GOODKIND V

[Werthead]

So it begins again. However, I feel that perhaps the normal rules of Westeors' Literature forum were perhaps relaxed a little over the last two threads, so let's reiterate and reinforce those rules more strongly this time:

1. Satirical discussion of TG's books is fine.

2. Discussion of the author, who is in the public eye and whose statements affect thousands of his readers, is also fine.

3. Flaming other posters, insulting other posters, general rudeness and so forth will not be tolerated. Previously certain posters were allowed to get away with what would be warning offences simply because of the more light-hearted nature of the thread. However, towards the end of the last thread a nastier and more personal side emerged (from both sides). This will not be tolerated as easily as before.

4. Any insulting statements contained in a PM sent on Westeros.org will be considered as if they were made in an open thread, leading to referral to the admins.

5. This shouldn't even be necessary to voice, but Westeros.org posters are requested not to go around vandalising other websites, not even temporarily for comedy value.

6. I don't necessarily see much more life that can be wrung out of this topic, so I would suggest that this the last thread on the subject for now. If it is felt that there is more life in the subject after this thread is exhausted, I move that a seperate forum is created for the purpose, as was done for GioG.

Thank you. Happy posting!

[TheSorrowfulMan]

Yes I am first I can't beleive it.

Who has Phantom Pre Ordered on Amazon seeing as it is the last book in the series?

Anyone have any idea what Goodkind will do after? Retire? Start a Cult? Or Write more Fantasy thats not Fantasy books?

[Moosicus]

Is Phantom really going to be the last? I heard differently. When is it coming out? I think a new TG book would definitely breathe new life into the thread. In the meantime, I think we can keep going for a while.

[Werthead]

There'll be one more after Phantom (as the finale three form the Chainfire 'Trilogy'). However, TG has apparently reserved the right to do more books set in the same world or prequels etc. So there should be one more after Phantom, unless it's a Trilogy-that-is-not-a-Trilogy.

[Moosicus]

Well then, that should keep us busy for quite some time. *giggles quietly to self*

[Mme Erzulie]

The last thread... that's so sad. Maybe we can hope that it is a last thread that isn't a last thread?

Cheers.

[Snowbeat]

There'll be one more after Phantom (as the finale three form the Chainfire 'Trilogy'). However, TG has apparently reserved the right to do more books set in the same world or prequels etc. So there should be one more after Phantom, unless it's a Trilogy-that-is-not-a-Trilogy.

You can only do a Trilogy-that-is-not-a-Trilogy if your name is Douglas Adams.

[Jaxom 1974]

There'll be one more after Phantom (as the finale three form the Chainfire 'Trilogy'). However, TG has apparently reserved the right to do more books set in the same world or prequels etc. So there should be one more after Phantom, unless it's a Trilogy-that-is-not-a-Trilogy.

Okay...I read this too somewhere.

Serious (Semi-serious, since it is a Goodkind thread): What the duece? Really? The "Chainfire Trilogy"? A trilogy set within the series as a whole? I've never really been a fan of that concept. It works to a degree for Tom Clancy, but it feels weird with this whole thing...Like Moose said, could be a lot of fodder.

But the Serious (semi serious, since it's a Goodkind thread): Didn't the The Terry himself say somewhere once that he'd be done after Phantom with the whole Sword of Truth series, but he wanted to move on to other things, better things? So if it's a trilogy, doesn't that go against what he'd said almost from the start?

Though I guess the author reserves the right to change his mind, but still...

[Sariel]

I thought Terry claimed Chainfire to be his last book within the SoT universe once.

Considering the little extract we've received from Phantom, I'm sure the book will be overflowing with excellent quotes of the day

[Wolf Girl]

Considering the little extract we've received from Phantom, I'm sure the book will be overflowing with excellent quotes of the day

I'm afraid. Very afraid.

[Plessiez]

I thought Terry claimed Chainfire to be his last book within the SoT universe once.

