Tomatoes 2

[hadaad]

I started reading this thread at the beginning and it's interesting enough (and, oddly, civilized enough) that I feel that I can chime in.

Kheldar, your entire argument for Drefan's ability to attack Richard come from the fact that you assume that TG made one mistake rather than another mistake (assuming that "it" was the mistake rather than "back" being the mistake) where either one is equally probable. You can feel free to interpret it however you want, especially if it increases your enjoyment of the series. I didn't spend that much time on the sentence, myself. My disbelief can be suspended to superhuman levels and if an author wants to have a heroic (or anti-heroic) last gasp for a guy, with or without a spine, that's fine for me.

The series, for me, started to turn with the Anders and the Hakens. That was a society that I hated reading about and had to struggle to get through. I didn't see much realistic about it but again, once I was out of that hell, I accepted that the author could put it there if he wanted to, and continued on.

The spell was absolutely broken for me in Naked Empire. The story was decent enough throughout, but then the horrible "magic cures everything" deus ex machina piece of crap along with the "Gee, Zedd, I'm so glad you managed to solve your problem off camera" resolution made me start taking a hard look at the series. It's easy to keep on with an author when you have moments of doubt, as long as he's earned the benefit of the doubt, and he doesn't break the spell. People can say what they want about Jordan, about how CoT was a needless book, how Path of Daggers was terrible. I don't care about that. I had my moments of doubt reading the Wheel of Time series but Jordan, for me, kept the spell going. There was nothing that made me throw the book down in disgust and need to yell at people.

After that, I started scrutinizing the story and finding little problems (with the help of the people here, I suppose). The last three books were bad as well but I rode it out because I wanted to get the magic back. I guess Naked Empire destroyed the series for me because I couldn't cheer for Richard anymore and when I'd brought up my concerns and problems with Naked Empire to people over on the PI website, I was told that my concerns were unimportant, that a book doesn't have to solve every single problem or something like that, and that it wasn't the point of the story to have the problem solved in a way that would make people happy.

Well, I don't read books to get disgusted with a writing style or to feel like seven years of following a series has been turned on its head because the author got less concerned with the story and more concerned with the theme.

Story is all. If you are going to compromise story, don't write a story. Especially, don't start off writing a good story (despite the flaws in the writing) and then cheese out with three books to go.

The worst part of it all is that TG probably thinks that he did good with Naked Empire. So glad you got that collar off, my foot!

Edit: I didn't mean to quote Kheldar's entire post, honest!

[hadaad]

[quote name='Atreides' post='1432399' date='Jul 8 2008, 18.10']Yeah, as said I've never read it so I didn't know if they disrobed and then deployed for battle and were say, exposed to the elements for hours, or whether it was for a matter of minutes, which could be doable.[/quote]

I'm feeling snarky, so I'll say that that detail was omitted because it would have distracted from the themes represented by the army rising up and living their lives.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1431680' date='Jul 8 2008, 10.50']How did Superman just happen to end up looking completely human, indistinguishable from real humans? Why was a disguise of putting on some glasses enough to fool everyone?[/quote]

Roswell wasn't for another nine years, Siegel and Shuster didn't know what aliens looked like yet. :P Besides, it's a allegory.

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1431680' date='Jul 8 2008, 10.50']Or the reader.[/quote]

Ah. The "You say PoTAYtoe, I say PoTAHtoe" defense. I see.

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1431680' date='Jul 8 2008, 10.50']Internal logic is all that's required...it doesn't have to match up with real-world logic 100%. This is an instance where it matches enough for some readers, but is too different for other readers.[/quote]

You can accept that folks accustomed to more sophistication in their reading can see that there is little adherence to the internal logic of TG's world then? That that is what makes it "too different for other readers".

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1431680' date='Jul 8 2008, 10.50']So you won't assume that a major blood vessel was hit, then, right?[/quote]

Now that was just mean. :P

I, personally, never assumed anything about the blood vessels since the text clearly indicated to me that the spine was gone and ripped apart. Why worry about blood vessels?

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1431680' date='Jul 8 2008, 10.50']The logic is internally sound. I can't speak to TG's thoughts behind the skills (assuming there wasn't much thought, there, aren't you?), but for me the detail provided was sufficient to understand/explain the events.[/quote]

I disagree. Strongly. But if we all agreed, then we wouldn't have this thread, would we?

