Author Topic: Terry Goodkind  (Read 6826 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jetjaguar15

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
  • Liked: 0
Terry Goodkind
« on: January 11, 2008, 07:20:40 AM »
Anyone else here enjoy the Sword Of Truth series?


anais.jude

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2008, 07:06:18 PM »
I do, I do! Have you read confessor yet?


Offline Fuzzy Necromancer

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1915
  • Liked: 15
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2008, 09:58:41 AM »
Terry Goodkind books are the fantasy equivalent of Hot Pockets. I got as far as Pillars of Creation before I found myself sweating, lying in front of the toilet, going "Why did I read all that?! x_x"

I'm convinced that the so-called "Terry Goodkind" is simply a pen name for some malovelent alien being, hell-bent on filling the world with dark propoganda to turn humanity into self destruction and make them more easily subjegated when the Death Fleet arrives. He has virtually no bio. He thanks the hard-working people of our nation's shadiest institutions in the front pages. His characters are mere sock puppets, loveable and endearing, but they immediately radically change their behavior and drop all motives and personal depth whenever they are needed to spout Goodkind's pro-torture Randroid nightmarish ideology. In each book, the bad guys do something terrible monstrous, evil, and inhuman. Then in the next book, Richard does the same thing, only it's not evil anymore, because Richard is so cool.

Terry Goodkind. Can anybody have the last name "Goodkind" and not be evil? Isn't that kind of like a girl named "Faith" or "Hope"? Doesn't the world basically just drive you to moral depravity for the sake of irony?

Wizard's rules. What arrogance. What condescention. What a thinly vieled way of displaying his Ayn Rand-gone-rabid ideology and philosophy.

Terry Goodkind books are distilled nightmare and corruption wrapped in a highly addictive, tasty, tender, flakey crust.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2010, 07:03:03 PM by Fuzzy Necromancer »
Love doesn't hurt. It kills.

"Where there's smoke, there's a smoke-making machine."


Offline jetjaguar15

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
  • Liked: 0
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2008, 10:07:13 AM »
I do, I do! Have you read confessor yet?

Not yet.


anais.jude

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2008, 12:00:00 PM »
well how far have you gotten, because i don't want to spoil them for you. The section on the middle, from Faith of the Fallen to Naked Empire was awesome!


Moleman

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2009, 11:58:59 PM »
I am not a book reader.  I hate books.  I hate reading.  Reading ruins my eyes.  People who read don't get out.  Reading is for bored housewives and nerdy men with tiny genitelia...ok you get the drift.

BUT!

After checking out what this "Legend of the Seeker" is on Hulu without hearing or reading anything about it I instantly liked the series.  So after watching all 22 episodes I became disappointed I'd have to wait till November to see more so I got curious and checked out the first book

then I checked out the second book...

then I checked out the third book...

Now I'm currently reading the ninth book (which is funny because 9 books is about the total number of books I've read in my entire life before this series) and I'm still very much hooked.

When I watched the show I was interested in the story but reading the books I've found myself almost uninterested in the story and enjoy all the observations on human behavior, discussions on rationality, psychology, philosophy.....my brain starts hurting if I read though some of these deeper sections in the books for more than an hour.  Its so brilliant and so true.

Faith of the Fallen and Naked Empire are the two best books by far.  The former takes a look at the failures of communism and similar ideas, the latter shows a society that doesn't believe that there is such a thing as evil.

Fuzzy Necromancer's post makes me so sad because he clearly didn't get anything that was being talked about in the books.  Anyone who hasn't read the books read them and if you actually understand them then look at Fuzzy Necromancer's post and see if you notice anything familiar.


Offline Fuzzy Necromancer

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1915
  • Liked: 15
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2009, 09:32:35 AM »
I get that Terry Goodkind uses strawman fallacies and sock-puppet characters as bullhorns for his ridiculous ideology.

What kind of series has a totalitarian leader that  both
1. Lectures people about how they should be independent and think for themselves and
2. Has them WORSHIP HIM for an hour each day.

Book 1:
Terry Goodkind has bad guys do evil things that are very evil. Richard beats bad guys.
Book 2:
Richard does a lot of the evil things the bad guys did, but now they're okay, no, better than okay, morally necessary, because Richard is doing them, and anyone who disagrees is evil.
However, bad guys are doing more evil things that are evil.
Book 3:
See book 2
Book 4:
See book 3
Book 5:
I'm starting to notice a pattern here.


This is to say nothing of the way Goodkind uses "war wizards" with their "instinctive magic," IE, magic that works only when it is convenient to the plot and does whatever the author requires of it. XP

I object to Terry Goodkind in the strongest terms as a fantasy reader and a philosopher.

