Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth

by **Stephan** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:33 pm

Modedit: This topic was split from another discussion and originated here.

Legend of the Seeker. And yes, it sucked. It sucked terribly. It hardly even had a story arch. It just took the characters and basic plot from Wizard's First Rule and used that to make a completely irrelevant series.

by **Manon Eileen** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:37 pm

I just watched to the third episode or so. It was such a disappointment (not that I'm a great SoT fan but that they would destroy any story so badly is just plain depressing). :wall:

Be my friend on Goodreads · by **Benni** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:03 pm

Hahaha, I am a fan of both the Sword of Truth books (I've only read the first few) as well as the Legend of the Seeker tv series. Many, many things were changed, but I liked to imagine that the differences meant that there were more Richard and Kahlan adventures for me to enjoy. Although, the two season finales were awful, awful. Time travel and alternate universes definitely did not fit...

by **Satara** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 3:15 am

I was a fan of SoT until I found out that Terry Goodkind didn't think the series was fantasy. I mean... really!? *rolls eyes* Fan of the show? Not so much. I made myself watch it, but mostly because I wanted to see what they butchered. :wall:

Anyway, I just recently purchased Game of Thrones, but I haven't started it yet. I'm super excited for the series! There isn't enough fantasy TV/movies out there to satisfy me.

by **Manon Eileen** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:39 am

Time travel and alternate universes? Whoa, are you kidding me?

That's so 180 that it's not even funny anymore.

I didn't know he thinks his books aren't fantasy, rofl!!!! Obviously that's why they're always in the SF/F department. :w00t:

by **Stephan** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:21 am

Wasn't that about that other book of his? The Law of Nines, or something. Because that one was intended not to be fantasy.

by **Satara** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:51 am

From what I've heard and seen for myself, he doesn't like it when people call the Sword of Truth series a fantasy series. I can understand Law of Nines not being fantasy, but SoT is high fantasy even. He has a very loyal fan base, and even they get touchy on the subject. Of course, this is just heresy. It's not like I talk to Terry Goodkind personally. :roll:

The other thing I heard is that he's pretty rude to his fans. I know that shouldn't impact my enjoyment of his books, but it does. I tried to reread the SoT series awhile back and I just couldn't do it. I kept thinking... "How is this not fantasy?" It was intruding on the experience, I guess.

*shrug*

by **Manon Eileen** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:54 am

That's what I heard, too, Satara. It's always very off-putting when an author behaves like that. *shudders*

by **Stephan** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 1:32 pm

Haha! That's awesome! How can he think his books are not fantasy? Is he mental?

by **caleighm** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 3:32 pm

I had no idea about this -- do you guys know of any articles on Goodkind's refusal to identify his books as fantasy? I'd love to learn more. Just to snicker at it, really.

Be my friend on Goodreads · by **Benni** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:02 pm

caleighm wrote:I had no idea about this -- do you guys know of any articles on Goodkind's refusal to identify his books as fantasy? I'd love to learn more. Just to snicker at it, really.

*now spending my lunch hour hunting this down* lol

Be my friend on Goodreads · by **Benni** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:09 pm

He's got a narrow view of fantasy:
http://cgi1.usatoday.com/mchat/20030805003/tscript.htm

Terry Goodkind wrote: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.

Yup, no other book has fun stories and has made people think.

Actually, I will stop, because you can pretty much make fun of anything he says.

by **caleighm** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:21 pm

HAHAHA! Oh my god, Benni, what a find!!! Thank you so much for this

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.

And I'm sorry if there are any diehard Ayn fans in here, but I had a reeeal good laugh over this, too:

Weymouth, MA: In your opinion who is the most must-read, cutting edge writer publishing today?

Terry Goodkind: Ayn Rand.

This interview is pure gold. I am bookmarking it and will refer back to it whenever I need a laugh.

by **Manon Eileen** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:12 pm

Wow.

This must be an act!!!!!! :wall:

I hope in the nearly 10 years that have passed since that interview he's come to realize that ... his books are truly fantasy, whatever he says. What arrogance, :bad:

by **Stephan** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:18 pm

Hahaha! It's amazing! As if there's ever any world building without magic. I feel like calling him names. :whistle:

Also, Kahlan and Richard talk and act like 5 year-olds. How realistic is that, really? :wall:

The best thing of it all is that his second book, which had the most focus on building his magic, was completely stolen from Robert Jordan.

by **Manon Eileen** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:23 pm

The... Stone of Tears?

