Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Sign in to follow this  
bobsbarricades

Terry Goodkind and the Sword of Truth novels

Recommended Posts

I thought you would recognize the similarities.

 

I'll do a quick chart.

 

Aes Sedai  = Sisters of light

Embrace Saidar = Embrace Han

Only women = only women

Men evil/insane = Men evil till trained for 1000 yrs.

Female side = Female han

Female inferior strength over all = female inferior strength over all (vs men for both)

Amyrlin = Prelate (Both are ruling women over their channelers/magic users)

Black Ajah = Sisters of the Dark

Three Oaths = Oaths to creator

 

Questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rada'han=a'dam

Pebble in a Pond=ta'veren

The Creator=The Creator

The Dark One=the Keeper

The Betrayal of the Winds=The Taint on Saidin (an ancient act of pride by a male wizard resulting in the male gift of power failing/not being accessible due to it being touched or witheld by the Keeper/Dark One)

 

Also have a look at the way Zedd creates a web with the six powers in the Stone of Tears. It's ok, its not a blatant copy of RJ. There are six powers, not five, and one of them is ICE!

 

Also--Stone of Tears?

 

 

Essentially SoT is WoT worldbuilding, Ayn Rand philosophy, and plot of Richard and Kahlan being seperated each book to fight their way back in together. Add to that Goodkind's attitude, stating that SoT is not fantasy but inspirational literature designed to educate the ignorent masses (that would be us) and his abuse of his fans (including, but not limited to, telling a fourteen year old he was not a real fan and was 'afraid of the truth' for asking for more fight scenes and less dialogue).

 

Oh, and then there is the creepy but quite obvious fact that Goodkind sees himself as Richard. The bringer of truth, divulging it on the ignorent masses. If I had to see one more case of a supposedly wise character making idiotic arguments against Richard, only to appologise profusely and praise Richard as the light of the world (only to repeat the wholse procedure in the next book) I would puke. He seriously has Richard argue with a child in one book. Genuinely sets a child against an adult, and expects us to be impressed with Richard's victory.

 

I most distinctly recall a scene in Confessor when someone (Kahlan suffering the latest lame plot device to seperate her and Richard and create some sort of tension???) sees Richard from accross a field of people and thinks to themself 'thats the most dangerous, most handsomest, most amazing person in the whole world'. GAH!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize that, but the naysayers in here did.

 

I told you it didn't have the ratings to last. WAY BACK WHEN THE THREAD STARTED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL Luckers that was in Pillars of Creation.

 

I just shook my head when I read it.

 

Lol, no, the one I'm thinking of is definately in Confessor.

 

Am I startled this happens more than once? Nup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will admit I am disappointed by the decision to drop the series, but I think once Tribune announced they were not renewing, it was inevitable. However, from what I have read, Tribune have a lot to answer for regarding advertising and time slots (and probably other things). Everywhere I have read seems to suggest there was no continuity in when it was shown (i.e. anytime they felt at whatever hour) and advertising was just not there. A show will never succeed if there is no stability or decent advertising. In the UK, SciFi/SyFy (the channel that shows LotS) has it on at a constant time (8pm on a Thursday), and there is plenty of advertising, whether it is just the show or the channel itself. A part of me still hopes...

 

It's a shame, and will probably make me watch TV less as my view is TV is full of junk, in other words, reality TV and talent show contests. Seriously, can they just go and rot in hell? At least I have Ashes to Ashes (until its planned end after season 3) and Sanctuary still to enjoy, and Warehouse 13 to look forward to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rada'han=a'dam

Pebble in a Pond=ta'veren

The Creator=The Creator

The Dark One=the Keeper

The Betrayal of the Winds=The Taint on Saidin (an ancient act of pride by a male wizard resulting in the male gift of power failing/not being accessible due to it being touched or witheld by the Keeper/Dark One)

 

Also have a look at the way Zedd creates a web with the six powers in the Stone of Tears. It's ok, its not a blatant copy of RJ. There are six powers, not five, and one of them is ICE!

 

Also--Stone of Tears?

 

 

Essentially SoT is WoT worldbuilding, Ayn Rand philosophy, and plot of Richard and Kahlan being seperated each book to fight their way back in together. Add to that Goodkind's attitude, stating that SoT is not fantasy but inspirational literature designed to educate the ignorent masses (that would be us) and his abuse of his fans (including, but not limited to, telling a fourteen year old he was not a real fan and was 'afraid of the truth' for asking for more fight scenes and less dialogue).

 

Oh, and then there is the creepy but quite obvious fact that Goodkind sees himself as Richard. The bringer of truth, divulging it on the ignorent masses. If I had to see one more case of a supposedly wise character making idiotic arguments against Richard, only to appologise profusely and praise Richard as the light of the world (only to repeat the wholse procedure in the next book) I would puke. He seriously has Richard argue with a child in one book. Genuinely sets a child against an adult, and expects us to be impressed with Richard's victory.

 

I most distinctly recall a scene in Confessor when someone (Kahlan suffering the latest lame plot device to seperate her and Richard and create some sort of tension???) sees Richard from accross a field of people and thinks to themself 'thats the most dangerous, most handsomest, most amazing person in the whole world'. GAH!

Wow, I had heard that Goodkind was anything but kind but putting down a young fan is despicable.  I only read the first two books in this series.  The first one was ok, but when the blatant WOT ripoffs started happening in the second book I was out.  And hearing all of this makes me glad I did.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to hear Goodkind rip off Homer Simpson's quote: "Everyone sucks but meeeeeee!!!"

 

EDIT: For all your Goodkind-bashing needs, this is a pretty good forum for it:

http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/908-single-minded-terry-goodkind-9.html

 

Is this guy for real? Sheesh.  Well hey, it provides some good unintentional comedy if nothing else...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rada'han=a'dam

Pebble in a Pond=ta'veren

The Creator=The Creator

The Dark One=the Keeper

The Betrayal of the Winds=The Taint on Saidin (an ancient act of pride by a male wizard resulting in the male gift of power failing/not being accessible due to it being touched or witheld by the Keeper/Dark One)

 

Also have a look at the way Zedd creates a web with the six powers in the Stone of Tears. It's ok, its not a blatant copy of RJ. There are six powers, not five, and one of them is ICE!

 

Also--Stone of Tears?

 

A collar to control people who use a magical ability in fantasy. Robert Jordan wasn't the first.

A way to explain why extraordinary things just happen to occur around main characters. RJ wasn't the first.

A quasi-religious deity worshiped by the good and his/her/it's antithesis. The word creator was not coined by RJ.

 

The Betrayal of the Winds thing is like saying apples are ripping off cherries because they both have seeds.

 

Are you trying to say The Stone of Tears is a ripoff of the Seals or what?

 

The mystical power in a fantasy world having specifically to do with the elements. Wind, air, fire etc. Surprisingly enough RJ was not the first to do that either. Just stick to saying that you don't like the dude as a person. That's perfectly fine, I don't either.. And that, in your opinion (Which I share) WoT is on a whole other plain of existence. Awesome. But he did not plagiarize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Asha'man Kovan, an argument can be made that common mythological forms and plot devices forms can manifest in fantasy novels. The nature of creating entire worlds, not just stories within a world, lends itself to picking up common themes on which to sit your worldbuilding, and thus common themes within different stories.

 

But the problem here is not that there were a couple of similar things we're leaping on in our hatred of Terry Goodkind, the problem here is the sheer number of similarities, as well as the common form of the manifestations of those similarities. For instance I have no problem with Kate Forsythe having her witches 'draw on the One Power', which is made of 'Earth, Fire, Water and Air', because in every other way her worldbuilding and storytelling differs, as to make clear that this was a coincidence in the creative structure of two different authors.

 

Whats that old star trek thing? Infinite divirsity in infinite combination. This is different--similarities, not diviristies. The same stories will be told again and again, the same ideas raised--but in normal coincidences of ideas it would be in alternate combinations. We are instead talking here of the same idea's raised in the same combinations, with a little twisting thrown in to attempt to smooth it over.

 

Just stick to saying that you don't like the dude as a person.

 

Why would I do that? He's a writer, of course I'm going to judge him on his writing, and the detailed and numerous similarities in his writing to the Wheel of Time indicate to me rampant plagarism has occurred. By what reason would I not express that?

 

But he did not plagiarize.

 

Anoxanamore and I, indiferent SoT readers, have found 15 direct parallels off the top of our heads, and I just thought of another--the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks.

 

In a vacuum the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks harken back to the Inquisition, and the Inquisition is one of the single most used concepts in Fantasy. Witchhunters and militant puritanical moralists have to be present in at least half the series on my bookcase.

 

But we ain't in a vacuum. The role the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks play is too similar to sit alongside 15 other such similarities. And I know there are more.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Asha'man Kovan, an argument can be made that common mythological forms and plot devices forms can manifest in fantasy novels. The nature of creating entire worlds, not just stories within a world, lends itself to picking up common themes on which to sit your worldbuilding, and thus common themes within different stories.

 

But the problem here is not that there were a couple of similar things we're leaping on in our hatred of Terry Goodkind, the problem here is the sheer number of similarities, as well as the common form of the manifestations of those similarities. For instance I have no problem with Kate Forsythe having her witches 'draw on the One Power', which is made of 'Earth, Fire, Water and Air', because in every other way her worldbuilding and storytelling differs, as to make clear that this was a coincidence in the creative structure of two different authors.

 

Whats that old star trek thing? Infinite divirsity in infinite combination. This is different--similarities, not diviristies. The same stories will be told again and again, the same ideas raised--but in normal coincidences of ideas it would be in alternate combinations. We are instead talking here of the same idea's raised in the same combinations, with a little twisting thrown in to attempt to smooth it over.

 

Just stick to saying that you don't like the dude as a person.

 

Why would I do that? He's a writer, of course I'm going to judge him on his writing, and the detailed and numerous similarities in his writing to the Wheel of Time indicate to me rampant plagarism has occurred. By what reason would I not express that?

