Goodkind XII

[Moosicus]

Williamjm~

Beautiful stuff, can't wait for part two!

Isabel~

Richard and co. weren't mounted when they killed the hippies. Just armed and running.

[Lady Pendleton]

.....And it also explains the Pillars of Creation which even I thought was a little odd – leaving your lead character for a whole book in order to introduce a character who turns out to be not all that important ...

Gods, Will. You've just written the most bang on summary of Pillars of Creation I've ever seen-in one sentence! Your whole post was brilliant.

:bow:

Will, go ahead and send that letter, but be careful.

You may get dubbed a hater of life and possibly find yourself at the point of a sword. After all, haters of life are tattooed, loath to bathe, dislike pretty buildings, and deserve no more or less than to be run through by Truth! Although this may happen only after first being tortured by a hot blonde chick who was once known as Death's Mistress but is totally reformed and is now..well ...Death's Mistress.

However, if you really hate life the previous will most likely be followed by another hot blonde chick zapping you repeatedly with a magic red leather dildo. And if after all this you are still not thoroughly converted, you may then have to get your mind and free will erased by another hot chick, but don't worry you will come to love and serve her and call her "mother". (See, she has motherly brown hair-not that ass kicker shade of blonde. )

But then again, if you just say the devotion.."Master Guide us... ad nauseum..." you should be able to escape with your ass and that "free will" thingy intact.

[theMountainGoat]

Richard turned the door handle and pushed the door open until it was open enough for him to move in through the door into the room. As he entered the room he stopped in shock. An utterly shocking sight met his bewildered eyes. His left eye could not believe it, nor could the right eye either. There in the centre of the room was his beloved wife, the Mother Confessor, the woman of his dreams, he felt like he had known her all his life, he loved her completely and all that sappy shit, stood completely naked except for a large white hat which sat on her head at a jaunty angle. To Richard's left was the Royal Artist stood behind an easel with brush in hand.

For once Richard was speechless.

'What in the name of Truth is going on here? Is this what goes on behind my back? You harlot! I should never have married you, you've broken my heart! Carrying on with the Royal Artist behind my back.' Richard's speechless diatribe continues on for some more minutes until he stops because he has run out of breath. He really was rendered quite speechless by the stunning sight which met his eyes.

'Richard it's not what you think,' said Khalan, 'it is International Naked Hatted Portrait Week. Everyone's doing it. I am not carrying on with the Royal Artist at all. Zak has been nothing but a gentleman.'

'Thank you m'lady. Nice tits, you are a lucky man Mr Rhal sir.' Said Zak.

Richard's face darkened until it was darker than normal.

'Everyone is doing it? Everyone? Are you not an individual my darling, able to think for yourself. You blindly follow the herd. Do the popular thing. Bare your naked body for all men to see? As your husband only I should see your naked body, and then only at the appropriate times behind closed doors with nobody else to see.'

'But . . .' Khalan began, a furious blush creeping up her body. It had just reached the middle of her tummy.

'What kind of an objectivist are you anyway? I thought you of all people understood the concept of my socio-religious fanaticism. And as for you, so called artist.' Richard drew his sword the sound of it rang clear and true and free and beautiful and so obviously right it could not be wrong and the ringing continued like a cacophony of church bells bellowing for the death of a king. The ringing was so loud Khalan, whose blush was now rounding the top of her breasts and had the finish line in sight now, could not even hear the high pitched girlish squeel of the artist as he turned in terror and tried to escape the wrath of the Lord Rhal.

'I'll give you International Naked Hatted Portait Week you filthy communist pervert!' Yelled Richard as he chased down the artist and proceeded to cut him into bloody bits.

'Oh well,' Sighed Khalan, 'looks like I'll just have to find someone else to shag on the side . . .'

And the moral of this tale ladies and gentlemen is clearly thus: if Richard is against it then it must be good. So do your part to fight the Objectivist scum and get Naked and Hatted Portraits Avatars for this week only. Thank you.

