Favorite Fantasy Series (High or Low)?

[Akri]

But then these threads would be so dull.

Yes, how boring for people to not bash other people's tastes

The only reason why anyone does--the rape porn.

I'm confused--is that the only reason why anyone reads a book they hate, or they only reason anyone reads Goodkind? Either way it's wrong.

But if you wanted rape porn, you know you could find it elsewhere, right? Google can be very helpful in that regard.

 

[Brian-M]

I don't object to aesops (and I actually prefer writings with strong ones), but Goodkind's writing beats you over the head in the most brain dead possible manner with the silliest Deep Truths one could imagine. (Never read Martin or WoT, so I can't comment on those in comparison.)

TVTropes can burn in Hell, but that is another thread.

I think what you're referring to would be discribed on TVTropes as an Anvilicious Aseop.

Just for fun, here are the other TVTropes pages that deal with Aseops...

An Aseop
Aseop Amnesia
Broken Aseop
Space Whale Aseop
Spoof Aseop
Ignored Aseop
Fantastic Aseop
Captain Obvious Aseop
Clueless Aseop
Do Not Do This Cool Thing
Double Aseop
Accidental Aseop
Alternate Aseop Interpretation
Aesoptinum
Aseop Collateral Damage
Family-Unfriendly Aseop
Gay Aseop
Green Aseop
Long Lost Uncle Aseop
Lost Aseop
Monster of the Aseop
Stock Aseops
Subverted Suspicion Aseop
Trend Aseop

(This list may be incomplete.)​

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Yes, how boring for people to not bash other people's tastes

The series you love spent an entire book bashing the artistic tastes of a straw-commie culture and praising those of the Hero, who without training crafted a statue of two people so beautiful and Truthy that it caused crowds to fall to their knees crying and embrace pseudo-Objectivism with one look.

I'm confused--is that the only reason why anyone reads a book they hate, or they only reason anyone reads Goodkind? Either way it's wrong.

Suuure, and I suppose you read Playboy for the articles? But I was actually referring to "read the books, plural, if you clearly developed a hatred of the writing with Wizard's First Rule". I think this is why people were turned off when the sociopolitical silliness took more time than the raping.

 

[Akri]

Edit: you know what, nevermind. I'm done with this derail.

Can we go back to talking about books we like, please?

I'll add another to my list: Sanderson's Mistborn trilogy and Alloy of Law. A unique magic system (that focuses on metal, which I like--I make chainmail, so a fondness for metal is a necessity ), interesting characters, and a freaking Checkov's Armory. An excellent combination in my opinion.

 

[PixyMisa]

The writing is very good; the plot is genious; the heroes are paragons of virtue.

Except that we know what the "heroes" do in the story. It's not subjective, they are objectively vile.

I have given every bit as much justification for my views as you have.

No. You just like bad books.

 

[PixyMisa]

Second, the agiel were not magice torture dildos. Mord-Sith used them in sex, but only to increase pain (rather basic physiology). They were not sexual devices, but devices for inflicting pain. The fact that Mord-Sith used them during intercourse does not make them sexual objects; I know people who use rope during intercourse, but for some reason no one complains that wooden sailing ships are erotic.

So, magical torture-dildos?

Finally, with the exception of the agiel (which you've completely mischaracterized) EVERY SINGLE THING YOU'VE SAID, AND WORSE can be said about George R R Martin's works.

Oh, there's a whole lot of awfulness going on in Game of Thrones, and at most one character with any redeeming qualities. That's why I don't like that series either. It is, however, at least competently written.

 

[PixyMisa]

I'm confused--is that the only reason why anyone reads a book they hate, or they only reason anyone reads Goodkind? Either way it's wrong.

I'll repeat here that I regard Wizard's First Rule as the worst book I've ever read.

But to qualify as such means that I must have read it - and I did, all of it. I have encountered books that might be even worse - ones that were ungrammatical or downright incoherent. But I didn't read those, and I did read Wizard's First Rule. There is a strange kind of fascination in such unremitting awfulness.

I can't blame anyone for reading one book in the series. But if you then decide to pick up a second volume, you're on your own.

 

[Akri]

Yes, yes, Goodkind is the worst author ever and those of us who enjoy his work have horrible taste in books and are probably also morons or lepers or something. We get that. I bow to the superior taste and intellect of those of you who wisely shun the sin against literature that is Sword of Truth.

The horse is glue. Can we move on?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I just received a prophecy that you would win this fight!

You win by changing your mind.

 

[Akri]

I just received a prophecy that you would win this fight!

You win by changing your mind.

No no, you and the other Goodkind-haters won. He's a terrible author, I have horrible taste for liking him, I only read it for the porn, etc etc etc. You are victorious.