[Kheldar]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1432375' date='Jul 8 2008, 19.49']Feel free to continue to claim that Drefan, sans spine, could swing a sword with deadly power.[/quote]
I never made such a ludicrous claim. I corrected the misperception that Defran's spine was entirely ripped out. With a partially intact spine, the ability to ignore/bypass pain, the ability to slow bloodloss, and great upper-body strength, a person with a severed lower spine could prop themselves up against a wall and swing a sword. It won't be as powerful a blow as if he were standing and able to shift his body (to add his weight to the swing), but it doesn't have to be extremely powerful in order to be deadly.

[Kheldar]

[quote name='hadaad' post='1432727' date='Jul 9 2008, 01.51']I started reading this thread at the beginning and it's interesting enough (and, oddly, civilized enough) that I feel that I can chime in.

Kheldar, your entire argument for Drefan's ability to attack Richard come from the fact that you assume that TG made one mistake rather than another mistake (assuming that "it" was the mistake rather than "back" being the mistake) where either one is equally probable. You can feel free to interpret it however you want, especially if it increases your enjoyment of the series.[/quote]
Given human physiology, I find it extremely unlikely (to say the least) that the entire spine would be ripped out through the stomach. More likely is that the spine with be ripped apart (which is what was described).

[quote name='hadaad' post='1432727' date='Jul 9 2008, 01.51']The series, for me, started to turn with the Anders and the Hakens. That was a society that I hated reading about and had to struggle to get through. I didn't see much realistic about it but again, once I was out of that hell, I accepted that the author could put it there if he wanted to, and continued on.[/quote]
I can understand that. I wasn't particularly fond of the Anders and Hakens the first time I read it. It was easier to swallow the second time through.

[quote name='hadaad' post='1432727' date='Jul 9 2008, 01.51']The spell was absolutely broken for me in Naked Empire. The story was decent enough throughout, but then the horrible "magic cures everything" deus ex machina piece of crap along with the "Gee, Zedd, I'm so glad you managed to solve your problem off camera" resolution made me start taking a hard look at the series.[/quote]
Yeah, Naked Empire lacked believability for me in a lot of respects, and I also didn't like the "magic cures everything" solution to the poison. I don't know which was worse: some Bandakars accepting that violence was sometimes necessary based solely on Richard's monologues, or the magic-guided creation of just the right antidote.

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1432971' date='Jul 9 2008, 09.08']Ah. The "You say PoTAYtoe, I say PoTAHtoe" defense. I see.[/quote]
Not really. You were speculating on where the problem may lie...I added the third possibility. I'd say that the most likely answer is "a combination of all three". TG wrote it poorly, the editor didn't make him fix it, and some readers didn't follow what TG was intending to say because of the poor wording.

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1432971' date='Jul 9 2008, 09.08']You can accept that folks accustomed to more sophistication in their reading can see that there is little adherence to the internal logic of TG's world then? That that is what makes it "too different for other readers".[/quote]
I wouldn't say "more sophistication", and I disagree with the assessment that there is little adherence to the internal logic of the world.

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1432971' date='Jul 9 2008, 09.08']Now that was just mean. :P[/quote]
:D

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1432971' date='Jul 9 2008, 09.08']I, personally, never assumed anything about the blood vessels since the text clearly indicated to me that the spine was gone and ripped apart. Why worry about blood vessels?[/quote]
I never gave blood vessels any thought when reading it, but I never made the assumption that the entire spine was gone either.

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1432971' date='Jul 9 2008, 09.08']I disagree. Strongly. But if we all agreed, then we wouldn't have this thread, would we?[/quote]
Which means, for you, the detail provided was NOT sufficient to understand/explain the events. Which is why I said (above) that it's a combination of the writing being unclear and readers seeing different things in what was written.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1433167' date='Jul 9 2008, 10.10']Given human physiology, I find it extremely unlikely (to say the least) that the entire spine would be ripped out through the stomach. More likely is that the spine with be ripped apart (which is what was described).[/quote]

Here's the thing, Khel. You're entire defense of this act of monumental carnage seems to be entirely based on assumptions. "Given human physiology...", et. al. while at the same time dismissing everything else we've said. The text states that Richard reached in and grabbed the spinal column and ripped it out. You say that "it" must mean Richard's hand, which is another assumption.

