Terry Goodkind

I'm sorry to say, I think last night I answered my own question in my nighttime reading. The most revolting sex scene *has* to be the one in Faith of the Fallen in which Nicci makes Richard wait out in the hall while etc.--and meanwhile Kahlan feels it all through her link with Nicci.

I have a pretty strong stomach, but "revolting" is a weak word for this scene. :eek:
 
so stop reading, you'll feel better for it trust me there is a great list of fantastic authors on this web site, or I'll say what I always say and tell you to read steven erikson,
 
Hi everyone - I found this site by accident looking for info on "Confessor"; thought I'd throw in my 2 cents:

I have read and re-read all 10 of the SOT books so far, and they are at least better than I could have done. I find them entertaining. What I think you have to remember about all of the horrific scenes is that (at least for the most part) they are written to show in unmistakable terms just how terrible and evil the bad guys are in the series. Does TG go too far? Certainly, but I don't think it's because he aspires to be the next Marquis de Sade or anything.

My biggest objection to the series (keep in mind here that I admit to reading and enjoying the books in spite of this) is the shameless and blatant plagarism of the central theme. Don't get me wrong, some people re-write the theme of an older book because they feel they can do better - and some of them do. Case in point: "Armor" by John Steakely(sp) is MUCH better than "Starship Troopers" by Robert Heinlein - and RH is one of my favorite authors of all time! The difference is that John S was very upfront about stating that he used the theme of Starship Troopers and re-wrote it; there was nothing underhanded in it, and he did not try to pass the theme off as an original idea.

Now as to "Mr." Goodkind - "Wizard's First Rule" (book 1 of Sword of Truth) was first published in September of 1995. Another book some of us know, "The Eye of the World," (book 1 of Wheel of Time) by Robert Jordan (pen name) was published in November of 1990 - 5 years earlier.

In the Wheel of Time:
1. The story begins as a young man ("Rand"), who did not know he was adopted, is suddenly forced to leave home by the intrusion of evil - he is given a magical sword by his father before he leaves.

2. The Hero of course turns out to be the central character of the series, and is a very rare man who can do magic.

3. The Hero is persecuted by hidden 'darkfriends' of various levels of ability, but all of whom are sworn to the 'dark one.'

4. The largest group of other magic users known is the Aes Sedai, an organization entirely composed of women, who seek to control/destroy men who can do magic for their own good. Hidden amongst them is a group devoted to the dark one, the Black Ajah.

5. The stalwart Hero endures much adversity and, having converted a select few of the magic women to his side (including their leader), rises to prominence as the military leader of the world (conquering those who oppose him with his inherited forces).

6. Etc., etc.

In the Sword of Truth:
1. The story begins as a young man ("Richard"), who did not know he was adopted, is suddenly forced to leave home by the intrusion of evil - he is given a magical sword by his grandfather before he leaves.

2. The Hero of course turns out to be the central character of the series, and is a very rare man who can do great magic.

3. The Hero is persecuted by hidden 'banelings' of various levels of ability, but all of whom are sworn to the 'keeper of the dark.'

4. The largest group of other magic users known is the Sisters of the Light, an organization entirely composed of women, who seek to control/destroy men who can do magic for their own good. Hidden amongst them is a group devoted to the keeper, the Sisters of the Dark.

5. The stalwart Hero endures much adversity and, having converted a select few of the magic women to his side (including their leader), rises to prominence as the military leader of the world (conquering those who oppose him with his inherited forces).

6. Etc., etc.


Nuff said on that??

As to some questions I saw earlier:

Richard went to the castle of Queen Melana (sp) and her daughter, princess Violet, in the 1st book. He was searching for the 3rd "box of Orden," which he had been told was in the queen's possession. Captured on his way out of the kingdom, Richard was tortured by Denna, a 'mord-sith' (star wars anyone") first at the castle and then at the "Palace of the Prophets" (Richard's ancestral home, although he didn't know it yet). While at the castle, Denna let P. Violet (a very sadistic little brat) torture Richard. Although he endured it stoically, begging Denna to stop "for the sake of the child's psyche" (essentially, not a quote), when Violet announced the horrible things she was going to do/have done to Richard's love he struck out with his foot and kicked her in the chin - breaking her teeth and severing her tongue. Note: Richard was hanging by both hands from a ceiling beam at the time, so all he could do was kick; since he was held essentially at 'tiptoe', the kick would have only been able to reach the brat at the chin level.

Richard was also first named as "Lord Rahl" in book 1 - at the end of the book his grandfather undid a spell that hid Richard's lineage and everyone started to know him as the new leader. Although Righard noticed that he was being called "Lord Rahl," it is unclear whether he knew it was true before book 2 (Stone of Tears).

Violet is presumed dead until book 10, "Phantom" when it is revealed that (a) she lived, (b) she's been healed by a witch woman, and (c) she's more despicable than ever.

