(from the link below)
"For those of you who don't know him, Terry Goodkind writes a series of fantasy novels that go by the name of "The Sword of Truth" I believe. His first book "Wizards First Rule" was solid but since then the books have gone steadily downhill. I think I gave up after the fourth one.
Too bad. In book 6, he really stands the whole genre on its head. "For those of you who don't know him, Terry Goodkind writes a series of fantasy novels that go by the name of "The Sword of Truth" I believe. His first book "Wizards First Rule" was solid but since then the books have gone steadily downhill. I think I gave up after the fourth one.
Funny, I don't remember anything particularly revolutionary to the genre. All he did was regurgitate the ideals already espoused in Atlas Shrugged (which managed to do so much more eloquently imo). In fact if you take that little bit away, it's pretty much the same basic plot as the 5 books preceding it.
Below are a few quotes from interviews he's done. One is on USA Today.com and the other is right on the front page of his official site.
Quote:
Orem Utah: What do you think distinguishes your books from all of the other fantasy books out there, and why should readers choose to read your series?
Terry Goodkind: There are several things. First of all, I don't write fantasy. I write stories that have important human themes. They have elements of romance, history, adventure, mystery and philosophy. Most fantasy is one-dimensional. It's either about magic or a world-building. I don't do either.
And in most fantasy magic is a mystical element. In my books fantasy is a metaphysical reality that behaves according to its own laws of identity.
Because most fantasy is about world-building and magic, a lot of it is plotless and has no story. My primary interest is in telling stories that are fun to read and make people think. That puts my books in a genre all their own.
So I guess readers who are interested in story rather than world-building and details of magic would have a good time reading my books.
No, you write fantasy. Not only that, it's derivative.
Well, he might be operating under his own definition, but so what? That's his prerogative. I can see his point, which is that what he considers to be fantasy fiction uses magic in certain ways. David Eddings pulled a lot of the same stuff in his books through the voice of the characters. His arrogance practically oozes off the page but he doesn't have the balls to come right out and say so directly. Maybe Goodkind's wrong about how what he considers fantasy differs from his own writing, but your definition is no more right than his. And I can see his point about the issues of magic. Plainly he sees his magic as having a coherent set of rules and function in his universe, as opposed to other books where it just shows up and does whatever fits the author's needs, without rhyme or reason. Again, he might be wrong about the other authors' use of magic and so forth, but his definition of fantasy fiction as being about the magical elements or fantasy world is actually very close to one that I was given by a literature professor in a college course. And having read the whole series, I can also see where he gets off with his claims that it's about human beings and all the rest. Maybe he renders this poorly onto the page, but plainly he has done some thinking on the topic. If you want to fall back on the simplistic definition of fantasy as "anything with magic in it" that's your issue.Quote:
Orem Utah: What do you think distinguishes your books from all of the other fantasy books out there, and why should readers choose to read your series?
Terry Goodkind: There are several things. First of all, I don't write fantasy. I write stories that have important human themes. They have elements of romance, history, adventure, mystery and philosophy. Most fantasy is one-dimensional. It's either about magic or a world-building. I don't do either.
And in most fantasy magic is a mystical element. In my books fantasy is a metaphysical reality that behaves according to its own laws of identity.
Because most fantasy is about world-building and magic, a lot of it is plotless and has no story. My primary interest is in telling stories that are fun to read and make people think. That puts my books in a genre all their own.
So I guess readers who are interested in story rather than world-building and details of magic would have a good time reading my books.
No, you write fantasy. Not only that, it's derivative.
The funny thing is that when I first read Goodkind's books I found his magic system to be far more arbitrary and deus ex machina-like than any fantasy that I had read in a LONG time. I didn't see anything resembling an actual set of rules other than what he seemed to make up on the fly. Honestly, I found it to be one of the weakest points to the series from the very beginning, and I did in fact enjoy the series until book 7.
Quote:
Haddonfield, NJ: Second Question - I've noticed similarities between your Sword of Truth series and Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series...(Black Sisterhood vs. Black Ajah; The Order vs. The Seanchan; Richard vs. Rand both discovering their powers, both have Nameless evil Gods...etc.)
Those alleged comparisons are either so general or in the case of the Seanchan one, so ridiculous it undermines the intelligence and reading comprehension skills of the questioner. There is nothing remotely like the Seanchan and the Imperial Order, much less the role they play in their respective series, except they are both powerful empires invading the region in which most of the books take place. That "similarity" along with the other ones asked about, are so general and widely occurring that inquiring as to the specifics of the similarity to one series in particular speaks more to the questioner's general inexperience and ignorance in the genre. Haddonfield, NJ: Second Question - I've noticed similarities between your Sword of Truth series and Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series...(Black Sisterhood vs. Black Ajah; The Order vs. The Seanchan; Richard vs. Rand both discovering their powers, both have Nameless evil Gods...etc.)
