Jump to content

Goodkind XIV


Werthead

Recommended Posts

***"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." USAToday.com Q&A***

Because nobody before the great Tairy ever wrote anything that was both intelligent and entertaining!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh we are bowing our heads good governer! In sheer awe I assure you!

“My books were defined in the marketplace as fantasy purely because of business considerations, not essential characteristics. In the business of selling books, the fact that there are elements of magic in my novels and, far more importantly, that I am published by a fantasy publisher, nullifies every other consideration. If I were now to write a book about a travel agent going on a whale-watching cruise and the boat was captured by Islamic terrorists who intended to use it to deliver a dirty bomb into Boston harbor, and this book were published by my present publisher, and I used my real name, the book would be racked in fantasy -despite its content.

Because fantasy publishers make their living publishing fantasy, they seek out fantasy that will sell to the fantasy reader, so there is rarely any confusion. Most fantasy authors are very deliberate in their intent to write fantasy books. In my case, I have ended up with a good publisher who happens to be a fantasy publisher, among other things but they failed to see beyond the fantasy elements in the first book. Look at WIZARD'S FIRST RULE. What did my publisher insist be on the cover? A red dragon. Was a red dragon, per se, central to the story? No. But in the minds of unthinking individuals the existence of a red dragon in the story superseded all other aspects and defined the book, therefore it went on the cover.

So, my books were categorized according to one of the least important elements of their content - red dragons -at the expense of the most important element - human themes shared by every one of you.

I've finally succeeded in getting Tor to put a new cover on WIZARD'S FIRST RULE. What is the subject of the new cover? Two people. Are they central to the story? Yes. Is magic central to their story? No. What is? Volition. How is volition carried out? Through the thinking human mind of the characters as demonstrated by the plot Theme, Characterization, Plot. A novel.

Along with cover content, I've endeavored to mitigate confusion and misconception by having the imprint used on my books changed from the one that says "fantasy" to the generic "TOR" logo and by removing some of the more overt fantasy trappings, such as the sword on the title page. You will also observe that the series name -The Sword of Truth -is no longer used on the books' covers. But, because of marketplace realities, there are limits to what I can do to get this message across.

Yet there are those who rail at me because I don't behave like a fantasy author is "supposed" to. I don't follow the rules, as they see it.

There are those who focus exclusively on this least important element -magic - simply because people I don't know, despite my strenuous objections at the time, insisted on placing a red dragon on the cover of my work, and because of that, and who published the book, I was racked in bookstores as fantasy. As a result, in the minds of some readers I am for all time to be labeled as a “fantasy" author. So I must now follow some unstated laws of writing - I must know my place - because I've been mindlessly labeled a "fantasy" author? That, my friends, is bigotry.

I am not an obedient subservient cog of a group, slavishly following the group's conventions. I am a thinking individual acting of my own free will.

Shania Twain had a similar problem with country music fans who resented her because her music doesn't follow the constrained conventions of country music. She has risen above category names. For most of my fans, so have I.

Most of Shania Twain's fans are not regular country music fans. Most of my fans are not regular fantasy fans nor are they so bigoted that they think I must know my place and stay in it.

While my books do contain elements of fantasy, and I'm proud of those elements - just as I'm proud of the romance, the political intrigue, the mystery -those fantasy elements are not the essential characteristics that define my work.

A proper novel, with a true plot, must have ideas that drive the story. Action without psychological articulation is not a worthwhile plot. Those essential elements that make my books novels (and not the fantasy elements) are the fundamentals that are most important to me, So please keep in mind that, while I will be happy to entertain questions that pertain to the fantasy elements, those things just aren't central. Magic is but a tool I use to help tell important human stories. The magic isn't what matters -the characters do.

You might say that the magic is like a light used to illuminate someone skulking around in the dark. When people focus intently on the magic elements, it's as if, when I shine that light on the man lurking in the darkness, they are asking me, "Say, what kind of batteries do you have in that flashlight -are they disposable or are they the rechargeable kind? One time you said it took a fraction of second for the flashlight to turn on. Now you seem to be implying that it turned on instantly. I’m confused, which is it -a fraction of a second, or do you really mean instantly? Hey, let me ask you a question about voltage. .." They only want to know about my flashlight. I want to know what the man is doing mucking about in the darkness. “

How dare thay makes him usez a redd dragon on his book cover?!! Red commiez!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at WIZARD'S FIRST RULE. What did my publisher insist be on the cover? A red dragon. Was a red dragon, per se, central to the story? No. But in the minds of unthinking individuals the existence of a red dragon in the story superseded all other aspects and defined the book, therefore it went on the cover.