[The Real Will]

Dear Mr. Dew,

I find myself drawn back to composition by your letter. You hit on some excellent points and I am grateful that you found my ramblings worthy of a response. I can only thank you again for reminding me of my lack of perfection. You are right, I am poor and do lack direction in my life. I am confused and damaged and seeking solace but I am trying, Scooby. I’m trying to better myself every day and I know that your sincere intent is to aide me in my attempt.

I must register one note of alarm, however. You seem to have misread my letter as an attack and if that is how it came across then I can only apologise, to you, to Mr. Goodkind and to this entire board. I had hoped to express my appreciation to Terry; the lessons I have learned reading his works have been as important as they have been numerous. I would recommend that anyone read these books and, as you suggest, not be sucked in by Richard’s preaching but rather consider what Mr. Goodkind’s true message might be.

Your points are many and it is beyond me, right now, to answer every one of them however there are one or two I would like to respond to.

On the nature of art and the strive for excellence. I feel that what we have here is a minor point of departure. I want to say at the start that I did not mean to be hypercritical of Mr. Goodkind in anyway. I had hoped that what I said was constructive and that I had expressed a knowledge of my own failings. If I seemed arrogant then, again, I must apologise. However, I think I can speak for Terry when I say that excellence in art is a noble goal. I alluded briefly to this in my previous letter, but please allow me to expand as I think I have been somehow unclear. I feel that, when a person stands up and declares that they want to be an artist in the public arena, that they do so because they believe they have something to contribute and wish to contribute it in the clearest way possible. An artist, like any other profession, should possess a certain skill set, and should work to develop these skills and to better their art. Should every artist be Michelangelo or Shakespeare? No, but I do expect anyone who wishes to be a writer to have made a passing investigation into what a semi-colon is used for. Lacking the basic skills necessary to their job a writer might set out with an concept of surpassing brilliance and fail to execute it simply because they are unaware of how to craft a passage that will entice the reader, that will make the reader feel, think, dream. Terry knows this. I am confident that he is sitting down, right now, over a big bowl of celery and (if you will permit a somewhat saucy colloquialism) boning up on just what an adjectival clause really is.

Allow me to furnish an example of what I’m talking about from Mr. Goodkind’s own work. It has been some years since I read Faith of the Fallen, but I believe the story goes something like this: Richard, wishing to sway the populace of Alur’Rang by showing them a vision of true beauty, and never having carved stone before, apprentices himself to a stone carver. He works with the man for many years, learning the trade and finally ends his apprenticeship and sets out into the world as a journeyman. During this period, he carves many studies and small works. He is dissatisfied with most of them but occasionally he sees something in one of his pieces which pleases him and his confidence is renewed. Finally, at the age of forty-seven, he sits before a block of stone ready to begin the three-year ordeal that will produce his masterpiece, LIFE. I’m sure the story went something like that. Goodkind, with his conviction in the value of artistic beauty, would never suggest that Richard just have at a lump of rock with a chisel and little or no training and expect to achieve his vision. Such an attempt would be likely to result in a statue more aptly named “Chunky Stone Blob Which Crumbled a Little When I Tried to Do the Ears†than LIFE. When he unveiled it there wouldn’t be a mass alteration in human perception. Some wit at the back of the audience would probably call out, “Right… Now do deformed rabbit.†I think you understand what I am saying. For the artist, as much as any one else, skill, technique, study and dedication are indispensable.

I had just one other thought, reading your reply. You said, in reference to Goodkind I believe, “Yes, he writes of rape and torture but we can see by reading ALL the words in all his books that the guy doesn't condone these acts. He just writes about them.†Now I am sure that Mr. Goodkind does not condone rape and torture. Indeed, as I have said before, I am convinced that his books are a treatise against exactly this behaviour. Richard on the other hand… You see I feel that it is not the words that Mr. Goodkind would have us focus on, but rather the actions of the characters. Goodkind knows that the basic rule of writing is, “show don’t tell†and so he would know that what the narrator or the characters says is far less important than what they do. We will ignore any amount of rhetoric about the evils of torture if the character then turns around and orders someone tortured, and if the character preaches the glories of individuality and then condemns a group of people to collective execution then we will be equally suspicious.