Simple question then: Taking the text literally, can you not see that the spine was removed through the action?

[quote]Which means, for you, the detail provided was NOT sufficient to understand/explain the events. Which is why I said (above) that it's a combination of the writing being unclear and readers seeing different things in what was written.[/quote]

There is a difference between writing being unclear and a writer being deliberatly unclear to allow the reader to interpret. Much of SoT, the spinal column removal being a specific example of the former, I'd say are examples of poor writing. Jon Snow's murky parentage and how it will effect the eventual outcome of ASOIAF is an example of the latter and an example of good writing.

[Kheldar]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1433196' date='Jul 9 2008, 11.27']Here's the thing, Khel. You're entire defense of this act of monumental carnage seems to be entirely based on assumptions. "Given human physiology...", et. al. while at the same time dismissing everything else we've said. The text states that Richard reached in and grabbed the spinal column and ripped it out. You say that "it" must mean Richard's hand, which is another assumption.

Simple question then: Taking the text literally, can you not see that the spine was removed through the action?[/quote]
Simple answer: because the sentence is poorly written. It cannot be taken literally, because if the "it" refers to the spine, the "back out" doesn't work logically. Therefore, it makes the most sense to me that the "it" that was "ripped back out" was Richard's hand, and the "it" that was ripped apart was the spine.

It's unclear writing, but taken one way, what follows in the story is possible (though improbable), while taken the other way it's impossible. A man without a spine cannot move his upper body, but a man with a severed lower spine can. So I choose to make an assumption that fits better, as opposed to making an assumption that makes the rest of the scene impossible.

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1433196' date='Jul 9 2008, 11.27']There is a difference between writing being unclear and a writer being deliberatly unclear to allow the reader to interpret. Much of SoT, the spinal column removal being a specific example of the former, I'd say are examples of poor writing. Jon Snow's murky parentage and how it will effect the eventual outcome of ASOIAF is an example of the latter and an example of good writing.[/quote]
I agree with this (although I think we'd disagree on what parts of TG's books are unclear).

[Arthmail]

Lets just remember, he punched his hand through a man's stomach. That's just a stupid martial arts movie scene right there, and negates any worthiness in this entire conversation. Its such a stupid idea on so many levels, a: "I know, this would be sweet, it'll be like that scene in the matrix!" moment. Fucking dumb.

At any other point, in the entire series, did Richard show that he had this kind of power?

[Kheldar]

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']Lets just remember, he punched his hand through a man's stomach.[/quote]
Yep.

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']That's just a stupid martial arts movie scene right there[/quote]
And?

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']and negates any worthiness in this entire conversation.[/quote]
Why? Because it's not real? Or because it's been done before?

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']Its such a stupid idea on so many levels, a: "I know, this would be sweet, it'll be like that scene in the matrix!" moment. Fucking dumb.[/quote]
Matrix: 1999. Temple of the Winds: 1997.

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']At any other point, in the entire series, did Richard show that he had this kind of power?[/quote]
Did he punch his fist through anyone else's stomach? No. Did he show that he was very strong? Yes. Did he show he could kill people? Yes.

[Foreverlad]

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']Lets just remember, he punched his hand through a man's stomach. That's just a stupid martial arts movie scene right there, and negates any worthiness in this entire conversation. Its such a stupid idea on so many levels, a: "I know, this would be sweet, it'll be like that scene in the matrix!" moment. Fucking dumb.

At any other point, in the entire series, did Richard show that he had this kind of power?[/quote]

While some wizards or sisters can cast fireballs or weave protective shields, Richard Rahl, being a War Wizard, has Deus Ex Machina as his ability. He can lengthen hair, bring areolae to the nipple-less masses and deduce complex magical theory. There is likely no limit to what he could do. After punching a hole in your stomach, Cornflakes could come flying out, and where they fall, great fields of corn could grow.

Now, supposing his War Wizard ability has nothing to do with tearing Drefan a new hole, you need to remember, Richard is bigger than most men, stronger too. He can run for days on end, conquer the battlefield of Ja'La dh Jin (a field game) and raptor-gaze the masses into submission.

