Jerol Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 http://www.prophets-inc.com/art_gallery/terry/signing5.JPG Garrrgh... feel his glaring power. The glare, the power of the yeard, and most of all the ugly blazer that is obviously intended to make him look like a legitimate author rather than the proverbial hack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray the Enforcer Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Romantic Times? Whoa. How does it get on a Romance bookclub? Despite what Goodkind says, the book is still Fantasy (crappy as it might be). But then again, with the way he does his descriptions and his fetish for sexual...er...encounters in all of his books, it might as well be. Terry does not write romance! Or fantasy! Dammit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosicus Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Terry does not write romance! Or fantasy! Dammit. Just what does he write again (in his opinion)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brys Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I had begun to think that Mystar was the only ridiculous Goodkind fan who ever left terrygoodkind.net, but it seems I was wrong: Chronicles Terry Goodkind thread Look at post 89. That's almost up to Mystar's standard. Those of you who thought you'd been exaggerating at GioG on the "Tolkien is a hack" and "Dickens is a hack" etc threads - Like Dickens, Goodkind is writing with a definite agenda in mind. Dickens wanted to draw attention to the plight of the underclass. Goodkind writes about the value of the individual. Jordan set out to write a tale of astounding scope and complexity. Granted, I think it got away from him, but then, I think the Divine Comedy got away from Dante. Talk of Goodkind or Jordan (or any contemporary writer you'll find in the Fantasy section) writing simple escapist fantasy as opposed to "Proper Literature" is misguided and, in any event, decades premature. Hard to believe. Just what does he write again (in his opinion)? He writes books about the nobility of the human spirit. And fantasy, depending on the interview (he transcended the genre, injected life into a tired an empty genre, but he is not, in the essential sense, a fantasy author). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 He writes books about the nobility of the human spirit. And fantasy, depending on the interview (he transcended the genre, injected life into a tired an empty genre, but he is not, in the essential sense, a fantasy author). And evil chickens. And noble goats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zadok Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 And as far as prose is concerned, you have on one hand, virtuoso stylists who can work wonders with the language. On the other, you have more plainspoken wordsmiths, who consider communication of an idea more important than ornament. Both have their merits. It is quite possible to enjoy both for what they are. From the same post that Brys is talking about. I feel these descriptions are far too broad to encompass the "talents" of Mr Goodkind. In this he is actually in a group of his own, as he so often claims, the borderline autists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Maid Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 In this he is actually in a group of his own, as he so often claims, the borderline autists I think autistics would be offended to actually have Goodkind grouped with them...and are there actually borderline autistics? At least he's not claiming to be an idiot/autistic savant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BranTheBuilder Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 They always seemed to think they did a fine job of hiding their feelings from others, but, as obvious as it usually was, they might as well be painted purple. Ok, what was he smoking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sad King Billy Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Bran, do you enjoy sadomasochism that much??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BranTheBuilder Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I've started the bloody thing, so I'm definitely going to read at least 12 chpters... besides its almost comical in its dreadfulness..... edit: besides, its better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Goodkind's work might feature shit you don't agree with, but it's not as bad as you all make it out to be. It's a damn sight better than Brooks or Eddings, and a few others I'm loathe to mention because it will get knickers in a twist. There's only so much hate you can muster. Ok, the man himself is a pretentious ass. So are most authors. He may take it to new levels, but I don't see attacks on Rowling for being 'too important' to go and get her Hugo. Her HUGO! So the guy writes fantasy from the right as opposed to the left. Crucify the bastard, why the fuck don't you. Yeah, it sucks. 95% of everything sucks. Sturgeon's Law. You don't need to obsess over how bad it sucks, because honestly, there's much worse out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLL17 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Terry GoodKind: the Danielle Steele of philosophy. He's to fantasy what Dan Brown is to theology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asa Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 We need some more Eragon hate threads. I mean...it's worse than Goodkind's crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hark Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 [grumble grumble] ... [grumble grumble] Party pooper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 This is true. Writers who who are worse than Goodkind that I have read include L. Ron Hubbard and Warren James Palmer (self-published), but then Hubbard is dead and Palmer thankfully too obscure outside the UK. As for Eddings and Brooks...difficult. The Tamuli collected edition is probably the worst book I have in my collection, certainly worse than the two GK books I read. But the Belgariad and Elenium were much better than those two GK books. Brooks I think is better than either (despite doing a blatant knock-off of Lord of the Rings and publishing it under the name The Sword of Shannara), but still pretty crap when compared to anyone else. I think the main reason GK attracts this criticism is that, frankly, he asks for it. The stuff he says is preposterous and a ripe source for comedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BranTheBuilder Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 In Sci Fi, E.E. "Doc" Smith is MUCH worse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehelm Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I think the main reason GK attracts this criticism is that, frankly, he asks for it. The stuff he says is preposterous and a ripe source for comedy. I guess any publicity is good publicity...but even if talking shit about him gives him more exposure, so be it. I just like talking shit about him too much to stop! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Goodkind's work might feature shit you don't agree with, but it's not as bad as you all make it out to be. It's a damn sight better than Brooks or Eddings, and a few others I'm loathe to mention because it will get knickers in a twist. I don't think anyone is going to argue that Eddings or Brooks are exceptional writers with exceptional tales. The saving grace of both however is that they know they write "sword and sorcery" novels, and that their books are easily excisable for young readers. They don't bog it down with graphic sex scenes or heavy handed philosophy. There's only so much hate you can muster. Don't confuse snark with hate. It's not like we are trying to get a constitutional ban on buying Terry's books. Or make plotting to bomb his car. Terry is very mock worthy. His story is very mockable. And the fact that he is a pretentious ass just makes it more fun. Ok, the man himself is a pretentious ass. So are most authors. He may take it to new levels, but I don't see attacks on Rowling for being 'too important' to go and get her Hugo. Her HUGO! Careful you'll stir up the Harry Potter fans. Now they are scary! Is Rowling perhaps a bit arrogant? Yes she is. However she is also very nice to her fans, and seems to realize "hey with out these people I would not be living in my 18 bedroom mansion". So the guy writes fantasy from the right as opposed to the left. Crucify the bastard, why the fuck don't you. Yeah, it sucks. 95% of everything sucks. Surgeon's Law. You don't need to obsess over how bad it sucks, because honestly, there's much worse out there. I deify you to name three books worse then Goodkind's series! No Mein Kampf does not count! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray the Enforcer Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Not going to examine my motives...that's for the Finns. We Poles just do what We wish. And what We wish is for more snark and less navel gazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehelm Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I deify you to name three books worse then Goodkind's series! No Mein Kampf does not count! Michael Swanwick Sucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.