Single-minded Terry Goodkind

Toby Frost

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
6,878
This thread seems to be about 4 things:

1) Is Terry Goodkind an arrogant git?
2) Are his books any good?
3) Are his books morally bad?
4) Should they be in the library?
 

chopper

Steven Poore - Epic Fantasist & SFSF Socialist
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
2,269
Location
Sheffield, SoYo
This thread seems to be about 4 things:

1) Is Terry Goodkind an arrogant git?
2) Are his books any good?
3) Are his books morally bad?
4) Should they be in the library?

i'm paraphrasing here, i'm afraid, but i'll defend to the death his right to publish codswallop & twaddle.
 

the smiling weirwood

Axes and Saws Prohibited
Joined
Jan 10, 2006
Messages
1,757
Some people seem to be under the impression I have somehow censored his material in my local library. Allow me to clarify.

My mother needed to recover shelf space for new material in the collection. This entails removing older books. I suggested she get rid of Terry Goodkind's books among others towards this end. This was deemed acceptable despite their relative novelty because they hadn't been checked out very often.

Claro?
 

j d worthington

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
13,889
Being connected to the Head Librarian at our the county headquarters by blood I was successful in my petition to remove his works from the collection entire. I don't regret abusing my power at all.

Some people seem to be under the impression I have somehow censored his material in my local library. Allow me to clarify.

My mother needed to recover shelf space for new material in the collection. This entails removing older books. I suggested she get rid of Terry Goodkind's books among others towards this end. This was deemed acceptable despite their relative novelty because they hadn't been checked out very often.

Claro?

I think that if you look at the original post and compare it with this one, it's pretty obvious how such an impression would be gained -- the first one blatantly states (or seems to, though this may be hyperbole) that such is the case. In a forum full of heavy readers and writers, that's bound to get backs up, given the history of such actions.

If, on the other hand, it was a matter of a decision being already made to remove books which were not being checked out, and when consulted you made a suggestion, that puts things in a rather different light, and I hereby apologize if I seemed to come on too harshly.

As for Goodkind's "right to" etc.... *wince* I must agree with that one, though I really dislike doing so; especially as there are so many better books out there that have trouble finding an audience; but defending his freedom of speech is also defending theirs; and censoring his books because one finds them distasteful (or outright vile) is, in the final analysis, no better than someone doing the same with books you or I -- for example -- would find uplifting, but which they would find objectionable: Jurgen, Ulysses, Naked Lunch, Catcher in the Rye, Huckleberry Finn, Frankenstein, Cat's Cradle, Bug Jack Barron, Camp Concentration, The Atrocity Exhibition, Fahrenheit 451....
 

Connavar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
8,411
Some people seem to be under the impression I have somehow censored his material in my local library. Allow me to clarify.

My mother needed to recover shelf space for new material in the collection. This entails removing older books. I suggested she get rid of Terry Goodkind's books among others towards this end. This was deemed acceptable despite their relative novelty because they hadn't been checked out very often.

Claro?

I doubt Goodkind books are the least checkout in hole library. If it is then removing is fine. Its a somewhat famous fantasy and those are always popular no matter qaulity so i doubt very much its the least wanted book of the library.

Otherwise removing it despite people actually read it is censorship no matter how you put it.
 

the smiling weirwood

Axes and Saws Prohibited
Joined
Jan 10, 2006
Messages
1,757
The most checked out books in our local library are extra large print romance novels and Louis Lamour books. It's Mississippi.
 

speedingslug

Cyber Pest
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
128
I wish I hadn't bothered to read Goodkind now I've wasted my money and time which I could of used read decent books, it's not until the last few that I've noticed how blinked I was. I'll never get that part of my life back now.
 

Koren

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Messages
1
Ugh, my history reading that author has been love-hate.