The similarities between the different factions in these series isn't so much about the specifics as much as they are about the generalities. It just seems that much more suspect when you consider that each of the these factions was not introduced until after a vaguely similar faction had been released by a more popular author of the same publisher. And the release wasn't even particularly distant from the Jordan's books. It very much, validly, gives one the feel that Goodkind was reading Jordan and saying 'Oooh, that's a great idea, I think I'll use that.' He never copied them enough to make it seem like a true copy which strangely makes it feel even MORE like it's copied. A coincidental similarity would seem more outwardly like Jordan's factions and thus less like it was copied.
Quote:
Kansas City, KS: What made you choose to leave out other common races(dwarves, elves, etc) from your books?
Terry Goodkind: Please refer to the previous answer, in which I explain that I'm not writing fantasy ... My purpose is not weirdo cultural diversity. I repeat: I am writing stories about important human beings.
Quote:
Question: Lately I've found myself in many arguments defending your books against 'fans' who say they used to like your books but no longer do to the extent that they used to. Would you mind settling some debates by answering the question: What, if anything do you have to say to the people that voice the opinion that you're latest four books haven't been as good as the previous four and call them "too preachy"?
Answer: Don't be fooled. The assertion made by these detractors is a note wrapped around a brick thrown through the window. These people are not fans. There are hundreds if not thousands of fantasy books that fulfill their professed taste in books. Why would they continue to read books they claim are bad? Because they hate that my novels exists. Values arouse hatred in these people. Their goal is not to enjoy life, but to destroy
I pulled this from the Gone Gold forums and I couldn't agree with the sentiment there more. What a tool."
He makes it fun to make fun of him!
The "former friend/ally/fan" argument is also a common one. Lots of people seem to think it gives them credibility to claim they were once among the fans or numbers of what they now claim to hate. Plainly Goodkind has put a lot of his personal beliefs and values into his books, and agree with them or not, you can't deny his apparent sincerity in promulgating those ideas. While I would also say it is plausible for people to keep reading a series that has taken a sharp turn and whose direction they now hate, or for people to have expected escapist fantasy fiction from the first couple of books (if you didn't get what he was getting into by book 3 or 4, you weren't paying attention) and then realized they'd stumbled into this objectivist propaganda nightmare and make the complaint mentioned above, his answer also has some plausibility, that their objections are to the values and ideas that make up the central themes and ideas of the books, rather than the quality of the story or writing suddenly going downhill. The quality of the writing, I felt, remained fairly consistent throughout the series, as did the story (what that precise level of quality was, is a different issue altogether) but he does have a point in his claim that their complaints are specious in this regard. The series did not change around book four or five. It was more or less what it always was. A lot of slower fans might have suddenly started waking up to what that series actually was around that point however. Kansas City, KS: What made you choose to leave out other common races(dwarves, elves, etc) from your books?
Terry Goodkind: Please refer to the previous answer, in which I explain that I'm not writing fantasy ... My purpose is not weirdo cultural diversity. I repeat: I am writing stories about important human beings.
Quote:
Question: Lately I've found myself in many arguments defending your books against 'fans' who say they used to like your books but no longer do to the extent that they used to. Would you mind settling some debates by answering the question: What, if anything do you have to say to the people that voice the opinion that you're latest four books haven't been as good as the previous four and call them "too preachy"?
Answer: Don't be fooled. The assertion made by these detractors is a note wrapped around a brick thrown through the window. These people are not fans. There are hundreds if not thousands of fantasy books that fulfill their professed taste in books. Why would they continue to read books they claim are bad? Because they hate that my novels exists. Values arouse hatred in these people. Their goal is not to enjoy life, but to destroy
I pulled this from the Gone Gold forums and I couldn't agree with the sentiment there more. What a tool."
He makes it fun to make fun of him!
Goodkind might be a bit lacking in false modesty, but a little open-mindedness helps to find the sincerity in his responses and see where he is coming from. If he perhaps does not express himself in the best manner possible to put himself in a better light, well, his writing hardly suggests the man is a master communicator or glib persuader who can always portray himself or his point in the best possible light.
That's a nice attempt to discredit anyone who claims to have once been a fan. However, I will say that I was once a fan, and my dislike for Goodkind has NOTHING to do with his message of objectivism. In fact, I am actually a big fan of Ayn Rand and her works. My issues with Goodkind have always lay in his lack of originality. I was sick of reading the same story time after time after time. Let me quickly give you a synopsis for basically EVERY Sword of Truth book I ever read.