Heh, of what little I remember it did strike me as sort of similar back then.

I have to say though, I did enjoy the (general) story lines of book four (Temple of the Winds) and six (Faith of the Fallen). They were a little more mature than the rest somehow. But really, I can't say I'm a fan. ;')

Be my friend on Goodreads · by **Benni** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:36 pm

Stephan wrote:The best thing of it all is that his second book, which had the most focus on building his magic, was completely stolen from Robert Jordan.

Then clearly you aren't old enough to be reading Goodkind's books:

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.) I've often voiced my suspicion that these two series might be occurring on the same world...how crazy am I?

Terry Goodkind: If you notice a similarity, then you probably aren't old enough to read my books.

by **Stephan** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:51 pm

HAHAHAHA! OMG! :shock:

by **Manon Eileen** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:54 pm

Stephan wrote:HAHAHAHA! OMG!

Just that. I'm getting twitchy eyes now. :shock:

<-- pretty much like that guy actually.

by **Weirdmage** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:09 pm

I read all the Sword of Truth series. And they are really bad. Supposedly they are about objectivism, something I hadn't really heard anything about when I read the books. It looks like a semi-fascist ultra-capatalism in the books. And I noticed that the books "turned right" after 9/11.

I've read the Goodkind interview before, and he is obviously totally delusional. Saying that SoT is not fantasy is totally moronic.

by **lotteandzac** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:13 am

I have read all of SOT and WOT (to date) and whilst they do have similarities, I can understand why Terry Goodkind sees his work as different. The tone throughout the books was to me based upon a frustration on society, that not enough people try to live their lives to the fullest. Society is full of people who envy others success, ignoring the hard work that went into creating that success, and as a result particularly in the UK we now have a self destructive generation that believes society owes them something for existing.

I liked that element and whilst right leaning I would not call it fascist.

the fantasy element of SOT was the sugaring of the pill, where as WOT was pure story telling. Both can be enjoyed but for different reasons SOT made me think of the real world society, WOT was pure escapism

by **Stephan** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:39 am

Honestly, I see some of the conflicts you're mentioning. Definitely. However, I do think they are far fetched, and if they are meant to depict a reality, the fantasy sugar coating applied is thick enough to break my teeth on. You can argue it's a good thing, that it's subtle, but if you combine it with the fact that the books are written in a very childish style and the dialog is horrible, I honestly believe it misses its point.

And yeah, no matter what you intend, if you sugar your story with fantasy, it is fantasy. And if Goodkind is such a deep guy, he really doesn't do well displaying such idiocy. Doesn't have a positive influence on his book's believability.

by **lotteandzac** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:06 am

I think what he was aiming for was not that far fetched I see parallels in society all the time, if I have issue with this was that TG frustration on the topic made him anything but subtle towards the end and it was as case of force feeding. I think he used fantasy as a vehicle for his message, and so in context it is fantasy in its entirety, but the base message is not, it is more idealism. I really enjoyed the books and I did not find them childish, perhaps I was subconsciously adding to the story, which is perhaps what TG meant with his daft comment on age.

by **lotteandzac** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:22 am

I think the main reason why the TV programme failed was because the fantasy element without the "message" was too weak

by **caleighm** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:24 am

I don't think any fantasy book is 'pure fantasy', in the sense that its message (theme, whatever) has absolutely nothing to do with real life. All authors, after all, live in real life. Every book ever written is informed in one way or another by reality, and every book ever written also makes a statement on the society in which its author lives -- whether that opinion is just blasé acceptance of the society or a more interesting and sophisticated challenge of it.

No book comes without a 'message' or subtext of some kind. Every author has a worldview and it's always visible in the books -- just more or less subtly. In SoT, Goodkind chooses to hit people over the head with his message.