Also, can we go one book without our female lead being subjected to a vividly described almost-rape-scene?

This is the series where our hero winds up gleefully killing "evil" pacifists.
Also, writing stories where masses of people act improbably stupid and are easy to manipulate out of all proportion to established human behavior is not the same as proving that people are stupid and easy to manipulate.

Also, there's the whole "I don't write fantasy, I write stories with important human themes" aspect. I realize that the definition of the fantasy genre is somewhat nebulous, and there's lots of authors trying to avoid the stigma of being in a speculative fiction genre, but COME ON! You have a medieval society and technology level, magic swords, wizards, and dragons. You are writing FANTASY. >_<
Love doesn't hurt. It kills.

"Where there's smoke, there's a smoke-making machine."


Moleman

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2009, 12:20:24 PM »
At first I thought you were just disagreeing with the morality presented in the book but (I know your post before was from well over a year and a half ago so I'll give you the benefit of doubt) it sounds like you missed the times where the books explained all these things.  Did you only read the cliff-notes or jump around chapters?

Quote
totalitarian leader
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote
Has them WORSHIP HIM for an hour each day.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In what you've talked about so far you seem to be looking at things in black and white, saying that this here is evil and this here is good.  Totalitarian rule is always evil no matter what and democratic rule is always good no matter what.  Torture is always evil no matter what.  Forced worship is always evil no matter what.  Killing a pacifists is always evil no matter what.  And at the same time you are claiming the series takes things as morally black and white with the author coming out and declaring all these things as always right and anything else as being always wrong.  As if the author is forcing you to accept his beliefs.

It couldn't be any more the opposite.  A common phrase in the book is "Nothing is ever easy".  I think that's probably the most accurate phrase that can be applied to this book series.  Nothing is ever easy or simple, right and wrong isn't that simple either.  To know what is right and be an individual, you have to use rationality.  If you don't use rationality then you open yourself up to blindly following something on faith which may or may not be right in reality.  These books certainly do imply that there is absolute right and wrong....BUT.....the only way to determine what that absolute right and wrong is is to think and reason, to learn all the knowledge available and then make a sound decision.  It couldn't be more clear that this book never implies morality as being easy, clear, and black and white.  Morality is extremely gray and what is truly right and wrong depends on the situation.  You must analyze ever situation if you care about it being right.  And even when you do, you are going be wrong, you are going to make mistakes (As the characters CONTINUALLY do and realize after the fact) because you can't have all knowledge on all the factors involved in a decision all the time and even the most rational of people have biases or programmed beliefs.  One of these programmed beliefs Richard has ends up being the main message in the 8th book.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
.  It is blatantly obvious that Richard is intended to be character with flaws who isn't always right no matter what.  If you want a character who always does the right thing and has no depth then go watch a Disney movie.  You speak like you're an expert on novel writing yet seem to be appalled that the main character in the story makes mistakes and does a few "evil" things.

I just don't get why you feel so threatened by these books. ITS FICTION!  Any sort of morality talked about in the book is only in the setting of the reality of the world created in the series.  So if you don't want to think that what's said in the books applies to real life then it simply doesn't.  Its fiction.  Move on and stop being so bitter about people who think differently than you.  Don't scream out "EVIL EVIL EVIL" because some guy wrote a book series that's not the way you see things.  Nobody held a gun to your head to read it.  Nobody is holding guns to anybody's head to read it.  You apparently made it through not one but SIX book and were into the seventh before it occurred to you that the book was making you think for yourself, or something.  I really don't know.  Maybe you're just finding fault with it because you stopped finding the story entertaining.  But attacking the author and being bitter about a piece of fiction, a fantasy, because its not reality as you see it is about as irrational as you can get.

Everything your talking about is like saying because Jedis in Star Wars believe in the force and it gives them power, everyone is being forced to believe in the force and are being lied to that believing in the force allows them to have special powers.  It just doesn't make any sense.

These are works of fiction, a fantasy, created by some random guy in books that you can choose to either pick up and read or not.  The only person or thing attacking your beliefs is yourself.  If you're beliefs were challenged then you must have, at some point, begun questioning yourself based on what you read.  You then realized what you were doing and made the conscious decision to put down the books and stop so you would no longer question yourself.  Then you bitch about how wrong the books are and how conspiratorially evil the author is so you feel better and more confident in your own beliefs.  It is all on you man.  Its over a year and a half later and you make a post as if you just made the other one yesterday.   Makes me wonder how much these books must have got to you and really made you question yourself.

Brush it off as a work of fiction if you want.  But please don't try to belittle people who do choose to read them.