One final example and I will leave you. Let’s discuss, briefly, the Pacifist Incident – sometimes know as the Mass Hippy Slaughter although I think we should endeavour to be as non-sensationalist as possible. It is interesting to examine the message that we can take away from this scene if we take it simply at face value. You suggest the message is, “Kill a few supporters to get to an evil occupying murdering force or die yourself.†I feel that it is slightly naughty of you to simplify in this way because, while this message is a possible interpretation, the people are not supporting the occupiers but opposing Richard (there is a distinction) and it is neither the protesters nor the occupying force that is threatening Richard but rather a poison (given to him by one of the protestors, to be sure, but since we and Richard believe in individuality then mass guilt is really not to be considered). It is somewhat like taking a machine gun to a traffic jam for blocking an ambulance. I think that there is a powerful message here, and that message becomes apparent if you consider two people. One is the woman who ran down to the protest to try and prevent her father from joining a rally that she felt was both wrong and dangerous, and the second is a man who, seeing Richard, realised that they’d all made a terrible mistake and started extolling his fellows to clear the way but couldn’t be heard over the chanting. The woman appears in the actual text here: “Richard took a powerful swing, lopping off the woman's head and upraised arm,†and the man appears here: “A man made the mistake of reaching for Richard's weapon, and took the full weight of a charging thrust.†Their stories, of course, do not appear in the text, but I suspect that it is only because Richard never learned them. The point is that, especially if you espouse individuality, you cannot deal justice on anything but an individual scale. For this alone Richard's actions are wrong, questions of weaponry (or lack thereof) or murder don’t even need to feature (although they are also important). I am sure that this is the point Mr. Goodkind was making although I admit that it would have been strengthened by including the individual stories of those killed. I would hesitate to say that you don’t understand Mr. Goodkind’s genius – such a charge would be unjust and small minded – but I would say that your understanding is quite different to my own.

I won’t take up any more of your time with my small thoughts, but will simply thank you for listening and for reminding me of my own fallibility. I eagerly await any thoughts or suggestions you might offer and apologise, as well, to the group for taking up its valuable time space.

Yours sincerely,

Will.

[MinDonner]

I don't agree with everything he puts on paper or his site but I wouldn't turn my nose up in the air at an author because I disagree with some preachy remarks in his books. The guy believes what he says.

I like many books and authors but not every single word they put to paper is what I do or will believe. You will be disappointed every time you read if you expect to agree with everything an author writes.

If you don't like someones stuff why do you keep reading it? Are you that small a person that you need your ego secretly inflated temporarily by downing someone else who doesn't know you even exist?

...

The magical elements, the kingdoms at war, the characters in conflict is what draws me to Goodkind's books not necessarily the philosophy he imbues in it. I have a brain I can see he thinks this way and wants his readers to follow him in his quest but I don't have to if I don't but some of his readers can be fanatical about it. It's all about choice.

...

As for that skewered Rand philosophy, where exactly in the books(not his forum) does Goodkind say in print this is "the way" and if you don't do it you will go to hell? Oh my mistake, that's the Bible again. I'm not an objectivist and i'm not a bible thumper. I am just a human being. I just don't recall that sentence where he says this using those words.

You dare to like Goodkind for his magical elements and not his philosophy? You're on his shit-list now. This is what he thinks of your filthy sort...

These people are not fans. There are hundreds if not thousands of fantasy books that fulfill their professed taste in books. Why would they continue to read books they claim are bad? Because they hate that my novels exists. Values arouse hatred in these people. Their goal is not to enjoy life, but to destroy that which is good -much like a school child who does not wish to study for a test and instead beats up a classmate who does well. These people hate what is good because it is good. Their lives are limited to loathing and indifference. It isn't that they want to read a good book, what they want is to make sure that you do not. Ignore them.

Yep, that's not about us, that's about YOU! Someone who likes his books but not his philosophy.

You can find the full interview here...

This is one of the main reasons we hate Goodkind and like to spend so much time slagging off his books.

[Xray the Enforcer]

Well done, williamjim!!!

[zakalwe7]

williamjm / MG - those made my day. feckin fantastic.

[Werthead]

Personally, I want now to see Zak actually do a picture of 'Ninja Tyrion'.