As I understand it, once Goodkind decided it was time to wrap up his money-making scam bring the epic story of Real Human Emotion to a close, it was always the plan that the final three books of the series would be a trilogy. But I remember seeing at least one review (real, I think) where the reviewer seemed to have missed this and instead praised Goodkind's bold decision to give the series such an open end. Don't think that was ever based on anything the Yeard himself said.

[Werthead]

You can only do a Trilogy-that-is-not-a-Trilogy if your name is Douglas Adams.

Or Robert Rankin, who published the seventh novel in his Brentford Trilogy a couple of years ago.

Okay...I read this too somewhere.

A trilogy set within the series as a whole? I've never really been a fan of that concept. It works to a degree for Tom Clancy, but it feels weird with this whole thing...Like Moose said, could be a lot of fodder.

Quite a few authors do it. The Midkemian mega-saga that Raymond E. Feist is writing has an overall arc (the story of the five Riftwars and Pug's role in them) but is divided into tons of lesser series. Frank Herbert's first three books are frequently called The Great Dune Trilogy although there are another three books in the series. The Foundation Trilogy is still referred to as such, even though there's another four books in the series. Even Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing Trilogy is the first part of a larger, seven-book series called The Second Apocalypse. Not for the first time, Goodkind's work has a precedent.

[Larry.]

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted over here as well. Just an odd thing, but read within for the link and see how the other side lives.

[Mercury Poisoning]

Even Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing Trilogy is the first part of a larger, seven-book series called The Second Apocalypse.

The Prince of Nothing also has "a Kelhus that was not Kelhus," somewhere towards the end of The Warrior Prophet.

EDIT:

Some choice quotes from Ambassador Ben's terrygoodkind.net thread.

I have often wondered why the childish, deurogatory and vitriolic hatred continues against Terry Goodkind and his fans. It makes very little sense to me how some folks will go so far as to create fake profiles on myspace, create fake websites, and get into edit wars on Wikipedia to the point of charater assassination, identity theft, and outright libel and slander.

I've drawn some conclusions, that there is jealousy among GRRM and Jordan fans due Goodkind's success

The deliberate malice and deciet displayed on the few forums I have frequented, was simply put, hateful and childish.

While I can not speak for others, the superiority complexes, and lack of respect, and quick response of "lashing out" to any whom have defended Goodkind or tried to show an alternative perspective, has more than displayed the type of charcters we are discussing.

-- Cowduck, jumping on the bandwagon.

[Hark]

I've drawn some conclusions, that there is jealousy among GRRM and Jordan fans due Goodkind's success

Doesn't he get it? We hate them for their freedom.

[Werthead]

I've drawn some conclusions, that there is jealousy among GRRM and Jordan fans due Goodkind's success

Well, yes, because GRRM has sold as many copies-per-book of his series as Goodkind has, and Jordan has sold twice as many plus. GRRM has won the Hugo, Stoker and Nebula Awards and Goodkind has never won anything prestigious at all. Erikson was nominated for a World Fantasy Award and Goodkind never has been. Martin was featured in an article in Time Magazine, which last time I checked was a fairly rare occurence for a fantasy writer. Goodkind has probably never even been mentioned in it.

So yes, we're re exceedingly jealous of Goodkind's mighty non-achievements

I think I've worked out what the GK fans' main beef is. Eddings and Brooks come in for a fair amount of bashing on these boards but their fans don't go batshit insane trolling boards trying to defend them. Jordan, Erikson and Bakker are controversial in some regard or another but again there isn't this frenzied activity. Erikson and Bakker have sold enough for them to write full time for a living, Goodkind rather more than them and Jordan, Eddings and Brooks even more so (well, Jordan definitely but surely Eddings and Brooks have as well). General popularity and sales don't seem to be the issue. What is at issue for GK fans is whether or not his books are accepted as art (presumably due to his Objectivist leanings). The fact that quite frequently even positive Goodkind fans say something like "He tells a good yarn, a good page-turning story to pass the time," seems to annoy them and GK himself, so satirical evaluations such as those carried out here and on other sites must truly incense them.

