Graeme Rodaughan's Reviews > Lord Foul's Bane

Secondary Character Shocker! 'Bait and Switch,' of the Main Character Revealed!: "When I signed up for the role of Lena in 'Lord Foul's Bane,' I had no idea that the role of Thomas Covenant was secretly being played by Jeffrey Epstein." - Lena - Journal of the Harvey Weinstein School of Publishing.

I find myself in the position of re-reading this book (and possibly the series) in an attempt to validate my own memory... a quixotic enterprise, but one I'm undertaking because I have a particular bee in my bonnet about understanding the success of these books.

Of course, reading this book makes me think deeply about rapists, psychopaths, aggressive narcissism, and the concepts of restitution, redemption and the comparison of deontological and consequentialist ethics.... neither yours' nor my typical entertainment.

When I first read these books I was fresh off a farm, a youngster for whom rape was an abstraction that I'd fortunately never come across. When Covenant raped Lena I was shocked, horrified and perplexed - like - WTF? But I was also a naïve nerd who continued reading because book, fantasy, epic, might be as good as LoTR... and I read the whole series.

So, why read this again? I'm giving this another go. I'm non-plussed that a character as thoroughly unlikeable as Thomas Covenant could capture people's imagination and sympathy and I'd like to understand why.

I have a hypothesis (in multiple parts)... which is unlikely to be popular, but here it is.

[PART 1: Situational Psychopathy]: Thomas Covenant 'the unbeliever,' is situationally positioned as a psychopath, a creature driven by aggressive narcissism whose 'disbelief,' of the Land and its inhabitants renders him into the grandiose position of 'the one real thing,' relative to everyone else in the Land.

This is precisely the pose of psychopaths everywhere who envision themselves the narcissistic center of their own universe surrounded by human 'nothings,' that only have value in terms of their utility to the psychopath.

Our culture has substantial psychopathic and narcissistic traits embedded within it, especially the closer you get to the top of society.

Thomas Covenant's disbelief in the Land invites us all to position ourselves in 'his position,' as 'the one real thing,' in a dream world without real repercussions and accountability, and then to sympathize with Covenant within that positioning.

HOOK #1: Invite the reader to sympathise with vicarious psychopathy by proxy.

[PART 2: Normalisation of Sexual Predation]: Throughout the first 20% of the book, Covenant obsessively sexualises every female he comes across with special attention given to anyone who is a teenager. I.e. positioned between a child and a woman.

Covenant is the Jeffrey Epstein of fantasy literature.

The character of Lena, 16 yo and a virgin, is precisely his obsessive sexual target. Lena saves his life, heals him, feeds him, shelters him, and offers him nothing but compassion and kindness and so - he hits her (violence) then rapes (aggravated rape) her because it satisfies his immediate personal needs to do so.

The absence of justice for Lena is a tacit endorsement of sexual violence. In our culture and society, especially amongst the ruling elements, sexual violence is an accepted part of life. I posit that part of this book's success comes from its tacit endorsement of one of the worst features of our culture and society.

The subtext of this story is that rape is ok, and that any evil act committed in an environment without accountability (in this case, a dream world) is allowed. The key message is that 'it is only the presence/absence of accountability that makes an act right or wrong.'

In other words, 'Anything you want to do and can get away with is good!'

HOOK #2: Invite the reader to normalise Sexual Predation.

[PART 3: Myth of Universal Redemption*]: The idea that any evil act can be redeemed by a sufficiently impactful good act. This is a comforting belief that many people like to believe in. One day, one special day, we'll all be redeemed from our sins.

However, I believe that redemption rests on a foundation of restitution, of making the subject of the original harm whole, as if the harm had never been inflicted. If restitution can not be made then redemption can not be achieved.

Thievery (you can return stolen goods) can be redeemed. Lying (you could tell the truth) can be redeemed. But, Rape, like Murder, can not be undone. A murdered victim cannot be restored to life and filled with health. A raped soul can not be un-raped.

Thomas Covenant has no path to redemption, but this story will tell you he does - which overlays his act of evil in raping Lena with a soothing (and justice denying) blanket of 'somehow it's all right...'

