Faith of the Fallen (Sword of Truth, Book 6)

Rating:
Summary: A Really Good Read If You Can Get Over Yourself
Review: I have been reading Sci-Fi/Fantasy for a very long time, and have read just about every Fantasy series in existence. Everyone of them has a philosophy incorporated into the pages of EVERY book. What is the big deal? You either agree or don't agree with the philosophy. If all you read are books with a philosophy with which you agree, where is the growth?

I believe Faith of the Fallen is a good read. In this case, Terry's philosophy happens to agree with mine. However, I read the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant three times, and I don't agree with the philosophy in them at all. If you want to criticize a book for being bad literature, that is all well and good. Leave politics out of it. Every author has his/her own view on things. Let that stand and get over yourself.

Faith of the Fallen does repeat from time to time, I admit that. My personal view is that the book is a good read and a lot of fun. What good is it if your main character is mediocre? There should be something outstanding about him. The one thing that I have noticed about Richard is that he is longsuffering and makes an effort to understand his situation and those around him, no matter what. And as to the criticism that he couldn't learn stone carving in one month..read the book. He had been carving for a lot longer than that, just not in stone. In addition, the carving is a part of his magic. If you're going to read a book, really read it. This one is worth the effort.

Rating:
Summary: What Goodkind was thinking...
Review: Guess what? Terry Goodkind doesn't fancy himself a fantasy writer... not even one bit. Go to his website, read some interviews... he honestly says that the fantastic world that he creates is just a place to espouse his philosophy. Yes, Wizard's First Rule was less of this, and some of you out there may be unfamiliar with fantasy as a genre that does espouse Idealism, Libertarianism, Individualism... many books out there do not do it as obviously as Goodkind does, but it's there, even in the first few books of this series. I believe wholeheartedly in the "virtue of selfishness" and Ayn Rand, although I belong to a segment of it that gives more credance to emotion... in a rational sense. (yes, even the great Rand was wrong sometimes, but her essentials were dead on.) However, just like Richard and Kahlan, I will not let emotion blind me to reality, and I will not use emotion to excuse anything that I do wrong... Some of the contributors to this forum are genuinely frightening... you actually believe that I am wrong because I see my own preservation as the only moral purpose of my life? I'm not fighting for it all the time, thanks to humans motivated by self-benefit through history, we have developed technology that has helped us to easily overcome the hardships that cavemen faced... but when I DO feel that I am fighting is when people like the detractors here are talking. You will not get my money, my time, or my help when you demand that I sacrifice myself to you or your inane causes. No, instead, I will make a productive life that I can live off of, and in the process teach my childen that when they are finally adult humans, they can be so incredible that they cannot imagine it... THAT is what we should be teaching our kids... to help themselves... not to live every day in a stagnant pool of mediocrity and altruism... that's what happened to Nicci... I can only hope that some of you see in yourselves what she saw in herself... that you are that incredible, and that capable...
"Your life is yours alone! Rise up and live it!"

Oh, and by the way.... Richard was gifted in the ways of the stone... it was magic, how he carved the statue. There are stories told in the book about how some wizards were born with this gift... to use their intellect in that way. The fact that "that's not possible in real life" is irrelevant. The story is still fantasy. The philosophy behind the book is the real truth.

Rating:
Summary: Faith of the Fallen
Review: I have read literally hundreds of books from various authors. The Sword of Truth series is by far the best series I have ever read. I have looked over all these reviews and paid special attention to the bad ones. These people that write the bad reviews are nothing more than petty liberals. The philosphy in the Sword of Truth series is a conservative one. That only you are responsible for yourself. That only through your ability and hard work will you succeed in life. Some people do not like that philosphy and would try to stamp it out if they could. I see some of that in the comments made about Terry's books. The anger and rage directed at an author for only telling the masses the truth about what a free society is. The story in FotF is extremely well written and centers around the belief that you are responsible for yourself and not for someone else. This book isnt for you if you believe that half the population should support the other half or that the government should make all your decisions for you. If you believe that then this book will enrage you. This book basically shows the horror and abuse that occurs in that type of society. The degradation of the human spirit to the point that you can no longer think for yourself. The brain washing that begins at birth so you look at other societies as evil and uncivilized. People who buy into that type of system will only see this book as trash and hate it all the more for speaking the truth. I found this book very insightful, well written, and touching. The masses that believe in a free society will find this book a confirmation of their beliefs and values. It will give them strength and heart to fight the good fight. Keep it up Terry!

