Talk:Confessor (novel)

Keith Parkinson reference
So, when I was making this page, I thought it would be worthwhile to reference how Terry selected art from work Keith had done before he died. It's apparent that it happened, but I saw this quote posted by a member of the swordoftruth livejournal community, and thought it was great, only they didn't source it properly. I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere else, so maybe someone could help me find a proper sourcing for it? --DragonGuyver 18:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

last book in series
In an interview which I watched on YouTube, Terry said that Confessor (which had been unnamed at that time, but was implicit as the last part of the Chainfire trilogy) might not be the last book set in the Sword of Truth world, or even necessarily the last book focused on Richard and Kahlan. This is also supported by his description of his writing method (ha ha, my source!, scroll down to the question "Have you already started working on the next book?"). So I was thinking we should address this somewhere... if we do it will also change the info wherever it says that Confessor and the Chainfire trilogy conclude the entire series. While they are purportedly ending the story arc begun in Wizard's First Rule, it isn't necessarily an end for the story of these characters and this setting, I suppose is what I'm trying to say.

Oh, and I guess I should sort of introduce myself... after reading all the back-and-forth on the Talk pages for Terry's and The Sword of Truth... I feel like I'm walking into an established group or club. So, uh, I'm a fan of his, I thought I hated Ayn Rand and now I'm having second thoughts, I really love the philosophy and the character of Richard, and right now I'm reading Pillars of Creation.

If that was totally inappropriate of me, I apologize... I never thought to do such a thing before, but you all seem to know each other and have quite a history, so I thought I ought to state my position with the books and such. So, hi. --DragonGuyver 18:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi DG. Let me just note that the interview question you are pointing to was talking about the Pillars of Creation, not Confessor.  That interview will be 7 years old in September.  Just wanted to clear that up.  Omnilord 04:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh about his writing method? Yes, I'm aware of that, that is true; but I haven't seen any statements from him to indicate that he's changed his approach to writing his books (ie: taking them one at a time). I was just pointing this out in the context that Confessor might not be the last SoT book. Have you seen anything more recent that changes our understanding of how he works? (of course, I'm keeping in mind that he may be viewing the Chainfire trilogy as a sort of meta-book, and I think when he says it ends this story, it just means the ongoing conflict with Jagang... but I suppose we will see!)
 * --DragonGuyver 11:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Trust me, this ends the series. Quite a good finale as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.211.102 (talk) 00:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * There is one important thing not finished. What is with the son of Richard and Kahlan, they have to create if the magic of the Rahls bond should go on (Ok Richard ends the devotions), what with the confessor power? Every child of a confessor is a confessor, male should be killed (Richard wouldn't do this, like he wouldn't kill his sister). Children of a Rahl are sometimes without the spark of the gift, so they cannot be a confessor.
 * Will their son be a "war wizard confessor"? 84.57.240.41 (talk) 23:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting reminder, their first child died in the fifth book, when Kahlan was beaten almost to Death. Perhaps that was their "male-war-wizard-confessor-child-of-death." Wayfarer (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably not the last book....
I tend to agree that this might not be the last book he'll write...like many of his books, Goodkind ended this one with a few teaser lines that don't start new conflicts in and of themselves, but allow openings for future conflicts/stories. The first few books that didn't involve the Order were fairly independent story arcs...until you read the next book and find out that really it's not. Each of these segues was done with a little comment or two by someone who knows more than we do (ie. Zedd, Ann, Nathan, etc.). The same thing is very evident in Confessor... Tstitans (talk) 04:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Terry Goodkind has explicitly stated that while not necessarily the last book he'll write or even the last book in this setting, it is definitely the last book of this series. On another note, this article desperately needs to be rewritten, as it is horribly written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.177.80 (talk) 00:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Article Title
I wonder if this article should be renamed (moved) to "Confessor (Sword of Truth)," as with Phantom, for purpose of consistency. Dansiman (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No, no need. See Naming or Naming conventions (books), consistency with this is to be found by following these guidelines not by adding "disambig" phrases where unneeded. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  15:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Then should Phantom be moved to "Phantom (novel)"? Dansiman (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps - but there is no real reason to keep changing things - however Phantom (novel) would be more in keeping with Naming conventions (books). but as you will notice the "space" is taken by another title by another author! Perhaps Phantom (2006 novel) which is the next preferred form. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  08:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Odd... when I checked it yesterday it said article not found. Dansiman 21:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, capitalization error. Dansiman 21:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Missing paragraph? Richard paints his team with symbols...? What team? Skips a section of plot there. penguify

Plot Summary
That whole section is horrific, full of speculation, misinformation and needless wording. It needs a serious paring down and editing for factual content...Mystar (talk) 19:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

True key -> sword of truth
If the whole thing with the book of counted shadows was a failsafe, is Book 2 - Stone of Tears only a "false fear". Only the true key can open the boxes in the right way (pushing the sword into the box)

So Darken Rahl opened a box with the false way, not the "right door" if you want. Why was the veil torn? A Failsafe or protection shouldn't be able to destroy everything...

This would be like 3 switches which can destroy the world and a false guide which one should be pushed. The real switch which can enable or disable the weapon is hidden, but all 3 not hidden switches will destroy the world. This would be stupid, so all visible switches shouldn't be able to destroy the world. But if this is so, the second book would be about a false story. 84.57.240.41 (talk) 23:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If you try to rob the bank by force opening the door, you may fail, but the door may still be broken MxM (talk) 19:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Eleventh Rule
There are certainly other interpretations of the Eleventh Rule than the one given in this article, notably that it's the last eleven words of the book, "Your life is your own. Live it as you see fit." Magic9mushroom (talk) 16:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)magic9mushroom
 * The best option would be quoting an explanation of the rule by Goodkind, with a citation. If no such official explanation is available, I think the best alternative would be to cover all the major interpretations, using citations from sources such as book reviews. Also, is the rule actually numbered? If not, I think the section should be titled "The rule unwritten". -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)