|
|
Little Valkyrie (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} waltraute) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} fandom_wank,@ 2006-08-29 11:46:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
What would Richard Rahl think of this wank?
This wank report owes its existence to a request from the lol_meme. I hope you all find it full of LOL.
There's no wank like author wank, as we've seen before from Anne Rice and Laurell K. Hamilton. Now throw some zealous fans into the mix, and you get Terry Goodkind's wikipedia page.
For those of you not familiar with his output, Terry Goodkind writes novels (don't call them fantasy!) in the 'Sword of Truth' series, beginning with Wizard's First Rule and now up to I don't know what. They've garnered comparisons with Robert Jordan in terms of size and the tendency to go on and onand will probably eventually sell for $2.99 a pound. He's also a serious devotee of Ayn Rand, works grand philosophical insights into his books, and is very insistent that he's not writing fantasy--the nasty publishers have just miscategorized his books:
Text from a chat transcript, retrieved from the Wayback Machine:
Yet there are those who rail at me because I don't behave like a fantasy author is "supposed" to. I don't follow the rules, as they see it.
There are those who focus exclusively on this least important element -magic - simply because people I don't know, despite my strenuous objections at the time, insisted on placing a red dragon on the cover of my work, and because of that, and who published the book, I was racked in bookstores as fantasy. As a result, in the minds of some readers I am for all time to be labeled as a “fantasy" author. So I must now follow some unstated laws of writing - I must know my place - because I've been mindlessly labeled a "fantasy" author? That, my friends, is bigotry.
I am not an obedient subservient cog of a group, slavishly following the group's conventions. I am a thinking individual acting of my own free will.
Shania Twain had a similar problem with country music fans who resented her because her music doesn't follow the constrained conventions of country music. She has risen above category names. For most of my fans, so have I.
Most of Shania Twain's fans are not regular country music fans. Most of my fans are not regular fantasy fans nor are they so bigoted that they think I must know my place and stay in it.
So naturally, there's an ongoing debate on Wikipedia about his books.
Mystar, who seems to pop up from various IPs, is out to keep the record straight:
Call them "misguided" if you wish. That is really y too bad is this IS Goodkind's page and I have edited according to HIS wishes.
Some other editors make comparisons to George R. R. Martin's and Steven Erikson's pages, but they're just biased, you know:
Ahhh yes! "Just because you can source something doesn't mean it's notable or should be on the page". The ole "do what I say not what I do, double standard eh!
You allow the same content on GRRM's etc page. I see Paul or is it Worthead? I see that you are the ASOFAI fanatic and as such allow this same content there, but cannot stand for it of Goodkind's page. I hope you can explain yourself. Suddenly out of the blue you trash Goodkind’s page. SO just because you have edited a couple of GRRM's pages...that makes you the "consensus"? Sorry bub, that outs you and your two other buddies. You want to cause havoc, and they your get a couple of other ASOFAI buddies to back you up. That is in no way any kind of "consensus". All anyone has to do is to look at the history of you guys and see the truth. You see nothing that looks "biased" because you are a fanatic of the page and want the bias there. It suites you, your buddies and GRRM as well. The fact is it is loaded with bias and POV. You cannot have it both ways dude. You have not acted in good faith or in an unbiased manor
And then it goes to arbitration. That's never wanky, right? Right?
Allegations of sockpuppets becomes the constant theme:
I for one prefer to think of myself as an honest and moral man, I saw/see nothing civil in any of your commentary toward me, quite the contrary. I see you assuming "superiority" in tone from me. That would be entirely a failing on your part, as I have not taken any such tone. I suggest you stop attempting to read me as you feel you would be replying. A common mistake with this media, but I assure you I am nothing but concerned for proper content and eliminating the use of harmful editing and sockpuppets to back up such vandalism. I also disagree about your GRRM statement. He can say anything he wishes. We have no proof of its validity. Anyone can say anything they wish. mystar68.188.220.8 05:30, 28 August 2006
NeoFreak tries to keep some kind of calm going:
Well you have been calling other editors liars and idiots and accusing them of having dishonest intentions without any proof. Your tone has been hostile and condesending but if that was not your intention then we can get past that. NeoFreak
What would Richard Rahl do?
You ask others if they have read the Sword of Truth novels - have you read them, Mystar? If so, did you understand the messages within? Emperor Jagang rules over a cruel and wicked empire - do you think he would allow anyone to criticize him? Of course not. Richard is the one who fights for freedom, equality, and free will. Richard wouldn't try to silence his opposition, he wouldn't try to deny anyone the right to speak their mind. Instead, he would take criticism and use it to better himself and make himself a better person.
And it shows no signs of ending anytime soon, except for the call for a moratorium on edits.
ETA: I hadn't even noticed the first archive of the wikipedia talk section, which proves that this one's been going on for a while. Consists of even more allegations that everyone editing the page but Mystar hatesfreedom Goodkind.
ETA2: For everyone else curious about the evil chicken, googling found me this:
Hissing, hackles lifting, the chicken's head rose. Kahlan pulled back. Its claws digging into stiff dead flesh, the chicken slowly turned to face her. It cocked its head, making its comb flop, its wattles sway. "Shoo," Kahlan heard herself whisper. There wasn't enough light, and besides, the side of its beak was covered with gore, so she couldn't tell if it had the dark spot, But she didn't need to see it. "Dear spirits, help me," she prayed under her breath. The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken. This was evil manifest.-- Soul of the Fire by Terry Goodkind
ETA3: The chicken has generated wonderful icons. Someone please collect them for posterity.
