News from the insane world of Terry Goodkind

[Mme Erzulie]

Ok, guys, BORING!

Bring on the Goodkind fun again.

[Larry.]

Goodkind fun, huh?

How come many people don't comment on how with his balding front and the long hair in the back that Goodkind appears to be developing a skullet?

Think about it...

[keefer]

So, uhm, I own all the books up until chainfire, which I am currently reading.

And I will buy the next two(I think that's what I heard was left, but we'll see) for really no other reason than I've started it, and I figure I should finish it.

It's like watching a train crash. It leaves the station, all clad in beautiful objects or whatever, and for a while, all is good. Then it gets further down the track, and shit starts to fall off the train, it's stuttering. Then you glance ahead, and see some obstruction(penny?) on the tracks, and you think to yourself, "Oh, this won't end well."

But at this point you're unable to look away. The train hits the object, the wheel derails, for a couple of feet the train is running on the dirt, and then suddenly, it's doing a barrel roll into an unsuspecting farm house, where the owner is just about to unwittingly light a match in a room full of gas.

AT THE SAME TIME, a plane is falling out of the sky towards this destination, and something else, maybe a bus, is also careening towards it. You steel yourself for the inevitable explosion, and when it happens, you're shocked, and appalled. Then it's over, and you leave going "Holy goddamn mother of shit! I can't believe I just saw that! Jesus-on-a-stick was that horrendous!"

Then maybe you tell people about it, or you don't because you're embarrassed for some reason.

But yeah, that's my stance on it. I certainly don't stand up for goodkind or his beliefs, and, much to his dismay I suppose, I frequently skim the books. This is mostly because the first like, 150 pages (especially in the later books) are all recap of everything that's happened already, usually in a very unenjoyable way to read. Typically it gets better later on, better of course being entirely subjective.

Anyways, those who read the books aren't all as batshit insane as some of the users on the linked board are, is I think the biggest point I'm trying to make. I like to read, and sometimes reading something that isn't that great makes you appreciate the stuff that is all the more</cheesiness>

Probably not the best "second ever" post one could make, but hey.

[Xanrn]

Boom.

sheesh you really shouldn't egg people on when their stoned, tendecy to make fools of themselves.

[The Stranger]

subtle, red fisted one.

gaze upon the horrific ramifications of Goodkind fans learning about the real world:

Goodkind's Fans See Some Reviews...

[Baeraad]

We need to support Terry against the people who haven't a clue and only seek to try and ruin a great story for others.

Astonishing.

It's one thing reading about Goodkind himself rant about how he's a genius and how everyone who doesn't like him are a) too stupid to understand his workd and trying to destroy everything that's above their own level. To realise that he's managed to sell that worldview to other people is just... well... astonishing.

I mean, say Goodkind was a genius. Say that we who don't like him were morons. Would we be more likely to a) wage a relentless war against him or write him off as a "too clever by 'alf" and go back to mooching off the government, or whatever it is we death-worshipping collectivists are supposed to do, while paying no further attention to Goodkind or his works?

But no, Goodkind and his followers both seem to believe he's the single most important human being in the world and that not being with him is being against him. You can't stay neutral in the great war for Life and Liberty, I suppose.

Astonishing.

[Max Clegane]

I've read quite a few of Goodkind's books, sad to say. WFR wasn't bad, and was enough to make me buy the rest published to that point in paperback (I only buy GRRM's books in hardback anymore; S. King was another until the last of the Gunslinger series. Grr). That was a huge mistake. The second one was kinda meh, but readable, and it went downhill in a hurry from there.

It wasn't the obvious copying from Jordan--although that bothered me--or the repetition of plotlines...but rather it was just that Richard and Kahlan were so god damn perfect, and Richard was always right. Always. Without fail. Even when Kahlan was disagreeing with him, he was still right. And he got a new power every book. Uhm. Yeah. Marty Stu much, Mr. Goodkind?

That, and the point of the books is to seperate Kahlan and Richard, then hook them up again at the end. That was it. Big plot. Woo.

However, since I hate wasting money, I read them all, up through the one where Nicci kidnaps Richard by holding Kahlan's life hostage through some weird magic I have no idea why anyone would think of it at *all*, and then Richard shows Nicci the value of capitalism and how communism is eval. *vomit* Whatever. After that, thankfully, I could stop, and bleach my brain.

It doesn't surprise me that he's crazy. His books also make me feel better in that one of mine might get published someday, and be semi-popular. Maybe. I mean, if tripe like that can can published and be popular, why can't MY tripe make me loads of money?

EDIT: And btw, if I ever did publish a novel (or series, or lots of one-shot novels, there aren't any of THOSE around anymore, are there? nope, all gotta be series now...) and got semi-famous, I would make sure I had a Flame On! section for people to bitch about how awful I was if they wanted. It would keep my ego in check, or help to, at least.

