oneeye Posted October 16, 2006 Share Posted October 16, 2006 You know I kinda like phantom so far. After the initial preachings by shota and nicci the action is pretty much non stop. And yes, richard has lost his gift and sword and kahlan has been abducted yet again, but they are working it pretty well. A couple characters from book 1 reappear too which is fun. Not sure why but I'm going to have to say sot >wot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Greetings! Finally I'm cleared to post. First off: great site. Great to see that I'm not the only one who thinks GK has lost his mind. When it's ok to kill unarmed protestors one has to wonder. RR would probably kill Ghandi claiming he choose death over life. Second: you probably answered it a thousand times but what does BBNC stand for? I'm not a native English speaker so help me out. Maybe it’s a good idea to ad a glossary somewhere. Third: Sandstorm reviews rulz. Everything you always knew about RR but were afraid to say. Fourth: I appreciate all the effort everyone put in to re-read the books just so that the rest of us don’t have to. Your selfish less act (you hate life!) enables us to parasite of your knowledge (egoistic ergo we love life!) Fifth: speaking of which, - I read somewhere in the 13 or something threads and 150+ pages that the IO (ad to glossary) will starve in Phantoms. Didn’t they capture the vast grain stocks of Anderit a couple of books ago? Or did RR put a stop to this (before or after denouncing democracy)? - Someone already noticed that in real life RR army fighting a guerrilla in the OW (!) would face the same logistical problems as the IO; no supplies, food reinforcements etc. But didn’t the mighty RR start a revolution in Altur rang that spread as a oil spill over the OW and would those enlightened people be a little disappointed when they find out that RR orders his troops to kill their kin instead of enlightening them? Apparently people can only redeem themselves (to kill pacifists and love life) if it fits the story. - With the IO running amok in the middle lands (even in the west lands) where did all the people go again? And if they went to D’hara how do they feed all those people again? - I’m not the only one who thinks RR is justifying terrorism a la Al Quada, Hamas, and Hezbollah (they’re bigger than us, have more people and better weapons so we cant let “war rules†stop us. We must attack without discrimination between civilians and soldiers and kill them all! Bomb busses, fly planes into buildings, bomb train and metro stations. We are just they’re devils) - Don’t the people of D’hara have to pray to RR 5 times a day (like muslims) and didn’t RR say that this was a good thing (clears the mind or something) - When Khalan led the recruits into battle and killed an IO army 10 times their seize didn’t she told a story about the ruthless D’haran army? All of a sudden they’re civilized? (Pillars) Please prove me wrong and restore my faith in RR and the righteousness of his actions. Love life and prosper! E.I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosicus Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 You know I kinda like phantom so far. After the initial preachings by shota and nicci the action is pretty much non stop. And yes, richard has lost his gift and sword and kahlan has been abducted yet again, but they are working it pretty well. A couple characters from book 1 reappear too which is fun. Not sure why but I'm going to have to say sot >wot. 1)The initial preachings by Shota, Nicci, and especially Jebra, all go on to a total of a least 50 pages IIRC, and that isn't nearly the end of the talky-talk blah blah blah. After that, what action? 2)How on earth is Richard's dilemma and Kahlan's abduction being worked well? 3)Though I'm not nearly as big a fan of WoT as I used to be, I find the statement sot>wot to be a bit crazy. Nothing personal. An SoT vs. WoT thread might just be fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosicus Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Greetings! Finally I'm cleared to post. First off: great site. Great to see that I'm not the only one who thinks GK has lost his mind. When it's ok to kill unarmed protestors one has to wonder. RR would probably kill Ghandi claiming he choose death over life. Second: you probably answered it a thousand times but what does BBNC stand for? I'm not a native English speaker so help me out. Maybe it’s a good idea to ad a glossary somewhere. Third: Sandstorm reviews rulz. Everything you always knew about RR but were afraid to say. Fourth: I appreciate all the effort everyone put in to re-read the books just so that the rest of us don’t have to. Your selfish less act (you hate life!) enables us to parasite of your knowledge (egoistic ergo we love life!) Fifth: speaking of which, - I read somewhere in the 13 or something threads and 150+ pages that the IO (ad to glossary) will starve in Phantoms. Didn’t they capture the vast grain stocks of Anderit a couple of books ago? Or did RR put a stop to this (before or after denouncing democracy)? - Someone already noticed that in real life RR army fighting a guerrilla in the OW (!) would face the same logistical problems as the IO; no supplies, food reinforcements etc. But didn’t the mighty RR start a revolution in Altur rang that spread as a oil spill over the OW and would those enlightened people be a little disappointed when they find out that RR orders his troops to kill their kin instead of enlightening them? Apparently people can only redeem themselves (to kill pacifists and love life) if it fits the story. - With the IO running amok in the middle lands (even in the west lands) where did all the people go again? And if they went to D’hara how do they feed all those people again? - I’m not the only one who thinks RR is justifying terrorism a la Al Quada, Hamas, and Hezbollah (they’re bigger than us, have more people and better weapons so we cant let “war rules†stop us. We must attack without discrimination between civilians and soldiers and kill them all! Bomb busses, fly planes into buildings, bomb train and metro stations. We are just they’re devils) - Don’t the people of D’hara have to pray to RR 5 times a day (like muslims) and didn’t RR say that this was a good thing (clears the mind or something) - When Khalan led the recruits into battle and killed an IO army 10 times their seize didn’t she told a story about the ruthless D’haran army? All of a sudden they’re civilized? (Pillars) Please prove me wrong and restore my faith in RR and the righteousness of his actions. Love life and prosper! E.I. Greetings E.I. I agree that RR would have killed Ghandi. His skinniness would only make it easier to yank his spine out. BBNC stands for Big Barbed Namble Cock. As for all the grain taken from Anderith, I don't think you're supposed to remember that. As well, people fleeing to D'Hara, or wherever, only need to eat if the story is supposed to make sense, and this always takes a back seat to to more important points/philosophies, regardless of how stupid they are. Though on the surface it may seem that TG (BBNC) is justifying terrorism, I suspect that what he really believes (since terrorists love death instead of life) is the we, the free people of the world, should not use any restraint whatsoever in how we deal with them, and that things like the Geneva convention are silly ideas that will only prevent us from bringing enlightenment to barbarians all over the world. Yup, D'harans have to give the "devotion" several times a day. This should not be confused with praying, because Richard is a real guy and the devotion really works. Praying is only for people who can't deal with life on their own. Poor bastards. Yes, the D'haran army is referred to often as ruthless and terrible, but of course, and army is only as moral as the person who leads them, apparently, and deep down inside they are all decent people, who like puppies and butterflies, and despite their reputation for implacable bloodlust, they all pray for peace. As soon as Richard took over, the army suddenly became the Peace Corps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Third: Sandstorm reviews rulz. Everything you always knew about RR but were afraid to say. Aw, bless ya! And thanks again to everyone whose parodies I've nicked to make it what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Thanx for your fast repley Though on the surface it may seem that TG (BBNC) is justifying terrorism, I suspect that what he really believes (since terrorists love death instead of life) is the we, the free people of the world, should not use any restraint whatsoever in how we deal with them, and that things like the Geneva convention are silly ideas that will only prevent us from bringing enlightenment to barbarians all over the world. Still I could make a case claiming Bin Laden has mastered the principles of Objectivism or at least read all TG books. From his standpoint (Bin Ladens) he's absolutely right and his actions are totally justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosicus Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Thanx for your fast repley Still I could make a case claiming Bin Laden has mastered the principles of Objectivism or at least read all TG books. From his standpoint (Bin Ladens) he's absolutely right and his actions are totally justified. See, this is an easy mistake to make. The actions of Bin Laden et al cannot be deemed justified because they are immoral people, thus everything they do is wrong. Richard, on the other hand, is justified in everything he does because Richard is always right. See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 It's true. Even if Bin Laden was actually walking on water, feeding the hungry and healing the sick, he's still be the bad guy because he's just, well, bad. Whereas Richard, the Good Guy, can do what he likes because he's intrinsically good. It's pretty simple - just read the labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 See, this is an easy mistake to make. The actions of Bin Laden et al cannot be deemed justified because they are immoral people, thus everything they do is wrong. Richard, on the other hand, is justified in everything he does because Richard is always right. See? It's true. Even if Bin Laden was actually