So yes, I'd still say SoT is fantasy -- right down to the bones. Fantasy books all have different messages -- I don't think there's such thing as a specifically fantasy message. It's the window dressings (swords, magic, dragons, etc) that make a book fantasy or not. Compare Pullman's His Dark Materials to WoT, for example, or (a more obvious comparison) to Overstreet's overtly Christian series. All fantasy, but all REALLY different messages.

by **lotteandzac** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:36 am

Excellent response, nice to see this page move towards book discussion rather than author attack. I think I like the idealism of the TG books, a conservatives utopia! I also think that we draw differently from books depending on what we are encountering at that time in our lives. I tend to find most books real aspect tend to focus on the individual where as to me TG focused his wrath on society influencing the individual

by **Stephan** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:17 pm

It might just depend on how much you feel connected with a book's themes? I don't feel a connection with TG's themes at all. I think that, the combination of not feeling connected with them and the blatantness of them makes them feel so far-fetched, that those themes themselves feel like fantasy to me. I felt the same about Pullman's works, by the way, though I felt more of an aversion to his themes than a lack of connection.

If I compare that to Wheel of Time or Lord of the Rings, where the themes are much more subtle and much more relevant to me, personally, I guess I prefer those.

by **Manon Eileen** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:24 pm

Frankly, I don't think this is an "author attack", most of us were just expressing our shock at how he treats fans. Nothing odd about that, since he was extraordinarily rude in that interview.

I understand he wanted to share his frustration with our world with the rest of the world, but to then, I assume consciously, tell his story in a fantasy world and then not call it fantasy? I don't know what to call it but to me that just seems stupid. It is also very condescending toward other fantasy/sci-fi authors, who are incredibly creative in sharing (subtle) messages that relate to our real world but set in a whole different world - and they take pride in being able to do that and actually doing it (which is entirely deserved).

If he despises "fantasy" as much as becomes clear in that interview, he should have put his story in our real world, and he should have given those characters "magic" that would follow the rules of our laws of physics and physiology.

I also tend to agree with Stephan. Some might enjoy TG's conservative themes, but others might not. I for one didn't particularly care about it. But at points it's so in your face that it feels like he's preaching, and I never appreciated and never will appreciate when an author does that.
He can have his morals, but his readers don't have to agree with him necessarily (which I get the idea he does think). A book of high fantasy fiction is not the place to convince people of your own ideals relating to our real world, is my opinion. For that you need a soapbox.

by **lotteandzac** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:45 pm

Manon, well said. However, I think all creative people who create something have the right to state what their creation is. There is a lot of "pop" fantasy out there and for some this should be distinguished from the elite. I think that dissecting the interview can lead to statement appearing out of context, and it may also be the case that he interviews poorly and cannot convey arguments verbally. My point is I have read a lot of fantasy, including SOT, and in many respects he does stand alone in my opinion.

by **Weirdmage** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:05 pm

There's no doubt Goodkind stands alone, both in his heavy handed preaching and his ultra-conservatism.
He's not alone in refusing to accept he writes SFF. But he is the only one who is both marketed as fantasy and is embraced by the fantasy community (at least parts of it) that shows such hate for fantasy, and for the fantasy fans that have made his books successful. The interview linked to in this thread isn't the only time he has expressed those views.

I respect that he has a totally different view on politics than I do. But I don't respect his hate for fantasy, and his blatant disrespect for fantasy fans.

by **Satara** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:47 pm

Holy cow. I don't get one for one day, and look what happens. :w00t:

Regardless of TG and his personality, I still enjoyed the SoT books. There were many, many things that were frustrating for me (most have been listed in this thread) and there was a book or two that I almost didn't get through. It was preachy and childish. It was repetitive. Pillars of Creation was flat-out boring.

However... I actually enjoyed Temple of the Winds and Faith of the Fallen. Don't get me wrong, they weren't the best books I've read by far, but I enjoyed them.

And just for the record... I must be too young to read SoT, because I saw a SHITTON of similarities between SoT and WoT. Even down to the characters. :bad:

Yes, there are many mean things I say to TG in my head.

by **Stephan** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:39 am

There was one book in the series that I enjoyed.

by **Michael** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:30 am

I will now read Wizard's First Rule. I must know!

My sum total of books read that were written by guys called Terry is 1. The Colour of Magic.

Spot the pretend fantasy fan ------>

by **Manon Eileen** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:56 am

Stephan wrote:There was one book in the series that I enjoyed.

They each had to have sex with different people, but he found a way to have sex with her instead. She didn't know and she enjoyed it, thus he lost the will to live. It was so damn entertaining, like watching a really dirty soap opera.

That's Temple of the Winds!

