Wizard's First Rule

I wanted to like this book because the TV series was not so bad. The quality of the writing is not the best, the main storyline is interesting, but the quest to achieve the main characters goals includes some side plots that were just not fun at all, like the Mud People.

Richard Cypher is the “Farm Boy” (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FarmBoy) who meets the damsel in distress Kahlan that turns out to be not so helpless after all. I liked the friendship between the two of them, it was very true and beautiful.

I already knew some of the story, so even though Kahlan decided to keep her secret from Richard for a long time, I understood her decisions along the way. However, I would be very frustrated if I did not knew that beforehand, as it took too long for it to be revealed, and was accompanied with a few few plot holes with it.

The Darken Rahl scenes were a bit annoying. He is an evil psychopath, and way too much time was spent trying to show how he could behave nicely to get what he wants. The outcome of one scene where this happened was very nice though, as it really transmitted his personality. He is only interested in knowledge and power, and the things he do to people to achieve his goals are of no consequence for him.

Zed is the very likable mentor/father figure for Richard. He is the old wizard who decided to live in isolation because the world is irrational and would not heed his warnings and advices.

One thing that REALLY bothered me is the book's title part of the story. The Wizard's first rule is stated as an actual “rule” for becoming a wizard, and it is a very “stupid” one (unintended pun, if you know the story). Basically they reduce being a wizard as being smart an intelligent. “You fooled me, therefore you could be a wizard” (paraphrasing). Not only that, but when Zed speaks of this, he makes it seem that only wizards can be smart. “Ah, you would know not to trust people if you were a wizard” (paraphrasing). It does makes sense that you need to be intelligent to be a wizard, but the exposition of this fact was too crude, close to saying “You need Int 14+ to be a wizard”.

I liked the Mord-Sith plot, as the transmitted perversion of goodness feeling was very fitting with the story. I think this might be the most memorable and unique part of the book. Oh, and I did not find the torture scenes too harsh as some people pointed out, but they were strong enough.

I do not intend to read any more books in the series because:
- This is the best book, and I didn't like it
- The way it ended, somewhat in the lines of the hero achieving ultimate power, is never conducing for a good sequel. (take Dune, Matrix or any other example for this)
- I know the plot of the second book because of the TV, and it is kind of good, but poorly executed.

By the way, the TV series as I remember was very faithful and well adapted from the book. Some concessions had to be made of course, such as the way Kahlan powers work. I found them to be much more interesting in the TV and a more convincing reason for she and Richard never being able to be together.

Protagonist is an ‘Angry Young Man'... Check. Has great hidden powers... Check. Meets a beautiful maiden at the beginning of the tale... Check. Falls madly in love with her... Check. Has powerful friends (Wizard / Warrior)... Check. His enemies are even more powerful, and are absolutely Evil (with a capital E)... Check. I could go on and on.

If someone were to sit and create a template for Fantasy-Action-Adventure genre, they'd be wasting their time - ‘Cuz this book is IT.

And I can't really recommend it or, the rest of the 12 books in the series. If its action you're looking for, there are better options - Gemmell's works, for example. If its quality of writing and a believable world, there are better - check out Guy Gavriel Kay or Dan Simmons. And if you have the time to invest in a epic storyline, you could do better there as well - see David Eddings' or Robert Jordan's work (though those aren't exactly high quality either, just better).

This book is just so... mediocre. I felt like stopping more than a few times, but I plowed through - to an ending that I saw coming a mile (and a half) away.

In high school, my sister sent me Wizards First Rule as a Christmas gift. Sadly, I never did get around to reading it back then, missing out on a great fantasy world. This is the first in over a dozen books in Goodkinds Sword of Truth which was also made into a TV series: The Legend of the Seeker. The confessors were the most interesting part for me – women who can touch a person and control them for the rest of the their lives. The wizards of this story seemed all powerful and not powerful at once, which left me confused on their abilities.

I first read this book yrs ago and actually ended up naming 2 of my kids after characters from this book series. Kahlan and Cara. I loved it then and still really like the book now, however my views and reading preferences have certainly evolved since then

While I did not know it at the time Terry Goodkind was very much influences by Ayn Rand and it does come through alot in this series and book in general. This is not to say that it is a bad book by any means I sitll love it it. But it also has a very black and white objective right and wrong philosphy, Richard, Kahlan, Zed are inherently good guys while our big bad Darken Rahl and his minions are inherently Bad guys

That being said it is epic fantasy to a high degree, big world, big ideas and big book over 800 pages. The magic, division of the world and powerful magic of life and death is epic in scope and generally a enjoyable read for that epic fantasy fan.