walking on water, feeding the hungry and healing the sick, he's still be the bad guy because he's just, well, bad. Whereas Richard, the Good Guy, can do what he likes because he's intrinsically good. It's pretty simple - just read the labels. Veins bulging, headaches, confusion..........serenity now Y'all know that you're fighting an uphill battle dont you? On another note; I read the wiki about ayn rand and her view on women and sex. TG isnt that off: According to Rand, "For a woman qua woman, the essence of femininity is hero-worship — the desire to look up to man." Hence the ovulating when RR enters the scene and "the sex in Rand’s novels is extraordinarily violent and fetishistic. In The Fountainhead, the first coupling of the heroes, heralded by whips and rock drills and horseback riding and cracks in marble, is ‘an act of scorn . . . not as love, but as defilement’ – in other words, a rape. (‘The act of a master taking shameful, contemptuous possession of her was the kind of rapture she had wanted.’ In Atlas Shrugged, erotic tension is cleverly increased by having one heroine bound into a plot with lots of spectacularly cruel and handsome men.) Need I say more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theMountainGoat Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Just caught up on the thread. Love the track \"Pass The Hatchet, I Think I\'m Goodkind\". Did you all notice it is taken from the album \"I Am Not Afraid Of You And I Will Beat Your Ass\" - almost something Richard would say. Yo La Tengo, my new favourite band Great parodies from Agulla - good work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray the Enforcer Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Need I say more? For the luv of BBNC, no. :sick: (not you personally, just no more Rand. Fuck, that shit is vile.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mme Erzulie Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Hey, MinDonner. Just thought I'd let you know that I'd be thrilled if you'd consider my GK Mauling worthy of a place on your site. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khamul Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Greetings! Finally I'm cleared to post. First off: great site. Great to see that I'm not the only one who thinks GK has lost his mind. When it's ok to kill unarmed protestors one has to wonder. RR would probably kill Ghandi claiming he choose death over life. Second: you probably answered it a thousand times but what does BBNC stand for? I'm not a native English speaker so help me out. Maybe it’s a good idea to ad a glossary somewhere. E.I. Welcome here . BBNC stands for Blessed be His Namble Cock. Apparently it is detailed in one of the QotDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 While reading the previous post and re reading my post I noticed that I mention Richard (the just) as RR. In the books RR "special" guard all have "knives" with a double R on it. Must be painful. Just thought I share this titbit (...) of knowledge with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneeye Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Although I see how the Dharans can be compared to radical Islam with their devotions and new willingness to total war, and being the underdog, you have to remember that they are about freedom and life while the Imperial order is about repression, woman hating and communism in the most wretched sense. I think the comparison is being made that our war on terror can't be fought against just the terrorists but against all that support them. I'm pretty sure Al-Quada, hezbollah and other such groups have plenty of support from the local population who are supposedly innocent. I think it sums up well the current frustrating war on terror which is being lost. Can a war ever be anything but total? Killing a few terrorists when the cauldron of radicalism is still brewing, and every little free speech evokes protests and death threats will never get us anywhere. Peace or total war, not the current weak mess. Here's hoping for peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Although I see how the Dharans can be compared to radical Islam with their devotions and new willingness to total war, and being the underdog, you have to remember that they are about freedom and life while the Imperial order is about repression, woman hating and communism in the most wretched sense. Yeah. The D'Harans are Good, so what they do is Right. Jagang's Total War is Wrong, because he's Bad. I'm fully expecting the next book to show Jagang eating kittens and little hamsters. Jagang's evil empire is not a real political system, it's a cipher for Bad Things and would never, ever work in real life, magic or no magic. If anyone's woman-hating it's our good friend Terry. I think the comparison is being made that our war on terror can't be fought against just the terrorists but against all that support them. I'm pretty sure Al-Quada, hezbollah and other such groups have plenty of support from the local population who are supposedly innocent. Supposedly innocent? What's this "supposedly"? The Geneva Convention is further up the thread