Sword Of Truth Book Review

[Emerson Mata]

iagree with you on three points. The biggest put off for me was the preacher of truth richard,esp when he was with his new found sister. i mean,comeon terry,that was plain boring. luckily for me, i had soft copies so i would just scroll ten pages down until i thought i had gotten to where the action was, only to find that it was the same person still saying the same thing but just in different words. and really,wassup with richard not reaching his full potential as a wizard, where is the fun in that??and why does he have to be soo tired or injured or both most if not all of the times. I couldnt even finish the series. Chainfire was my breaking point. im done. Qouting from the review, it sure seems like Terry Goodkind tries to stuff his sickeningly righteous Ayn Rand bullshit down the throats of his readers over and over again. And then he does it again for good measure.nxaaa

For the bad guys: i think i only liked darken rahl, he is just aweful without any redeeming qualities, just openly aweful, not like jagang that was brought up wrongly. Jagang is like a jehova witness you want to turn away, Darken Rahl was more like serial killer that can never be redeemed.

I read the series, and felt i had to read the next book, because surely he was building to something,,,, ie becoming a war wizard or whatever and the series could go somewhere. But nothing ever happened of note, it was the same story over and over again in the same format, just slightly different events along the same theme. In the end it just felt like he was rehashing the same stuff because he was getting a handsome pay check with no real development or imagination. So my verdict was first few books good and everything after lacked imagination and was done for the money.

Revised! 31/08/06

These were all posted on the Let's Mock Terry Goodkind threads at westeros.org by me and various people, and I've decided to collect them all into one place for the sake of posterity. The Mad Moose has kindly provided links to all the actual Goodkind quotes these are lampooning, but if you can't be bothered to read them all (or if Terry's prose makes your eyes hurt) here is a quick summary:

LMFAO

Have you even read the SoT series, or are you just going off of what you have seen at that acne-ridden teenage mastabitory site? I don\\\'t recognise much of anything from that list of happenings in the book. At least you said you got it off a thread that openly mocks Terry\\\'s books, so hopefully nobody with half a brain will actually think any of this crap is actually what happens in the books. lol...

Hey, Anonymous 3! As it happens, all my Goodkind plot info comes from actual quotes from the Sword of Truth series, posted by the noble Mad Moose on the westeros forum, all referenced so you can check if you like. I will happily admit that I've only read Stone of Tears, and am glad of Moose's help so I don't have to read any more of those dreadful books.

You do use some actual quotes, but you completely thrash any meaning the quotes actually have, and come up with your own meaning behind them. Your misuse of them in such ways then is just as bad as misquoting the books completely. Anybody can take situations out of context and either make the characters villians or heros, it does not take that much talent. The sad part is, you spend so much time dedicated to hate an author. How is that laughable to hate someone so much?

Dude, it's called cut'n'paste. It doesn't take a whole lot of time. And the ones by me, I did because I thought it was funny. Terry Goodkind has a philosophy that I find utterly vile, and I am glad to be able to rip the piss out of his objectionable works.

I feel sorry for the people that read this before reading the books themselves, as when you take a quote out of context, it changes the meaning completely, as well as just makes it sound stupid. I also feel bad for you. Anyone who spends their time writing parodies for a series of books that they didn't even read is just sad. I'm sorry that this is the way you live your life.

Aw, that's sweet! Thanks for your concern - it's very big-hearted of you to care so much about the hobbies of people you've never met. Might I make a suggestion, though? If you'd like to defend Mr Goodkind's work in a way that doesn't just involve insults, you're very welcome to come to the westeros.org forums and discuss it there, as this really isn't the place for it. Otherwise, the internet's a big place, and I'm sure you can find a site you enjoy reading more than this one. Have a nice day!

Alice, I think this blog goes through the looking glass :)

Anonymous 3(based on style, mystar):

Nice to know that such crusaders as you still exist, oh honorable sir! Too bad that there is literature beside Terry Goodkind. Too bad, that other people do not like his prose. Too bad, that you have to accept that others can put their works on the internet as well.