So, my books were categorized according to one of the least important elements of their content - red dragons -at the expense of the most important element - human themes shared by every one of you.

I've finally succeeded in getting Tor to put a new cover on WIZARD'S FIRST RULE. What is the subject of the new cover? Two people. Are they central to the story? Yes. Is magic central to their story? No. What is? Volition. How is volition carried out? Through the thinking human mind of the characters as demonstrated by the plot Theme, Characterization, Plot. A novel.

Apparently you convey "human themes shared by every one of you" by putting two people on the cover of a book. "Oh, look, two people. This must be a book about human themes."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, I didn't know that Tairy had a flashlight!! What brand do you suppose it is? Do you think it's one of them new-fangled LED flashlights? I wonder how he holds it. Do you think he holds it underhand style like a camper, or overhand style like a cop? Does it have a push button or a switch? Do you think he ever calls it a "torch" like the English? What color is it? I have so many questions.

And how DARE anybody say he writes fantasy? I fail to see how a story that includes swords, sorcery, fairies, witches, dragons, fantastical beasts, and a general medieval setting can be classified as "fantasy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how DARE anybody say he writes fantasy? I fail to see how a story that includes swords, sorcery, fairies, witches, dragons, fantastical beasts, and a general medieval setting can be classified as "fantasy".

Psh, you must be "an obedient subservient cog of a group, slavishly following the group's conventions." :rolleyes:

Also, how can he say

Is magic central to their story? No.

unless you discount, you know, all that "magic" that is "central to the story". Someone explain to me how the the Boxes of Orden aren't "magic" or "central to the story"? Aren't they the main plot device? Or how the Confessor's ability isn't "magic" or "central to the story." Doesn't it reslove the entire plot in the end?

(That is, if you call that end a resolution, not some deus ex machina way out of logically ending the story. "By the way, the magic doesn't work on you because you love her. Or some such crap.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, I can see from your name that you are obviously a pinko commie. As such you could never understand the scope of Tairy's genius. :D

The boxes of orden are merley a metephor for fried chicken, and everybody knows that there is no magic involved in fried chicken. Duh!! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More ammunition!

Tairy converting young nubile 14 year old girls and boyz to da cause!!

"This is an excellent question and I'm glad you asked it. My novels are based on stories that most anyone could appreciate. Young people, while they may not be able to articulate the reasoning behind certain events, can nevertheless appreciate the sense of life presented. There is plenty there for someone your age to read and enjoy. I've heard from 14 year-old readers, like you who in fact have a better grasp of the story than do people in their twenties. But there are still concepts involved that are beyond the complete understanding of young people. Think of how much more you understand than you did only a couple of years ago. Young people are still putting together the meaning of ever more abstract concepts. While you can certainly begin to grasp the meaning and implications of love between a couple such as Kahlan and Richard, you are simply not old enough to completely understand such a relationship. The magic that you enjoy reading about is fun in and of itself, but there are deeper meanings behind it. I use magic metaphorically -meaning that it's used to represent other things in our world. On the most simplistic level, magic is used as a metaphor for technology. The journey books used by the Sisters of the Light, for example, are metaphorically much like e-mail or other forms of communication. It's not the magic itself that's important, but what is done with it -it's the message sent that matters, not the means, just like when you get an important message. The older you get, the more you will come to understand the meanings behind the things in the books. Think of it this way: Imagine a seven-year-old listening to the audio of one of my books. They would be able to grasp the story, but do you really think that they would get everything that you, at fourteen, would understand? In the same way, as you get older you will come to understand more of the meaning involved in the stories. I've had people come up to me at book signings and tell me that they first read WIZARD'S FIRST RULE at fourteen, and then they re-read it when they were twenty and they could hardly believe how much they had missed when they were younger. This doesn't mean that they weren't smart enough, or that they didn't enjoy it the first time, it only means that it's natural to understand more about life as you get older. For this reason I say that the books are meant for adults, but that doesn't mean that younger people can’t also enjoy the story, and I've very pleased that you did. I think that, in some ways, young people are better able to grasp the goodness in the main characters. It seems that some adults miss this aspect of the stories because they become so tangled in irrelevant details. In this respect, it could be that you got more from the stories than many adults."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An extremely long-winded way of saying "you'll understand more as you get older". does this guy ever shut up?

