PDA

View Full Version : Wizard's First Rule thoughts


Straka
09-05-2008, 06:51 PM
Hey all, I'm almost finished reading Terry Goodkind's "Wizard's First Rule" and I was wondering what impressions or reactions people had to his work.

Serenity
09-05-2008, 06:56 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed the first book. Bought the second book and it was good. Bought the third book and eh... I finished it, but it went downhill from there for me, honestly. I don't think I even finished the last one I bought. I read maybe five chapters and... well, I think it's around here somewhere. I won't be heartbroken if I don't find it.

katzenjammer
09-05-2008, 11:38 PM
Goodkind is one of the few modern fantasy writers I've actually read... all 11 books.

The first and second books are the best IMO. The series sags in the middle, hits an all time low in "The Pillars of the Earth" (you don't even see Richard for like 99% of it) and "Naked Empire" (this is like a total "bonus level" book). Then it gets OKAY again in the last 3 books... but each book has at least some awesomeness in it to keep you wanting more.

I am a loyal Goodkind fan, and I'm sure I'll end up reading everything he writes in the future, but I think for whatever reason, the Sword of Truth series went on longer than necessary (though I admit I was in mourning when I finished it forever). All the best and most creative ideas happen in those first 2 books... the seeker/sword, the boundaries, confessors, mord'sith, shota, additive vs subtractive magic, the sisters of the light/dark and the prophet nathan. Whatever new magical stuff happens after those 2 books is basically just a rehashing or reappraisal of the same stuff...though the whole imperial order thing is pretty badass, as is nicci later on.

Also, he gets pretty preachy as the series progresses (hint: Goodkind's a big fan of Ayn Rand :) ), so unless you agree with him philosophically, there's a chance of his tirades becoming annoying haha.

My advice: if you like the first one, read the second one....if you're in love, keep on going. Richard and Kahlan are fantastic characters--each of them is superhumanly special and powerful and wise and smart--yet they still seem like regular people. They will buoy you through the lame bits :D

pconsidine
09-06-2008, 01:00 AM
I'd say stop after the first book. The ending of the series is in no way satisfying enough to make up for the aggravation of the next ten books. Overall, as the series goes on, they take on the tone of someone who's just trying to fill out his contract. Fifty pages of story get stretched out to 500 pages of writing, scenes and phrases are repeated almost whole, and sermons take the place of plot development. Whatever passion Goodkind might have put into the first (and maybe second) book is completely gone by the fourth and it's painfully obvious.

If not for my compulsive need to know how things end, I would never have even bothered finishing the first book.

Mr Flibble
09-06-2008, 01:07 AM
I prefer books where I can't guess the end from half way through. Makes a nice doorstop though.

If not for my compulsive need to know how things end, I would never have even bothered finishing the first book. Same here.

waylander
09-06-2008, 03:03 AM
first one was Ok
Then I read George RR Martin and the next Goodkind book looked poor by comparison

MadScientistMatt
09-06-2008, 03:30 AM
I've only read the first book myself. My biggest problem is how he gets way too obvious with his forshadowing. Sometimes I could see a "surprise" plot twist from page 90 that didn't occur until page 400, but somehow the characters managed to be completely oblivious to it. It's not bad, it had some really brilliant parts to it. Some of my favorites include how Zed dealt with an angry mob and the artist with the magic pictures. But there were some times I just wanted to scream at Darken Rahl for failing to have read the Evil Overlord List.

Tachyon
09-06-2008, 04:46 AM
I've only read the first book myself. My biggest problem is how he gets way too obvious with his forshadowing. Sometimes I could see a "surprise" plot twist from page 90 that didn't occur until page 400, but somehow the characters managed to be completely oblivious to it. It's not bad, it had some really brilliant parts to it. Some of my favorites include how Zed dealt with an angry mob and the artist with the magic pictures. But there were some times I just wanted to scream at Darken Rahl for failing to have read the Evil Overlord List.
That was pretty much my beef with the books, and it only gets worse as the series goes on.