for your edification. I think it sums up well the current frustrating war on terror which is being lost. Can a war ever be anything but total? See Geneva Convention, above. Killing a few terrorists when the cauldron of radicalism is still brewing, and every little free speech evokes protests and death threats will never get us anywhere. Agreed. Killing all the civilians as well is not actually going to make things better, though... do you disagree, or do you think we should kill everyone? Peace or total war, not the current weak mess. Here's hoping for peace. Yes to peace. Total War is not only stupid, it's utterly fucking immoral. Campioni Del Mondo, your Goodkind Mauling is now up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zakalwe7 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Here is a picture of what being given a Terry Goodkind present for your birthday can do to you http://www.flickr.com/photos/kitreid/27157...57594331464486/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Well HAPPY BIRTHDAY! all over again! WOOO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuenjato Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 The following is a pet theory I have in regards to Goodkind fandom. Not all of it is meant to be taken seriously The case of Goodkind's popularity is a bewildering one. Why is it that a novel of cliches, deadened prose and dubious research has claimed the bestseller lists? Why are Goodkind's fans so rabid in the merits of this author? I was quite frankly stunned when, after slogging through the inept first volume of The Sword of Truth, I discovered that this guy had actually held an auction for his book, and recieved a record-breaking advance. Was I reading something different than everyone else? Were those 50+ pages of boring, redundant torture actually entertaining to the mass audience? Was it simply a case of what Goodkind stated himself: People are stupid? It has to be more than just that. I'm well aware that Goodkind hit upon a generational wave of fantasy readers, snarring that impressionable audience of 13/14 year olds in the early 90's. Hey, when I was that age I devoured Brooks, Eddings and Dragonlance without much internal criticism. Perhaps at that age I would have dug the adventures of the yeard et al. with its AC/DC inspired hack n' slash and black/white ethos. But there are other factors at play here: I postulate that it is those very acts of rape, pedophilia, and violent reprisal that attract a certain element to Goodkind's novels, and more than for simple shock value. It's well documented that a sizable percentage of children suffer from sexual abuse every year - so what better wish fullfillment than to have a pedophile character forced to cut off and eat his own testicles? A few years ago I found myself conversing with conspiracy theorists, and the Bible at that time for CT consisted of the works of David Icke. After reading a couple of these books, I was struck by the emphasis on child-rape, ritual pedophilia, etc. After interacting with those who fervently believed Icke's rants, I discovered that most if not all had issues of sexual abuse in their past - indeed, Icke's expose pointed towards a 'method' beyond simple human cruelty / lust; that it was all a vast conspiracy - a comforting paradigm to adhere to. So I wonder: how much of Goodkind's audience identify with the main characters as they fight a blanket Evil, narrowly escape rape, etc etc. for reasons stemming from trauma-response? Perhaps there is more to Goodkind than we imagine...going the 'conspiracy theorist' route...perhaps he's a former CIA agent using basic propaganda techniques to cull a sizable audience of youth into the good notions of blind patriotism, moral fascism, might is right; all the while carefully tugging on the trauma-strings as a brainwashing tool. Or maybe he has a personal dungeon, and like Hemmingway, prefers to 'write from experience.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exa Inova Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I had a rush of inspiration and was gonna write a new goodkind song only to find out it already exists! You have to change one name and only a few other things and the song is finished. To my horror it is a song fron a very popular band we all know and most of us love here it is: At home Drawing pictures Of mountain tops With him on top Lemon yellow sun Arms raised in a V Dead lay in pools of maroon below Daddy didn't give attention To the fact that mommy didn't care King Richard the wicked Ruled his world Richard spoke in class today Richard spoke in class today Clearly I remember Pickin' on the boy Seemed a harmless little fuck But we unleashed a lion Gnashed his teeth And bit the recess lady's breast How could I forget He kicked me with a surprise left My jaw left hurting Dropped my tongue Just like the day Like the day I heard Daddy didn't give affection And the boy was something that mommy wouldn't wear King Richard the wicked Ruled his world Richard spoke in class today Richard spoke in class today Try to forget this... Try to erase this... From the blackboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.