I still enjoy this book and series and look forward to continuing my read of it and while I am giving it 3 stars it is still among my most loved book series that I have read. Richard and Kahlan among my favorite fantasy couples

While there are a number of aspects I would change about this book, it gets me thinking about things that are true. Not just fact and fiction, but about being true to one's self and being true with others. One can be trite to another without giving all factual information. These are ideas and thoughts that I need to sirens more time with. Goodkind's illustration gives these ideas a fun vehicle for the experience. Though the story doesn't have the same emotional impact as when I read it twenty years ago, it was still well worth the read to me.

There are some disturbing scenes in this book, however. They vividly paint the distinction of these natures of the characters in the story. I struggle with this part of the book. It accomplishes the task of showing character and evil, however it is disturbing to read. Not unlike reading the news these days. Readers who do not want graphic violence and evil will not appreciate several scenes in this story.

The story has a number of elements commonly found in fantasy literature, but I found I greatly looked or disliked most of the characters. There story without all the thought provoking ideas would still be enjoyable but would not achieve the five stars that are reserved for books that impact me personally and challenge my thinking.

In high school, my sister sent me Wizards First Rule as a Christmas gift. Sadly, I never did get around to reading it back then, missing out on a great fantasy world. This is the first in over a dozen books in Goodkinds Sword of Truth which was also made into a TV series: The Legend of the Seeker. The confessors were the most interesting part for me – women who can touch a person and control them for the rest of the their lives. The wizards of this story seemed all powerful and not powerful at once, which left me confused on their abilities.

The book started quite promising and up to the 30% mark I was having a great time. Interesting characters, fascinating world and an exciting quest.

And then some patterns started to emerge that soured my enjoyment and doomed me to struggle all the way to the end.

The book is VERY derivative of other works. And while I have no issue with tropy stories, and unpredictability isn't end all be all to me, copying characters and scenes from other stories and pasting them into your own exactly the same will always be worthy of scorn. Samuel - the former seeker was basically a counterfeit of Gollum from The Lord of the Rings. There was also so much "borrowed" from Star Wars and The Wheel of Time, among other things, that I had to wonder how anyone who's ever consumed these works could possibly enjoy this one. Of course, I am no gatekeeper of the virtues of literature, so if you did enjoy it, then please disregard this rant - your enjoyment does not require my approval. :)
But even worse, when you have predictable story lines, but are dragging them around for ages as though they are big secrets, it makes me feel like I'm waisting my time. You can't create and maintain suspense when your reveals are obvious from the start. Prolonging the reveal and continuously dropping little hints only works if your “mystery” isn't obvious to begin with. And we had quite a few of those. It left me feeling as though many of the scenes were overwritten and overstayed their welcome.

If there is one thing that can turn me off from an author almost instantaneously, that is unnecessary s**ual violence against children. I'm not saying it should never be in books, but it should makes sense to be there. And if it's not needed, like in this case (literally, if you remove those parts NOTHING will change for the story), then that means the author only added it because he wanted to. And I can't help but derive conclusions based on that fact.

And lastly, the author has tried to create a highly philosophical work (my observation is that he has borrowed quite a bit from Ayn Rand in that aspect), and has for the most part succeeded. But on quite a few occasions, he has failed to maintain moral and logical consistency in his musings. Which left me with the impression of performance rather than actual conviction. And that extended to the moral triumph of the main character, which did not ring true (no pun intended).

ALL that being said, the story is vast and if you are able to ignore the obvious “influences”, could be interesting, so I feel comfortable giving it 3 stars.

Unfortunately, barring unexpected circumstances, I will not be continuing with this series.