You know who is a good author, though? Adam DeCamp (known to some parts of the internet as Rutskarn). He wrote a novel called Vatsy and Bruno: Dangerous Ink that's well worth checking out (and you can find it for free, which is handy). It's an urban fantasy/sci-fi/dystopian...thing. Difficult to accurately describe, but it's pretty original and has a nice humor to it (but manages to get rather emotional by the end, which surprised me). It's also got a chimpanzee with a sawed-off shotgun, if you're into that sort of thing. I highly recommend giving it a shot.

 

[Daald]

I actually rather like the Sword of Truth series. But I have understood that it's very popular to dislike them, mostly because of the ideology that the author tries to promote. I'm not a Randian or objectivist, but, as I said, I still liked them, despite the ideology being in your face a bit and the countries of strawmen people.

Hey. Different strokes for different folks. My dislike of them has nothing to do with it being popular to dislike them. Heck, I didn't even know it was popular to dislike them. I dislike them because I simply could not get through the material anymore because it got just stupid to me. It felt like they were repeating plot lines. Other plot lines didn't finish in a very climactic way etc etc. It basically felt like getting a very cheap hand job to me. Again, that is my personal experience and if you loved them, then good for you.

I also did not like the Farseer books by Hobbs either. Again personal tastes and all that. It felt like I was taken for a long ride for a sub par finish. I know plenty of others that love them. Just not my thing.

Goodkind said he had a particular ending in mind, which he was writing towards, and it showed. Although the series wouldn't be in my top fantasy series list, the ending blew my mind and was well worth the reading of all the books.

I didn't find it very good. He could have done it many books before and I felt he was dragging it out on purpose.

In the end who cares? I like WoT and plenty of people think it sucks. So freaking what? I like it they don't. Same with SoT. I dislike it you don't.

 

[PixyMisa]

Yes, yes, Goodkind is the worst author ever

No, he's just ordinary bad. This is epic-level badness.

 

[Vortigern99]

Actually neither Raimi nor Tapert had much input in the writing of the show. What they originally wanted was a very graphic, direct adaptation of the books (in the vein of Spartacus) but this plan was rail-roaded by executives at ABC who fired the writing team and rewrote the show as the watered-down episodic train wreck called "Legend of the Seeker".

While LOTS started with relatively adult tones it rapidly descended into the same sort of slapstick, ridiculous plotlines that we saw in "Xena". By season two the writing was so appalling that cast and crew alike used to openly mock it on set. I felt particularly bad for Bruce Spence - a legendary Australian actor forced to play out the most absurd plots and regurgitate the most appalling dialogue.

For me the "jump the shark" moment was episode 13 of Season 2 "Princess" in which Cara has to pretend to be a princess seeking to wed the Margrave of Rothenburgh so the team can sneak in to rescue Kahlan, with Zedd masquerading as Cara's elderly female chaperone and naturally attracting the romantic interests of a guard. Vomit. Standard slapstick Xena fare.

Here we are again, you and I, categorically disagreeing with each other with every syllable out of each other's keyboards. I enjoy the show immensely and have watched it twice through in its entirety. It isn't perfect, and I understand it differs greatly from the books, but as a piece of fantasy cinema -- compared to all other works of cinematic fantasy -- I find it superb.

But this thread is about literature, so I'm going to drop this sidebar.

 

[GraculusTheGreenBird]

Can also second Michael Swanwick's The Iron Dragon's Daughter, and Richard Morgan's The Steel Remains and The Cold Commands.

And can't believe I forgot K J Parker. The excellent Engineer Trilogy, Archer Trilogy, and several standalones such as The Hammer, Sharps, The Company. All broadly set in the same Medici style politics heavy world with no magic.

Very English in style, full of realistic characters ever so politely explaining just why they have to do this most terrible thing, because there really isn't any other choice, do you see?

Couldn't get into his/her Scavenger Trilogy though.

 

[gumboot]

Here we are again, you and I, categorically disagreeing with each other with every syllable out of each other's keyboards. I enjoy the show immensely and have watched it twice through in its entirety. It isn't perfect, and I understand it differs greatly from the books, but as a piece of fantasy cinema -- compared to all other works of cinematic fantasy -- I find it superb.

But this thread is about literature, so I'm going to drop this sidebar.

Most of my post was factual, rather than opinion. You do know I worked on LOTS right?

 

[Akri]

Most of my post was factual, rather than opinion. You do know I worked on LOTS right?

In what capacity? And, more importantly, did you get a hat?

OT: It occurs to me that I never mentioned the Redwall books. I loved those as a kid. And have been known to use "Eulalia" as a warcry when gaming.

 

[IDB87]

In what capacity? And, more importantly, did you get a hat?