[The Stranger]

once again, you relativists refuse to give me the answer to a simple question: I read the book ten years ago, and I dimly remember sand being something important.

how the hell can sand be a pivotal feature of the books? in fact, if I remember correctly, doesn't the villain in WFR have a giant sandbox?

lil' help, pu-reeaze.

[Brys]

As I understand it there is a difference between libertarianism and liberalism. Both believe in social freedom, but libertarians believe that "the government that governs best is the government that governs least." They think that almost all taxation is theft, that as much as possible should be privatised. Usually they will be in favour of a low, flat rate of tax for all people (8-10%) which funds the military, and sometimes roads and public education up to high school. The idea is that it is immoral to take taxes for any other purposes because people should have the right to choose how their money is spent, in accordance with their own ideologies (unless of course you're a pacifist, in which case you still have to give tax to the military). Libertarians are especially utterly opposed to any kind of state welfare system, and believe that private industry should be as unregulated as possible, with the pay and conditions of workers individually negotiated with their far more powerful employers, although they do of course believe in some safeguards against outright slavery (the extent of these depends on the Libertarian). Liberals will argue that the only people who have true freedom under this sort of system are the rich, because everyone else lives at the mercy of their employer.

Liberals on the other hand (and this doesn't include the Australian Liberal Party, who are all conservatives), believe that all people should have the same basic level of freedom, and that things like public health, education and general wellbeing are important if we are to all have this basic level. If some redistribution of wealth is needed in order to attain that, then that is okay. Liberals believe that taxation should be determined according to need, and that it is okay to tax higher income people at a higher rate than lower income people, with the justification that people on higher incomes benefit more from our social structure than people on lower incomes. Libertarians (like Goodkind) would argue that this is punishing those who work hardest, stealing their money to benefit those who work less hard.

In terms of British politics, Goodkind is probably most similar to Margaret Thatcher, than any politician around today. While Libertarians do tend to vote for conservative parties, since conservative parties tend to spend less on welfare and public health etc, most of them dislike all major parties, as all of them tend to have pretty large governments.

I thought libertarianism referred to social liberalism, meaning that the government didn't intervene in anything. What you seem to be defining is neo-liberalism, while liberals are progressive. Perhaps it's all just a matter of terminology, and Goodkind would be far better described as a neo-conservative. Or perhaps a facist, except I think he would object to that on the grounds that facism is far too collectivist for him.

Back to Goodkind. More quotes from the forum:

Well ya know... we have standards..

[mormont]

In response to questions about Goodkind's popularity:

I was saying this to someone the other day. I know a few people who like Goodkind. Without exception, they like his stories because... well, they're simple, undemanding fantasy escapism. Good guys, bad guys, quests and swordfights, and everything ends well for the good guys (except that then it starts all over again). Nothing complicated, nothing demanding, no surprises, no twists. No difficult concepts, no demanding prose, just an easy read.

Obviously, Terry himself would freak out at this. But whether he likes it or not, 90% of his readership is (like 90% of Feist's, or Gemmell's, or Brooks', or even a large chunk of George's!) people who read fantasy because this kind of escapism is exactly what they want. They don't care about all the objectivist pseudism. They barely notice it, astounding as that may seem. They just want to read about Richard defeating the bad guys with his kewl powerz and deep wisdom.

Of course, as the series goes on and Terry's ego grows, this kind of thing is being sacrificed for boring eight-page monologues, and this is why the sales are dropping and the reviews are getting bad. Not because of the evol people dragging down Terry's 'excellence', but because he's disappointing the people who just wanna read some mindless escapism.

[Multaniette]

I actually saw something I agree with

I wonder how many people there got it...

[Werthead]

So, uhm, I own all the books up until chainfire, which I am currently reading.

And I will buy the next two(I think that's what I heard was left, but we'll see) for really no other reason than I've started it, and I figure I should finish it.

It's like watching a train crash.

Indeed. And since many more people (including me) have that attitude towards Wheel of Time I find that an understandable reason for carrying on. It's when people stand up (even the author) and proclaim this the greatest work ever in the history of the universe that the bile starts to rise. After all, as much as I dislike Eddings and am disappointed now in Jordan, neither of them have stood up and proclaimed themselves saviours of America and claimed to create a philosophy to enrich their readers' lives (whilst burying their heads in the sand about global warming, among other subjects). The only other author I've known to do that is L. Ron Hubbard.

Xanrn's post does not seem present on that thread. So either he hasn't put it up yet or it was instantaneously deleted. I know which I'm betting on.

How about this one, though? Scary. And comical.

http://www.terrygoodkind.net/forums/showthread.php?t=197

[Eurytus]

How about this one, though? Scary. And comical.

http://www.terrygoodkind.net/forums/showthread.php?t=197

Looks like they are having the time of their lives!