LaR
 
I thought it was Book 1 when he encountered Violet. Thanks for clearing that up for us. :)
 
Yar said:
On the surface I would agree. However with these few people, points to a few posts below this one, it is more that "dislike". What we see here is a few people that have taken it more than a step further and shown the true callowness of their character. They show us the void of their existance that they are not simply "poking fun" but rather are unmasked by Goodkind so they have no choice but to run around attacking, doing their best to try and belittle anyone who reads Goodkind's work.

This kind of behaviour not only suggest that Goodkind has more than struck a nerve but that it has shown the fact that they are just a bunch of bulllys. These are the same kinds of antogonistic and belligerent children who find what they think is a target and attack.

Now these people show their true character not just by attacking the material, but also the people who offer up good words or simply they liked the series. Someone offers up "I liked the series" and off they go attacking this person, then puking forth some week point about "he's arrogant", or "His prose" is really bad" or even "how can anyone read him". Week indeed.

To go to the lengths to make sure they hit an many boards as possable Adam et al. show themselves to be devoid of character. SO someone likes Goodkind? So what?

Some have found that within Goodkind's novels, is something more than just a story. They see a deeper meaning. They see a story of strength and of courage. Most see a story about the struggle with life and from it they find hope!. They find strength! and they find courage! Many simply find a good story to entertain them. But the former...yes these are what scare people like Adam here...over zealous people who hate that anyone read Goodkind, then cannot let it go with out doing the best to drag down, mutilate and or simply pummel these people to death.

And for what? Simply this, they have shown why, they cannot stand that someone has found something they either could not, and/or that someone could rise above and be something better. They rail that Goodkind an unknown has violated their sacred world with things like, Truth, Integrity, Ethics and a hero who refuses to bow to the enemy even to save his own skin.

One may not like the way Goodkind writes. So what? that simply doesn't cause such shallow people to behave in a mannor like these zealouts do. One may not care for the characters in Goodkinds story. So what? then move along... Unless as I stated, Goodkind has exposed the true nature of these sour people casusing such a caustic behaviour. One may well feel Goodkind is an over paid nar-do-well. Again so what?

The truth is in the fact that Goodkind started with a story they read and liked (now a few will try and spew that they never liked them). Then as time and story progressed, they found themselves not liking they story line offering up such things as "too preachy", "to much philosophy", "he needs to kill of a main character" or such things. In short...they didn't like the track the story was taking. The story is Goodkinds to tell, not theirs, and that wrankles them to no end. They cannot get at Goodkind, so the next target is to try and ridicule and berate those whom they can get to...his fans. Shallow indeed.

No doubt now will ensue their rage and tirade of vitrolic denials, attempting to twist it around with all kinds of trenchant comments and rebuffs... But the cat is out of the bag, they have been exposed. The truth behind theis mordent refrains is all too clear.
Click to expand...

Terry, we know this is you!

Stop posting as Yar and have some courage man, just use your real name.
 
Wow, a little bit heated for a moment wasn't it? I thought The Sword of Truth was great, he has an almost addictive style of writing, but like a lot of people I got a tired of the predictability of the whole series. I would still read the series and I'm not having a dig at those who like the books, each to their own. The only problem I have is the insinuation that if I do not like the books then it is because I am threatened by their message. I now view the books as throwaway entertainment, nothing more,not something to get my teeth into. If people find a deeper meaning then good on them, although viewing his work as some kind of rules to live by would seem overzealous. Come on people it's only fiction!:)
 
This is the man who said "Gang rape is democracy in action". No, really, he did. Along with gems as

"A video game would run counter to everything I do. I am writing stories with important human themes, not creating worlds. A novel is a story involving the events in a human being’s life. If it is a good novel it’s a form of art that serves an invaluable purpose,[...] To create a game based on such a work would be the equivalent of reproducing a piece of fine art on toilet paper"

and

"A baby cries when spaghetti pushed off its highchair won’t bounce the way a ball would. He cries because he wants the spaghetti to bounce. He cries because he wants his mother to fix it, to make the spaghetti bounce."

which is part of his explaination of magic BTW :)
 
Hmmm am I the only one who doesn't get the bouncing spaghetti thing?
 
A broader quote perhaps :)