My coworker told me I should read them, so she lent the entire series over the course of the summer. I found that that overall it was a good but not great story. Goodkind's writing could really stand some improvement. I had previously read all sorts of negative reviews that focused on how heavy the Objectivist viewpoints were, but honestly, I didn't really think that was the worse aspect--yes, the long-winded philosophical speeches are annoying, but those are symptomatic more of his poor writing.

Darzian
09-06-2008, 05:22 AM
I love the Wheel of Time, and I heard repeatedly that the Sword of Truth is a complete rip off from the Wheel of Time and decided to avoid it. I'm not sure if its true, but combined with the repeated negative comments about the latter books, it might be safer to not read them.

MattW
09-06-2008, 06:45 AM
My opinion - SoT can be interesting, but not enough to keep me for more than 3 volumes. And that was during a particularly dry spell for fantasy at my local library.

The writing and serialization became repetitive, the political subtext bludgeoning, and the Onion Effect of increasing layers of evil was in full force. Less and less believable characters and motivations, convenient discoveries of new powers by Richard, and Kahlan kicking ass in one chapter, then folding like a cheap suit in the next.

All in all, I'm glad to have found Martin and other places to go after I outgrew Wheel of Time.

dgiharris
09-06-2008, 10:59 PM
Personally,

I found the first three books incredibly enjoyable.

The 4th but was a disappointment, but I gave it to him

From there it goes downhill fast.

I stopped at Book 8 or 9 "Naked Empire" or Pillars of Creation I think

Buy the first three and enjoy.

Read 4 if you are Jonesing for a fantasy fix

5 - 9 you can use for kindling

p.s. My personal take is that at Book 3, the agent told him to slow down, and milk this cash cow. If he had continued with his 'normal' pacing as indicative by books 1 -3 the series should have been completely COMPLETELY done by book 5. Had he done that, I think it would have been a very well done series.

But he choose to milk his adoring fans.

Well, he got me to buy 9 books but I will never read him again.

Mel...

Shadow_Ferret
09-06-2008, 11:27 PM
... negative reviews that focused on how heavy the Objectivist viewpoints were, but honestly, I didn't really think that was the worse aspect--yes, the long-winded philosophical speeches are annoying, but those are symptomatic more of his poor writing.
The objective what? Glad I never read Goodkind. I read fantasy for escapism, not to be preached to.

Tachyon
09-07-2008, 03:18 AM
The objective what? Glad I never read Goodkind. I read fantasy for escapism, not to be preached to.
Then don't read The Sword of Truth series--it is unabashedly preachy. Goodkind espouses Ayn Rand's objectivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_%28Ayn_Rand%29). A good deal of the word count of each book consists of long-winded speeches by the principal characters.

otterman
09-07-2008, 04:28 AM
I just read Wizard's First Rule and thought the book was a little cliché and simplistic. There were parts that interested me and kept me reading but it was often repetitive and many of the plot elements seemed to be afterthoughts, as if Goodkind lacked a cohesive plan in writing it.

bethany
09-07-2008, 04:42 AM
OMG, my mom kept buying these and giving them to me. I love certain fantasy series, but these didn't do it for me. She kept saying I should read them because they weren't that bad. But I don't read huge epic books for 'not that bad' I read them for general awesome-osity.

newbiewriter
09-07-2008, 06:47 AM
I liked the first book, but by the time Goodkind got to the evil chickens, I knew it was time to bail on the series.

Miguelito
09-07-2008, 09:11 AM
I got two-thirds of the way through the first book before I put it down for good. And I almost always finish a book that I start.

I absolutely hated it. I hated the characters. I hated how Goodkind wrote. I honestly felt that it had no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

But that's just one man's opinion.

Storm Dream
09-07-2008, 12:13 PM
I remember really enjoying Wizard's First Rule. I think I got as far into the series as...hmm...I remember liking it up until Temple of the Winds (4?) Actually, I think I really liked Temple.

