|
Well some of us had to use the special "80s/90s era USA" reading order, which was "Read the books in whatever order you can get your hands on them, why the hell is Pratchett so hard to find in this drat country" When they finally started mass-marketing Discworld in the US I was so happy that I didn't even mind the eye-scarringly bad cover art.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 11:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
Sulevis posted:I'm still holding out for a Susan/Lobsang/Death book. Which could happen, depending on how you read the last part of Thief of Time. Was that perfect movement Lobsang surprise kissing Susan? It was already implied that Susan can't have a relationship with any one completely mortal so another humanized aspect would work out for her.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 14:58
|
|
|
BexGu posted:Which could happen, depending on how you read the last part of Thief of Time. That is exactly how I read it and thus I look forward to seeing how the relationship develops. I'm also curious what the offspring of Death and Time would be like (apart from somewhat of a logical contradiction). Plus, Death is one of my favourite characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 15:16
|
|
|
Sulevis posted:I'm still holding out for a Susan/Lobsang/Death book. Oh yeah! I really liked that he set that up and yet here we are, x years and number of books later and there's not even a mention of Lobsang in an artbook, nevermind a book proper. The ending of Thief of Time is one of his strongest, ah reckons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 18:49
|
|
|
Oh man. According to the Wikipedia list of Discworld novels, Thief of Time was number 26. We're at number 36 now. It really doesn't look like Pratchett is going back to Death/Susan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 19:30
|
|
|
Sulevis posted:Oh man. According to the Wikipedia list of Discworld novels, Thief of Time was number 26. We're at number 36 now. It really doesn't look like Pratchett is going back to Death/Susan. I always thought that ToT was possibly going to be the last Susan book. Of course, I'd like another Death book too, which necessarily involves Susan and Lobsang, so that would be awesome, but if he chose to end her story I'd be happy he chose that book to do it with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2007 19:47
|
|
|
Sulevis posted:Oh man. According to the Wikipedia list of Discworld novels, Thief of Time was number 26. We're at number 36 now. It really doesn't look like Pratchett is going back to Death/Susan. If you don't count Eric (illustrated, and about half the size of most other Discworld novels so it always felt to me more like a novella than a proper novel), there was a 12-book gap in Rincewind novels from Sourcery (5) to Interesting Times (17). Even if you do count Eric (9), that's still a pretty decent gap to IT. So who knows?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 10:06
|
|
|
Leospeare posted:If you don't count Eric (illustrated, and about half the size of most other Discworld novels so it always felt to me more like a novella than a proper novel), there was a 12-book gap in Rincewind novels from Sourcery (5) to Interesting Times (17). Even if you do count Eric (9), that's still a pretty decent gap to IT. So who knows? Similarly Last Hero (27), The Amazing Maurice (28), Monstrous Regiment (31) and the introduction of Tiffany Aching and Moist Von Lipwig happened in between Thief of Time and now. Only time will tell, indeed. On the other hand, the next two books to be announced are Aching and Lipwig(1), so we won't be seeing Susan for a while yet anyway. ninja edit: also he is apparently working on a non-Discworld book called Nation, according to that wiki page. Even longer to wait now! (1)Discworld's OTP
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2007 11:16
|
|
|
dregan posted:Similarly Last Hero (27), The Amazing Maurice (28), Monstrous Regiment (31) and the introduction of Tiffany Aching and Moist Von Lipwig happened in between Thief of Time and now. Only time will tell, indeed. Speaking of Nation, does anyone have any info on what it's about? Just by the name I'm guessing it's going to have a lot of stealth-philosophy in it. EDIT: vvvv Hmmm, intriguing... Moist von Lipwig fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Nov 15, 2007 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 07:09
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Speaking of Nation, does anyone have any info on what it's about? Just by the name I'm guessing it's going to have a lot of stealth-philosophy in it. http://www.theage.com.au/news/books/meeting-mr-pratchett/2007/02/15/1171405371862.html?page=fullpage posted:"You'll be the first to know," he says. "The next book was going to be that one; but there's a book I've been wanting to write for about four years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 07:14
|
|
|
Interesting. I'm looking forward to it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 17:17
|
|
|
That "for kids" thing worries me again. I haven't read any of the Aching books, are they any good? He doesn't necessarily write for adults, but his stuff can be pretty complex which is what I worry would be removed for a kids book. So yeah, Aching books: are they as good as the rest?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 20:15
|
|
|
Just finished Interesting Times. As fun a discworld novel as I've read in a long time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 20:22
|
|
|