I first picked up Wizards First Rule when I was 12 or 13 or something, I read it, thought it was awsome, went to there website (Which was only a chatbox back then), I called Zedd (the character a n00b) and a bunch of Emo's threatened to hunt me down and kill me, at the time RPG maker was sort of this new cool tool and i emailed them asking if i made an rpg of the wizards first rule if they put it on a fan fic section, I got one of those letters about copyright laws and sueings lol, anyway, feeling fully alienated this was a very long time ago :D

just a few years ago while iam in my mid twenties I decided to try reading the series again. The first book was still good, The second book reminded me of the Barrens in World of Warcraft, the third and fourth book were OK, but lets face it, Cara was the only saving grace.

Now the rest of the series I have a problem with, this is where Terry starts making fun of other peoples beliefs, even going so far as too completely change characters to match his agenda (case in point: Ann), and his constant bashing of religion isn't very fair, one of the main characters, Verna, is a religious person, and everyone from Adie to Kahlan has insulted her beliefs, but she never defends her beliefs, just lowers her head, basically if it were a boxing match between Terry and a Man of Faith, Terry had that mans arms cut off before the fight, it's one sided

Another problem I have is how all Terrys fans idolize Richard as the perfect human being, pure good blah blah blah, the fact of the matter is, I don't think Richard got in many situations where he'd have to make moral choices, Kahlan was usually the one out on the fields making morally questionable commands, killing innocent bystanders, killing her own brother. While Richard is off playing sex-slave to Denna, Nicci, Shota (insert any women with magic here).

Anyway iam sorry for this rant, that book series took up a couple of months of my life (although i did read them at work) and I felt the need to babble and vent the second I sow this fourm :(
 

LJonesy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
86
Now the rest of the series I have a problem with, this is where Terry starts making fun of other peoples beliefs, even going so far as too completely change characters to match his agenda (case in point: Ann), and his constant bashing of religion isn't very fair, one of the main characters, Verna, is a religious person, and everyone from Adie to Kahlan has insulted her beliefs, but she never defends her beliefs, just lowers her head, basically if it were a boxing match between Terry and a Man of Faith, Terry had that mans arms cut off before the fight, it's one sided

Another problem I have is how all Terrys fans idolize Richard as the perfect human being, pure good blah blah blah, the fact of the matter is, I don't think Richard got in many situations where he'd have to make moral choices, Kahlan was usually the one out on the fields making morally questionable commands, killing innocent bystanders, killing her own brother. While Richard is off playing sex-slave to Denna, Nicci, Shota (insert any women with magic here).

No i think you're very right here. As soon as i got to the point about the Sisters of Light and the Sisters of Dark, i immediately recognised this as Goodkinds point of view about the modern day Church. And it's obvious he thinks the church is full of corrupt babbling servants who can't think for themselves. Does he live under a rock? I've been reading the Stone of Tears simply because i was too stupid to buy it years ago and i have it sitting unread (I hate that). And i swear, reading Kahlans undying love for Richard every second page, it makes me want to through up. Not only is that form of love completely blind and lacks any conciousness whatsoever, it's just gut wrenching to watch.

The thing about his books is, they lack substance. Goodkinds choice of third person perspective completely ruins the opportunitys to weave anything deep and meaningful into the books. It's the fact that he uses perspective writing, instead of third person, which ruins that opportunity completely. You can tell it's because of that because his "Philosophy" is crammed into any other spot he can try and fit it. Through situations, somehow in every characters thoughts, and through the general progression of events. It's the weakest thing he could have done. If Goodkind wanted to really go deep with his "Philosophy" he should have chosen either first person or third person. But then again i'm not sure he even edits his work judging by the quality of it.

And mate, Verna does not defend herself when everyone insults her beliefs because Goodkind does not want her to, he doesn't want the worlds religions to be able to defend themself, only to concede to his all-knowing philosophy. Fat chance.

I think that's the whole problem with Philosophy in general, people try and grasp life, in all it's entirety and cram it into their own box they made up so that everyone can look at it (it being life) the way they do. Now such an attempt is fraut with flaws, and most of all tunnel vision, who can contain all the concepts of life all in their little human brains? Some philosophers think they can, i think it's unwise. It's wiser to focus on how you act as a person, and how you act and react to the world around you, rather than trying to create and own a perspective and interpretation on the world itself. Because, somewhere down the line, it's not going to work. It's obvious through the books how flawed Goodkinds philosophy's are, how one sided they are, lacking discretion and wisdom to see things through without the need to lie down and have sex every 2nd page and kill someone every 1st page.

