GOODKIND VI: THE PHANTOM MENACING

[Moosicus]

A correction Richard didn’t kill Violet, he only smashed her baby teeth and cut off her tongue. I read in a review that she is back, with a tongue, in Phantom.

My guess is that TG (BBHN) is wrapping up loose ends, so she has to die in some horrible fashion.

Does anyone know how much time has passed in Richard’s world? I’m wondering how long it takes to grow back a new tongue.

She gets her tongue back? Aw fuck! I was hoping she'd not make a sound, like Ilyn Payne, and when she did it would just be a clacking sound to indicate she's laughing.

I would guess about a year each for the first six books maybe. After that quite a bit less, maybe a year for the last 3? I'm guessing.

[14th Dragon]

Disagreeing then ...he boots Violet only because he feels truly sorry for her (don't ask). It's the only way he can break the Mord Sith spell. He's still vulnerable because he hasn't added 2 and 2 together at that point.

ETA: Basically drawing on the substractive side of the blade, which is impervious to MS magic. Denna is capable of beating him senseless, for the only reason he cannot go where she does not want him to, physically

Actually it is not that subtractive side is impervious or that it is subtractive magic in general. The swords magic is made from both sides of the magic. It is simply that the Mord Sith can only use magic used against them. He used the rage/hate/anger side of the sword in his first attack and was captured. When he switched to forgivenss/love/understanding the blade went white and he attacked her with it and she did not try to capture that magic.

[diabloblanco18]

Is Goodkind a mad genius? Most of us here will disagree, but perhaps we are all just subjects of a grand experiment of his.

Perhaps Goodkind's books, nay, his entire public image, are really one big straw man. What if this is all a weird crusade against Objectivism?

[niamh]

Actually it is not that subtractive side is impervious or that it is subtractive magic in general. The swords magic is made from both sides of the magic. It is simply that the Mord Sith can only use magic used against them. He used the rage/hate/anger side of the sword in his first attack and was captured. When he switched to forgivenss/love/understanding the blade went white and he attacked her with it and she did not try to capture that magic.

The Mord Sith have no power whatsoever on substractive magic, because they only have additive themselves (it's said afterwards quite a lot of times. Don't ask me what books). She could try all she wanted, to no avail

[Werthead]

One of the disappointments about living in the UK and working full-time is I usually miss out the shit hitting the fan, as it seems to have done today. Oh well.

The Wiki Drama Continues. Before I begin, I just want to state that that I thought that 'drive-by edit' of the Goodkind wiki was childish and an unbecoming act of vandalism. However, I will say this in favor of the vandal: he probably was just doing it for a lark and not seriosuly expecting the misinformation to remain undetected and become a permanent part of wiki.

However, it seems that Mystar regards the Goodkind wiki as his own personal stomping ground. It seems he desperately, desperately wants the article to include the phrase 'phenomenally successful' in reference to Goodkind. I would even go so far as to say he has a bee in his bonnet about it. Not only that, but it seems the Goodkind fans have taken to attacking moderators and anyone who edits Goodkind's wiki so that it portrays him as less than a God on Earth.

I think I can safely maintain that almost anything on the GIOG site is exceeded by Terry's actual fans.

The Wikipedia situation is just lame beyond all reasonable belief. I think Mystar needs to learn that Wikipedia articles need to be 100% neutral-POV. They are not there for publicity purposes. Last week I had to gut the Steven Erikson page on the request of a mod simply because someone had gone a bit wild listing stuff directly out of the books' appendices, which is a) dubious from a copyright angle and unnecessary in a brief summary of the author and books page. And you do need to quote a source for every single claim on every single page. Some people don't and sometimes it's not a problem if it's not contentious, but if called on a topic by anyone, you do have to prove your case. For example, 'phenomenally successful' could be attributed to Tolkien (the biggest selling fantasy novel of all time) or Rowling (the biggest selling living fantasy author at the moment with a vast cultural impact), but I don't see how Goodkind's sales (even if taken as 50 million) could be said to be elevated above other 'really successful' authors like Jordan (who must have sold more), Pratchett (who definitely has sold more) or Dan Brown (who is getting on for selling the same amount with just four books).

If I had any sort of moral clarity at all, I would push Mystar off a cliff for the good of mankind. Jeez!

I hurt from reading the page it brought me to. I am sure "mystar" has an "ability" "somewhere" to "write." I cannot be "sure," though, as his "posting" appeared to be "written" by a "4 year old parapalegic with no arm beneath the elbow who was born blind and in a non-English speaking country.*"

Easy with the personal comments and insults, people, as related on Page 1 of this thread. This also goes for Mystar. People here are clearly not lacking in 'moral clarity', nor are they 'terrorists'. Suggesting otherwise is frankly preposterous.