[Sophelia]

Argh! Why am I reading this thread? Why did I click on the link?

Actually, having been in Terry's closet, I can say he wears lots of other colors and has a pink shirt! He wears bluejeans, floral prints and several light colors as well.

*scared*

Actually I'm a little creeped out by fans with that level of interest in their author's personal habits. Please, nobody ever post the contents of GRRM's wardrobe on our board!

[mormont]

The more amusing one is the thread that links off that where someone asks if he got Terry's permission to post those pics.

Here it is:

I read this and I was insenced!

I very rarly allow anyone to bother me, but this lil puke just went too far as far as I'm concerned! I responded to him, but I'm curious as what your guy's think? Was I spot on, or did I over react?

That's nice, what's 'insenced'?

Spelling is so over rated.

However, it is none of your business period!. I'll answer because Terry god a good laugh outta this...

Freudian slip there? 'Terry god'?

Terry is again a dear dear friend. We talk about once a week. Sometimes more, sometimes less.

A dear dear friend. He wants us to know. (I'd be hiding that, but what the hell.)

Lastly and I'm about two seconds from banning your sorry butt for even posting such a thing.

Mod policy over there is so even-handed.

You could also ask the 200 people who were at the last book signing and the gathering that "I" alone formulated, arranged and put together. All with Terry's permission and agreement. It was "me" who talked Terry into this whole thing; it was "my" hard work that pulled it all together with out a hitch. You are more than welcome to ask any one the people who were invited to attend a "special" dinner with The Goodkind’s and later retire to their home for a relaxing evening will attest to the fact of what it is I speak of.

So modest.I do wonder if the publishers and indeed Terry might just have contributed to the putting together of these events. Not to mention the fans who actually came.

Seriously, can't see Lodey ranting on about how "he" alone formulates, arranges and puts together BwB events, can you?

I notice he also quotes himself in his sig.

Yes I take umbridge at your petty questions

For some reason I find that particular misspelling hilarious. You got to worry when the board's admin types like Os on a bad day.

I expect an apology toot-sweet, or its bye bye for you. and "I" am not kidding!

Why does he keep putting his personal pronouns in quotes?

This is also funny.

How absolutely pathetic that prophet, which I think is the same prophet from FE, would have the audacity to make such assinine accusations. What it shows is his lack of intelligence, based on the fact that he has ignored every single mention of your friendship with Terry. Everyone who knows you knows that you are good friends with Terry.

Now, the other question is...

What the hell was he on? I mean, look at that horrific grammer. I swear, its like he's speaking an imbecile's language. Perhaps, he is..

If you're going to criticise horrific 'grammer', perhaps you should spellcheck your own posts first.

But I suspect the favoruite quote people will have from that thread is..

He seemed to have an interest foremost in defaming your character, by pretending to be Terry, and nullifying the friendship you have with the real Terry. (How the heck could he be Terry with writing THAT bad!! lol!)

[Kingslayer]

How the heck could he be Terry with writing THAT bad!! lol!

[Ahimsa]

You know who these Goodkinders remind me of? Do you remember Patrick Swayze in Donnie Darko, and how he had all those people who made their little-hero worship cult? Yup, it's almost the same thing.

[sologdin]

gods, what a pack of assholes. i might have to join up there just to see how long it takes to get banned.

[Xray the Enforcer]

It's like watching a train crash. It leaves the station, all clad in beautiful objects or whatever, and for a while, all is good. Then it gets further down the track, and shit starts to fall off the train, it's stuttering. Then you glance ahead, and see some obstruction(penny?) on the tracks, and you think to yourself, "Oh, this won't end well."

[...]

Probably not the best "second ever" post one could make, but hey.

What're you talking about, Keefer? That post was a) accurate and entertaining! I can't really speak to the fullness of the metaphor -- I've read WFR and I briefly skim each new tome at the bookstore, just to check to see if my original thoughts were correct, ie GK is a homophobic nutter with negligible wordcrafting skills.

oh yeah, and welcome to the boards!

once again, you relativists refuse to give me the answer to a simple question: I read the book ten years ago, and I dimly remember sand being something important.

how the hell can sand be a pivotal feature of the books? in fact, if I remember correctly, doesn't the villain in WFR have a giant sandbox?

lil' help, pu-reeaze.

Stranger, I think we've all blocked these things out to keep the world a more beautiful place. I do remember some shit about the sand, too. Like, it opens portals to other dimensions. There's also that bit about Kalahn and her Con Dar moments, creatures that cultivate flies and...well, that piss poor excuse for a protagonist, Richard.

[sologdin]

xray--

a series is beyond redemption, also, when the villains are soul-stealing chickens. that's friggin' bottom of the barrel.