Apparently I'm not the only one who did enjoy Temple of the Winds and Faith of the Fallen, I'm glad

Satara, I have to agree with you that Pillars of Creation was by far the most boring book. Wasn't that the one where you don't see anything of Richard or Kahlan in the entire book and you follow this... quite random girl?
:wall:

And rofl, Michael! :lol:

by **Satara** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:43 pm

Yeah, that's the one, Manon. :wall:

is a very apt emoticon for that book. I think you actually end up seeing Richard and Kahlan in the last chapter when that Baka Ban Mana woman catches up to them... or something...

by **Stephan** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:10 pm

I don't think I've read that one yet. The last book I read was about this boy who wanted to be really important. TG set him up pretty well, built his character and gave me the feeling this would be a regular in future books.

That's how masters of fantasy do it, right? Gradually introducing a new character, building him up from scratch and making readers slowly fall in love with the character, to then make him a regular character in future books.

Well, not Mr. Goodkind. This particular character died at the end of this particular book. All that character building, for nothing! That's when I stopped reading. I did buy the next book, but I just couldn't get myself to read it. Still sits on my shelf, unread.

by **lotteandzac** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:25 am

I enjoy a good story, regardless of whether sci-fi fantasy, crime, it does not matter. I tend to read more stories that fall into the fantasy genre, but do I care how they are class? No. SFF often has the reputation of people in fancy dress, role playing, dungeons and dragons etc. That is fine for those that enjoy that, I enjoy the escapism of a story. Do I care if the Author is rude? No really. I very much doubt Tolkien was a joy to be around, does that detract from his works? Todays society is so used to having their authors on tap, and in a very competitive area of SFF many authors use this passion and demand to their advantage in promoting works. However they run the risk of producing works to please their audience rather than produce the works intended. So do I care if Mr Goodkind is rude, no really, I would rather he continues to write books he intends that I enjoy. Do I care if I feel he appreciates me, not really passed that level of insecurity decades ago. I think fans of any genre should take care not to impose upon the writers of the works they enjoy.

by **SPAZinOL** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:55 pm

lotteandzac wrote:Do I care if the Author is rude? Not really.

To each their own. I'm very interested in the type of person the author is and it will affect my purchasing and reading decisions. With the same reasoning, I'll never go to the theater and support a movie starring Mel Gibson. As they say, vote with your wallet. And the small amount of money I have is not going to be spent enriching people I despise. (Only using the word despise for effect.)

by **lotteandzac** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:00 pm

In so doing you miss the Mad Max's of the world, the lethal weapons and The Passion. All in the time were good films, dated now, but the point is judge the art not the artist some of the greatest were the most flawed of all.

by **SPAZinOL** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:06 pm

lotteandzac wrote:In so doing you miss the Mad Max's of the world, the lethal weapons and The Passion. All in the time were good films, dated now, but the point is judge the art not the artist some of the greatest were the most flawed of all.

I disagree. There is plenty of good art out there. No need for me to financially support a person I don't like. When I'm introduced to someone for whom I have a great (and perhaps morally-inspired) distaste, I'm not gonna say, "Hey, I don't like you, but you're probably really good at your job. Let me buy you dinner!"

As I said, to each their own.

edit: I should add that I have never seen the Mad Max films or Passion of the Christ or Braveheart. I don't seem to be hurting for it.

by **lotteandzac** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:29 pm

The difference to me is that I would buy the art not the biography, perhaps I am unusual in that I can see it that way

Pop celebrity vs Talent

I am also sure that you do support a lot of artists you do not personally know, only what the press or publicists allow you to. So a bit judgemental based upon third party information, my brother meet Mel Gibson once and said he was a really polite and nice person.

You did not miss much with Braveheart fair enough, and one could go they entire life without reading a book, and they would never know what they missed - I think their life would be poorer

by **lotteandzac** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:41 pm

Fandom" implies a subculture marked by youthful enthusiasm but comparatively little sophistication compared to scholarly literary criticism and thus marks the popular aspect of the general topic of the reception of J. R. R. Tolkien. "Tolkien fandom" in this sense sprang up in the USA in the 1960s, in the context of the hippie movement, to the dismay of the author (Tolkien died in 1973), who talked of "my deplorable cultus

by **SPAZinOL** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:53 pm

lotteandzac wrote:The difference to me is that I would buy the art not the biography, perhaps I am unusual in that I can see it that way

Pop celebrity vs Talent

I am also sure that you do support a lot of artists you do not personally know, only what the press or publicists allow you to. So a bit judgemental based upon third party information, my brother meet Mel Gibson once and said he was a really polite and nice person.