But a reign like Goodkind's will be shortlived. He'll join all the other philosophers who people forgot about. Or maybe he won't... hahaha
 

Saeltari

Druid Trainer
Supporter
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
642
Location
Preparing to move 2022
Regardless of the author's actual attitude the books themselves had me fairly happy at first as I thought I had found a new "fantasy" series along the lines of ones I like. However, when Richard started acting out of character and with no character I disgustedly bounced the book off the wall. I really hate it when characters don't act intelligently for their background and situation.

Recently watched the new series on tv and realized all over again why I never read much past the first book as it reminded me that to me the characters don't stay in character and tend to be fairly narrow minded and sum'at stupid.
 

LJonesy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
86
Regardless of the author's actual attitude the books themselves had me fairly happy at first as I thought I had found a new "fantasy" series along the lines of ones I like. However, when Richard started acting out of character and with no character I disgustedly bounced the book off the wall. I really hate it when characters don't act intelligently for their background and situation.

Recently watched the new series on tv and realized all over again why I never read much past the first book as it reminded me that to me the characters don't stay in character and tend to be fairly narrow minded and sum'at stupid.

You're not the only one to notice that... But i agree on that it was entertaining. Then it just became, well, difficult to put up with
 

mygoditsraining

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
448
Picked up Wizard's First Rule when I was 19, 20? Something like that. Seemed like pretty standard fantasy popcorn for the most part - like the sword and sorcery versions of airport thrillers - right up until the main character gets kidnapped by a dominatrix and whipped and whipped and whipped and he learns to kind of like it and then keeps liking it for a good 200 pages or so.

I finished the book but got the feeling Goodkind could have tidied that up a bit by spending a day on the therapy couch or maybe buying his missus a flail. It just struck me as enormously incongruous to basically bring the rolling momentum to a shuddering halt so miss whiplash can get her rocks off on Mr Impossibly Nice Hero.

Mind you, lots of people really enjoy the series, so this is all just personal opinion. To give a point of reference, I never managed to get past the first Wheel of Time book either (although I am up to date on all of Erikson's books and devoured Robin Hobb's novels - everyone has their own tastes!).

Reading the interview excerpts...well, there will always be gits in the world. Although I can't imagine being able to interview the guy and keep a straight face.
 

ratsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
4,643
Don't you mean for the write reasons?

;)

Nice.

Having read all of Goodkinds books I can honestly say that there is so much out there that is better. When I read the first few I hadnt read many other authors yet and really enjoyed them. I feel the more books you read, the worse some of them become because you have so many more to compare them to. There are certain authors that I just love to read (eg Robin Hobb), the story is consistent as are the characters. Everything is tied together.

As it got further in the Sword of Truth series you realize that every book was essentially the same....Richard and Kahlan being seperated and having to solve some strange magical trap and then they would reunite only to have the same thing happen in a month. And in the later books, Zedd, Richard, Nicci whoever else...just hung out at the Wizards Keep and talked...and talked...and talked about nothing without solving anything. It was strange.

Don't even get me started on the conclusion to the whole series...Good people stay and bad people go. Is this heaven and hell and does that make Richard God???? Just like Goodkind always must have pictured himself as Richard and maybe he has a God complex. Just look at the pony tail wearing bearded Goodkind in the back of his books. I could almost swear he stares at himself in the mirror and thinks back to how he defeated Darken Rahl.
 

dreir

Flamer of Udun
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
215
Oh my, I'm so glad that I found the first few pages of Wizards' First Rule boring the first time I picked it up at a bookstore about two years ago. I've always wondered what the series was about but never really felt any overwhelming urge to try it.

Sorry, I just found this thread for the first time. I couldn't stop laughing after reading those excerpts in the original post. Jeez.

- Dreir -
 

Top