I just went to Wikipedia to check out the book chronology, and I remember reading Soul of the Fire (5) but don't remember anything about it...hmm. By Faith of the Fallen I was tired with getting preached at. I probably noticed it in book 5 but by 6 it was old. Didn't read anything else after that. Biggest recollection was being annoyed with both Kahlan and Richard as the series went on.

I still think (hope?) if I read the first one today I'd still enjoy it. Good fantasy/adventure story. I don't know if I kept the book, but with the TV show coming up I'll take another look at it if I can dig it up.

Like Waylander, I discovered Martin and he blows Goodkind out of the water.

Ruv Draba
09-07-2008, 01:01 PM
Hey all, I'm almost finished reading Terry Goodkind's "Wizard's First Rule" and I was wondering what impressions or reactions people had to his work.The title (and the concommitant magic design) seemed cheap to me. It's really the 'author's first rule', turned into a magic law. :tongue Should wizards have it harder than regular folk? Why, other than that the author desires it? It's like that bit in Tolkien when Gandalf says to Frodo: "You were meant to have the ring." (Meant by whom? Why, by the author of course.) It skirts too close to self-referentiality for me.

A more subtle magic design would have the difficult arise as a consequence of the magic, not parked as an axiom of the magic. Le Guin did the metaphysics better for instance, with her Taoist principles of balance in the Earthsea books.

Phoenix Fury
09-08-2008, 07:37 AM
I got two-thirds of the way through the first book before I put it down for good. And I almost always finish a book that I start.

I absolutely hated it. I hated the characters. I hated how Goodkind wrote. I honestly felt that it had no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

But that's just one man's opinion.

I totally agree. Folks, this guy actually has one of his characters give a speech on--wait for it--the evils of fire.

Really. Fire. How it's bad. Stop fire at all costs. :Huh:

And if that weren't bad enough, this speech is apparently effective (people weeping, etc.). A speech, let me repeat, on the evils of fire. And it gets worse from there. Absolute dreck, in my opinion.

Straka
09-08-2008, 05:48 PM
I finished over the weekend and I have the same issues more or less as everyone here. The predictability was painful at times, and easy to guess at the foreshadowing. For a smart Seeker I could not believe Richard would forget the Rahl put a spell on him to look like an enemy to Zedd and Co. Maybe that's why they would attack him as Shota the witch for saw? hmmmm? To me that just does fly because throughout the book Richard does many clever things.

Beyond that little things like that I felt the writing was way to long. 800 pages for more or less 9 or 10 major scenes? Also I felt he did a lot of telling, albeit through dialogue rather than description.

I actually liked the characters at times. But in terms of world building the world felt, kinda flat to me. In WoT the world felt so much more vivid. In SoT I did not get a great sense of what Midland was all about. It had a witch and a bad queen. Its hard to put a finger on it, but I felt like it lacked culture besides a typical "medieval" setting besides the mud people.

The speech about the evils of fire at the beginning was a dead give away to me, and also kind of silly. If I was one of those audience members I would leave afterward to start planning a revolution.

I did enjoy some aspects of the book, but in the end I felt sort of burned out on fantasy. I had just finished another typical fantasy book similar to Goodkind and I need a change of pace.

I'll most likely turn back to reading a Game of Thrones.

Sassee
09-08-2008, 06:38 PM
I read the first one in high school and I *loved* it. It was by far my favorite in the series. I think I devoured the second one just as fast. It slowed from there, though... I just wanted him to get to the point. I wanted to know wtf happened to everyone now not 7 books from now. (And oh my God, I hated Pillars of the Earth.)

The story was take it or leave it, but I must say I loved some of those characters. Zed and Adie especially, with Cara as close third.