Imagine in WW2, if we'd have declared war on poison gas chambers, and we said all these jews are dying in gas chambers, we have to stop this, we're gonna declare war on poison gas chambers, we're gonna find the money of the people who have backed the gas chambers constructors and we're gonna find the poison gas importers and we're gonna stop them. Uh, in WW2 we rightly declared war on nazis, because it's an evil philosophy that was trying to destroy us, but in this war, we're declaring war on a tactic, like we're saying we're gonna outlaw the blitzkrieg. Well you can't declare war on a tactic, you must declare war on the philosophy that is using that tactic.

Hmm, I don't recall America's joining of WW2 having anything to do with ideology, other than "this country is attacking us and our allies, let's (belatedly) get 'em!" .. gah, what am I doing? The Yeard speaks truth. It is known.

WW2 is my specialist area of history, so a few facts to set the record straight.

1) The United States never declared war on Nazi Germany. Roosevelt was keen on it, especially after the US and German fleets started exchanging fire in the Atlantic from early 1941 onwards, but the Senate did not think they could justify getting involved in another European war. Even after Pearl Harbour, the mood in the Senate seemed to be for prosecuting a war against Japan but not against Germany (despite the German-Japanese alliance). Luckily for Roosevelt, the decision was taken out of the Senate's hands four days later when Hitler, in arguably his single most pointlessly demented decision of the conflict (even startling the Japanese ambassador to Berlin, who didn't think the Nazis would live up the alliance), declared war against the United States.

2) The Allies knew about the Final Solution from intercepts and prisoners, almost certainly from early 1944 onwards. Bombing the death camps was even discussed. The news was not made public, nor was any action taken against the death camps simply because it was tactically difficult to do anything about the crisis until the US and the Russians actually overran the camps themselves, and for morale reasons.

3) The tactics of blitzkrieg were naturally not outlawed (because they make fricking good military sense) but later used by the Russians (in WWII at Stalingrad and the road to Berlin), Israel (to defeat Egypt in the Yom Kippur War) and by the Americans (among others) in the Gulf War.

4) The Nazi ideology was indeed defeated and destroyed. It was replaced by a communist dictatorship which terrorised the eastern half of Europe for 55 years instead which Roosevelt seemed to have no problem with. Not knocking the Americans overall in this instance; Patton certainly had the right idea in pressing on to Berlin and Roosevelt's hero worship of Stalin's fortitude during the war was certainly understandable at the time (would America have fought on with 30 million dead?). Just to point out that America's desire for an ideological war was non-existent. The war was fought on practical grounds for realisticly achievable goals.

But, naturally, off-topic

[niamh]

Never let a bad truth get in the way of good ideology Werthead! tsk tsk

[VigoTheCarpathian]

A little off the current topic, but:

Did everyone know that TG(BHHN) is only doing one book signing/meet-and-greet for Phantom? It's at a ranch in Las Vegas, and is a ticketed event ($25 per ticket). I just found this out, and it pretty much ruined my whole year.

I was hoping he would be doing a national tour. You see, inspired by the Malazan forum and this thread, if Mr. Goodkind (BHHN) visited Oregon for a signing, I was planning on standing outside of the venue in a full war wizard "outfit", with the best yeard money can buy and an awesome cardboard SoT, repeatedly kicking a small girl mannequin in the jaw and screaming (with rage) "Witness my moral clarity!", etc. I was hoping to get suggestions on things to scream from both boards, and with any luck, to get others to perform similar acts in other cities.

Oh well...

[Draco the Lizard]

Can I just say that I quit after book 7, because a) I read so much about Goodkind being the pompous prat that he is, the book wasn't even ABOUT Richard and Kahlan (although I think that may have been an improvement) and c) book six was just too damn annoying with the communism thing.

If you're wondering why I stuck it out so long: I'm gonna say Dutch translation. A lot of you say that Terry's writing style is simply horrible, and well, in a translation the writing style gets changed at least a bit. Besides, the first couple of books at least were done by the guy who translated Lord of the Rings, and clearly knew what he was doing. So I'm thinking that an excellent translation can do a bad book a world of good.

[The Wolf Maid]

She gets her tongue back? Aw fuck! I was hoping she'd not make a sound, like Ilyn Payne, and when she did it would just be a clacking sound to indicate she's laughing.

I would guess about a year each for the first six books maybe. After that quite a bit less, maybe a year for the last 3? I'm guessing.

You can grow your tongue back? I thought that only goes for tonsils.