I wondered the same thing. I can be as long winded as Tairy at times but I fall short of sounding as arrogant on most occasions. He really thinks he's something. But at least these quotes can be found laying around like rare treasures to give people an insight into what he is.

It's a shame I enjoyed the series BEFORE I started thinking deeper into the characters actions and motivations and stumbling upon GoodKind's ranting. Had I kept a "it is just fun fantasy about evil poultry!" mind set I would be up to Phantom by now. Of course Tairy would still call me a dumb peasant for seeing his novels as fantasy instead of philosophical "better living" guides to the soul.

Isn't he married? How can his wife deal with him? Is she an O'ist or just with him for the finacial perks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course Tairy would still call me a dumb peasant for seeing his novels as fantasy instead of philosophical "better living" guides to the soul.

You wouldn't just be a dumb peasant, you would be a force of evil who wants to destroy all that is good in the world. This is exactly what Tairy has said about people who only like his books for the swords'n'sorcery nonsense and ignore his "message". Gotta love the guy.

On the subject of "paid employment =EVIL!!!!1!", I suspect Richard may have a British counterpart in magazine magnate Felix Dennis, an entrepreneur who regularly insults his staff for being weak and servile by, er, being staff and not striking out on their own. He's written lots of (utterly abysmal) poetry about how great it is to be your own boss and how you've gotta live your own life and not bow to the will of others; he has an island full of concubines (possibly clad in red leather?) and - yes - a yeard. Has anyone ever seen him and Tairy in the same room??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is merit to the idea that Goodkind shouldn't be classified as fantasy, since he cheapens the entire genre. Instead, bookstores should have a shelf for didactic fiction. Goodkind could share it with Left Behind and Sherri S. Tepper's works. He would then have another target for bashing. I wonder what he would say, but I suspect the phrases "hate life" and "reinvented didactic fiction" would be mentioned... (I'm going to think about this. Perhaps it could be funny.)

EDIT - I mean it would be guaranteed to be funny if the Yeardi wrote it himself, but I'm wondering if I could bend my mind enough to channel him in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to welcome the newcomers to the table. Us oldtimers have had so much meta-chicken that we are full and a bit content, but you bring back life to Terry-bashing.

Do all of these people know about the GioG forums?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to welcome the newcomers to the table. Us oldtimers have had so much meta-chicken that we are full and a bit content, but you bring back life to Terry-bashing.

Do all of these people know about the GioG forums?

Hello! Glad to be here.

I haven't actually been to the Goodkind is our God forums; I'm not actually sure if the forums are spoofs or are run by genuine True Believers. I've heard both.

And a quote, this one from Chainfire, Chapter 48. The speaker is Zedd, and he's explaining the Wizard's Ninth Rule:

"To believe in a contradiction is to abdicate your belief in the existence of the world around you and the nature of the things in it, to instead embrace any random impulse that strikes your fancy--to imagine something is real simply because you wish it were. A thing is what it is, it is itself. There can be no contradictions. In reality, contradictions cannot exist. To believe in them you must abandon the most important thing you possess: your rational mind. The wager for such a bargain is your life. In such an exchange, you always lose what you have at stake."

So oxymorons, logical fallacies and paradoxes don't exist, despite all evidence to the contrary. Thank you, Tairy! I never would have known this if not for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how does he explain the chicken that is not a chicken? That looks kinda like a contradiction to me... :rolleyes:

Methinks Tairy needs to read his own words a leetle more carefully. Still, you can't blame him for not wanting to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Methinks Tairy needs to read his own words a leetle more carefully. Still, you can't blame him for not wanting to.

Fan: "Gee mr. Goodkind, could you explain your theory of contradictions a bit more?"

TG: "What do you mean?"

Fan: "In Chainfire."

TG: "Oh shit, I don't read that crap!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how does he explain the chicken that is not a chicken? That looks kinda like a contradiction to me...
Chickens-that-are-not-chickens are scientifically verifiable creatures. Any inherant contradiction is cancelled out by the existance of noble goats.

Fan: "In Chainfire."

TG: "Oh shit, I don't read that crap!"

Are you saying that Chainfire is crap?! Sir, I challenge you to a duel!!! :fence:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chickens-that-are-not-chickens are scientifically verifiable creatures. Any inherant contradiction is cancelled out by the existance of noble goats.

Are you saying that Chainfire is crap?! Sir, I challenge you to a duel!!! :fence:

That wasn't me man, that was Tairy. It's just speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...