Single-minded Terry Goodkind

[seerdon]

I've read the first two Sword of Truth books, and enjoyed them greatly. I didn't really like the look of Goodkind on his site though, and he does seem to be a little pretentious and over-assuming. However, I am prepared to ignore this to be able to enjoy his books properly

[LadyFel]

I enjoyed the first two or three books, but by the fourth I already knew what would happen by the end...unfortunately, oodkind's detractors are partly right...He' rehashing the same story the whole time and just slightly changing the action...

And I thought 'The Pillars of Creation' were just weird...Not to mention that I read some of the above interviews in the meantime and it sort of lost its charm for me...

I've had a chance to meet George R R Martin, who is one of my favourite writers, and he was seriously the nicest sort of person...you could see in the way he took the time to answer every question that he really enojs writing his books and thinking about them...I get the feeling Goodkind's resting on his laurels and spitting in the face of those who read his books by his high and mighty attitude...

[The Master™]

I've read ALL Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series... And I must admit that the first book was VERY refreshing in its approach to magic and the like... But as the series has gone on, it is getting to the point of DEJA VU... Gone over stuff before, and not really learning anything new... I've finished reading Naked Empire, and not sure if I'll get the next - should one be written...

I don't really care what happens in interviews, I'm not interested in the person who writes a book - just THE BOOK(S)!!!

I have to say that I've never gotten bored or felt short-changed by any of Raymond E Feists books... Whenever I get a new one, everything else is pushed aside!!!

[Lucifer]

I quit reading Terry Goodkind because of his books. I've never read an interview with the man. From his main character's behavior, I didn't really need to. The brief snippets quoted by I, Brian simply confirmed my feelings about him.

For those who haven't read Goodkind, he writes like a 3rd grader with a god complex. While I will give him credit for some wild plot twists and interesting ideas, the sheer arrogance overthrows whatever good might have come of his work. I'd say that the first through third books are all right, but things go steadily downhill from there.

Here is Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth novels in a nutshell:

1. Kahlan does something crappy.

2. Richard is forced to leave Kahlan, usually captured by attractive women. This guarantees that Kahlan will spend the next 500-odd pages having angst about Richard cheating on her, forgetting about her, never coming back, etc.

3. Attractive women try to seduce Richard.

4. Richard fends them off because he only loves Kahlan (even if this causes Kahlan to suffer in some way.)

5. Richard has angst.

6. Richard makes threats.

7. Richard pontificates for pages and pages and pages, generally about the wonder of capitalism and the evil of communism.

8. Something moderately interesting happens.

9. Kahlan almost dies, but Richard saves her.

10. Richard saves civilization . . . again.

Richard is also good at everything. I'm not joking about his speeches either - he goes on endlessly about things like the power of friendship and other things that should require a sentence or two at most. There's also a lot of needless information thrown around, ususally of a sexual manner. It also pissed me off that in order to make one of his baddies seem really, really bad, Goodkind made the character into a homosexual pedophile who also rapes Kahlan. Cringe worthy. Goodkind also lacks the ability to write a female character who is secure, independant, and strong.

The bottom line is that we've seen it all before, written by someone who might actually respect his readers.

[knivesout]

I think that's a most apt summation of Goodkind's plots. I've read his first three books - and, yes, that was the way it went down. Now I realise that much goodis fiction is didactic, and often the better for it, but Goodkind makes it too transparent. Much like his avowed inspiration, Ayn Rand.

The pity of it is, he actually has the ability to tell a good yarn somewhere in there.

[Shoegaze99]

(Thanks for pointing me to this thread, Brian. I've only recently discovered the wonderful world of Terry Goodkind the Man, and I am fascinated by the creature)

Originally Posted by SDNess

I picked up WFR at the library a couple of days ago. I don't have time to read it now, but I just wanted to look through it. I found it interesting that he uses regular English names like Richard, George, etc. and that the dialogue is also in plain English.

Interestingly enough, Goodkind seems to think he is a genius when it comes to naming characters. In the above-mentioned chat a reader notes his characters names; Goodkind responds, "Thank you for noticing that I put a lot of thought into my characters' names.."

Ummm, Zedd? Richard?

Whatever.

One of the things that struck me most in the handful of interviews I browsed was that Goodkind seems to have, well, anger for people who don't enjoy his novels the way he thinks they should be enjoyed. He scolds people for not reading them properly. If people say he overstates the level of the 'depper meanings' in his stories or suggest he's not doing anything all that unique, he suggests they are not smart enough to read his books.

Quite some time ago I grabbed the first few of these from the SF Book Club. I now regret doing so, because I may have put some money in his pocket.

But what jumps out at me most is the man's sheer arrogance, his petty attempts to distance himself from the genre that is making him money - 'Oh, these aren't silly little fantasy books, folks, they're important books on philosophy, and the degree to which he has convinced himself of his own importance.