Rating:
Summary: Rehashed Ayn Rand
Review: The first book in this series, I thought, was the best sci-fantasy book to come down the pike in ages. Almost since the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. But the books have devolved quickly, culminating in this latest installment. Faith of the Fallen is Atlas Shrugged all over again. And while Ayn Rand can fairly be called a philosopher, Terry Goodkind is an author. There's a big difference, and one which Mr. Goodkind ignores.

One similarity to Ms. Rand, however, is Goodkind's incessant need to repeat. Like in Atlas Shrugged, it was "90-page rant on the evils of surrenduring your will to that of the community," followed by "100-page soliloquy on the evils of surrenduring your will to that of the community." Condensed, I think the plot development took about 10 pages.

And, unfortunately, those 10 pages were an almost-verbatim repeat of prior plots. But this point is aptly addressed in the other several-hundred negative reviews on this book, so I'll leave you to read those.

Rating:
Summary: Decent book, not great
Review: I found this book to be reasonably well written. However the plot developement really wasn't what I was looking for. The characters added weren't too terribly interesting and it could have been written much better. Overall, still worth a read.

Rating:
Summary: not 5 but still good
Review: Terry Goodkind has done it again. He has woven a story of huge proportion. I admit that he took quite a leap by trapping Richard in the Old World, and that the story through most of the book was slow paced at best. The ending still justified the means. Goodkind showed the everlasting and defiant spirit characterized in every human being. He showed the meaning of freedom to an unprecedented degree. Hence I give Faith of the Fallen 4 stars.

Rating:
Summary: From fun fantasy to politic preaching
Review: While this book is readable, it isn't as interesting or memorable as earlier additions to this Fantasy series. It could be just a way of passing time while Terry figures where he wants to take the rest of the series. I certainly hope so since I don't want the next book to be just as self-righteous and preachy as this one. Terry is letting the original fantasy world, whose intricate construction and internal logic took this series through the first 5 books, fade into background. In its place he seem to be setting up a caricature of socialist distopia for use as a platform from which Terry can give vent to his political beliefs.

This is disappointing. While Terry is good at laying out a internally somewhat consistent fantasy land, he is not good at using the real world constraints to vet moral concepts espoused though this imaginary world. This is of no consequence when he writes a pure fantasy novel. It becomes a serious problem if the novel becomes just a venue through which to preach a political view point. He is neither clever about his allegories, nor insightful or even thoughtful about what he preaches. He comes across as just a fervent and uncritical convert who is willing to overlook any problem in his theology and push it on anyone as hard as he can.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent writing and vision
Review: Terry Goodkind's writing has improved dramatically. I read this book in two days and am once again excited to read the remainder of the series.

To be honest, I was not thrilled with the beginning of this story and had to scratch my head, wondering why Richard had to go on his little journey, how easily he was forced into 'bondage', and just why the Order had to be so invincible.

In addition, some of the numbers just did not make sense. Not to be too picky, but come on, 2.5 million soldiers on what is essentially a medieval field of battle? Now that would certainly be hopeless, but it decreased believability for me. However, I used my right to willingly suspend disbelief and was glad I did.

By the time I made it half-way through the book, the pieces came together in an exciting way (something I thought this book was going to lack). When you see why he must be there, it makes sense. I thought the ending was absolutely perfect. It was emotionally laden, and beautifully described. I was more satisfied with this book (by the end) than with any other in this series. Bravo.

One word to readers, don't generate your opinions too early in the book. Have some faith that Goodkind has a purpose with some of the things he writes. He does.

Is this story original? Probably not completely. Is it a theft of others' work? Not that I have seen. Remember, William Shakespeare did not create every idea he wrote about. He just did it better. I am not saying that Goodkind is a Shakespeare, but that you can make your own mind up about whether he does a good job with the story he tells. I think, in this book, he does.

Now about the political commentary issue. Yes, there is a conflict between collectivism and individualism. Yes, this represents the worst of collectivism. Yes, some people live(d) this way. No, not everyone in collectivist (communist) societies did. It's a story. A Story.

If you are a fan of collectivist governments and communism and cannot put that aside for a while, I can assure you that you will not like this book. However, this is not a book of political or social philosophy, it is a fantasy novel.