While I'm morbidly curious about what happens to everyone in the series, I'm not curious enough to finish the series. My frustration level with Richard and Kahlan was off the charts. I remember that I enjoyed the first few books, and I want to preserve that memory. Going back to re-read them and finish the series now would probably destroy that good memory.

Rabe
09-11-2008, 08:11 AM
Odd how this thread has completely failed to mention Goodkind's obvious and blatant love of S&M which is forced - throughout the books - on the characters and therefore also on the readers. Hell, even the idea of the 'Confessor' has Dominatrix written all over it - as did most of the leading female characters - and the MC? Constantly put into 'punishing' situations. As if Goodkind was frustrated about how much he wanted to be spanked but never got up the nerve to actually go and have it done. I read only the first few books but kept expecting some sort of 'sling swing' set up at some time - or even Madonna to make a guest appearance, somehow.

Rabe...

Tachyon
09-11-2008, 08:18 AM
Odd how this thread has completely failed to mention Goodkind's obvious and blatant love of S&M
Because I'd blocked that memory out, dude ... thanks a lot. :P

Queen of Swords
09-11-2008, 12:33 PM
I couldn't stand the first book, for most of the reasons mentioned in this thread. I wrote a very snarky review which is posted on my website.

Darzian
09-11-2008, 01:08 PM
I heard that the SoT is a complete rip off from the Wheel of Time so I didn't read it, considering that I'm a big fan of the WoT.

beezle
09-11-2008, 01:12 PM
I heard that the SoT is a complete rip off from the Wheel of Time so I didn't read it, considering that I'm a big fan of the WoT.

Is that valid?

Darzian
09-11-2008, 06:14 PM
Is that valid?

The person who told me had read both the WoT and SoT. Apparently, the story line is pretty much the same. I didn't bother to risk it anyway, especially as how the series apparently gets boring later on and I always prefer to read a series to completion.

I came across it here:

http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,27718.0.html

TheWritingRunner
09-11-2008, 06:37 PM
So, for those who finished the series, was the ending worth it? :)

Personally, I dislike padding of any kind... whether it is a novella into a novel, or what could have been a good 3 or 5 book series into a never-ending one. :)

pconsidine
09-11-2008, 09:15 PM
The ending of the series is in no way satisfying enough to make up for the aggravation of the next ten books. Nuff said.

krylyr_dave
09-11-2008, 11:04 PM
I read the first book in high school to and thought it rocked. Really, I thought that. I read the next 3 (I think) and they got worse and worse. Honestly, even the second one felt pretty recycled to me, what with the dark evil overlord coming back to life from the dead (or threatening, too -- I can't remember, it just felt like the not-quite finished 2nd death star in Jedi to me. Been there, done that).

I want to think if I reread the first book it'd still be fun, albeit predictable fun. But I don't have any desire to read anymore of Goodkind's stuff.

Phoenix Fury
09-12-2008, 02:25 AM
Odd how this thread has completely failed to mention Goodkind's obvious and blatant love of S&M which is forced - throughout the books - on the characters and therefore also on the readers. Hell, even the idea of the 'Confessor' has Dominatrix written all over it - as did most of the leading female characters - and the MC? Constantly put into 'punishing' situations. As if Goodkind was frustrated about how much he wanted to be spanked but never got up the nerve to actually go and have it done. I read only the first few books but kept expecting some sort of 'sling swing' set up at some time - or even Madonna to make a guest appearance, somehow.

Rabe...

Dear God, I had forgotten that. Yeah, that was also horrific. He seemed to enjoy the torture scenes, in particular--I actually put down the book right after one of those scenes and never picked it up again.

Inarticulate Babbler
09-12-2008, 03:23 AM
Odd how this thread has completely failed to mention Goodkind's obvious and blatant love of S&M which is forced - throughout the books - on the characters and therefore also on the readers.

1) I only read the first two.

2) I loved the pun of the title Wizard's First Rule and the axiom--because it infers Zed's sense of humor. (When I'm having a rough day dealing with ignorant people, I just say "Wizard's First Rule", and from everyone who works with me--who have also read the book--I get a chuckle.