[Agulla]

I've noticed a striking similarity between Goodkind points of view about terrorism in this interview and Dan Simmons infamous Time Traveller's Tale in his April's message to his fans.

Goodkind where uses says declaring war on poison gas chambers, Simmons uses "declaring war on aviation" after Pearl Harbour. Of course Simmons even if he is wrong would never make the terrible historical mistakes that Goodkind makes as it has already been explained.

I wonder who got the idea first or if both of them have the same sources and because of this arrived to the same conclusions.

(Historical nickpicking mode activated:)

Wert: I think that it could be more precise to use the example of Blitzkrieg in the Six Days War rather than the Yom Kippur. In the former Israel executed a textbook Blitzkrieg attack against Egypt that included the destruction of the Egyptian air forces in a surprise preemptive strike and then the use of armoured forces with the close support of aviation, the only part of the book that they didn't use was an airborne assault on the Egyptian rear, maybe because they were using their paratroopers against the Jordanians and had already used that trick against the Egyptians in the 1956 war.

In the later war the Blitzkrieg tactics failed because the Egyptians used wire gided anti tank missiles and had a very strong SAM defensive system. Israel had to change tactics after the Tsahal tanks suffered important loses while attacking without support from artillery and infantry.

(End of Historical nickpicking mode)

[williamjm]

I was going to praise Mindonner on his (her?) excellent parody and say that was the funniest thing I read today. But then I read the newest QotD.

Sorry Mindonner, the master is still greater then the student.

At least she still has something to aspire to - maybe one day she'll be able to write as well as the Lord of the Yeard himself

I agree the parodies are excellent, I'm just curious who the next author to find his work Yearded [1] will be?

[1] This should be a word.

[Mr Smash]

Alright, pardon my ignorance, but I missed a good part of the previous threads, so I'm not in on a lot of the references that get thrown around here. I was able to figure a good amount of them out, but one in particular escapes me: what exactly does "yeard" mean?

[Moshe Goldberg Rubinshteyn]

AFAIK pony tail +beard=yeard

[Xray the Enforcer]

Psst -- WELCOME to Drago and Vigo. (Fresh meat!)

[Zadok]

AFAIK pony tail +beard=yeard

Yes but that's only half the story. In one of the earlier threads mystars yard somehow because the topic of discussion, and when he referred to it he made the typo, and someone made the ponytail/beard joke and it stuck. A hilarious word, and the best thing to come out of these threads, IMO.

[Seventh Pup]

If you are new here is some lingo you may find helpful.

Yeard= Pony tail + Beard.

Yeardi= The Grand master of us all, Terry Goodkind.

Chicken that is not a chicken = In fifth book our heroes encounter a chicken that is really an evil spirit manifested. It even lets out the chicken equivalent of a MWAHAHAHAHA!

Goats are Noble = Book 6? Can't remember, but it stars a noble goat, and one of the cheesest passages ever written.

Richard's Thing = I think Goodkind meant this to be his righteous anger, that enables him to control the sword. However GK relates to it as his "thing" rises up at which point he kicks the face of an 8 year old girl in.

GioG = Goodkind is our God. A parody site that is quite funny. (Even if I can't access it on my computer :mad: !!!)

Hope that helps.

[The Wolf Maid]

If you are new here is some lingo you may find helpful.

Yeard= Pony tail + Beard.

Yeardi= The Grand master of us all, Terry Goodkind.

Chicken that is not a chicken = In fifth book our heroes encounter a chicken that is really an evil spirit manifested. It even lets out the chicken equivalent of a MWAHAHAHAHA!

Goats are Noble = Book 6? Can't remember, but it stars a noble goat, and one of the cheesest passages ever written.

Richard's Thing = I think Goodkind meant this to be his righteous anger, that enables him to control the sword. However GK relates to it as his "thing" rises up at which point he kicks the face of an 8 year old girl in.

GioG = Goodkind is our God. A parody site that is quite funny. (Even if I can't access it on my computer :mad: !!!)

Hope that helps.

Very helpful, Seventh Pup.

The goat is Betty, i think.

Other words, acronyms and phrases to add:

BBHN: Blessed Be His Name, as in 'Goodkind (BBHN) said..."

QOTD: Quote of the Day, random or requested quotes/scenes from SoT, as provided by the Mad Moose

[Knight of the Wineskin]

I saw a dude with a yeard at the grocery store today. As he was also taller and heavier than me, I was in fear for my life.

[The Wolf Maid]

I saw a dude with a yeard at the grocery store today. As he was also taller and heavier than me, I was in fear for my life.

Was his thing rising? Ooops, wrong question.

maybe that was GK (BBHN) in disguise...

[mormont]

Time to close this.