Jump to content
Myshkin

Goodkind 55: Back in the Dick Life Again

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

He's also shit. He's a technically bad author who doesn't have a very good grasp of characterisation, pacing or how to structure a narrative. The fact that his work is so awful (to the point of comedy on occasion) but he's so po-faced about it and claims it's Real Literature is just what makes it amusing.

Lets not forget that he basically lifted half the ideas from the first few SoT novels almost directly from Wheel of Time... but did them worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 3:15 PM, AncalagonTheBlack said:

Fellow lemmings,i bring more glad tidings from Tairyland! He recently released a new novella titled Trouble's Child,which also serves as a prequel to his upcoming mystery/thriller The Girl in the Moon,coming out on the 20th!
 

Behold the awesome blurbs for both!

 

 

I smell Hugo... nay... Nobel Prize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lord Patrek said:

Nah, the Yeard would probably say that the Nobel prize is for brown-nosing Left-leaning hacks. . .

That's what everyone says until they win it. Plus, it's tough to turn down a million smackers. You'd have to be a real Sartre to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Werthead said:

He's also shit. He's a technically bad author who doesn't have a very good grasp of characterisation, pacing or how to structure a narrative. The fact that his work is so awful (to the point of comedy on occasion) but he's so po-faced about it and claims it's Real Literature is just what makes it amusing.

 

That and the way his 'good' characters do all the same terrible things as the 'bad' guys, but are still portrayed as 'good and right', and everything they do is good and right simply because they are the ones doing it. That is what would make me throw the book across the room.

Edited by Kagi Soracia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Kagi Soracia said:

 

That and the way his 'good' characters do all the same terrible things as the 'bad' guys, but are still portrayed as 'good and right', and everything they do is good and right simply because they are the ones doing it. That is what would make me throw the book across the room.

A story which involves despicable people trying to outwit and destroy each other can be entertaining (Best Served Cold by Joe Abercrombie is a good example).  But, you know that everyone is despicable when you're reading it.

Goodkind's characters are despicable, but for some reason, one group are portrayed as good and righteous when they murder, torture and lie, whereas their opponents are evil because they do these things.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Goodkind's characters are despicable, but for some reason, one group are portrayed as good and righteous when they murder, torture and lie, whereas their opponents are evil because they do these things.

 

 

 

It's the hypocrisy and double standard that gets to me. Richard & co are just as bad as the bad guys, but the narrative has no ambiguity, they're just Right because they have Truth on their side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SeanF said:

A story which involves despicable people trying to outwit and destroy each other can be entertaining (Best Served Cold by Joe Abercrombie is a good example).  But, you know that everyone is despicable when you're reading it.

 

 

 

 

And I don't think think any of them ever claimed to be good and righteous. Richard and co, OTOH do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the thing is I don't like reading books where I don't like any of the characters. I couldn't read Dune because I just hated everybody, Paul included. When Tairy's characters cross the line like they do so often, I just lose any empathy I had for them, and then I throw the book at the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:14 PM, Kagi Soracia said:

And the thing is I don't like reading books where I don't like any of the characters. I couldn't read Dune because I just hated everybody, Paul included. When Tairy's characters cross the line like they do so often, I just lose any empathy I had for them, and then I throw the book at the wall.

I enjoyed Dune, greatly.  Actually, I rather liked Paul for most of the story.  It's only towards the end that I realised that he had become a monster.

Jessica always remained sympathetic, for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I enjoyed Dune, greatly.  Actually, I rather liked Paul for most of the story.  It's only towards the end that I realised that he had become a monster.

Jessica always remained sympathetic, for me.

To be fair I didn't get real far with it, maybe 50-100 pages? But I did see the Children of Dune miniseries on SyFy many years later, and I liked that rather better. Didn't think it was great, but didn't turn it off or yell at the tv either. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Tairy's on a roll,he has another new book coming out from TOR in December! :wacko:

Quote

Siege of Stone: Sister of Darkness: The Nicci Chronicles, Volume III

The third book in Terry Goodkind's New York Times bestselling Nicci Chronicles, where the warrior Nicci must save the entirety of the Old World

The ramifications of Shroud of Eternity extends throughout all of the Old World as familiar allies, dangerous magic, and creatures created by twisted sorcery all work at cross purposes to either save or destroy Ildakar in Terry Goodkind’s Seige of Stone.

