Single-minded Terry Goodkind

[Neon]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Lol!! I completely forgot!!!

I may well have missed the Chinafire marketing window on this occasion - however, I'll make a point to chase this up in future, and try to raise some of the questions for him to answer, if he will.

Looks like you might have to wait until the next book for Mr. Goodkind to explain how wonderful he is

[anniekelleher]

i read the swords of shannara books years ago and dismissed them as hopeless tolkien knock-offs of the worst kind... goodkind's popularity frankly escapes me. i don't just CHOOSE not to read his books; i CAN'T read his books, because i think he writes the WORST sort of fantasy... full of flat, silly, banal characters who never have a genuine thought, motivation or dream of their own... and moreover, he has no idea how to write a female character who sounds like anything but an adolescent boy zipped into a girl suit.


criticism is never easy to hear... but one thing i've learned is that even when i really don't like what a critic or reader says, i ALWAYS pay attention, and try to glean something useful to improve... some critics have even given me ideas as to how to make a current book better...

[LadyFel]

Originally Posted by anniekelleher

i read the swords of shannara books years ago and dismissed them as hopeless tolkien knock-offs of the worst kind... goodkind's popularity frankly escapes me...

Sorry, wrong Terry...Shannara is by Terry Brooks

The rest of what you wrote applies to Goodkind though, so no harm done

[red_temple]

Originally Posted by anniekelleher

i read the swords of shannara books...

Or perhaps you mean the Sword of *Truth* books????

[Teresa Edgerton]

Very easy to get the two Terrys mixed up. Many have done so before, here and elsewhere.

Which is rather hard luck for Terry Brooks, who, whatever his sins as a writer, does not appear to be an egomaniac.

[Earos]

I tend to agree with Goodkind... People are stupid... A person can be intelligent, but a group of people... stupid at best.

That is the Wizard's First Rule...

I think he is a little harsh to people whose opinions differ from his, but he is human... He has faults... Regardless, he is a decent author and his books aren't half bad...

[jenna]

he's not human, he's a living god. it's true. just ask him...

[Frey Slayer]

Originally Posted by jenna

he's not human, he's a living god. it's true. just ask him...

This is so funny. I picked up Wizards First Rule quite a while ago without knowing anything about Goodkind at the time.
I thought it was basic random variable fantasy genre.
By that I mean he took the basics you usually find in fantasy novels, shook them around and came up with something quote - unquote - original....but essentially derivative. He had a couple of novel concepts..I liked the society of torturers and the talking doll, but otherwise it was Danielle Steele of fantasy. The book passed the time but left no lasting impression on me.

Imagine my surprise when I learn about his ego and what he thinks of his own work. Man, get down off the high horse my friend!

Good derivation is just that....non-original and therefore worthy of little merit outside of its own incestous circle.

[red_temple]

Oww!! Harsh, man. If Goodkind were to read that, he'd put a pox on you forever.

[Earos]

Originally Posted by Frey Slayer

This is so funny. I picked up Wizards First Rule quite a while ago without knowing anything about Goodkind at the time.
I thought it was basic random variable fantasy genre.
By that I mean he took the basics you usually find in fantasy novels, shook them around and came up with something quote - unquote - original....but essentially derivative. He had a couple of novel concepts..I liked the society of torturers and the talking doll, but otherwise it was Danielle Steele of fantasy. The book passed the time but left no lasting impression on me.

Imagine my surprise when I learn about his ego and what he thinks of his own work. Man, get down off the high horse my friend!

Good derivation is just that....non-original and therefore worthy of little merit outside of its own incestous circle.

His books are decent reads... He is not on of my favorites, but I dont have anything against him... I very rarely pay attention to the authors... I am not really a fan of people... Why I agree with Goodkind's statements concernig the general pop... Does it mean I think I am any better? not at all... So who cares what an author sais when it's not in his books? He proves his point better then anything else could have...LOL

Oh and the danielle steele statement was just mean... Funny, but mean... LOL

[Teresa Edgerton]

Goodkind considers all fantasy to be inferior. Which is why, he insists, that he neither reads nor writes the stuff.

It's hard for a confirmed fantasy lover like most of us here to love a guy like that.

[braddockery]

Hello Everyone. First post here. Lots of great topics for a Fantasy fan. I`ve noticed alot of times especially in modern fantasy novels the main characters in books are a reflection of how the author sees himself. The Sword Of Truth seires is the best example of this. I`ve read all of Thierry Goodkinds books and only do so because it`s a decent different type of fantasy series, but it is one of those books where you find yourself skipping paragraphs and skimming pages, especially when he starts preaching and ranting about some philosophical idea he wants to get across. Just check out the picture of him in the back of each book and you`ll get a very good idea of just how much he thinks he`s Richard Rahl!

[Neon]

LOL that's true .... it's possibly one of the most arrogant, self-obsessed photographs I've ever seen.

[Brys]

Originally Posted by DarkHelmet

Yes, I'm forced to agree that Goodkind sounds like he has a screw loose, if you judge from the extract of an interview above. But, as Brian said I think it's better to read the entire interview before making any harsh statements.

Anyway, in my opinion an extract of an author interview shouldn't keep you from reading terific books, which I really enjoyed and still will enjoy, even if the author is a woolhead...

Well the rest of the interview (and every other interview) is even worse. I've also heard that his books range from the mediocre with Wizards First Rule to the awful with some of the later books. Fortunately, I haven't read any of them. He is ridiculously arrogant and pretentious - the only author I've seen who actually says that anyone who doesn't like his books are wrong, stupid etc. Anyway, we should just read these for comedy value - he may be being serious, but taking it seriously is pretty horrible to consider what he's saying. I doubt that Goodkind has actually read much fantasy - he probably looked at the covers and thought he didn't like it. How ironic is it that he writes extremely derivative fantasy, then complains about having a conventional fantasy character, yet he claims that he is completely different to all other fantasy writers. (He clearly hasn't read anything by Bakker, Cook, Donaldson, Erikson, Hobb, Lieber, Martin, Mieville, Moorcock, Peake, Wolfe or Zelazny - I probably missed a load out there, but it just helps to show how little he must know of the fantasy genre. If he has read them, then I think he must be having serious problems if he claims they don't have plot, theme or characterisation).

[GOLLUM]

Sadly (or otherwise... ) Book 1 Wizards' First Rule is one of the few books I just couldn't bring myself to finish.

YIKES this guy is fighteningly bad IMHO.....