[Rakehell]

[quote name='Arthmail' post='1435112' date='Jul 10 2008, 12.45']Lets just remember, he punched his hand through a man's stomach. That's just a stupid martial arts movie scene right there, and negates any worthiness in this entire conversation. Its such a stupid idea on so many levels, a: "I know, this would be sweet, it'll be like that scene in the matrix!" moment. Fucking dumb.[/quote]

Yeah, I brought up this point a few pages back. It was dismissed with the idea that because the abdomen is soft tissue it's not that improbable (and some bizarre reference to breaking bricks on someone's stomach). I had started to look up things like the tensile strength of skin, deformation of a surface and the difference between elastic and inelastic collisions in order to further my point, then I realized it would be a waste of time.

Once you accept that someone can stick their hand into another person's stomach without the aid of a sharp implement, you can accept anything from that point on as being equally reasonable.

[Kheldar]

[quote name='Rakehell' post='1435249' date='Jul 10 2008, 14.13']Yeah, I brought up this point a few pages back. It was dismissed with the idea that because the abdomen is soft tissue it's not that improbable (and some bizarre reference to breaking bricks on someone's stomach).[/quote]
I never said it wasn't improbable....merely not impossible.

[quote name='Rakehell' post='1435249' date='Jul 10 2008, 14.13']Once you accept that someone can stick their hand into another person's stomach without the aid of a sharp implement, you can accept anything from that point on as being equally reasonable.[/quote]
Maybe it had been a while since Richard cut his nails. ;)

[Watcher]

Khel, maybe you answered this already, but what do you find in TG's books that are so compelling?

I think the punching your hand and ripping out parts of the spinal cord scene is one of the worse things I've read. It is completely cartoonish. If Martin would've written I'd drop his series immediately. It boggles my mind you or anyone is trying to defend it.

[Arthmail]

It's stupid because it's impossible. Yes, impossible. I said it. In a world of magic, its impossible. Why?

Lets assume for an instance that the Hulk (Hulk Smash!), is the one doing the punching. He punches Joe Blow Victim in the stomach. Does he punch through? No, because the amount of force exerted, and the material it is exerted upon, would prevent such an action unless Joe Blow Victim was braced against something. Say for instance if he was lying on a table, or standing against a wall. Now, removing the fact that the Hulks hand is larger than Richards by several magnitudes, i bring up this point because there is simply no way - short of magic - that a hand would be able to gain the velocity necessary to penetrate flesh fast enough without the aid of some sort of bracing behind the indvidual being hit to prevent Joe Blow from simply being thrown back through the air before more than minimal penetration is attained.

I worked for two summers at a military base while in University. Part of the studies included critical diameter, amongst other things. I have seen everything from pipe bombs to ground mounted apache missle test firing. Its all cool, but the principles remain the same in every case.

The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its current velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. Kinetic energy can be passed from one object to another.
In a game of pool, kinetic energy is passed from the cue stick to the cue ball. If the ball collides with another ball, it will slow down while the ball it collided with will accelerate to a speed as the kinetic energy is passed on to it.

Now lets consider a bullet. As a missile passes through tissue, it decelerates, dissipating and transferring kinetic energy to the tissues; this is what causes the injury.[1] The velocity of the projectile is a more important factor than its mass in determining how much damage is done;[1] kinetic energy increases with the square of the velocity. In addition to injury caused directly by the object that enters the body, penetrating injuries may be associated with secondary injuries, due for example to a blast injury.

Lets say tha Richard Rahls fist is similar to that of a thrown club, used by an expert (from the chart that the interwebs so conveniently supplied me). Lets compare it to some other weapons that use velocity to see what we can see:

[b]Club, thrown (by an expert):[/b] 40 m/s 130 ft/s 90mph [b]Kinetic Energy: 800 J/kg[/b]
- I chose a club because it seems closest to a human hand, so while there is some flaw in this data, its as close as i can get without scouring the web, and i've already gone pathetically far enough on a subject i really care nothing about.