"Oh I love Richard!"
"Oh I love Kahlan!"
"Let's get married!"
"Oh no! We can't get married because of <insert contrived plot device>"
"Oh I miss Richard! I wish we could be together!"
"Oh I miss Kahlan! I wish we could be together!"
"Oh joy! We have overcome the forces of darkness, and now we can be together again! Let's get married!"
Rinse and Repeat.
Ironically, the book that finally turned me off to him is the one book that he tried to do something original by exploring characters he hadn't explored yet. The shock of it all made me realize how repetitive and derived the previous books had all been. I find it even funnier that in his reasoning for going back to the world of Richard and Kahlan with those specific characters, he explains how much he hates writers that explore new characters in their familiar worlds rather than dealing with the same characters as all previous books, despite the fact that he himself did the very thing in Book 7 and it was an epic failure imo.
The man is a hack, and if I saw him on the street I would fight him.
Grimbear
Let's see if you are old enough to read this post....Or Goodkind is still a Jackass!
- 02/08/2011 01:59:54 AM
9238 Views
What a stupid fucking douchebag pile of shit.
- 02/08/2011 04:35:43 AM
1275 Views
I toally agree. I only wish I could say I was wise enough to avoid his books all together. *NM*
- 02/08/2011 07:40:54 AM
533 Views
So? What harm is he doing?
- 02/08/2011 06:58:56 AM
1629 Views
book 6? Was that the second or third time Ricky got kidnapped/changed his captors way of thinking?
- 02/08/2011 07:08:45 AM
1303 Views
But then you have to retract the rip-off assertion
- 02/08/2011 01:58:28 PM
1250 Views
Er. You didn't answer her question: Why was Book 6 so groundbreaking?
- 02/08/2011 02:07:18 PM
1228 Views
That was just a joke about her giving up the series. I didn't even recall which one was book 6
- 02/08/2011 02:28:06 PM
1279 Views
It's funny, though, because you hit the nail on the head with your random choice of number.
- 02/08/2011 08:11:58 PM
1285 Views
Isn't that the one where Richard carves a statue that is so rad it inspires a rebellion?
- 03/08/2011 12:02:10 PM
1265 Views
As well as being the most overtly anti-communist & anti-religious of the series.
- 06/08/2011 02:52:52 AM
1297 Views
You assume I care that much. I enjoy pointing out the absurdness of this author.
- 02/08/2011 07:02:42 PM
1368 Views
Re: So? What harm is he doing?
- 02/08/2011 07:39:17 AM
1474 Views
Heh. Goodkind sucks. And yet... I read all of SoT
- 02/08/2011 02:14:45 PM
1334 Views
I have heard this from many people.
- 02/08/2011 07:06:15 PM
1197 Views
I read all the way through the end, and I thought the last couple books redeemed it in my eyes
- 03/08/2011 12:11:56 AM
1142 Views
The revelation that Terry-um, I mean Richard, is God was retarded? For reals? *NM*
- 03/08/2011 02:14:00 AM
577 Views
After that I wouldn't mind burning his books, I will never read his books again! *NM*
- 03/08/2011 03:58:44 PM
512 Views
Goodkind is still porn.
- 03/08/2011 08:45:14 PM
1309 Views
I don't know, there are many authors who do it better.
- 03/08/2011 09:48:33 PM
1204 Views
This makes me want to pull up some amature (written) porn right now! *NM*
- 04/08/2011 02:40:34 PM
537 Views
When my husband is rotated to sea duty, I like to read it for ideas for emails. 
- 04/08/2011 07:03:12 PM
1388 Views
- 04/08/2011 07:03:12 PM
1388 Views
No no, not erotica. Porn.
- 05/08/2011 02:46:23 PM
1147 Views
It makes you feel guilty after "doing" it?
- 04/08/2011 12:52:09 AM
1280 Views
Of course 
- 05/08/2011 02:45:51 PM
1094 Views
- 05/08/2011 02:45:51 PM
1094 Views
Goodkind is a jackass with a complete disregard for people who think any different than him.
- 04/08/2011 08:53:39 PM
1296 Views
A passage from Terry Goodkind was a "bad prose competition" selection at readercon this year.
- 05/08/2011 03:29:21 AM
1868 Views
I find Terry Goodkind inspirational.
- 06/08/2011 02:08:07 PM
1245 Views
Also, that Class,Style, and Grace aren't learned, but are natural. *NM*
- 11/08/2011 10:03:27 AM
533 Views