Single-minded Terry Goodkind

. 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.


I stopped reading Goodkind after... I can't remember the name of the book now (sold them all on Ebay years ago!). I heard that he is now writing literary fiction or non fiction or something. (Not that he was ever writing genre-fiction, of course ;) )
Goodkind's Wiki page notably has no negative slant on it whatsoever. Normally, if you were to look up J.K Rowling or other famous authors you would find a whole section devoted to the criticism of the book or series, and also any scandals or things which had arisen because of any controversey which arose from the books publishing.

Bias much? The page is totally one sided.
I was a tad curious as to how Goodkind would respond to the criticism of his awful conclusion, and so I searched the web for an interview. I can across this one, and was slightly horrified (but not surprised) and also slightly amused at the excerpts from the first post. I never knew he was in denial...

But I thought, surely he wasn't like this from the beginning right? Maybe he slowly became insane after writing like that for too long.

Then I realized this interview was from 5 years ago. Nope, no hope for this guy.
I have read a few of Terry Goodkind's books, and have found them to be semi-enjoyable. This may simply be a problem of finding out too much about the author rather than just enjoying the writing he produces. I find this happens to me quite often when it comes to actors as well, the political views they sometimes express hinder my enjoyment of the movies or series they star in. I try not to dig too deeply into their private lives and avoid tabloids so that I can just ignore that aspect. This may seem like a bury your head in the sand approach, but it works for me! If you had to analyze the moral values of everyone whose work you enjoyed, most of us wouldn't pick half the books and movies that we do.
I had read many of goodkind's SOT series, right until the first book of the chainfire series.

Despite what goodkind claims about his book not being fantasy, his book is definitely in the fantasy genre.

There are magic, dragons, hero etc.

I think goodkind is very much mistaken if he thinks all fantasy books are plotless and just focused on world building. He is too egoistic, I think.
I think that Goodkind just thinks that his stories transcend genre's and I am sure he feels that the story could have been told in any setting. His stories to him are human nature pieces describing how individuals will act under duress. I am sure that he could have completed the same story with the setting in Africa. The protagonist could find out that his father is none other than a drug lord,smuggling weapons and oppressing people and he sets out to stop him after he sneaks through a guarded border.

I think that Goodkind feels like he has something to say about the power of life and how valuable it is and this comes off quite often as preachy and self-rightous so many people get tired of it. Which is fine. I like his books enough and I don't really care what he says or doesn't say off the printed copy that I buy in the store.
I was introduced to the book series via the television series.

As soon as I found out there was a series, I bought all twelve and spent the next year reading all of them. I'd like to start off by saying that I love the series and the characters.

I was a little disappointed with his ending of the series; although, I will admit it follows his common theme of "fighting for life". It was great that the sword turned white because he forgave all those who wish him and his people harm and sent them elsewhere, but the wedding afterwards? And then the speech at the wedding? I found these to be overkill, sort of like wrapping everything up in a nice neat little bow without saying "and they all lived happily ever after".

I waas also bothered with the fact that the "religious" people in the book were written the same. They all tried to shape events in favor of their cause. While there are some religous and spiritual people like that, we can't put this entire group in on nice little box. That's like saying all black people steal, or all young people listen to loud music.

I believe that people should have the chance to read it, but this series belongs in the adult section of the library, far from the children's section and maybe even the teen section.

If we start sensoring books, where do we draw the line? What's considered in and what will be voted out of the library? I believe I'm smart enough to choose my own books without this type of "assistance" at the library. I'm not a fan of Twilight, but many people are, it shouldn't be banned because it's not something I would read of my own free will.

I read the entire series before seeing an interview and I'm glad I had because I may not have read his books after. It was an interview on the DVD of the series (P.S. if your not a fan of his books, the seires is worse). I thought he would be talking about his inspiration for writing the books and how he came up with the setting and characters. He talked aboout that a little, but it mostly focused on him and what he likes.

His newest book mimics the series. Guy meets a dangerous, beautiful, and mysterious woman. They fall in love while running for their lives and saving the world. They save the world and end up together.

Will I continue to read his books? Yes I will. WIll I watch his interviews? No. He can be (but not always) obnoxiously arrogant and sometimes comes off as self-rightous. Remember folks: if we knew what our favorite actors, writers, world leaders, role models, etc. were really like, we would only have a few we still admired.
I must admit I watched the TV series and it was fun even if it didn't follow the book much. I'm going to read Confesser over Christmas as I've already read the others it would give me closure. Backtracking a bit I know, but that's me.
Just been on the SFFworld site and theres this review of one of his books that says;

'First off, I just want to say SOT is the greatest series I have read in my entire 14 years.'

'Nuff said.
Just been on the SFFworld site and theres this review of one of his books that says;

'First off, I just want to say SOT is the greatest series I have read in my entire 14 years.'

'Nuff said.

What's SOT?
I read Wizard's First Rule. It was very amateur, almost naive in it's writing style and the plot was all over the place. I also couldn't tell whether it was supposed to be funny, or whether he was being entirely serious.

He really needs to learn to show, not tell; because he pretty much just spells everything out. If it was a movie it would be embarrassing to watch, the characters dialogue is like children's cartoons at times. Also, he is hardly Ayn Rand and his objectivist philosophy isn't complex or anything. It's just about viewing reality objectively; a good enough message for readers but it's hardly "trancending the genre of fantasy". There arn't many fantasy novels that don't have some intrinsic philosphy, and those that don't are usually poorly written.
Last edited:

Well said !

Its very wrong IMO abusing your power to remove a writer from the library just cause you dont like him or his books. Its censorship, deciding what people shouldnt read without giving the author a chance.

Its not like he is unknown. No matter how or how bad he is he deserves his shelf space.

Quite right. If you start doing that why not make a big pile and burn them in public? Oh yes, that's been done hasn't it? Back in the1930's it was very popular to just pile up any books you didn't like and burn them. There are authors I don't like, but I wouldn't say remove their books, because that's ME telling others what they can or can't read. Stalin would thought it a great idea of course. Remember the famous comment of Voltaire; 'I don't agree with your opinion but I will fight to the death for your right to express it'

Similar threads