I actually slogged through the first 5 books out of sheer boredom and lack of anything better to read (stuck in the boondocks with a whole lot of sci-fi/fantasy, no way to get any more, and I'd already re-read the good ones too many times). I kept hoping it would get better, but after the second book, it was just the trainwreck fascination that kept me at it for the next three. No matter how bad this article makes his books sound, they cannot do justice to the sheer mind-melting cheesiness of his writing.

Clearly, Goodkind is fantasy for those idiots who think Card's Ender's Game is grand science fiction. How can the genre go wrong with slaughtering, genocidal maniacs at the helm? And how soon can I get off this m***f***in' boat. Snakes on the boat!

LOL

i am a fan of the SoT series, and i also think Ender's Game is a good piece of sci.fi. But i love ur stuff its hilarious, i still will continue to love reading the series, but mein Gott i love what u have done here, friggin hilarious

keep up the good work

Thanks for this glorious compilation of hilarity, and saving me the trouble of navigating the forums! I've spent the last 2 hours laughing my spinal column out through my stomach, repeatedly, in between bouts of mortal combat with my liberal-communist siblings. I admit to following the SoT series up until chainfire, clutching onto some hope that redemption was possible. I look at these quotes, pointing out the obvious, and can only wonder at how I managed to miss so much. I blame my lack of experience with fantasy at the time, and am happy to report my discovery of the many brilliant authours fantasy enjoys.

PS: I work in a book store, and met a customer in the fantasy section who had NEVER READ any fantasy novel aside from gookinds (!!!) - all of which he had read several times! I sacrificed my last copy of Lynch's LLL in an attempt to save him... I only hope it was not in vain.

Hi Adam,

I'd like to join in the debate on Facebook, but at the moment it seems to be members only. Just one small point, though - I'm not sure how you can say this is "out of context" when full quotes are provided in support. Could you point out some instances where the context is missing or inaccurate?

You can always PM me on facebook and we can talk if you don't wish to join the group. Otherwise I offer this example of how most of this is out of context.

It says, "They enjoy eating the testicles of captured enemies; it is Kahlan who makes enemies eat their own testicles.**"

Actually this only happened one time, and it was to a man who rapes and murders young boys.

Hmm, yes. And to give it even more context, this testicle-eating happened just after Kahlan had wiped this man's personality with her Confessor power. This is a very morally complex situation (is torture ever right? Is the personality-wiped guy still punishable for his past actions? Isn't personality-wipe punishment enough? etc) that is just written off with some knee-jerk vengeance. For a someone with a supposed interest in philosophy, Goodkind ignores all the implications and goes for the Bronze Age eye-for-an-eye method without even blinking.

Actually the part about "they eat the testicles of their enemies" is not in reference to what Kahlan did to Demmin Nass in WFR, but is rather quoted from a later book (apologies I am not certain which one - might be Faith of the Fallen) and refers to the Imperial army who feed these "delicacies" to their soldiers.

This is one of a number of pathetic and obvious devices used to clue the reader in to who the bad guys are.

I don't actually mind this kind of purile nonsense in fantasy novels, the genre is littered with other similar examples. However when the author believes his work to be something beyond a normal everyday pulp fantasy novel and gives verbose, arrogant and philosophically driven speaches about how it is not merely fantasy but a story about "important human themes" I am just forced to laugh and call him on his BS.

...I'll that say that the Confessor's power is not love. How can it be one when the person's affected is wiped out of the very core of their personality? Sure, some people turn stupid or obedient when they're 'in love', and may experience times when they completely overly devoted to their 'loved ones' but many of these are unhealthy relationships and is not love at all (I will also argue that this people already had in they nature to be etremely devoted or stupid when in love. In Kahlan's case, she wipes every trace of personality in the person and turns into a shell).

What Kahlan's power is is blind, obessive devotion, the one that leads to self-destruction. It is a mockery of love.

Thank you very very much.

I read up to book 4 before my brain froze. Kept being told that it gets better.

I can not understand how someone can be so self righteous. Either as a character in a book, or the author of that book.

The irony is that he is chopping and changing his opinion in every book it seems.

Thank you for providing me some laughter and finally vindicating my dislike of Goodkind.

3a8082e126