OT: It occurs to me that I never mentioned the Redwall books. I loved those as a kid. And have been known to use "Eulalia" as a warcry when gaming.

I never understood the dimensions of objects and things in that series. Like, the first book, Cluny's whole horde is riding in a cart pulled by a horse, so were the cart and horse enormous, or are rats actually the size of normal rats? If they're normal sized rats, how come they use very tall trees to scale Redwall? Wouldn't Redwall be tiny?

Oh god, my brains.

 

[Akri]

I never understood the dimensions of objects and things in that series. Like, the first book, Cluny's whole horde is riding in a cart pulled by a horse, so were the cart and horse enormous, or are rats actually the size of normal rats? If they're normal sized rats, how come they use very tall trees to scale Redwall? Wouldn't Redwall be tiny?

Oh god, my brains.

I think at first the animals were supposed to be inhabiting a world with humans, but then he nixed that idea. So some things are human-scaled (like the giant wheels of cheese) while others are animal-scaled. The result is bizarre and confusing as hell. If I recall the cartoon decided that everything in the world was scaled to their size, including trees and things (so, animals are human-sized).

I try not to think about it too hard

 

[Damien Evans]

Actually neither Raimi nor Tapert had much input in the writing of the show. What they originally wanted was a very graphic, direct adaptation of the books (in the vein of Spartacus) but this plan was rail-roaded by executives at ABC who fired the writing team and rewrote the show as the watered-down episodic train wreck called "Legend of the Seeker".




While LOTS started with relatively adult tones it rapidly descended into the same sort of slapstick, ridiculous plotlines that we saw in "Xena". By season two the writing was so appalling that cast and crew alike used to openly mock it on set. I felt particularly bad for Bruce Spence - a legendary Australian actor forced to play out the most absurd plots and regurgitate the most appalling dialogue.

For me the "jump the shark" moment was episode 13 of Season 2 "Princess" in which Cara has to pretend to be a princess seeking to wed the Margrave of Rothenburgh so the team can sneak in to rescue Kahlan, with Zedd masquerading as Cara's elderly female chaperone and naturally attracting the romantic interests of a guard. Vomit. Standard slapstick Xena fare.

You say that like there's something wrong with Xena.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

This is an epix fail.

The Mord-Sith were never portrayed as lesbians, at least not in general. Two specific Mord-Sith happened to be lesbians, but it was pretty clear that they were simply two M-S who happened to be lesbians. Cara, for example, is straight. Also, complaining about sexual diversity in fantasy is simply ridiculous. Oh, horror! Goodkind's not a homophobic coward!!!!

Second, the agiel were not magice torture dildos. Mord-Sith used them in sex, but only to increase pain (rather basic physiology). They were not sexual devices, but devices for inflicting pain. The fact that Mord-Sith used them during intercourse does not make them sexual objects; I know people who use rope during intercourse, but for some reason no one complains that wooden sailing ships are erotic.

There was never a book where Richard was tortured by Mord-Sith while Kahlan was captured. When Kahlan got captured the Mord-Sith were on Richard's side. And there was never a time you could call them boyfriend/girlfriend. They went from team members on the same mission to betrothed to married. A pedantic point, yes, but considering the lies in your post (and there's no other word for such mischaracterizations) I consider it justified.

Kahlan didn't get raped very often if you read the books. ATTEMPTED rape, sure--but considering Kahlan's power it never seemed to work out well.

Finally, with the exception of the agiel (which you've completely mischaracterized) EVERY SINGLE THING YOU'VE SAID, AND WORSE can be said about George R R Martin's works. Most--again, and worse--can be said about Wheel of Time. Yet for some reason, they make Goodkind's books horrible, while they make those books realistic.

I honestly don't care if you enjoy Goodkind's works or not. I'm a male that went through high school as a fan of Enya; there's nothing you can do outside of actually murdering me that I haven't experienced because of what I enjoy (yes, someone tried to murder me over that issue--it was one reason I was on a hit list when the cops caught the guy), and I learned a long time ago to not care what others think of my taste in art. But the flagrant double-standards and the fact that you feel justified in lying about the books is something I simply cannot tollerate. If you don't like them, fine, but at least be honest.

How did an offhand comment about magic torture dildos turn into a personal attack on you and everything you believed in?

Apparently Objectivists:Sword of Truth::Scientologists:Battlefield Earth. They'll defend it to the end on principle alone.

It's just not a very good series, man. Not a very bad one, just schlocky. It went from generic fantasy epic to masturbatory fetish fuel to masturbatory philosophizing.

There's a place for that, but that place doesn't justify page-long pedantic rants over technicalities. The magical dildo-shaped torture devices used to **** people don't actually count as magic torture dildos? Really?