The Sorceress Nicci, the Wizard Nathan Rahl, and the young swordsman Bannon remain in the legendary city of Ildakar after a great internal revolt has freed the slaves and brought down the powerful wizards council. But as he fled the city, capricious Wizard Commander Maxim dissolved the petrification spell that had turned to stone the invading army of General Utros fifteen centuries earlier. Now hundreds of thousands of half-stone soldiers from the ancient past have awakened, led by one of the greatest enemy commanders in history.

Nicci, Nathan, and Bannon have to help Ildakar survive this unbreakable siege, using all the magical defenses of the legendary city. Even as General Utros holds Ildakar hostage and also unleashes his incredible army on the unsuspecting Old World, an equally powerful threat arises out in the sea.

Nicci knows the battle won’t remain in the city; if she can’t stop this threat, two invincible armies can sweep across the Old World and destroy D’Hara itself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicci knows the battle won’t remain in the city; if she can’t stop this threat, two invincible armies can sweep across the Old World and destroy D’Hara itself.



Am I the only one thinking maybe she should just take a vacation and let the armies do their thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/21/2018 at 10:36 AM, Kagi Soracia said:

It's the hypocrisy and double standard that gets to me. Richard & co are just as bad as the bad guys, but the narrative has no ambiguity, they're just Right because they have Truth on their side.

I used to wonder about this, until I realized that Tairy fills a big void in SF/F - he is an unabashed conservative writer, and there are many SF/F fans that I assume hove to the Right. He fulfills their narrative of being "right" about Everything and gives them their wish-fulfillment secret taboos proper society wouldn't tolerate -- e.g., slaughtering peace demonstrators with a big sword, banging blondes in skintight red leather, and generally strutting around like an asshole and getting praised for it. His childish, four-grade writing style coupled with 'adult' themes and the general doorstopper size of his novels, plus the 'philosophy', gives the uneducated the nice feels that they are intelligent cause they read Big Books with Important Themes.

That audience hasn't really diminished, and with SF/F championing more and more diversity, Tairy and others (like the Baen crew) obviously become a safe haven in a world where even the Fantasy genre--traditionally a conservative genre--are polluted with librul poltiks and revisionism.

Edited by kuenjato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Welcome to 'Objectivist Condemnation' where we dissect fictional villains as being objectivist characters and how their philosophy ties into their villainy. Last time, I said I would analyze Walter White but someone else (https://cjlockett.com/2013/09/02/breaking-rand-walter-white-as-failed-objectivist/) has done it for me, so I will instead move on to Light Yagami, of the manga 'Death Note':

>Essentially has the exact same view of justice as Mr. A, written as an Objectivist hero by Steve Ditko. Both Mr. A and Light Yagami have no interest in proportional punishment, they are always a Hanging Judge. He was also planning to step up his murders to minor criminals and those he views as lazy.

>Like Mr. A, Light Yagami believes there is only good or evil and nothing in between. This is what colours Light's interactions with law enforcement and how he fails to understand what Ryuk was talking about when Ryuk pointed out that when he kills all the bad guys, he'll be the only one left. He fully believes that everyone trying to stop him is evil, which is why he takes great pleasure in killing people in cruel ways, especially when he forces Naomi Misora to commit suicide, revealing himself as Kira just before she does so.

>Throughout the manga, his main concern has always been to protect himself, which from an Objectivist standpoint is ideal. This bites him twice over when Soichirou refuses to write Mello's name in the Death Note and when Mello gets himself killed to reveal that there are multiple Death Notes to Near. This goes into Objectivist beliefs that everyone is ruthless and self-serving, his predictions of Soichirou and Mello's actions fail because he doesn't understand principles or self-sacrifice.

>Like the "heroes" of The Sword of Truth, Light believes that his actions are justified because he is doing them. He shows himself fully willing to do actions that he condemns others for doing.

>Has no emotional connection to his family. His manipulations lead to his father Soichirou's death (and in some adaptations, he himself writes Soichirou's name in the Death Note) and the only thing that stopped him from murdering his sister is the attention it would draw.

>Some people might think that Light's god complex disqualifies him. However characters in objectivist works frequently display god complexes in their belief of their own omnipotence. Belief in god is inimical to objectivism because you can't put yourself above that. God complexes are not.

Edited by Scuttlebutt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×