[b]paintball fired from a marker:[/b] 90 m/s 300 ft/s 204 mph [b]Kinetic Energy: 4.1 kJ/kg[/b]

[b]airgun pellet (conventional maximum): [/b] 244 m/s 800 ft/s 545 mph [b]Kinetic Energy: 29.8 kJ/kg[/b]

[b]9*19mm (bullet of a pistol): [/b] 340 m/s 1116 ft/s 761mph [b]Kinetic Energy: 58 kJ/kg[/b]


So, airguns - which mostly only kill with blows to the temple or eyes - is still six times more powerful on a grade of velocity than a club thrown by an expert (don't ask me what constitutes an expert club thrower). Without that speed, Richards hand wouldn't be able to enter the flesh without simply throwing the man out of his reach.

[b]SO I SAY ITS FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE TO EVEN PUNCH THROUGH THE STOMACH, LET ALONE SNAP HIS SPINE.[/b]

Unless Terry specifically mentions that he is using magic to do so. And something substantive, not just...well, he's really strong because of his magic. If its just strength, and nothing to help him penetrate the flesh in a quick manner, it still wouldn't work. The hulk couldn't do it, Richard couldn't do it.


Discussion over.

[Foreverlad]

Epilogue:

Damn Arth, stick to your Bowie sucks posts. You're scary when you drop science.

Awesome post.

:cheers:

[Arthmail]

[quote name='Foreverlad' post='1435751' date='Jul 10 2008, 18.46']Epilogue:

Damn Arth, stick to your Bowie sucks posts. You're scary when you drop science.

Awesome post.

:cheers:[/quote]


Thanks. The amusing thing is, i never enjoyed science in any form until i got out of high school. Then i got hooked on the likes of Hawking, Sagan, and Brian Greene with his superstring theory. I've been pretending to know something ever since.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Kheldar' post='1435066' date='Jul 10 2008, 11.21']Simple answer: because the sentence is poorly written. It cannot be taken literally,[/quote]

Seems quite a lot of it is taken literally by a lot of people. Why not this sentence too?

[Ouroboros]

Because the sentence is poorly written, the author didn't try to write it well, since the author didn't try to write it well he didn't care about it. An author that doesn't care about how well his book is written, even in the smallest of sentences, isn't a very good author. Mediocre is the word. Terry Goodkind is a mediocre author, and mediocrity should never be praised or lauded, it should never be something to aspire to. Those who aspire to be only of middling ability deserve nothing but derision. An author should always strive for excellence in his work. Terry Goodkind aspired to mediocrity with his writing ability and achieved it.

So I guess he has earned the derision aimed at him if nothing else.

[marwyn]

[quote name='Ouroboros' post='1436012' date='Jul 11 2008, 06.33']Because the sentence is poorly written, the author didn't try to write it well, since the author didn't try to write it well he didn't care about it. An author that doesn't care about how well his book is written, even in the smallest of sentences, isn't a very good author. Mediocre is the word. Terry Goodkind is a mediocre author, and mediocrity should never be praised or lauded, it should never be something to aspire to. Those who aspire to be only of middling ability deserve nothing but derision. An author should always strive for excellence in his work. Terry Goodkind aspired to mediocrity with his writing ability and achieved it.

So I guess he has earned the derision aimed at him if nothing else.[/quote]

Well not like i'd want to defend TG but the reasoning in your post is sort of flawed. The fact that Goodkind can't write doesn't mean he doesn't try. (Well maybe he doesnt, I dont know, but there's no real reason to assume that.) Maybe he thought, in all honesty, that it was original and innovative and cool.
Even though his books are an endless source of fun and mockery for the Lemmings that doesn't mean that Goodkind himself doesn't care about the books. You can't spend 12 years writing books that you don't really care about.
As for the fact that he's mediocre, I won't go into that too much since I havent actually read all of His Works - but from what I've read, I agree with you. It's just that there's a difference between not trying and not being able to.

Kheldar, you earn some respect for singlehandedly defending the series from a forum full of people trying to make fun of them. Even though I dont really agree with your opinions it's nice that you try to defend them while managing to keep it polite at the same time (mostly;P) Kudos.

BTW is there anyone on this forums AT ALL who likes both aSoIaF and TG? I dont think I've read about anyone who does, yet.

[Ouroboros]

Its clear if he was trying, he stopped towards the middle of the series. I've read most of his books and it is clear he doesn't try as hard as he should. The fact he refuses to have his work edited or to rewrite (and that he gets uppity when such is suggested) also proves he doesn't care about writing to the best of his ability.