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2112
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2009, 12:39:35 PM »
The only problem I had - and it was enough to make me stop reading the series - was the terrible dialogue and overly-dramatic characters.  I think every character burst into tears in the first 200 pages of the first book.  Man up! You're meant to be heroes! :)


Moleman

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #9 on: September 12, 2009, 01:18:21 PM »
Hey nothing wrong with that.  You didn't like the book so you stopped reading it.  Sounds...normal.

I couldn't help but notice you don't seem to be going on a crusade to crucify the author and prove a conspiracy that because his name is "Goodkind" he's actually evil and trying to trick you into thinking like he does. ;D


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2112
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2009, 01:27:52 PM »
I've read and enjoyed Orson Scott Card novels, so I can't really judge Goodkind on whatever beliefs he may have.  :)


Offline borg48

  • Disembaudio's Squadio
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Liked: 0
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2009, 04:17:38 PM »
Oh how I love to hate this series.  I didn't know there was a tv series based on this til a few months ago.  When I found out I watched all of them and was dismayed about how bad the series was and how it glazed over several key characters and moments from the books.  I decided then to reread the series and get more detail on how exactly they screwed up.  Man was that a big mistake, I guess my tolerance for stupid has gone down since the last time I read this book series cause its a lot worse than I remember it being. 

I do have some problems with the characters, I do have problems with him masking his political/philosophical propaganda as a fantasy novel, but my main problem with these books is how he repeats himself ALL the time.  If you take out all the redundant material in these books you could compress the series from eleven books, down to six or seven.  I actually downloaded the audio books so I could listen to them whilst doing something thats actually productive.  I fell asleep one night listening to it, woke up and thought "I guess I just passed out for a few minutes cause they are still having the same conversation."  When I actually checked the files, five had gone passed, each file is somewhat over an hour long.  The worst part though is it was not the last time the characters had the same conversation, it came up again and again.  Each time I heard it I just wished I was reading the book at the moment so I had something physical to vent my rage at but sadly I could only bitch to my buddy fordprefect about it. 

I have been giving considerable thought to doing a "fan" edit of the series and taking out all the superfluous material.  After having seriously considered it I realized that would probably take several years to do and I'm not getting paid to help some baddy writer improve his books, I've already read them all through twice now and feel no need to ever do so again, not even to help other people enjoy them more because I am a jaded SoB.

Having said that I did read his new book because Goodkind has SOME writing talent.  I thought maybe he would have learned something from the mistakes (from my point of view) he made in the Sword of Truth series and would use this to make a new start for himself.  Sadly he did not, the main characters are watered down versions of Richard and Kahlan, figuratively and literally.  He still repeats himself, the plot is a repeat of the plot from the sword of truth series, but worse, but don't worry guys, if you liked the heroine getting almost raped scenes from the sword of truth series, there are several in this book to keep you going.   The ending to the book is so stupid and the only reason it works is because it is an Idiot Ball moment which is a sad sad way to end it.

And now to respond to Moleman and Fuzzy Necromancer in this section. I believe Fuzzy is just not that motivated to explain every thought he has on what is wrong with these books, because theres WAY to much wrong with these books to do that so he has edited down to some basic tenants, then moleman you are taking that and blowing it way out of proportion as to where hating these books is a past time for our undead loving friend.  In fact he should be pissed off because Goodkind sells fantasy novels, you buy it and its a philosphy book about something you don't care about, so you just wasted your time and money (both precious things to people).Goodkind might say he doesn't write fantasy novels that he writes novels about the human condition, but the fact that Tor publishes his book belies that comment.  Go look at the tor page www.tor.com  it is covered in vampires, sci-fi icons, *shudders* Tim Burton.  If he wrote novels about the human condition it would be published by Harper Collins and would probably be next on The Oprah Book Club.  What Goodkind does to us is an old bait and switch, you buy a book called "Naked Empire" and when you take the cover off it the title is "I Really Really Want to Fuck Ayn Rand because I am a Fanboy"  Even if I liked Naked Empire (which I didn't) I would still not have been happy with the author for doing that to me.