Loutre posted:So yeah, Aching books: are they as good as the rest? I've read the Wee Free Men and skimmed over Wintersmith, and what I saw was really rather more impressive than I thought it would be. It was quite witchy, mostly on account of her being taught by witches but you know what I mean. It's not nearly as sharp as his normal books but handwalks you a lot more comfortably though it. Of course I'm a college student so what my opinion on a children's book counts for is, well it's not much is it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 20:39
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:I've read the Wee Free Men and skimmed over Wintersmith, and what I saw was really rather more impressive than I thought it would be. It was quite witchy, mostly on account of her being taught by witches but you know what I mean. It's not nearly as sharp as his normal books but handwalks you a lot more comfortably though it. That's good to hear, my dad got me Wintersmith for Christmas and I've been a little iffy about reading it. Also, firefox spellchecker recognizes 'iffy' as a word but not 'firefox' or 'spellchecker' 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 21:31
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Of course I'm a college student so what my opinion on a children's book counts for is, well it's not much is it? I wouldn't call it a children's book. It's most certainly solidly in the young adult category. I guess you could argue semantics on that, but there's a huge difference between Wee Free Men, a young adult book, and Where's My Cow, a children's book. The Tiffany books are full of stuff that would go soaring right over the heads of most kids, even 11-12 years olds. They were certainly meant to be entertaining to adults as well as teens. Speaking of which, I loved the Where's My Cow reference in Wintersmith, with Rob trying to read it to the other Feegles
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 22:18
|
|
|
I think I can say with some certainty that if you enjoy the normal 'adult' Discworld books you will enjoy the Tiffany Aching books as well. They have a different feel to them, but I think for the most part it works very well. The Nanny, Granny and the Feagles help to keep things grounded. I was worried when I first read them that they were an attempt to cash in on the Potter fueled kids fantasy craze, thankfully Terry is a better writer than that. I need to try reading 'Wheres my Cow' to my son tomorrow, we have a spare copy so he can eat mine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2007 23:18
|
|
|
The Tiffany Aching books are also maturing in tone somewhat as Tiffany gets older. You really see that in Wintersmith especially.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2007 02:41
|
|
|
The Tiffany Aching books are some of my favorites that Pratchett has written and everyone who likes Discworld should read them. I hope that movie actually happens, it could be really awesome if it's done correctly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2007 08:49
|
|
|
Chiming in to name as my favorites the Witches books, particularly the trilogy-of-sorts comprised of Wyrd Sisters/Witches Abroad/Lords and Ladies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2007 10:21
|
|
|
I notice that nobody has mentioned Equal Rites yet in this thread. For me, it's always stood out from the rest of the Discworld novels. Why? Because it's not funny in the slightest! Not only have I never got a single laugh from that book, I can hardly find anything in it that's actually supposed to be a joke. I've found all of the other novels funny to varying degrees, but not that one. It's like he either forgot to include any humour or was deliberately attempting to write a serious Discworld novel. Is it just me or has anyone else noticed this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 01:47
|
|
|
Did anyone see Cranford last night, the new costumey periodey adaptation on the BBC? There's a woman in it who can only be described as Granny Weatherwax. Have a look next week if you haven't already. Loutre, I haven't read the Aching books yet (I've only just finished Guards Guards), but in my experience Pratchett's writing for children barely differs from his writing for adults, and he certainly never, ever talks down to the kids reading. The Johnny series, starting with Only You Can Save Mankind, is a marvellous read, and Truckers is an old favourite of mine. It might be going a step too far to call Truckers a full-blown satire on religion, but it is fair to say that he doesn't appear to be holding back from that sort of thing just because he's writing for children. My <thing we don't mention in SA> tells me the Tiffany Aching books are actually some of her favourite recent Discworld books. Someone mentioned the Tony Robinson audiobooks. I think he's the perfect choice to narrate the Discworld books, but the problem is that they're all so heavily edited that you lose a lot of the jokes and world details, and just get the story, and really I don't think that's why we read Discworld. Plus Tony sounds altogether too comfortable, sometimes almost slightly sleepy. I think the perfect televised Discworld would be something very like Tony Robinson's old "Blood and Honey" series: Tony Robinson, reading the books as unabridgedly as possible, acting out all the parts, and all while walking (and, age permitting, jumping) around in elaborate Discworld sets, as though filming "on location". After that all you'd need is a few costume changes for Tony, some tricksy camera work, and you've got the perfect TV Discworld.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 12:03
|
|
|
Buml0r posted:Did anyone see Cranford last night, the new costumey periodey adaptation on the BBC? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 15:33