He says that publishers want more books like his but can't find them because "copying innovation is an impossibility."

Maybe my favorite quote, and the most telling, is this one:

"What I have done with my work has irrevocably changed the face of fantasy. In so doing I've raised the standards. I have not only injected thought into a tired empty genre, but, more importantly, I've transcended it showing what more it can be-and is so doing spread my readership to completely new groups who don’t like and wont ready typical fantasy."

It's difficult to imagine the nature of the plant he is smoking.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Maybe this is where some authors go wrong: In NOT throwing temper tantrums and denigrating anyone who doesn't like their books. It seems to work so well for Ann Rice and Terry Goodkind.

But then there are the Ray Feists and the Tad Williamses. I've seen both speak at conventions, seen them interact with fans. No one could say that either one was lacking in confidence, but they exude warmth and geniality.

[Neon]

I read books because of the great stories, not because of what the author says and does outside of the fictional story world. So yes Goodkind sounds like a pompous ass, but I've read many of his other interviews and comments where he isn't so arrogant (although usually is, haha). But nevertheless, I've read all but 1 of this series (which was a prequel involving Zedd) and for the most part have really enjoyed them. Check out my review on Chainfire if you're worried the series is still going downhill, because to me Goodkind seems to be pulling things back together.

[Preston]

Reading this reminds me of the "Afterword" in the last Dark Tower book by Stephen King, where he insults his fans, and then warns us all not to visit him. Really put a sour taste on the whole series for me.

[I, Brian]

Does he? Will have to ask after that, having got a partner who has literally finished it all.

[jenna]

Goodkind is an A-Grade arrogant fool. like someone else said, i unfortunately had read the first 6 books before i found out what he was really like. i'm the sort of person who needs closure so i'm going to keep reading until the end, much as it irks me to do so.

the first thing that really annoys me that he's constantly bashing on fantasy. although he has toned that down a bit these days, the things that i've read in interviews are appalling. he goes on about how his publishers categorised his work as fantasy just because there was a red dragon appearing briefly at the end of Wizards First Rule. notice the title. Wizard. notice the main characters - strapping hero with magic sword, hot magic babe, old white haired mentor wizard, evil guy bent on ruling the world. good god, it's revolutionary! oh hold on, my mistake, that's text book fantasy if ever i saw it! that's what got me really disliking the guy. i can't stand people with god complexes... (for example the moderators on the Goodkind site's forum.. but that's a whole other discussion!!)

i had the displeasure of attending a Goodkind Objectivist Youth Rally... i mean, meet and greet. my biggest regret is that i was so close to him, i really should have just punched him in the face. would have made me feel infinitely better!! personally i think he made a fool of himself, but everyone else thought he was just awesome.
he actually said things like, "the thing about fantasy, although i don't read fantasy, is blah blah blah" and i'm like can he not even see how stupid that comment was? how can he think to comment on how all fantasy is crap when he's just admitted he doesn't even read it? i can't remember exactly what he said about the genre, but it was like what he said in the snippets Brian posted. that annoyed me. and also, a few days ago i noticed a book which he had done a reccomendation for. yep, a fantasy book. whether he actually read it or whether he just let them use his name, that was a dumb move.

another stupid thing he said was that he never revises his work, what we read is the original first draft. he doesn't need to revise because he gets it right the first time. that was so dopey. whether it's true or not, it makes him look like an idiot in my eyes.

lol, i could go on forever about what a spaz this guy is, but i think forever would take me over the post size limit, so i'd better stop...

[Shoegaze99]

Originally Posted by jenna

another stupid thing he said was that he never revises his work, what we read is the original first draft. he doesn't need to revise because he gets it right the first time.

So I IMed this to a friend with whom I often discuss books and with whom I have recently discussed our shared loathing of Terry Goodkind. His response?

"no wonder, you can TELL it is his first draft"

[jenna]

lol, that was my response too!

[Drachir]

I agree with Bohica. Terry Goodkind's first two books in the Sword of Truth series are excellent. His creation of the character of the Mother Confessor is brilliant, however, after the first two the books level off and the last two books of the series are no better than mediocre. And contary to the author's arrogant assertion that his books are more than fantasy they are not, unless you think that his neo-fascist philosophizing quakifies as something special. Goodkind is worth a read, but don't take his naive elitist political musings too seriously.

[MIDNIGHT]

Terry Goodkind I think believes his audience is a little slow.Ever notice that 3/4 of each book is spent explaing events that happened in the previous books.Quite frankly now that I think of it Robert Jordan is this way as well.No wonder they are so boring you end up rereading each book whether you want to or need to.Chances are nobody picks up the series halfway through so quit using old information as filler.I've snored my way through both of these series.Are they ever going to end!!