3) As to the "S&M", I found it interesting. (I'm not into that sort of thing, either.) I found it to be a completely different take on the costs of magic. I don't know how many times I've seen the same rules applied a slightly different way, or heard complaints about the originality of magic, but this is a one-of-a-kind. (And no one mentions Heinlein's "sexually depraved" nature.) Plus, for all I love George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series, it's magic is rather undefined.

Fortunately, I didn't get far enough into the series to see much of the preachy-ness. I didn't like the slow beginning to book one, and by contrast loved the fast hook of book two.

Tad Williams's Memory Sorrow and Thorn series isn't fast moving, but I loved it's depth in the end. Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time gave me issues with length and verbosity. The first two books were awesome, the ideas in the first four were, but about the time he put out the mammoth fifth volume, it suddenly became more of a milieu story than a character story. Considering the brevity of some of his Conan stories, I would have much more loved a series of different stories in that realm, with one overall theme--like David Gemmell's Drenai or Jerusalem Man series.

Straka
09-12-2008, 05:17 PM
It seems that a lot of us have major issues with this book / series, but this begs the question, why do these books sell so well? I believe all but the first two made it to the NY Times best seller list.

Is it the Wizard's First Rule in effect? Or are a majority of readers out there not as critical? Or is it a case of being sucked into a series and needing to know the ending?

Pila
09-13-2008, 11:23 AM
There's A LOT wrong with the series, as everybody has already mentioned, but none of it phased me all that much (except the repetitive speeches that I took to skipping over, ugh) but I devoured the books in a matter of days. I'm still not sure how I feel about the ending, though, but I don't recall it being as disappointing to me as a lot of the other endings to series I've read. I'm giving the series a re-read, soon, though, because I currently have nothing else to read.

MadScientistMatt
09-13-2008, 11:06 PM
The speech about the evils of fire at the beginning was a dead give away to me, and also kind of silly. If I was one of those audience members I would leave afterward to start planning a revolution.

I had to wonder why Richard missed the implications of that one. It was so obvious to the readers - I just wanted to smack the characters for failing to make the connection between that one and the story about what had been going on in the Midlands.

For those who read the later ones, I'd like to hear if it ever answered a question the first one raised. Darken Rahl was pretty much invincible in the first one. He was far more powerful than any other wizard, had an invincible army at his command, and it would have been a cakewalk to conquer the entire world with the resources he had at his command. So why did he ever think it was a good idea to bother with the Boxes of Orden anyway when he was already so powerful that whatever ultimate power they offered hardly seemed like it would have made a difference?

Tachyon
09-14-2008, 06:09 AM
I had to wonder why Richard missed the implications of that one. It was so obvious to the readers - I just wanted to smack the characters for failing to make the connection between that one and the story about what had been going on in the Midlands.
Indeed. I connected Zedd to "the great wizard" almost as soon as Kahlan first mentioned him. I couldn't believe it took Richard so long to work it out. Then again, I suppose he hasn't had the benefit of reading many fantasy series like us.

For those who read the later ones, I'd like to hear if it ever answered a question the first one raised. Darken Rahl was pretty much invincible in the first one. He was far more powerful than any other wizard, had an invincible army at his command, and it would have been a cakewalk to conquer the entire world with the resources he had at his command. So why did he ever think it was a good idea to bother with the Boxes of Orden anyway when he was already so powerful that whatever ultimate power they offered hardly seemed like it would have made a difference?Because Darken Rahl is a straight Evil Overlord (http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html), through and through.

And you find out in book 2 that there's an entire other part of the world, the "Old World" (the Westlands, Midlands, and D'Hara make up the "New World") behind a magical barrier of towers created from the drained life-force of wizards. Oh, and it's been taken over by an evil empire of socialists (the "Imperial Order"). Not that this would be a problem, because Richard wouldn't be stupid enough to destroy the barrier keeping the Imperial Order out of the New World, right? Not so much.