*This is a corollary of the Myth of the Moral Ledger ... next part.

HOOK #3: Invite the reader to validate the soothing myth of universal redemption for any evil.

[PART 4: Myth of the Moral Ledger]:

"Consequentialism is a class of normative, teleological ethical theories that holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct." REF: Wiki: Consequentialism.

This is the dominant ethical idea informing our culture. It is often framed as underpinning actions that are 'for the greater good,' but always ends up as 'the end justifies the means.'

I.e. Any act no matter how evil can be morally balanced, and even overwhelmed, if it results in a greater good.**

If Thomas Covenant saves the Land from Lord Foul, how many times can he rape Lena before his rapes outweigh his heroic act of saving the Land? One, ten, a hundred ... a million?

But if rape can not be restituted, Covenant can never un-rape Lena, he can never make her whole. No action of his can ever be measured against his rape of Lena and found capable of restoring her.

One day, she may forgive Covenant, but that would be her heroism - not his.

**In our world, 'For the greater good,' exists within a justification framework that is often abused to enable/commit acts of evil for 'expected goods,' that are never realised. All we are left with are the acts of evil and no 'greater goods.' This is normal human society.

HOOK #4: Invite the reader to validate the idea that the end justifies the means.

[SUMMARY]: This book has two stories within it.

[1] The superficial story: We are invited to journey with a leper through a world that could be (and is implied to be) real, but which he believes is a figment of his imagination. In his journey, he commits an atrocious evil deed, and then proceeds to the seat of local power where he admits to the local rulers that they are a dream. They assume he is a saviour and proceed on that basis to the end of the book, where he does indeed bring about a victory for the people of the Land. In the process, he attempts redemption for his evil deed by sending intelligent horses to 'pay homage,' to the victim of his evil deed.

On this level, the story appears to be a redemption arc from disbelief to belief. On the very last page, Covenant finally cares about what happens in the Land.

[2] Then there's the deeper story: Covenant obsessively sexualises every teenaged girl he meets. He is summoned to the Land, and meets Lena (16yo, virgin). She treats him with complete kindness and compassion to which he responds with violent Rape. Covenant luxuriates in the aftermath of the Rape, until he is struck by a fear of retribution and flees. He meets Lena's mother who becomes (awkwardly) his guide. He is confronted by Lena's angry boyfriend and is saved by 'The Oath of Peace.' Covenant then forgets about the rape and engages in a false dilemma while he struggles to adjust to the reality of the 'Land.' Setting up for the final act, Covenant suddenly remembers the 'Rape of Lena,' at Manhome and feels bad about it (indicating engagement with the Land as real (there was much preceding internal monologue where Covenant vacillates b/w the Land is real/dream as both impossible - an irreconcilable false dilemma leading up to this...)). Covenant commands the 'free spirits,' of the terrified Ranyhyn, and sends them 'as a redemptive gesture,' to Lena.*** The human guardians of the Ranyhyn, the Ramen, who are normally violently opposed to any harm to the sacred horses they care about, respond to this display of force through terror by literally falling at the feet of Covenant and worshiping his dominance. (Stockholm Syndrome in full display). Primed by all this, Covenant embarks into the final act, and successfully prosecutes the Quest, as he now, finally at the very end, believes enough to try, and reaches for the 'Staff of Law,' in an attempt to help.

There are two ways to read this book, [1] as a epic fantasy about a rapist leper who overcomes his doubt to save a Land filled with magic, beauty and terror, or [2] as a story validating psychopathy, rape culture, violence against women, the love of abuse, that the end justifies the means, and that any evil can be redeemed by a suitable good.

***There is also something infinitely creepy about Covenant's gesture of sending a Ranyhyn horse to Lena on an annual basis. Imagine a rapist sending their victim a single red rose on an annual basis... Covenant's behaviour turns my stomach.

It was with relief that I finished this book.

Final P.s. So, why was this book successful? Its hooks reflect dominant features of our culture and hence worked.

Not Recommended: 1 'No Justice for Lena,' stars.