Comments | m_mcgregor: Can I finish Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series? A rant.

m_mcgregor

Can I finish Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series? A rant.

Nov 30, 2007 21:57

The final book in Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series was recently released, but I'm not sure I can bring myself to read it. I've borrowed a copy and it's sitting here with me now, but after reading just a few sentences I find it difficult to continue, because I know that the ending that I want is not going to be the ending that I get. The ( Read more... )

reading thoughts

Comments 40

anonymous December 1 2007, 04:57:14 UTC

He gets his army of formerly evil-rapist-killer-re-rapers-re-killers (but they're better now, so it's okay) and orders them (did I mention he automatically became ruler of half the world somewhere in the last few books? Oh. Well, he did.) to defend the city.

But they have souls. lol

m_mcgregor December 1 2007, 05:13:57 UTC

No no, they have MORAL CLARITY.

Please, let's not to confuse our excuses for characters behaving stupidly.

anonymous August 16 2009, 00:07:44 UTC

You all lack the moral clarity to properly understand the position of Richard, he stands between barbarism and civilization. Their society emphasizes the glorification of the weak and sickly. Each man must find his own way forward and disregard everyone else, for they will only drag him down. Ultimately, it is our own choices which shape our future...-shot-

thank goodness, that idiot is dead

I enjoyed your criticisms of Goodkind csharpie September 23 2010, 20:00:14 UTC

far more than his last three books.

Well done!

selene2 December 1 2007, 05:02:55 UTC

I haven't read ANY of this series but I have read Ender's Game and I really liked that story. Please don't tell me that Orson Scott Card is all sucko now too!

m_mcgregor December 1 2007, 05:23:07 UTC

Ender's Game is great. I even enjoy the first three sequels, although by Children of the Mind you start to see Card's personal beliefs and politics begin to color the story. There's a strange kind of stereotyping and racism involved in it.

But then Ender's Shadow and that whole series came out, where we learn that there's no greater accomplishment for a fourteen year old girl woman than to have babies, and that fertilized embryos are YOUR CHILDREN! and you must protect them from evil super-geniuses who don't appear to have much sense. Then there's a whole bunch of really simplistic war scenarios he comes up with, although all I can remember right now is that the key to the world is occupying Thailand and India or something to that effect. It was all just very naive and childish ( ... )

artistshipper December 4 2007, 21:27:41 UTC

Having actually read Empire, I'd point out that it's a criticism on political polarization, and he's not much less critical of the conservatives than he is of the liberals.

The commandos aren't really "Conservative Republican". They're basically just in favor of keeping the country united. Simple soldiers who don't really get the politics behind the orders.

The "Liberal Army" is pretty riddiculous though. Combat Mechs are complete crap. Tanks are designed for LOW target profile for a reason.

Anyway, at the end, it's revealed that

SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!
SPOILER ALERT!

(The whole thing was engineered. By a guy ostensibly on the "conservative" side.)

selene2 December 5 2007, 03:26:54 UTC

Sorry to but in, but I just wanted to comment. I have only read the first two Ender books and though I enjoyed them, I saw the sexism in the first book (though the story was enoughto keep me involved for book two). As a young-teen girl in the pre-buffy era, I was pretty used to it- but it did turn me off of his books. The decline dosen't surprise me all that much. Make me sad for the waste of a talented writer, but doesn't surprise me. I'm glad now I didn't waste my time in reading them.

Thread 5

Sword of Truth, Moral Objectivism and other fecal matter anonymous December 1 2007, 05:03:00 UTC

Well, it's obvious that since you don't agree with Terry Goodkin/Richard Rahl, that you are an evil person, and we don't have to pay any attention to anything you say. Especially the screams you're likely to utter as you are horribly slaughtered in the most painful ways possible, and which is clearly something you richly deserve for doubting TG/RR's words of wisdom ( ... )

Re: Sword of Truth, Moral Objectivism and other fecal matter m_mcgregor December 1 2007, 05:25:12 UTC

Well one thing is that the reviews for his books (on Amazon anyway) have reflected the steady decline in quality. Naked Empire is at about 2 and 1/2 stars, which is insanely low for such a popular fantasy series. When it comes to a fantasy series it sometimes seems like you could just write the same story again and put "Book 2" in the title (coughBELGARIAD) and people will eat it up with a spoon, so he must be doing something wrong to get such low reviews.

Re: Sword of Truth, Moral Objectivism and other fecal matter anonymous December 1 2007, 12:24:05 UTC

"When it comes to a fantasy series it sometimes seems like you could just write the same story again and put "Book 2" in the title (coughBELGARIAD) and people will eat it up with a spoon, so he must be doing something wrong to get such low reviews."

But the Belgariad and it's re-incarnations are just pure fun.. . They even came up with a silly-enough-to-be-true reason for the duplication. And now I'm trying to picture the chaos a snarky, self-aware prophecy could have caused on Buffy. rotf

Dave (again)

On Reasonable Objectivists anonymous December 1 2007, 15:40:50 UTC

What if Terry Goodkind was purposefully showing us, the readers, how a brilliant, earnest, and well-intentioned young man could transform into that which he had once hated? What if we were being shown the evolution of a true fanatical killer? What if this was to be the greatest lesson of all, where in the final book it is revealed that Richard is the true evil now, and that someone else must now stop him?

Would that be a mindfuck, or what?

Alas, I don't expect this to be true. Goodkind clearly believes the Objectivist bullshit he spews

I used to participate in the newsgroup humanities.philosophy.objectivism, and many of the self-styled Objectivists (or "students of Objectivism", as some of them insisted) were very much like how you describe Goodkind(*) -- apparently thinking that those who disagreed with them were evil -- MUST be evil -- and deserving of death. Their arguments were often pathetic, and clearly more motivated by base emotions than the "clear identification of reality" as they claimed ( ... )

eleas December 1 2007, 15:42:47 UTC

Apologies if this is too long. I thought it might shed some insight into why I never liked the series in the first place.

I was recommended The Sword of Truth by an acquaintance. At first, I didn't know what to make of it. Obviously a lot of people liked it, and after a few pages I tentatively classified it as light-hearted casual fantasy. Even so, the protagonist was so lifeless he couldn't even be described as wooden, the world-crafting laughable, the villain worthless by any account. Worse still were the germinating seeds of Goodkind's insanity. Back then, I didn't recognize them for what they were, just that he seemed to devote a chunk of text to a scenario nobody in their right mind could fail to laugh at.

Which scenario is that, you may ask? I am glad you may asked.

"My beloved brother who shares with me"- he pounded a fist to his chest "the tragedy of losing our own mother to fire! Fire took our mother from us when we were young, and left us to grow up alone, without her love and care, without her guidance. It was not some ( ... )