You're not unusual in your decision to support the artist (good or bad) for the sake of the art. If anything, I think I'm the one in the minority here. Third party information is pretty much all we have to go on, but that doesn't mean that judgements made based on such information is automatically wrong. (Obviously, on the flip side, it's not automatically right either.)

And let's face it, the fact that your brother thought he was a nice guy means very little in this case (and I mean no offense here, the opinion would be just as useless in my eyes if it came from my own brother). Mel Gibson is a professional actor. He acts. And he's been doing it for a very long time. He's also accustomed to being in the spotlight. I'm sure he knows very well how to put on a happy face and be kind and courteous. Only the people close to him, who know him behind closed doors and outside of the public eye have any clue as to how he really is.

So like I said, we only have third party information to go on. But if enough third party information has been presented for me to make that "judgment" against someone, I will. I feel the information has to be at least somewhat compelling and I try not to make such judgments easily. But I have reached one in the case of Mr Gibson.

Having said all that, let me say that I totally understand and respect your position of ignoring the artist for the art. In a way, that might make you more of an art appreciator than I am.

As much as I love the arts, our world is made up of people and they do sometimes come first for me.

(I hope I've been able to make myself somewhat clear, and that I haven't disparaged your take on the topic.)

by **lotteandzac** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:10 pm

your responses have been good and very interesting not disparaging at all, as I got older (approaching the big 40) I am perhaps more jaded as to what we expect from people. When I was at uni I was very judgemental, takes far too much energy now!

Back to the earlier comments here are a few positive TG comments on his facebook page
http://www.facebook.com/terrygoodkind?sk=photos

by **Aloren** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:15 am

Faith of the Fallen, The Pillars of Creation, Naked Empire made me :wall:

I have no idea how I made it through. The last few were not bad though. I read SoT before or maybe around the same time I read WoT so I still have a place for it in my heart no matter its flaws. :oops:

Also I ran a site for SoT once opon a time. It kind of died once I left but it lasted about 4 years all in all and I thought we had a pretty kick as setup for the ranks and forums. Plus I was an awesome Mother Confessor.

by **Aldric** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:15 am

I'm disappointed, but it's probably a good thing, that I wasn't in these forums yet when you guys were having this discussion. I'm an avid hater of Sword of Truth, the series, and it's all too easy to take pot shots at TG the person, as was shown with a single link above, and there's many many more like that one, if you search around.

So anyway, it really is a good thing I wasn't around when this was happening, because I've been nasty enough about it before to dismay people who love the series.

I think I made it through book 5 before I quit in disgust. It's been long enough I'm not 100 percent sure.

*mumble* Utter WoT rip-off *grumble* rarely had foreshadowing, so random stuff seemed to constantly happen *cough*

goodreads · by **Michelle** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:23 am

Guess who's reviewing 'The Omen Machine'. That's right it's me.
And from what I've read of it so far this isn't going to be pretty...

by **Aloren** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:29 am

Michelle wrote:Guess who's reviewing 'The Omen Machine'. That's right it's me.
And from what I've read of it so far this isn't going to be pretty...

I can't wait to hear how it goes. ;')

by **Andrea** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:32 pm

I actually thoroughly loved Faith of the Fallen. But aside that and Wizards First Rule, thinking back none of the books really stood out to me as something I enjoyed. Just something to read.

The TV Series I enjoyed to the point of it was just 'random entertainment'. They really weren't the books at all, just as Goodkind has carried on the characters through 'new' books in the same aspect.

I have his "Law of Nines" on my bookshelf just out of Collection-need, but I feel hardpressed to bother picking it up for the same reasons I never finished the SoT series. I'm bored with his writing, and disgusted by his superior 'I'm a real author' attitude.

goodreads · by **Michelle** » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:57 am

Hi Andrea!

Welcome to the forums!

Yes, although I can review a book from an author I don't particularly like in an objective manner, if I dislike the author I'm less likely to go out of my way to actually buy the book myself. I'd probably just borrow it from a library if I need to read it.

Unfortunately, from what I've read so far this latest book is a bit tedious. Some people will attribute my dislike of the book as dislike of the author but I'm sure I've praised books from authors I wouldn't get along with in the past.

I'm a little worried actually. What if I get hate mail!

Who is online