[Moosicus]

What a fantastic day this has been for the Goodkind (BBNC) thread. Big thanks to all participants.

[kiko]

Personally, I want now to see Zak actually do a picture of 'Ninja Tyrion'.

I think we see him painting it from the vie of a webcam above the easel. You can see the exitement and the odd sense of clothing that is trademark tof every great artist

[Khamul]

A question: What does the BBNC stand for that you always write after his name?

[kiko]

Blessed be His Namble Cock

see one of the QotD

[Chicken/Not a Chicken]

I thought it was

BBHN - Blessed be His Name

or

BBNC - BIG BARBED Namble Cock

[Elrostar]

Yeah, I've been more of a fan of the Blessed Be His Name, We Love How He Touches Us.... less into the whole Namble Cock thing, but maybe that's just me and my wackiness.

Maybe I just don't have the requisite level of maturity?

[Maid Sansa]

Maybe I just don't have the requisite level of maturity?

And you forgot to eat your moral celery for breakfast. Tairy (BBHN) doesn't write for immature haters of life and goodness like you.

[zakalwe7]

Personally, I want now to see Zak actually do a picture of 'Ninja Tyrion'.

wert, I actually DO have one. It was an avatar for a while.

It's Tyrion doing his ninja flip when Jon first meets him at Winterfell.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kitreid/24673...57594289815434/

[Crazydog7]

What foreshadowing by Goodkind. Because of his treasonous sympathy and lack of moral celery Warren ends up getting killed by a child assassin. That'll teach you not to revel in the torture and destruction of an evildoer!

Rape is always my main fear when children show up in Terry "Jesus" Goodkind's books.

[Werthead]

wert, I actually DO have one. It was an avatar for a while.

Best. Picture. Ever.

[williamjm]

"Cut out the wierdo cultural diversity and speak english" got me..

I'm sure its the sort of thing Terry Goodkind would say if he ever went abroad

wert, I actually DO have one. It was an avatar for a while.

Of course it exists, every word in the Ayn Rand Code is based on THE TRUTH, only those lacking in moral celery would doubt it.

Speaking of which, here's part 2:

(quick summary, the police have run off to deal with the threat of the demonic plot device that is Le Poulet qui n'est pas un Poulet, Richard and Sophie are trying to decode the following message:

15 42 23 8 16 4

Why A Dad Warlord Loll Nutty?

Nor Oil Dance Diva

The Ayn Rand Code : Chapter 2 - "Let us not go to the Louvre, it is a Silly Place"

“Sophie, what is your analysis of the writing?†Richard asked.

“I’ve been thinking about the Numbers, but I can’t see what that ordering symbolises.†Sophie replied. “The only significance I can see is that numbers are the coefficients of the famous Valenzetti equation, which I know Rahl was fascinated with, but they are out of order and I can’t see the relevance to the murder case.â€

“Out of order,†Richard muttered to himself as he stared at the writing, his brain working furiously.

Breaker of Codes.

Suddenly enlightenment dawned. “The numbers aren’t significant, but the fact that they’re out of order is, he’s trying to tell us it is an anagram, in fact if you rearrange the letters they take on a whole new meaning – ‘What Would Randyll Tarly Do? Leonardo Da Vinci’. Obviously it is a reference to the famous painting by Da Vinci of Randyll Tarly, which I believe is in this very gallery.â€

“Yes, it is over there,†Sophie pointed to the far side of the gallery.

They walked over towards it, on the way Sophie looked around to check they were still alone then leaned towards Richard. “There is something you need to know, Reno didn’t tell you everything; there was originally a fourth line of text that they erased before you arrived.â€

“What did it say?†Richard asked.

“My star, find Robert Landgon.†Sophie said. “Reno jumped to the conclusion that Jacques Rahl was naming you as the murderer, he just ignored the first bit of the text, but I know what he meant was that you could help me find his murderer. Reno invited you here hoping you’d incriminate yourself, but I don’t think you are the sort of the man who would be capable of violence.â€

Richard reflected that Sophie obviously didn’t know him very well. “But why do you say it was a message to you?†he asked.