ETA4: I feel the need to draw your attention to Shania Rand here.
This wank report owes its existence to a request from the lol_meme. I hope you all find it full of LOL.
There's no wank like author wank, as we've seen before from Anne Rice and Laurell K. Hamilton. Now throw some zealous fans into the mix, and you get Terry Goodkind's wikipedia page.
For those of you not familiar with his output, Terry Goodkind writes novels (don't call them fantasy!) in the 'Sword of Truth' series, beginning with Wizard's First Rule and now up to I don't know what. They've garnered comparisons with Robert Jordan in terms of size and the tendency to go on and on
Text from a chat transcript, retrieved from the Wayback Machine:
Yet there are those who rail at me because I don't behave like a fantasy author is "supposed" to. I don't follow the rules, as they see it.
There are those who focus exclusively on this least important element -magic - simply because people I don't know, despite my strenuous objections at the time, insisted on placing a red dragon on the cover of my work, and because of that, and who published the book, I was racked in bookstores as fantasy. As a result, in the minds of some readers I am for all time to be labeled as a “fantasy" author. So I must now follow some unstated laws of writing - I must know my place - because I've been mindlessly labeled a "fantasy" author? That, my friends, is bigotry.
I am not an obedient subservient cog of a group, slavishly following the group's conventions. I am a thinking individual acting of my own free will.
Shania Twain had a similar problem with country music fans who resented her because her music doesn't follow the constrained conventions of country music. She has risen above category names. For most of my fans, so have I.
Most of Shania Twain's fans are not regular country music fans. Most of my fans are not regular fantasy fans nor are they so bigoted that they think I must know my place and stay in it.
So naturally, there's an ongoing debate on Wikipedia about his books.
Mystar, who seems to pop up from various IPs, is out to keep the record straight:
Call them "misguided" if you wish. That is really y too bad is this IS Goodkind's page and I have edited according to HIS wishes.
Some other editors make comparisons to George R. R. Martin's and Steven Erikson's pages, but they're just biased, you know:
Ahhh yes! "Just because you can source something doesn't mean it's notable or should be on the page". The ole "do what I say not what I do, double standard eh!
You allow the same content on GRRM's etc page. I see Paul or is it Worthead? I see that you are the ASOFAI fanatic and as such allow this same content there, but cannot stand for it of Goodkind's page. I hope you can explain yourself. Suddenly out of the blue you trash Goodkind’s page. SO just because you have edited a couple of GRRM's pages...that makes you the "consensus"? Sorry bub, that outs you and your two other buddies. You want to cause havoc, and they your get a couple of other ASOFAI buddies to back you up. That is in no way any kind of "consensus". All anyone has to do is to look at the history of you guys and see the truth. You see nothing that looks "biased" because you are a fanatic of the page and want the bias there. It suites you, your buddies and GRRM as well. The fact is it is loaded with bias and POV. You cannot have it both ways dude. You have not acted in good faith or in an unbiased manor
And then it goes to arbitration. That's never wanky, right? Right?
Allegations of sockpuppets becomes the constant theme:
I for one prefer to think of myself as an honest and moral man, I saw/see nothing civil in any of your commentary toward me, quite the contrary. I see you assuming "superiority" in tone from me. That would be entirely a failing on your part, as I have not taken any such tone. I suggest you stop attempting to read me as you feel you would be replying. A common mistake with this media, but I assure you I am nothing but concerned for proper content and eliminating the use of harmful editing and sockpuppets to back up such vandalism. I also disagree about your GRRM statement. He can say anything he wishes. We have no proof of its validity. Anyone can say anything they wish. mystar68.188.220.8 05:30, 28 August 2006
NeoFreak tries to keep some kind of calm going:
Well you have been calling other editors liars and idiots and accusing them of having dishonest intentions without any proof. Your tone has been hostile and condesending but if that was not your intention then we can get past that. NeoFreak
What would Richard Rahl do?
You ask others if they have read the Sword of Truth novels - have you read them, Mystar? If so, did you understand the messages within? Emperor Jagang rules over a cruel and wicked empire - do you think he would allow anyone to criticize him? Of course not. Richard is the one who fights for freedom, equality, and free will. Richard wouldn't try to silence his opposition, he wouldn't try to deny anyone the right to speak their mind. Instead, he would take criticism and use it to better himself and make himself a better person.
And it shows no signs of ending anytime soon, except for the call for a moratorium on edits.
ETA: I hadn't even noticed the first archive of the wikipedia talk section, which proves that this one's been going on for a while. Consists of even more allegations that everyone editing the page but Mystar hates
ETA2: For everyone else curious about the evil chicken, googling found me this:
Hissing, hackles lifting, the chicken's head rose. Kahlan pulled back. Its claws digging into stiff dead flesh, the chicken slowly turned to face her. It cocked its head, making its comb flop, its wattles sway. "Shoo," Kahlan heard herself whisper. There wasn't enough light, and besides, the side of its beak was covered with gore, so she couldn't tell if it had the dark spot, But she didn't need to see it. "Dear spirits, help me," she prayed under her breath. The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken. This was evil manifest.-- Soul of the Fire by Terry Goodkind
ETA3: The chicken has generated wonderful icons. Someone please collect them for posterity.
ETA4: I feel the need to draw your attention to Shania Rand here.
Post a comment in response:
