Goodkind's Sword of Truth series optioned

[Kivam]

A question I would like to ask: Why do people not like SoT?

 

As far as I can see, a lot of people object to him putting his ideological beliefs into the books. Others talk about WoT rip-offs (I myself never connect the two works whilst reading either of them). The argument always seems to boil down to emotions rather than rational critic. :roll:

.

 

It's not so much that he puts his ideological beliefs into the books, its how he does it - at the expense of plot, pacing, character development and coherence.

[the dude]

i still maintain that Richard Rahl is just a masturbatory extension of Goodkind's view of himself. Seriously. It's not far-fetched. It's what you call a Mary Sue character. richard is hardly a character at all; it's just goodkind wearing a different face and name; read the interviews, the "bios," etc. you'll see the parallels.

 

and before this turns into a rant, i will stop typing.

[Hannibal King]

TG CONSTANTLY talks about your freedom to make your own choices. That's what all of his Rules are about. YET! some of his rules are about how you MUST see the truth of a situation' date=' and if you can't, then you forfeit your life by living in a lie. This makes a lot of sense, on paper. But then he decides that there's only ONE choice you can make when you see the truth, which I think destroys his freedom of choice stuff. If there's only one right choice, then you have no freedom, you only have one option.

 

On a COMPLETE side note... where the hell is Hannibal King?[/quote']

 

Sorry guys. Been in South Carolina for the past week and a half to see my bro graduate from basic training. That is the reason I haven't been able to contribute anything in this latest discussion.

 

Sorry Kadere, I have to disagree. There is always a choice and a freedom of choice. TG is just showing that there are many times where you can make one that will mean you are living a lie. He is showing the difference between the two.

[Hannibal King]

i still maintain that Richard Rahl is just a masturbatory extension of Goodkind's view of himself. Seriously. It's not far-fetched. It's what you call a Mary Sue character. richard is hardly a character at all; it's just goodkind wearing a different face and name; read the interviews' date=' the "bios," etc. you'll see the parallels.[/quote']

 

I disagree, but I do agree. If that makes any sense. On one hand, I think Richard is a fantastic character and one of the best ever created. But on the other hand, you have it right, UNINTENTIONALLY. TG has said many times that Richard acts the way he would act were he put in the same situation. But unlike you, I think it works rather well.

[the dude]

understood, hannibal. i guess it comes down to "tomaito/tomahto." agree to disagree?

[Hannibal King]

Sure, dude. Agree to disagree it is.

[Cleopatra Narisse]

Funny thing I run into this thread when, at the White Tower org we have a thread going right now discussing Wizards First Rule. It was voted first to be read by our discussion group. I really like the series, granted that TG does drone on about what he sees more than I care to have discribed to me. So does RJ at times.

 

I read that the "movie" is going to be a TV Miniseries. I just read that update yesterday... sorry I didn't bookmark that link. I may be only repeating what I read.. it might be a movie. *shrugs*

 

I almost never read a book to find the "hidden" intent behind what a writer, writes. What I do care about is that I am entertained, find the characters believeable and desire to finish it or continue the series. I have read all of the books except Phantom. I currently am reading Chainfire.

 

Peace all!

[Hannibal King]

You're right Cleopatra. It's gonna be a tv miniseries on one of the major networks. It's not gonna be in theaters.

[One Man]

Heya. First, let me say I have read--and will continue to read--TG and RJ series' because I love the ideas, the charecters, the plot, the worlds...yadayada...

 

Second, I'm an Objectivist. Strangely enough, I'd been reading SoT for about two years before I ever read "Atlas Shrugged", and it was about a year after that that I actually discovered TG and SoT's connection to Ayn Rand or Objectivism. So it was pretty coincidental I suppose. Discovering this philosophy for life had inspired the FANTASY series I was reading only added to my enjoyment of the novels. It was pretty cool.

 

Third, I think RJ is the superior fantasy writer. Without a doubt.

 

Fourth, I don't really care about that too much. I know not every author will be the next Herbert, or the newest GRRM. I will read books, and I'll like or dislike each book on its merits. Not too inflammatory, right?

 

As an Objectivist--which in reality doesn't really mean I'm a High Priest of Logic or anything, it just means I like and strive for the ideas of freedom, love, reason and a good, peaceful life--I still find myself quite annoyed when TG decides in a particular chapter to Out-Galt Miss Rand. Perhaps more annoyed than readers that haven't been exposed to Objectivism as much as I, because, hell, I already know what Richard's going to say about life and freedom and all that.