 

But he did not plagiarize.

 

Anoxanamore and I, indiferent SoT readers, have found 15 direct parallels off the top of our heads, and I just thought of another--the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks.

 

In a vacuum the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks harken back to the Inquisition, and the Inquisition is one of the single most used concepts in Fantasy. Witchhunters and militant puritanical moralists have to be present in at least half the series on my bookcase.

 

But we ain't in a vacuum. The role the Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks play is too similar to sit alongside 15 other such similarities. And I know there are more.

 

 

 

Well....I disagree lol. I think RJ probably did too. About the only thing he said of the guy that I know about is that he was "Aware of Mr. Goodkind", right? You know that stuff much better than I do. But if anyone besides WoT fans, including RJ, really thought that there was that much obvious "Plagiarism", then lawsuits would have happened. Lawsuits are one of the foundations of our good ol' American society. People sue, and oftentimes win, for much less. I mean come on, "Sue me" is a sarcastic phrase based on how often it happens lol. I have to think that if RJ or Harriet as his editor or whoever is involved in noticing that kind of thing really believed it was plagiarism they would have taken legal action. And if it's as convincing and open and shut, the way you feel, he'd have won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I get like a handicap or anything in this argument? Because your articulative powers far exceed my own. In case my very powerful "Well I disagree" didn't clue you in on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading an Evilkind interview where someone posed the question about similarities between WoT and SoT.  Evilkind responded to the effect (I paraphrase here) that someone who makes that statement isn't mature enough to read his work.  Based on Evilkind's response, he must take Dark Helmet's quotation in Spaceballs to heart:

"Evil will always triumph...because good...is dumb"

 

Seriously, Sisters of the Dark is a total ripoff of the Black Ajah.  As others have pointed out here, there are consistent ripoffs that Evilkind takes from the WoT.  Simply far too many distinct replicas of races/orders that are in the WoT.  There are always corrolaries that fantasy authors will take from mythology/classic fantasy, but Evilkind doesn't even bother to pay homage to the genre that gave him his writing career.  If anything, Evilkind denigrates fantasy.  For that alone, he deserves the criticism he has coming to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading an Evilkind interview where someone posed the question about similarities between WoT and SoT.  Evilkind responded to the effect (I paraphrase here) that someone who makes that statement isn't mature enough to read his work.  Based on Evilkind's response, he must take Dark Helmet's quotation in Spaceballs to heart:

"Evil will always triumph...because good...is dumb"

 

Seriously, Sisters of the Dark is a total ripoff of the Black Ajah.  As others have pointed out here, there are consistent ripoffs that Evilkind takes from the WoT.  Simply far too many distinct replicas of races/orders that are in the WoT.  There are always corrolaries that fantasy authors will take from mythology/classic fantasy, but Evilkind doesn't even bother to pay homage to the genre that gave him his writing career.  If anything, Evilkind denigrates fantasy.  For that alone, he deserves the criticism he has coming to him.

 

You're just rehashing an argument I've already claimed to disagree with. An evil order of magic wielding women. Not something RJ used first. By a long shot. What replicas of races are there???

Your dislike of him seems to be based much more on who he is as a person. His attitude. His perspective. Whatever. That's fine but he didn't plagiarize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well....I disagree lol. I think RJ probably did too. About the only thing he said of the guy that I know about is that he was "Aware of Mr. Goodkind", right? You know that stuff much better than I do. But if anyone besides WoT fans, including RJ, really thought that there was that much obvious "Plagiarism", then lawsuits would have happened. Lawsuits are one of the foundations of our good ol' American society. People sue, and oftentimes win, for much less. I mean come on, "Sue me" is a sarcastic phrase based on how often it happens lol. I have to think that if RJ or Harriet as his editor or whoever is involved in noticing that kind of thing really believed it was plagiarism they would have taken legal action. And if it's as convincing and open and shut, the way you feel, he'd have won.

 

Sadly there is a law on the books in the US and in the UK that if the names are changed enough there is no room for a law suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well....I disagree lol. I think RJ probably did too. About the only thing he said of the guy that I know about is that he was "Aware of Mr. Goodkind", right? You know that stuff much better than I do. But if anyone besides WoT fans, including RJ, really thought that there was that much obvious "Plagiarism", then lawsuits would have happened. Lawsuits are one of the foundations of our good ol' American society. People sue, and oftentimes win, for much less. I mean come on, "Sue me" is a sarcastic phrase based on how often it happens lol. I have to think that if RJ or Harriet as his editor or whoever is involved in noticing that kind of thing really believed it was plagiarism they would have taken legal action. And if it's as convincing and open and shut, the way you feel, he'd have won.

 

Sadly there is a law on the books in the US and in the UK that if the names are changed enough there is no room for a law suit.

 

Would you happen to have a link or something about said law Princess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So then this: "If I change the words, do I still have to cite the source?"

"Changing only the words of an original source is NOT sufficient to prevent plagiarism. You must cite a source whenever you borrow ideas as well as words.", would kind of seem to contradict what you said a minute ago about how changing the names enough prevents a lawsuit.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...