Given that Goodkind is an Objectivist, I was kind of hoping that this would be more like Atlas Shrugged with swords, but aside from one 'oppressed creators' speech near the middle of the book, it was pretty thin in that regard. I don't know if Goodkind was just settling into his personal philosophy then, and still trying to figure out how to work it into the book (the whole "evil is subjective" thing also seems weird coming from a professed Objectivist). In any case, I can see how the S&M stuff would be a showstopper for a lot of people.
I also found the revealing of the Wizard's First Rule to be a little annoying (albeit very true). It felt gimmicky, esp. since the main character seemed to reference it every other page once he learned of it. Ugh.
And yet ... this book has spawned a series of what, 8, 9 books, most of which have hit the NY Times bestseller list? To me, that says the books must get better, though maybe it just means there are millions of sword & sorcery S&M fans out there...
Fri, 07/11/2008 - 8:08am
Given that Goodkind is an Objectivist, I was kind of hoping that this would be more like Atlas Shrugged with swords, but aside from one 'oppressed creators' speech near the middle of the book, it was pretty thin in that regard. I don't know if Goodkind was just settling into his personal philosophy then, and still trying to figure out how to work it into the book (the whole "evil is subjective" thing also seems weird coming from a professed Objectivist). In any case, I can see how the S&M stuff would be a showstopper for a lot of people.
I also found the revealing of the Wizard's First Rule to be a little annoying (albeit very true). It felt gimmicky, esp. since the main character seemed to reference it every other page once he learned of it. Ugh.
And yet ... this book has spawned a series of what, 8, 9 books, most of which have hit the NY Times bestseller list? To me, that says the books must get better, though maybe it just means there are millions of sword & sorcery S&M fans out there...
»