The Illearth War
Chapter 8: EIGHT: Lord Kevin’s Lament
by R, Donaldson, StephenIn “Lord Kevin’s Lament,” Thomas Covenant grapples with his growing emotional entanglement in the Land, fearing it undermines his autonomy and authenticity. Disturbed by his acknowledgment of High Lord Elena’s claim on him and his reluctance to engage with the Giants, Covenant recognizes the danger of surrendering to responsibility like Hile Troy. He views this as a path to self-destruction, akin to the tragic fates of lepers who lose touch with reality. Covenant suspects Lord Foul manipulates such burdens to ensure the Land’s ruin, reinforcing his belief that he—incapable of wielding power—must resist involvement to avoid catastrophic consequences.
Determined to reclaim control, Covenant resolves to find irrefutable proof that the Land is a delusion. He paces his room, searching for a logical discrepancy to anchor his skepticism. Summoning the Bloodguard Bannor, Covenant reflects on the Haruchai’s history—their unwavering loyalty to the Lords, their survival of the Ritual of Desecration, and their unshakable sense of duty. Though tempted to question Bannor about the Bloodguard’s existential doubts, Covenant refrains, respecting the warrior’s dignity. Instead, he probes for inconsistencies in the fates of Quest survivors, hoping to uncover evidence of illusion.
Bannor recounts the outcomes of the Quest for the Staff of Law: High Lord Prothall’s resignation, Osondrea’s leadership, and Quaan’s continued service as Hiltmark. Yet these details offer no clear discontinuity to validate Covenant’s doubts. Frustrated, he realizes he must create his own proof. He considers drastic actions—destroying his clothes, discarding his penknife, or growing a beard—to establish a tangible discrepancy upon returning to his “real” world. Each option carries the risk of prolonged uncertainty, but Covenant sees no alternative.
The chapter underscores Covenant’s internal struggle between his need for self-preservation and the seductive pull of the Land’s crises. His desperation for objective proof reflects his fear of emotional manipulation and the existential threat posed by his leprosy. The narrative tension hinges on his precarious balance between resistance and engagement, as he teeters on the edge of accepting or rejecting the Land’s reality.
FAQs
1. What internal conflict is Thomas Covenant grappling with in this chapter, and why is it significant to his character development?
Answer:
Covenant is struggling with the seductive pull of responsibility in the Land, fearing it will undermine his ability to maintain the emotional detachment necessary for survival as a leper. He recognizes that embracing this role—like Hile Troy—could lead to either failure (death) or success (an unbearable return to his numb reality). This conflict is central to his character, as it forces him to confront his self-perception as “incapable of power” and his fear that involvement would play into Lord Foul’s hands. His resolution to seek “incontrovertible proof” of the Land’s delusion reflects his desperate need for logical certainty amid emotional turmoil.
2. Analyze the historical significance of the Bloodguard’s Vow and its psychological impact on Bannor. How does this relate to Covenant’s own dilemma?
Answer:
The Bloodguard’s Vow was an extreme act of fidelity sworn to the Lords, invoking Earthpower to bind them eternally. Their survival of the Ritual of Desecration—while Kevin and the Lords perished—left them burdened by guilt, questioning whether their obedience constituted a failure. Bannor embodies this unresolved tension; his wife’s death millennia ago underscores the Vow’s cost. Covenant parallels this, fearing his choices (like the Bloodguard’s) might have unintended catastrophic consequences. Both grapple with the weight of commitment: Covenant fears responsibility will destroy him, while the Bloodguard fear theirs was insufficient.
3. What three methods does Covenant consider to create “definitive discontinuity” as proof of his delusion? Why might these fail to provide immediate solace?
Answer:
Covenant contemplates: (1) destroying his clothes, (2) discarding his penknife (his sole possession), or (3) growing a beard. These acts would create tangible discrepancies if the Land were a delusion (e.g., waking clothed or clean-shaven). However, their utility is delayed—proof would only manifest upon “awakening,” leaving him without immediate reinforcement. This underscores his precarious state: he needs urgent validation but must rely on future evidence, heightening his present anxiety. The plan also reveals his reliance on physical reality (a leper’s focus) to combat existential doubt.
4. How does the chapter frame the theme of inadequacy, particularly through Covenant’s view of Hile Troy and himself?
Answer:
Covenant views Troy as a cautionary tale—a man “overwhelmed” by newfound power (sight) and blind to his unsuitability for leadership. Troy’s summoning by Atiaran in “despair” mirrors Covenant’s own involuntary arrival, reinforcing his fear that Foul manipulates well-intentioned but flawed individuals. Covenant extends this to himself, declaring he’s “as incapable of power as if it did not exist.” The chapter critiques the danger of assuming burdens beyond one’s capacity, suggesting such efforts (even if noble) may serve Despite by inviting failure or corruption.
5. Contrast Covenant’s approach to the Land’s challenges with that of the Bloodguard. What broader commentary does this suggest about duty and identity?
Answer:
The Bloodguard embrace absolute duty (their Vow) despite its paradoxes, while Covenant resists commitment to preserve his fractured identity. The Bloodguard’s rigid fidelity contrasts with Covenant’s refusal to “pretend” he can wield power. The chapter implies both extremes are perilous: the Bloodguard’s unyielding service leaves them haunted, while Covenant’s isolation risks paralysis. This tension highlights the novel’s exploration of agency—whether to act (and risk error) or withdraw (and risk complicity)—and questions how identity survives under existential burdens.
Quotes
1. “He seemed to be losing what little independence or authenticity he possessed. Instead of determining for himself what his position should be, and then acting according to that standard, he was allowing himself to be swayed, seduced even more fundamentally than he had been during his first experience with the Land.”
This quote captures Covenant’s central internal conflict—his fear of losing autonomy in the Land and repeating past mistakes. It sets the tone for his existential crisis and resistance to emotional investment.
2. “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.”
A pivotal insight into Covenant’s worldview, revealing why he resists responsibility. The paradox illustrates his belief that engagement with the Land threatens his survival in both reality and delusion.
3. “When inadequate men assumed huge burdens, the outcome could only serve Despite. Covenant had no doubt that Troy was inadequate… he, Thomas Covenant, was as incapable of power as if such a thing did not exist.”
This crystallizes Covenant’s philosophical argument against action—that misplaced responsibility plays into Lord Foul’s hands. It underscores his self-perceived inadequacy and fatalism.
4. “They were faithful to an extreme that defied their own mortality, and yet they had failed in their promise to preserve the Lords at any cost to themselves.”
The tragic irony of the Bloodguard’s history mirrors Covenant’s dilemma about duty and failure. This reflection on unattainable perfection subtly critiques Covenant’s own standards.
5. “If he wanted proof of delusion, he would have to make it for himself… Anything he might do would take a long time to bear fruit. It would not become proof… until his delusion ended.”
This conclusion reveals Covenant’s desperate strategy—manufacturing discontinuity to preserve his sanity. The passage highlights his agonizing uncertainty and the novel’s metafictional tension.