I quote from TVTropes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/IAmNotMakingThisUp/Literature):
Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth fantasy novels, after the first couple volumes. Not only does the hero rapidly escalate into a Marty Stu (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MartyStu), he's an Objectivist Marty Stu (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MartyStu) who proceeds on the grounds that only he has the proper Moral Clarity to determine absolute Good and Evil (there are no in between grey shades, and if you think there are, then you do not have Moral Clarity and are evil) (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FamilyUnfriendlyAesop). This all-but-divine guarantee that he's always in the right allows him to kick 8-year-old girls in the face (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KickTheDog), slaughter nonviolent anti-war protesters (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KnightTemplar), command the absolute devotion and loyalty of an all-female brigade (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AmazonBrigade) of supernaturally-powered dominatrix/torturers, and engage in Author Filibusters (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AuthorFilibuster) at every opportunity. Among the enemies he faces are his own Evil Overlord (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilOverlord) father, and an entire nation of evil pacifists. Yes, evil pacifists. For a partial list of these and other absurdities in the Goodkind books, see this entryhttp://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/external_link.gif (http://sandstormreviews.blogspot.com/2006/08/goodkind-parodies.html) at The Sandstorm Reviews blog.
The series' low point, Naked Empire, falls firmly into the category of So Bad Its Horrible (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SoBadItsHorrible) and makes this editor want to declare it Dis Continuity (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DisContinuity). What's even sadder is that the first two books in the series aren't horrible Author Tracts (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AuthorTract) and explicitly contradict the Warped Aesops (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WarpedAesop) of the later ones. That 8-year old girl (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnfanteTerrible) deserved it, though. ;)
The anti-war protesters were serving as human shields for the real bad guys who would have gotten a Zero Percent Approval Rating (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ZeroPercentApprovalRating) from any culture with any sense... but they had a completely absurd society based on the ridiculous belief that because one cannot perceive reality perfectly, they should act as though the world doesn't exist. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StrawmanPolitical) He can try to invoke the I Did What I Had To Do (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IDidWhatIHadToDo) defense, but shouldn't he have at least tried to Take A Third Option (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TakeAThirdOption) before having them all killed?
That being said, nothing can properly explain the evil chicken. Yes, really.
What makes it worse is that Kahlan later uses that as a sign that they can trust the Marty Stu (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MartyStu) when he starts spouting gibberish. Oookay...
Right from the first few chapters of the first book, a politician makes a rousing speech advocating banning fire. Not only do the people not laugh him out of the room, they give him hearty applause.That link to the Sandstorm blog is hilarious, incidentally.... *goes off to read more*

Albedo
09-17-2008, 10:03 AM
The only thing I've heard about these books is that the hero kicks a little girl's jaw off and this is treated as just and good because she is Evil. I'll pass, if it's all the same to you.

EriRae
09-17-2008, 02:52 PM
It seems that a lot of us have major issues with this book / series, but this begs the question, why do these books sell so well? I believe all but the first two made it to the NY Times best seller list.

Is it the Wizard's First Rule in effect? Or are a majority of readers out there not as critical? Or is it a case of being sucked into a series and needing to know the ending?


I'm in the "sucked in" crowd. Critical, yes, but I NEED TO KNOW HOW IT ENDS, DAMMIT. Nobody ruin it for me. There's no way I was buying Confessor in hardbound, so waiting for the paperback at the end of this month.

Darzian
09-17-2008, 02:55 PM
I was not aware that the series is so ...disturbing. I've going to run away from those books now.

Isn't it strange how we manage to find so many problems with all these famous books, and yet they sell really well? It must be something to do with the way we view the books from a writer's view instead of a reader's one, I guess.