In a free and democratic society, this is a good thing. He has a Message he wants to deliver, which is laudably ambitious, but lacks the raw writing ability that, say, Bakker or Frank Herbert or China Mieville have to deliver their Messages in such a manner than even people who vehemently disagree with them can still enjoy the story. That Goodkind's existing hardcore fans enjoy his books on this level that other, usually better-read people do not is therefore the root of the problem.

So the GK hardcore really enjoy GK's books, think they are art and get irritated when other people say they are not. GK critics do not enjoy GK's books, think they are instead drivel and get irritated when other people say they are not. Stalemate. So my suggestion would be that both sides just live with it. GK fans can sit on their boards and bash every other author and people who dislike GK, and we can sit here taking the mickey out of GK as and when the matter arises and everyone is happy. We are never going to convince the other side that we are right and they are never going to convince us they are right. So there you go.

[TerraPrime]

In a free and democratic society, this is a good thing. He has a Message he wants to deliver, which is laudably ambitious, but lacks the raw writing ability that, say, Bakker or Frank Herbert or China Mieville have to deliver their Messages in such a manner than even people who vehemently disagree with them can still enjoy the story. That Goodkind's existing hardcore fans enjoy his books on this level that other, usually better-read people do not is therefore the root of the problem.

That is merely part of the problem. I think that Goodkind's lack of control over his writing renders his "message" as the literary equivalent of my cat's vomit from last night's meal - I mean, I know the cat ate a can of catfood called "savory salmon," but by the gods, I can't find a trace of it in this semi-gooey brown gruel. It's only through the innate human need to derive logic from chaotic surroundings that we piece together what Goodkind is getting at. Or sometimes, from Goodkind's explanation in interviews.

But let's not be uncharitable. Not all of Goodkind's messages are mangled by his own bad writing as a week-old roadkill is mangled by an 18-wheeler. Some of Goodkind's messages are clear as day. They hit you over the head like a wracking ball to the side of a building, e.g. the sculpture called Life.

[The Wolf Maid]

So the GK hardcore really enjoy GK's books, think they are art and get irritated when other people say they are not. GK critics do not enjoy GK's books, think they are instead drivel and get irritated when other people say they are not. Stalemate. So my suggestion would be that both sides just live with it. GK fans can sit on their boards and bash every other author and people who dislike GK, and we can sit here taking the mickey out of GK as and when the matter arises and everyone is happy. We are never going to convince the other side that we are right and they are never going to convince us they are right. So there you go.

Hear, Hear!

Unfortunately, I don't think some fans are going to let this stand, they'll try to hammer into other people's heads what they think is right.

And wait, is this really going to be the last GK thread?

And if Phantom is the the last SoT book, all I'll just say is, "Finally, the torture stops."

[Knight of the Wineskin]

That is merely part of the problem. I think that Goodkind's lack of control over his writing renders his "message" as the literary equivalent of my cat's vomit from last night's meal - I mean, I know the cat ate a can of catfood called "savory salmon," but by the gods, I can't find a trace of it in this semi-gooey brown gruel.

Terra, you are awesome. You seriously are what posters should aspire to be.

[Werthead]

Geez, if you guys continue to ridicule MyStar in the manor (did I spell that right?) that you do now, he might just fire off another round of email to GRRM complaining about how mean we are to him and his favorite author. We wouldn't want that now would we? So let's all play nice and be extra-gentle to MyStar and his friends. Agree with whatever it is that he says. Henceforth, I propose that we adopt the following guidelines on discussions concerning Mr. Terry Goodkind, blessed be his name:

(TerraPrime's post from Goodkind IV)

TerraPrime, just to let you know that this post has gone down a storm on Malazanempire. They've demanded I pass on their congrats and that they stand in suitable awe of you. So Nice one!