I am now going to tell you something that probably no other fantasy writer would ever tell you: I’m making it up.
One of the reasons people get so technically absorbed in the magic in my books is because (as I’ve said in the section on my philosophy — please go back and read it if you haven’t) I use magic very differently than most other authors. The magic in my books is treated as an existent — a thing that exists. Things that exist have their own identity and therefore behave according to the laws of that identity. That’s the way I make magic in my books behave — by the laws of its own identity. I treat it almost as a mathematical equation. People don’t close their eyes and grunt and wish to make it work, but rather they must discover the natural laws by which it functions, just as they must learn how to make a bow and arrow. Because of this, because magic is handled as an existent, the magic in my books has a very realistic feel to it. That realism pulls readers in, makes them feel that it is real.
However, because magic is not real, it can’t really exist. There is no way for it to exist in reality. If you begin to deconstruct it, to analyze it down to a subatomic level, as this reader has done, then at some point it will always fall apart. Always. It has to. It isn’t real. It can’t exist in the real world where there are electrons, etc.
When some readers want magic to exist, they simply leap to the assumption that it somehow can, and then become befuddled when the inconvenient facts of reality — the laws of identity — keep popping up. They pop up because that reasoning part of their consciousness — the part which deals with the laws of identity of those things that exist — keeps making its presence known. It keeps saying to them “But wait, that can’t work.” A baby cries when spaghetti pushed off its highchair won’t bounce the way a ball would. He cries because he wants the spaghetti to bounce. He cries because he wants his mother to fix it, to make the spaghetti bounce.
These readers want me to overrule their sense of reason — overrule reality — and make magic real, make it exist; make the spaghetti to bounce. I can’t.
No writer can ever create magic that would work in the real world. No matter the book, no matter the author, if it is extrapolated — examined with the laws of logic — it will at some point fall apart. It is impossible for it not to because magic can’t exist in reality. No author can create an existent that can do the things magic can do.
Technology can seem to do some of the things that magic does. For example e-mail can be viewed as much the same as the journey books so, on the surface, it makes magic seem almost plausible, seem in a reader’s mind as if it might be able to work. But magic touches everything in the world of the series whereas in reality technology must address specific, narrowly defined areas to accomplish explicit things and those narrowly directed technologies are tailored to use the unequivocal laws of identity of the existents involved. For example, airplanes can fly much like a dragon, and e-mail can seem to work like a journey book. In my novels such things are all driven by magic, but in the real world each thing must be a specific solution to a specific problem — they are not universal. Whereas magic makes a journey book work and also makes a dragon fly, an e-mail can’t fly you and your family to the Bahamas.
If magic can’t really exist, if it is impossible to write magic that can be dissected exterior to the novel and have it hold up, if it can’t be extrapolated into situations outside the plot of the book, then why in the world would an author use such fantasy elements?
Click to expand...

The whole thing is here if you want to laugh at or dispair over his "insights"

Terry Goodkind Forums - Just released Interview Q&A with Terry 02/10/07
 
One of the reasons people get so technically absorbed in the magic in my books is because (as I’ve said in the section on my philosophy — please go back and read it if you haven’t) I use magic very differently than most other authors. The magic in my books is treated as an existent — a thing that exists. Things that exist have their own identity and therefore behave according to the laws of that identity. That’s the way I make magic in my books behave — by the laws of its own identity. I treat it almost as a mathematical equation. People don’t close their eyes and grunt and wish to make it work, but rather they must discover the natural laws by which it functions, just as they must learn how to make a bow and arrow. Because of this, because magic is handled as an existent, the magic in my books has a very realistic feel to it. That realism pulls readers in, makes them feel that it is real.
Click to expand...

Whoa, this is straight-no-chaser Objectivism...applied to magic. And if you've ever had the misfortune to read anything written by Ayn Rand's literary executor and self-described "Pope of Objectivism" (there's some doubt he was kidding when he said this) Leonard Peikoff its almost as though it is written in Peikoff's clumsy style.

Since I haven't read anything by Goodkind and have no immediate plans to, perhaps someone who's read both his books and Bakker's Prince of Nothing series could explain why Bakker doesn't seem to get the same level of criticism for the sex stuff that Goodkind does. Hell, that series starts off with an interlude about a little boy getting raped repeatedly. And in my opinion goes downhill from there. Yet Bakker seems to be one those authors that seems to be above criticism, and is even treated as some sort of rising star in the business. (Full disclosure: I bailed on Prince of Nothing midway through the second book. Couldn't take it any more. )
 
I haven't read enough of Goodkind to know in detail (only extracts from his books - not one in complete), but I think the reason is that in Goodkind, the sex scenes tend to be gratuitous, violent and sexist, and as far as I know, common. In Bakker they're used sparingly and are generally essential to the plot (and not described in immense detail).

Bakker gets a lot of criticism, he also gets a lot of praise, but rarely of the sycophantic kind. I think he's generally respected more because his books aren't didactic and as a person he's willing to accept criticism (leaving aside questions of quality).
 
I keep meaning to try the series again wasn't there a sexually oppressed barbarian warrior who thinks he is gay, I've only read the first one but I sure there was I liked the guy anyway had all the scars on his arms, is this the correct books I only read the first one.
 
spiralx said:
"A baby cries when spaghetti pushed off its highchair won’t bounce the way a ball would. He cries because he wants the spaghetti to bounce. He cries because he wants his mother to fix it, to make the spaghetti bounce."
Click to expand...

Perhaps this happened to Goodkind when he was a baby and he's been traumatised by the experience ever since. Writing the "Sword of Truth" is actually his way to deal with his trauma, just wait for the last book when Richard saves the world by making spaghetti bounce ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
D Terry Goodkind (1948-2020) Obituaries 3
Crowbird Terry Goodkind Wizard’s First Rule rpg universe? Game Discussions 0
Vladd67 Terry Goodkind making friends again Terry Goodkind 32
Gonk the Insane Terry Goodkind's Influences Terry Goodkind 2
Davidjb Terry Goodkind's Warheart Terry Goodkind 25

Similar threads


Back
Top