Sophie looked sad, “Jacques Rahl was my grandfather, he raised me after my parents and brother died, we had been estranged for many years and no-one in the police knew that. He used to refer to me as his ‘little star’, I think the ‘my star’ was a reference to me; he must have known I would be told about the writing because the numbers would be sent to the cryptography department to decode. When I saw the Numbers I knew it was a message to me, he was always fascinated with the implications of those numbers, he even won the lottery using them once, although he claimed the win always gave him bad luck.â€

Richard thought about the message as they arrived at Da Vinci’s picture. He said, “I think the ‘My star’ may mean more than just being a reference to you. I think Jacques Rahl may have been referring to the ‘Priory of Mystar’.â€

“The Priory of Mystar? What is that?†Sophie asked.

“The Priory of Mystar is an ancient organisation founded millennia ago to protect one of humanity’s biggest secrets. Leonardo Da Vinci was once grandmaster of the Priory, he was a great believer in its purpose and included references to it in many of his works, included ‘What Would Randyll Tarly Do?’ Look here,†Richard pointed at an animal in the background of the painting.

“A goat!†Sophie exclaimed. “But what does that symbolise?â€

“The goat is an ancient symbol of nobility, and was used as the unofficial logo of the Priory. Of course, there is also a much bigger connection in this picture, since Randyll Tarly is intimately connected to the secret the Priory protects, as is this woman,†Richard pointed at the woman standing next to Randyll Tarly, gazing at him adoringly.

“Who is she,†Sophie asked, “I’ve always wondered who she was and why she was in the picture?â€

This was the sort of question Richard loved. It gave him a perfect opportunity to reveal some little-known symbolism in a long-winded explanation.

Explainer of Things.

“That’s Mary Magdalene,†Richard said, “if you look at her portrayal in the painting of “The Last Supper†and then look here, you’ll see she is the same woman in both. Leonardo is trying to let us in on the secret, that Randyll Tarly and Mary Magdalene were married.â€

Sophie argued, “But, Mary Magdalene isn’t in the…â€

Richard interrupted, “Long story, you should read my long-winded book on the subject, or if we happen to run into an English academic while we’re on the run we can get him to explain it to you. Anyway, the revelation that they were married is just a hint at the real secret – that Randyll Tarly and Mary Magdalene were both disciples of Jesus and were his choice to lead the Church and guide it in its true role as a bastion of Objectivism. Of course, you’ll never have heard any of this - the other disciples lacked the moral clarity to see the truth of objectivism and seized control of the Church. There was a struggle between the different factions for the next couple of centuries, initially the Objectivists were winning, they had Randyll Tarly on their side after all, but after he died of old age in 184AD they were defeated by the forces of moral cowardice. At the Council of Westeros in 325AD convened by the Emperor Erzuile to decide the future direction of the Church the Bishops Werthead of Camulodunum and Mindonner of Sandstorm succeeded in removing all mentions of Objectivism from the Bible, against the objections of the popular preacher Mystar the Great. After that Mystar found the Priory that bears his name, ever since then there have been a small number of people dedicated to preserving the memory of Randyll Tarly and Mary Magdalene and their beliefs. Leonardo Da Vinci was a big admirer of Randyll Tarly, he is known to have remarked in a letter to a contemporary that Tarly was “harsh but fairâ€

“Wowâ€, said Sophie, “that was a long explanation, isn’t this story meant to be a thriller? Less talking, more car chases?â€

“This isn't just a cheap thriller,†Richard said, “This is a story about the triumph of human nobility which means the author can put in huge slabs of exposition if he wants. Anyway, as soon as we’ve decoded the message Jacqeus Rahl left us by this picture, we can probably have a car chase which completely ignores the real geography of Paris. That should liven things up a bit, and it will look good in the inevitable but disappointing film adaptation.â€

They started to study the picture intently.

(to be continued (maybe)...)

[Werthead]

“This isn't just a cheap thriller, this is a story about the triumph of human nobility which means the author can’t put in huge slabs of exposition if he wants."

You could a new job as Dan Brown's publicity agent, William. That was pure class!