Errant Bard Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Can a book become a cult classic?yes. Behold... The eye of argon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niamh Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Well obviously you haven't been paying enough attention in his interviews. He HAS no fantasy references because he is NOT a fantasy author. Sheesh. Someone needs to be instructed on the proper method of reading. Yeah, you I didn't mention fantasy references, I mentioned litterature references. All he mentions is Ayn Rand. Go ahead and prove me wrong yes. Behold... The eye of argon. Are you kidding me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLU Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Yeah, you I didn't mention fantasy references, I mentioned litterature references. All he mentions is Ayn Rand. Go ahead and prove me wrong ~sigh~ Ayn Rand is literature. Obviously your manor of answering posts shows that you are to young to reed his books. Bonus points for guessing the source. OK, you got me, I concede defeat and choose death. Are you kidding me? To be fair, TEoA is somewhat of an involuntary parody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niamh Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 To be fair, TEoA is somewhat of an involuntary parody.But it has cult following Beside, SoT isn't an involuntary parody? *flexes, grabs sword and gets ready to slaughter centipedes* :fence: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLU Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Well, I suppose I've offed a lot of night wisps then. I will say that I have, at least, never paid for these books. The wonder of libraries, eh? Your merciless slaughter of night wisps absolves you from any taint gained from enjoying the series. You are off my Revenge List. But it has cult following Beside, SoT isn't an involuntary parody? *flexes, grabs sword and gets ready to slaughter centipedes* It does have a cult following, I concede defeat yeat again. Once more today and I have to staplegun myself to death. Don't you know? To slaughter centipedes of collectivism you don't need muscles or a sword, just a boundless supply of rage. Oh, and the author that is on your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares Posted May 2, 2007 Author Share Posted May 2, 2007 I just finished Wizard's First Rule. In many ways, its not much worse than your standard no-name author hack n'slash novel. The combat scenes do get better since the first one, but are unnecessarily brutal. It's not dreadful as a book other than the insufferable dialogue, stupid characters, horrible names and horrible, horrible prose in many places. Though considering the author's high opinion of himself and his constant boasting, it is a laughable effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Warpechowski Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Im strugling to read it. Hell, its so childish and lame. The plot focus change every 5 pages, and nothing is very clear. Its so chaotic. When you read ASoIaF, you can clearly see each chapter has a meaning, a purpose. In this book everything is mixed together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares Posted May 2, 2007 Author Share Posted May 2, 2007 Im strugling to read it. Hell, its so childish and lame. The plot focus change every 5 pages, and nothing is very clear. Its so chaotic. When you read ASoIaF, you can clearly see each chapter has a meaning, a purpose. In this book everything is mixed together. You can't compare everything to ASOIAF. Even LoTR compared to ASOIAF could be made to look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 But it has cult following Beside, SoT isn't an involuntary parody? *flexes, grabs sword and gets ready to slaughter centipedes* :fence: I will tolerate Eye of Argon because...the author is not a pompous ass. I think people would have left Terry alone in his....world had he not made those arrogant statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Warpechowski Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 You can't compare everything to ASOIAF. Even LoTR compared to ASOIAF could be made to look bad. Well, right now I´m comparing it to Salvatore´s books, since I thought there was nothing worst than Salvatore before reading this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 Well, right now I´m comparing it to Salvatore´s books, since I thought there was nothing worst than Salvatore before reading this. Meh, people who read Salvatore read him for a meaningless but fun tryst through Faerun. He at least delivers his goal. I find that the funniest thing about Goodkind isn't the novel itself but his self-professed superiority as an author. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crow's Eye Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 I find that the funniest thing about Goodkind isn't the novel itself but his self-professed superiority as an author. but his self-professed superiority isn't nearly so funny if you haven't read the books - they go hand-in-hand, like ass clowns and their balloon masterpieces. I stopped after the book where Dick Rahl carved his Statue of Philosophy or whatever the hell it was over the course of the entire book. I just couldn't do it anymore. not even to snicker at TG. Is there ANYTHING more boring that reading about a statue being carved out of stone that you can't see and the author can't stick with long enough to describe? I mean, these books really did major damage to my ability to accurately evaluate the quality of literature for quite some time. Anytime you go looking to re-read "Path of Daggers" or "Crossroads of Twilight" you know something's just not right anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLU Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 I just finished Wizard's First Rule. In many ways, its not much worse than your standard no-name author hack n'slash novel. The combat scenes do get better since the first one, but are unnecessarily brutal. It's not dreadful as a book other than the insufferable dialogue, stupid characters, horrible names and horrible, horrible prose in many places. Though considering the author's high opinion of himself and his constant boasting, it is a laughable effort. How about the fact that whenever Goodkind has a choice between different ways of doing things, he picks the one that is the most brutal, humiliating, painful, counterintiutive, complicated and unnecessary. "Hm. I need a way of getting the character to not be able to use his magic. I've narrowed it down to either some sort of collar, or a 86-page detailed description of his brutal torture at the hands of a thinly-disguised dominatrix with an electric dildo of pain. Well, the answer is obvious!" Or, and I haven't read it yet and neither have you, so I'll spoiler it: SPOILER: magic "Hm. I need a way to transfer magic from wizards, to insane torture-monkeys who happen to be uberhot, thinly disguised dominatrixes. Now, I can either go with some sort of ritual where they eat his flesh... (pause) It's amusing that this is the LESS gruesome method. (aaaand resume) SPOILER: continued ...or we skin the wizard alive and drain his magic into a statue. And it's not over yet. Then there's the way of transferring the magic. SPOILER: namble "Hm. How to transfer the magic to the insane torture monkeys who happen to be uberhot, thinly disguised dominatrixes. I can either have them use the statue as a butt-plug (perhaps electric? Of pain?) OR, I could transfer it to some sort of poorly described creature, that then then rapes them. But it's not really rape, because they want to do it, and because women are such whores, they all want it anyway. Speaking of which, perhaps I should untie my wife. Nah, fuck'er. Hm. So, what sort of phallus should this creature that fake-rapes the insane torture monkeys who happen to be uberhot, thinly disguised dominatrixes have. I can either go with smooth, or... barbed. Tough choice... OK, barbed. Now, should it be lubricated, or... And it goes on. 10 years from now, Goodkind will be kicking himself. SPOILER: future"Dammit! Why did I go so easy on them! It should have been a GANG rape, and the namble-dicks should have had FISH HOOKS, that tear their SPINES out along with their uterus! Fuck me, how could I have been so stupid. That would illustrate the important non-fantasy human theme of not trying to steal magic from a wizard. DAMMIT! Tearing Goodkind a new one is a delicate art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Tearing Goodkind a new one is a delicate art. Pun intended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 The thought of TG actually being that meticulous about his sexy bdsm girls are actually quite plausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lint Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Goodkind's got another one coming out this year?!? Sheesh, he's really churning them out isn't he? I'm just glad I stopped reading them a long time ago. Personally, I don't think the first three are that bad. Everything else after that though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antares Posted May 4, 2007 Author Share Posted May 4, 2007 BTW, anyone else find it funny that the titular wizard's first rule isn't actually a rule, nor does it have anything to do with wizards, nor is it particularily insightful? IMO it should be called "Random General Statement #1". A real wizard's first rule should be something like: "Only use magic to help others" or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkess Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 BTW, anyone else find it funny that the titular wizard's first rule isn't actually a rule, nor does it have anything to do with wizards, nor is it particularily insightful? IMO it should be called "Random General Statement #1". A real wizard's first rule should be something like: "Only use magic to help others" or whatever. Not true at all. Per Merriam-Webster: rule: 2 a (1) : a usually valid generalization (2) : a generally prevailing quality, state, or mode <fair weather was the rule yesterday -- New York Times> b : a standard of judgment : CRITERION c : a regulating principle d : a determinate method for performing a mathematical operation and obtaining a certain result Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosicus Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 There we go. It should have been titled "Wizard's First Usually Valid Generalization." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.