DNF at page 208. Whereas [b:The Lies of Locke Lamora 29588376 The Lies of Locke Lamora (Gentleman Bastard, #1) Scott Lynch https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1458646334l/29588376.SY75.jpg 2116675] got 2 stars because it's not bad, I just don't like it, this will get only one, because... I don't think anyone should read it. There's tons of other books to read that are better. I really tried. I should have read this when I was a teenager. Though... it was published after I was a teenager. It reads like 80s' Fantasy, though it was published 1993. It has all the tropes and everything, and nothing new and original, or interesting.The only reason why I'm reading this is that I saw a video “I read 27 books from a Buzzfeed list... here's what happened”, and I wanted to do the same, but with Fantasy books, and I found this list: The 51 Best Fantasy Series Ever Written, and I thought it can't be that bad, I'll take that.And... well... It can.Let's say that Sword of Truth is a pretty controversial subject. The author's attitude about himself, his books and Fantasy genre in general, stink. Yes, he tries to backtrack, but, honey, you already shot yourself in the foot, and so badly that you don't have any foot left to save. Just whittle yourself a pegleg and get it over with. You have fans, let that be enough. I am not one of them.The main character is an a-hole. Nothing bad with that, except that his creator, he himself and everyone he meets in the book seems to disagree. That just lets me know I can't trust anything these people say about anything. And when I know the author is trying to feed me BS, I won't be eating anything he serves.It tastes too much of [b:Elric of Melniboné 30036 Elric of Melniboné (The Elric Saga, #1) Michael Moorcock https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1388345555l/30036.SY75.jpg 388812] and [a:Ayn Rand 432 Ayn Rand https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1168729178p2/432.jpg], and even though I think both are better authors than Terry Goodkind, I dislike all of these books. Ayn Rand's values and opinions pretty much stink, as well, Elric was an a-hole as well. When you have those kind of people as ideals, it's no wonder Wizard's First Rule stinks. You can't write better than what you aspire to write. And Kahlan. She managed fine before she met Richard and then became a damsel in distress who needs constant saving, and is pretty useless. But we are told all the time what an amazing person she is, and so powerful and all that. If I can't witness it, I won't believe you. If you haven't been able to convince me otherwise in the first 200 pages of a book, I don't care what you do the rest of the 600 pages of this book, or the rest of the hundreds and thousands of pages of the 15 books in this series so far.(And this is what people mean when they say “show, don't tell”. You can say thousand times Kahlan is amazing, but when she behaves like a damsel in distress for 150 pages, I don't believe you. SHOW me she's amazing, don't just TELL me and expect me to believe you.)Well, I have to say she was presented fine. At the first meeting she seemed to be all Terry said she was, fully capable of taking care of herself, but then she started spending time with Richard, and page by page all that disappeared and she turned into a Frank Frazetta girl. I mean, Edgar Rice Burroughs' heroines have more spunk than this girl.It's not all bad, though. There are some funny bits in there, I like Zed and his cat, etc. Had I not read as much as I have, I would have been totally happy with this. And, I suppose, if I liked Ayn Rand and Michael Moorcock, I wouldn't mind this either. Now, I don't.

I thought the story was good, but sometimes rather lengthy. I felt myself losing interest a few times when the author spent too much time on imagery and not enough time on the story. Overall, I enjoyed the book, but I can't say that I have that burning desire to dive into the next one. I will continue the series, but will probably take a small break with another book first.

I read this and ... whatever it is that comes next. I almost enjoyed them. Unfortunately, there were two problems. One, the curious incident of the full moon rising at midnight. I actually stopped reading at that point. But worse, far far far worse, is the brutality-porn chapter in each. Goodkind just enjoyed that horror too much, and I didn't. I almost enjoyed them, but instead they wound up being on my “worst books I've ever read” list, and that is a very short list.

I have mixed feelings about this book and series.

The magical system that gets revealed over the course of the book is among my favorites, along with those from_His Dark Materials_ and The Kingkiller Chronicle. The magic system reflects real aspects of human minds and human interaction, with additional details and descriptions that made me feel like the magic made sense, was a reflection of something real. Instead of waggling a magic wand to get what you want, you learn about human minds and human behavior. There are also consequences that feel real and resonate with my own life experiences.

The fantasy world is full of fun surprises, with creatures and cultures and objects that don't just riff on existing ideas but operate in a unique way that makes the world enthralling to discover.

That said, there are aspects of the writing that I have to skim past and try to ignore.

The author revels in describing abuse of power, with detailed views into how the (fat, bald, scarred) villains enjoy manipulating, raping, and murdering children, and yet still get rewarded with power, while the (attractive, tall, muscular) good guys do a lot of grinning and rescuing children and suffering from the intensity of their own morality. This aspect of the characters is poured on too thick. I don't need my fantasy to involve so much twisting of the knife. I can see that making the reader writhe against injustice is worth something, but there's just too much of it.

There's also a touch of homophobia. In this first book, the only character we meet that prefers same-sex encounters is a sexual predator, and the focus of his villainy is that he prefers boys. There's a sadomasochist woman villain that is a “man hater” that is hinted at as a lesbian. Beyond these villains, the world appears completely hetero.

As in many fantasy novels, there are moments when it feels like the author accidentally starts retelling Tolkien stories and then has to shake out of it.

I've read this series at least twice and just re-read the first book, so obviously I have found the fantasy worth having to trudge through the physical and mental torture of most of the characters... but I wouldn't recommend the series to everyone and am not sure I'll read it again.

Phew! That's the first sentiment once you finish this well written but extremely long journey that is Wizards First Rule. Terry has a very nice way of telling the story keeping the narrative pretty simple but continuously adding more and more interesting characters to the plot. The narrative from multiple POV's also is well managed and almost perfect (I could have done with a couple of more parts from Rahl's POV). While there is a love story at the crux of the plot it never is too overt or overpowering. The ending though was a little flat and that's why it falls short of the full 5 stars. Highly recommended!