Moleman I can see why you like this series.  You obviously have not read much, cause you point out that you have not, so having a book series open you up to reading and philosophy you seem to be very protective of it, but when it comes down to it this series does not do fantasy or philosophy very well.  If you want to read a good book that makes you think, I may suggest The Great War and Modern Memory.  Some parts of the book can be challenging to read, and before you spend your time and money on it I think you should read through all the reviews of it from 1-5 stars and see if its something you would actually be interested in.  I wish I had a better book to ease you in with, but this is the only book I can think of offhand that has a mix of philosophy, war, people not wanting to fight but forced to and the horrors involved, and stupid people (homosexuality caused by excessive milk drinking??? oh how I love that creamy white stuff in my mouth)   

You can also if you want take the route of studying Logic which is closely linked to philosophy but also quite different.  This is also a handy tool in oh so many ways that will make you hate life and all people who do not use logic.  There is a logic for dummies book out there, I have not read it so I cannot personally recommend it but it may be easier to read that if you want to check it out yourself while not in a logic class. 

So this post has gotten really long and there's not as much rage in it as I hoped there would be when I first started typing.  So I guess in closing I would like to say if I put words in any persons mouth and its not what they meant feel free to come troll me, if you just don't agree with me come troll me, if you just feel like trolling come troll me, I <3 trolls and I'm a lonely lonely person who wishes they had tiny genitalia so I would have an excuse for it :(


anais.jude

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2009, 01:00:06 PM »
Borg says: Moleman I can see why you like this series.  You obviously have not read much, cause you point out that you have not

I liked the series a lot and I liked Faith of the Fallen and Naked Empire a lot and I have read TONS.

Just so you know, Goodkind appeals to all levels of book reader.

And I agree with what everyone has said partially. There is a lot of redundancy, the dialogue is pretty weak, and sometimes (especially the last 50 pages of the series) the philosophy gets very over the top, but I still enjoyed the series. There was a love story, there was good versus evil, there were awesome battles, and bitches who worhsipped the devil. I doubt I will read it again, but I did enjoy it while I was reading it.


Moleman

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2009, 01:51:24 PM »
When I said I didn't read much that was a little misleading.  That's actually not true at all.  What I meant to say is I never read any novels.  I never read fiction, especially fantasy.  However, I read a lot of non-fiction.  I own quite a few philosophy books (even though almost all of them were kept from previous college courses) as well as a few economic and political books.  One of my favorite books is Moneyball which I guess would still be classified as an economic book even though its set in baseball.

According to borg, because I said I don't read much I'm obviously unenlightened and don't understand how to interpret the world around me.  That would have to be true otherwise how can I possibly think these books are good?  Even though he himself admits to reading them, apparently enjoying them even to the point of considering doing a fan-edit.  Of course then he has to criticize them harshly otherwise we might mistakenly think he's not enlightened enough because he enjoys a series of fantasy novels.  I don't know why stuff has to be hated on to show how smart you are.  I'm certainly not impressed.  At least he was much nicer about it then the other guy although his recommendation to "study logic" made me laugh.

Look you either know how to think logically or you don't.  If you need to "study logic" in order to help you think more logically then something is very very wrong.  If A is B, and B is C, then A is C.  No amount of reading is going to make you better able to understand that.  Books on logic, cognition, and philosophical inquiry are nothing more than ways to explain and put to words what people who think already do.  You don't have to know what "straw man" is or even ever heard the term before to be able to look at something and see that its not a fair comparison if you know how to think already.  I remember the second day of a class I took in college on philosophical inquiry going through what logical fallacy's are looking around the room at the puzzled looks on people's facing and thinking to myself "Good God people, don't you do this already?"  If you use a thing called "judgment", then you can look at any argument and decide if its valid.  You don't need to memorize a list of logical fallacy's.  Just think!  If you do you'll never be taken in by someone using an appeal to authority argument, for example, because you would be able to analyze it yourself and realize that whatever authority they cited isn't good enough to authenticate the argument.  But if all you do is memorize what an appeal to authority is, you might think that any time someone mentions someone of authority connected to an argument that the argument is obviously wrong.  Kind of like saying that just because the author of the book series sets up something called the Imperial Order which is kind of like Communism and then argues against it, it must be straw man.  After all, isn't the literal definition "an argument or opponent set up as to be easily refuted or defeated"? 

borg is definitely right about one thing and I do have to, sincerely, give him credit for pointing it out.  I don't know why I'm getting a bit worked up and defensive about this like it matters or like I actually expect to change anyone's mind.  I guess we all need to vent sometimes.  I hope you guys don't take this is as a deep personal attack and understand that this is just my point of view and if you don't like it just think of me as an ass and move on.


Moleman

  • Guest
Re: Terry Goodkind
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2009, 01:58:43 PM »
Oh btw, I'm now reading Confessor and I'm on around page 90
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
.  I can't believe they're going to tie everything up in the next 500+ pages and I've heard from a variety of sources that the ending kind of sucks so I'll have to wait and see.  There's been a number of times when I thought what he was going to do with it was going to be disappointing and then I've been pleasantly surprised.