fact that the series continues, shows that there is an even longer term than this trilogy assumes. If Kevin wins in the "long term," culminating in The Power that Preserves, then does it all become pointless by the time the second Chronicles comes around? I guess that depends on whether Lord Foul is the enemy in the later series, but this is worth considering.

II

One thing that I enjoyed about the ending is the bloodguard being forced to make a decision over their loyalty to Kevin and the Lord's that they currently serve. That this was integral to the plot made the section more appealing.

III

Covenant continues to undermine his ability to determine whether this world is real or not. He grows a beard to serve as proof that this world is not real, given that he will not have grown the beard by the time he has returned. But then he chooses to shave it at the very end, showing that he is willing to sacrifice certainty and make decisions anyway. This considered, it does look like that Covenant maintains his Unbelief of the Land, while drawing a moral connection between the two. This may be laying the foundations for him coming to believe. Either that, or the theme will be that true belief is not actually necessary, and that this moral connection between the worlds is sufficient.

IV

Overall, the ending was great. There are ominous questions as to what will happen. On one hand, the army was destroyed and the battle was seemingly won, but it looks like Elena has done something . . . worthy of a "fool," to say the least. Was it a Ritual of Desecration? We'll have to see. I can't wait to see.

Lord Foul's Plan

We know from the Land's history that Lord Foul had infiltrated the Lord's Council when it was led by Lord Kevin. This is what allowed Foul to gain the power that he did, which in turn led to the Ritual of Desecration, when Kevin realized that Foul had become too powerful.

What this asks is whether a similar thing is happening right now. Consequently, it asks which Lord might be subverting the Council this time around. There is at least one possibility that comes to mind. Maybe it is one Lord among the many who we know less well, which is admittedly unsatisfying. I doubt it is Lord Elena, as she is the daughter of Covenant, not someone who Lord Foul could simply impersonate. And her actions fed into Foul's ends just fine anyway. Not Troy either, for the same reason. And not Covenant for the same reason. Maybe Quaan, though he is not really a Lord. Troy isn't either.

This leads me to my next point, which is that Foul's plans seem to have changed rather drastically from the last time. His actions then were secretive yet more direct, and they are more devious this time. I particularly liked how it was implied that Foul used Troy to destroy their armies, not by corrupting him, but by taking advantage of his tendencies. He knew that Troy would take a more defensive route through Doom's Retreat and risk dying in Garroting Deep. While it didn't work in the end, it was by a stroke of luck.

And it is also worth noting that this theory has not necessarily been confirmed. We still only have questions. And I should also mention that splitting his army as a part of this scheme would have been brilliant.

Another devious scheme would be using Covenant to mislead people. Covenant might not be Berek reincarnated at all, but someone handpicked by Foul to throw people off and waste their resources on. The irrelevance of Covenant to the plot seems to support this.

Reality?

There is still the question of what is and what isn't real. At the same time, the answer seems to have been given. But maybe not.

Once the reader enters into the head of Hile Troy, it makes you reconsider things. Troy himself comes to believe the world is real because his eyesight has developed. He reasons that because he could never see, he is not remembering something he once had. That means he can't be dreaming, as he would not be able to acquire that kind of information in the first place.

While the reasoning works for him, there is one problem with it. His acquired eyesight does not seem to be the same thing as other people's eyesight, as he can see further (and, of course, see without eyes at all). His dreams don't need to be informed about memories of eyesight at all.

Another stronger point is that the mere inclusion of additional perspectives is proof that this world is not simply Covenant dreaming. After all, is Covenant dreaming about Troy and the other perspectives? This is the most damning point. Unless Donaldson does not care about the implications of perspective.

But the world does seem to be real. The story is, and has always been, about Covenant's belief in the world. So, I think we can touch upon the connection in other ways. This book floats the idea that the dead might actually go to Covenant's world. Further, a character suggests that Foul, himself, might come from Covenant's world. And I ask in my notes whether Covenant might be the creator. I don't know if this last one was noted by the author or something I came up with myself.

Either way, all of this potentially has great implications, and I think I can join them together with another fact to provide another theory. Covenant is an author. Maybe this issue is more complicated than him dreaming, and is instead tied to his storytelling abilities. I don't know if his former books might be a part of it. It does not seem that he was transported into his own novels, as he probably would have mentioned that. I also don't think he is just imagining all of this through the page as a kind of cope, if only because it would be anti-climatic and contrived.

I don't know where this might all lead. I do think his authorship will be tied into this somehow, though.

Assorted

I

There was a very strange sequence in the beginning of the entry that I don't think was ever referenced later. It was when Covenant was at the bar, and a woman named Susie Thurston was playing for the customers one last time. She then looks at Covenant directly and calls out, referring to him as Berek. And another point worth mentioning is that Covenant is barely if ever called Berek in the story. This is probably because they already know Covenant, and he is already a mythic character in his own right, but I think it is still worth mentioning.

One thought that came to my mind is that perhaps the realities are actually flipped from what is suggested. What if the Land is the reality, and Covenant's position in the 1970s is the fantasy. What if the reason Thurston knew him as Berek was because that was his dream. Maybe his perceived real world is just his way of dealing with his self-doubt as he is unable to accept his position. This is doubtful in some ways, however. Aging in the series is one thing. That concept makes more sense if the Land is a fantasy or a parallel universe. And all of the musings I went through in the previous review also apply. What makes one reality "real," and another not?

Something is up with Susie Thurston, however. I hope this is not dropped. And I guess there was the beggar in the first novel, too.

II

Elena does not believe that Covenant was chosen by the creator. She thinks this belief is a dangerous one. I'm not sure what this implies, as I don't remember the text itself being terribly clear. If I had to guess, it suggests that she might be skeptical about Covenant. I got the impression that this was a throw away line, as this does not seem to lead to anything.

Conclusion

Overall, I liked the book. It was definitely an improvement over the prior entry. I will give it an 8/10.