 

But, honestly...who cares? GRRM certainly does NOT write absolutes, he does NOT cast crystal clear light on the protagonists and bleak, maligned shadows on the villains. Choices are never simple and the good guy rarely wins, let alone gets the chance to expouse his general philosophy on life and thus convince half the world he's been right all along. Sometimes, GRRM cuts off the good guy's head right before he opens his mouth. Was he going to convince us of the benefits of free markets and free minds? "Don't know. He's dead. Look somewhere else for buttressing your philosophy and outlook, buddy."

 

Know what? GRRM is my favorite fantasy author, by far. Why? I read to be entertained, to be taken on a ride I'll enjoy. I don't enjoy anyone else's books more than GRRM's. I don't care if he doesn't write or think within or share my philosophy on life. He sure as hell entertains me.

 

TG is a great writer, and I'll buy the last book. RJ is a great writer, and I'll buy the last book. I don't see why they should be compared THIS much...all you have to do is place them on a simple scale, and weigh them. Who entertains you more? Who entertains you less? I won't stop reading because one author doesn't meet the standards of my favorite author...I'd hardly read anything at all if I did that. So...yeah. Enough said by me on that score.

 

Also, I'm glad for the thoughtful statements I've read on the thread concerning Objectivism and its application in SoT. However, I also see a few misperceptions.:P That's fine. I can do it without preaching, if anyone wants a few clarifications. I won't try to convert anyone, but I also won't gurantee it will not happen. :twisted: (j/k)

 

In the vein of this thread, I'm defintely excited to see ANY major fantasy novel put on ANY screen. It's a difficult genre to disseminate through the larger population. I can't wait to see the visual rendition of this series I've been reading for so long...to see the charecters in color and hear their voices. I'm sure SoT haters can understand that? I personally detested LoTR...the books. But I thought the movies were pretty neat (mostly). I think it may be best to simply be pleased there is/might be a growing interest in the genre we all love. I just hope this enthusiasm and interest spreads, flourishes, and grows. Or at least that Cameron Diaz will stop appearing in movies. The woman looks like a Far Side cartoon, for God's sake!

[Angel of Death]

I just finished reading Chainfire, i quite enjoyed it. Though it wasn't the same without Kahlan. I think a movie for it would suck. I hadn't read LotR before the movies came out. - still haven't.

 

I read Eragon about a month ago, i liked it. Again seeing the trailer - i think it will suck. So my opinion is if the book is good - it should stay a book.

[Cleopatra Narisse]

Glad that you both participated. I have Chainfire in my nightstand. But I am re-reading the entire series right now because I am and another DMer are preping to open a SoT site. I really need to brush up on the whole story.

 

The Lord of The Rings was my favorite series when I was in Jr High School and that was back when heaven and earth were formed.

 

*sigh* but I think reading it when you are young is the best time to read it and well before the big guns (SoT, WoT and so forth)

[Dark Justice]

i simply loved Sword Of Truth untill he started his "political campaign". It was like seing the cold war all over again, with the supergood liberal forces, and the superevil kommunists.

It was just to much.

 

I came to pillars of creation. Then I started reading WOT, and could just not go back to SoT anymore.

[Cleopatra Narisse]

Ah but, I read for the pleasure of being taken away from rl and never tried to read into any author's works "what they mean by that compared to now" If I did that, I may never get to enjoy another book.

[Necrophorus]

To be honest I just scanned through the posts above especially after I read about someone who read phantom already. I am waiting for the paperback version before buying the book. I've read the entire serie up to that book and I do agree with what has been said above. Couple of points I want to make (not really sure if they were made, but well here it goes again sorry)

 

1. The only time he says that there is a view to the truth is in the very first book. Thereafter it's always his side of the truth that is the truth. This sucks... Every government system has it's positive and negative sides and every truth is ambigious. (I can say who my father is but it's not the same as yours is it... It's all point of view)

2. Book 1 to 6 with 6 being the crown of his work were really good. Book 7 was already quite saying what to think. And in book 8 he restated so many times that you needed to deserve victory and that you needed to do everything he said that I almost gave up on the series. Book 8 (chainfire) though is really much better again. And phantom I havent read yet.

3. That said I think still it's a mediocre series, with a nice romance in it, but in too many ways the writer takes obvious control of events, which makes it rather tasteless to read.

4. There are some really good characters in the series. I really like Zedd, he's just by far the best character. Furthermore, I like most of the characters on the side like Cara, Rachel, Chase, Nathan, Berdine and even Nicci, Ann, Verna and Warren.

 

Still it has been my first fantasy series that I started reading so it's really nice to read. Just skip half of NE and it's a fine series.