Albedo
09-17-2008, 04:02 PM
I think it's no coincidence that some of the biggest-selling books in science fiction and fantasy are aimed squarely at the devoted acolytes of a marginal belief system: Scientology in the case of L Ron Hubbard's books and Objectivism in the case of Goodkind's. "Fan" is short for fanatic, after all...

Mr Flibble
09-17-2008, 04:54 PM
Isn't it strange how we manage to find so many problems with all these famous books, and yet they sell really well? It must be something to do with the way we view the books from a writer's view instead of a reader's one, I guess.

No, I hated it even before I started writing.

Keffington
09-17-2008, 05:24 PM
I was skeptical after the first few pages, in which he stopped the narration short for long descriptions of the first woman to wander across the pages. (Because the most important thing about her is how physically attractive the viewpoint character thinks she is.) Even at 15, I remember being severely annoyed by a bad guy named "Darken."

I made it as far as this one scene where the wizard convinced a crowd of men that their penises were gone. The scene was ridiculous without managing to be at all funny. After that, I put it down and have no intention of picking it back up - I think that was about a hundred pages in.

Darzian
09-17-2008, 06:14 PM
I made it as far as this one scene where the wizard convinced a crowd of men that their penises were gone.

....................

MadScientistMatt
09-18-2008, 05:35 AM
I actually liked that scene - partially because I've heard of several cases where, in parts of the world where belief in magic is common, that one's been pulled off in real life.

katzenjammer
09-18-2008, 07:34 AM
Yes, I too have heard that the vanishing-penis maneuver has been successfully accomplished in real life, though I can't remember the source.

Pretty much any Fantasy can be made to look ridiculous if you're in the mood. I admit the SoT books aren't perfect, and I disagreed with much of the philosophical stuff Goodkind proposes, but all in all I'm glad I read them, and I don't think they're anywhere near as bad as everyone wants to make them sound.

YES, the prose is nothing to write home about (but the man suffers from dyslexia, so I really don't think it's cool to make fun of that). YES when you sit back and watch, it does seem like there's a lot of weird S/M crap going on, and rape and so forth... but honestly, how DOES one show overt evil, nowadays, without going down that route? (actually, I think I'm going to start a new thread asking this very question)

By the same token, you can call LotR ridiculous because a thing's "evilness" is determined by how ugly or how black it is. You have to look at it from within the context of the world that's been created. Otherwise, you're just another "anti-geek" dude or dudette, Cool As Anything before all the world, simply because you don't know what a wookie or a klingon is.

I dunno, I guess I'm biased because this was one of "my series" when I was a young teenager, before it really took off or anybody knew a thing about it. But I still say it's nowhere near as bad as some of the things being said here.

And by the way... I bet you'd kick an 8 year old girl in the jaw too, if she was torturing you and promising to have your girlfriend raped and killed. :tongue

beezle
09-18-2008, 07:40 AM
Yes, I too have heard that the vanishing-penis maneuver has been successfully accomplished in real life, though I can't remember the source.



Penis-Melting Zionist Robot Combs


http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1126/

Darzian
09-18-2008, 07:49 AM
Penis-Melting Zionist Robot Combs


http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1126/

What the hell was THAT?

I was just left with my mouth gaping.:roll:

katzenjammer
09-18-2008, 08:16 AM
Penis-Melting Zionist Robot Combs


http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1126/

ahahaha! I knew it! SEE? Goodkind was merely extracting gold from the fecund mines of human ignorance! Chalk one up for Zed :tongue Though I have to say, the real life version is far, far funnier than the SoT one.

Inarticulate Babbler
09-20-2008, 02:33 AM
Oh, great. Now the combs are out to get us, too!

jaypers
09-23-2008, 12:14 AM
Hey all, this is my first post here.

One thing we can all take from Goodkind's WFR is the fact that it made a lot of money...and I believe it went to auction, and he got 250K for it. So, whether or not we like it or don't, we might be able to learn something from it.

Plus it's getting made into a TV show too!

AuthorGuy
09-23-2008, 03:40 AM
Something else to skip.