Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - The "list the books you've read as you read them" thread

levite · 08-18-2009, 03:20 PM

Over the past couple of weeks, I read the entire 12-novel Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind.

I had heard people absolutely swear by this series, so I was quite curious to read it; I ordered the books for myself as a birthday present, and went through them one by one, without reading anything else at the same time, which is unusual for me.

I enjoyed them. Quite a lot. I was kept spellbound, and I will surely re-read them through the years.

I thought they were excellently crafted in terms of story arc, scope, breadth, and everything fitting together. Goodkind is not one to leave loose ends: what doesn't get wrapped up in one novel will surely come round again in the next. He is also one of the best I have ever seen for constructing elaborate and unpredictable catastrophic chains of consequences for his characters. In the sheer scope and detail of his work, he reminds me something of George RR Martin. He also reminds me of Martin in his utter willingness to make his antagonists unrelentingly, bestially cruel, and to describe their depravity with sickeningly unflinching meticulousness. He might take the prize for most stomach-turning antagonists, ever.

His main character, Richard, is comparatively well-developed, but other than that, Goodkind's main flaw is his heavy-handed lack of character development. He has a propensity for telling rather than showing, and most seriously, his characters tend to do most of their expository development in long monologues or socratic dialogues wherein they explain to another character the revelations they have had about the meaning of life or love.

Goodkind is very driven by his desire to convey to the reader his philosophy of life, which seems to be a somewhat Lockean, deeply and passionately Libertarian embrasure of life as an inherent positive, individual rights, and free choice, with a pronounced anti-communitarianist streak. Which is dandy, and certainly no worse than some of the odd philosophies sci-fi and fantasy writers have attempted to convey with their writings, but Goodkind unfortunately suffers from periodic preachiness of a slow-down-the-plot variety. It manifests most frustratingly when, at crucial moments in plot development-- such as battles and duels-- the action pauses for a character to elaborate on the philosophical meanings of their motivations. These sections can sometimes meander on for a couple of pages, which after a while I found myself tending to just scan, looking for where the action picked back up again. I didn't feel like I missed anything.

So, I guess the short version is that the books are eminently worth reading, and are worth appreciating for their superb crafting and their vivid breadth of detail and imagination. One just has to know going in that unless one happens to be deeply fond of libertarian/individualist rhetoric, there are places in every book one will need to skim through.

Goodkind is very, very talented. He is, as I mentioned, worth comparing with George RR Martin. But he's no Tolkein or Herbert.

I say...7/10. Maybe even 8/10.

BTW, the TV series they claim to have "based on" these books does not resemble them in any way. The unremitting suckage of the series is a deep, deep disservice to the books, which are epic and dark and cunningly executed. If you saw the series and were dismayed or contemptuous, don't let that put you off reading the books.

08-18-2009, 03:20 PM	#215 (permalink)
levite Minion of Joss Location: The Windy City	Over the past couple of weeks, I read the entire 12-novel Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind. I had heard people absolutely swear by this series, so I was quite curious to read it; I ordered the books for myself as a birthday present, and went through them one by one, without reading anything else at the same time, which is unusual for me. I enjoyed them. Quite a lot. I was kept spellbound, and I will surely re-read them through the years. I thought they were excellently crafted in terms of story arc, scope, breadth, and everything fitting together. Goodkind is not one to leave loose ends: what doesn't get wrapped up in one novel will surely come round again in the next. He is also one of the best I have ever seen for constructing elaborate and unpredictable catastrophic chains of consequences for his characters. In the sheer scope and detail of his work, he reminds me something of George RR Martin. He also reminds me of Martin in his utter willingness to make his antagonists unrelentingly, bestially cruel, and to describe their depravity with sickeningly unflinching meticulousness. He might take the prize for most stomach-turning antagonists, ever. His main character, Richard, is comparatively well-developed, but other than that, Goodkind's main flaw is his heavy-handed lack of character development. He has a propensity for telling rather than showing, and most seriously, his characters tend to do most of their expository development in long monologues or socratic dialogues wherein they explain to another character the revelations they have had about the meaning of life or love. Goodkind is very driven by his desire to convey to the reader his philosophy of life, which seems to be a somewhat Lockean, deeply and passionately Libertarian embrasure of life as an inherent positive, individual rights, and free choice, with a pronounced anti-communitarianist streak. Which is dandy, and certainly no worse than some of the odd philosophies sci-fi and fantasy writers have attempted to convey with their writings, but Goodkind unfortunately suffers from periodic preachiness of a slow-down-the-plot variety. It manifests most frustratingly when, at crucial moments in plot development-- such as battles and duels-- the action pauses for a character to elaborate on the philosophical meanings of their motivations. These sections can sometimes meander on for a couple of pages, which after a while I found myself tending to just scan, looking for where the action picked back up again. I didn't feel like I missed anything. So, I guess the short version is that the books are eminently worth reading, and are worth appreciating for their superb crafting and their vivid breadth of detail and imagination. One just has to know going in that unless one happens to be deeply fond of libertarian/individualist rhetoric, there are places in every book one will need to skim through. Goodkind is very, very talented. He is, as I mentioned, worth comparing with George RR Martin. But he's no Tolkein or Herbert. I say...7/10. Maybe even 8/10. BTW, the TV series they claim to have "based on" these books does not resemble them in any way. The unremitting suckage of the series is a deep, deep disservice to the books, which are epic and dark and cunningly executed. If you saw the series and were dismayed or contemptuous, don't let that put you off reading the books. __________________ Dull sublunary lovers love, Whose soul is sense, cannot admit Absence, because it doth remove That thing which elemented it. (From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)