|
|
|
i have to say, having started with the first book and reading them in rough sequence "like you're supposed to" i guess, you do miss rincewind quite a lot when it's your first real antihero in the discworld saga, amongst so, so many others. honestly, i have no real feeling for the aching series at all, and i can't recall wintersmith at all. somehow it got jumbled up with the summer and winter fairies of the dresden files, and i don't think i'd want to go back and read it again to clear that up. it's just so utterly disconnected to what id expect to be reading from pratchett, i keep waiting for someone to step in and break the whole thing up or integrate it somehow, make it fit in some fashion instead of a clunking great obtuse story skimming off discworld's literary gravity. but, i re-read monstrous regiment after making money and it was still fantastic stuff. even death gets a mention.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 15:34
|
|
|
Yammerhant posted:Do you mean Lady Ludlow (played by Francesca Annis)? I don't think I do, although I don't recognise that picture so now I don't know what to think. I mean the one who was apparent head of the busybody local women, and said things like "Well it is not the custom in Cranford." She eventually took her off stuff on't telly to her sister's funeral and decided to be friends with the bobby off of dirk gently. I'm not doing very well here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 15:42
|
|
|
Buml0r posted:Did anyone see Cranford last night, the new costumey periodey adaptation on the BBC? I can only imagine Granny W. as the Granny from the Beverly Hillbillies. Admittedly, it's more the attitude, and Granny W. is supposed to be semi-attractive, but that's how I see her.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 16:51
|
|
|
On the subject of audio books, Isis Publishing publish the unabridged recordings. They are mostly narrated by Nigel Planer, him who's in every British comedy movie or TV program ever apparently or Stephen Briggs, the guy who's name is on everything Discworld that isn't an actual novel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2007 18:18
|
|
|
toliman posted:honestly, i have no real feeling for the aching series at all, and i can't recall wintersmith at all. somehow it got jumbled up with the summer and winter fairies of the dresden files, and i don't think i'd want to go back and read it again to clear that up. it's just so utterly disconnected to what id expect to be reading from pratchett, i keep waiting for someone to step in and break the whole thing up or integrate it somehow, make it fit in some fashion instead of a clunking great obtuse story skimming off discworld's literary gravity. I tried making sense of this and I honestly have no idea what you're talking about, how is the story of Wintersmith obtuse? And how can you say Wintersmith is disconnect from the rest of the series and then go on and praise Monstrous Regiment, one of the least connected books he's written in the last decade?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2007 02:40
|
|
|
toliman posted:but, i re-read monstrous regiment after making money and it was still fantastic stuff. even death gets a mention. Of course Death gets a mention - he's the only character to appear in every Discworld book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2007 03:43
|
|
|
EvilMoJoJoJo posted:Of course Death gets a mention - he's the only character to appear in every Discworld book. I don't think he was in Wee Free Men. I can't find my copy to confirm this, but Wikipedia agrees with me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2007 04:24
|
|
|
Enfenestrate posted:I don't think he was in Wee Free Men. I can't find my copy to confirm this, but Wikipedia agrees with me. That's cause the Feegle don't believe in Death  But yeah, that's the only book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2007 04:32
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:That's cause the Feegle don't believe in Death Also, from Wintersmith I get the impression that Death doesn't like them very much and they have been banned from the Underworld because they cause too much trouble and leave beer bottles all over the place
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2007 22:49
|
|
|
Enfenestrate posted:I don't think he was in Wee Free Men. I can't find my copy to confirm this, but Wikipedia agrees with me. Wee Free Men is the only book he didn't appear in. Apparently when questioned about this Pratchett pointed out that somewhere over the course of the book someone died, and there you have it. Also Monstrous Regiment was pretty well connected to the world in general since Vimes and Angua and Reg Shoe and William de Worde were in it
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2007 07:35
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Also Monstrous Regiment was pretty well connected to the world in general since Vimes and Angua and Reg Shoe and William de Worde were in it The main story and the main characters of Monstrous Regiment weren't related to anything going on in Discworld (and haven't showed up again since) while the Elves playing a major part in the story of Wee Free Men, along with Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg showing up at the end. My point was that it's kind of ridiculous to criticize Wee Free Men for somehow being disconnected from the rest of the series and then praise Monstrous Regiment in the same sentence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2007 07:46
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:The main story and the main characters of Monstrous Regiment weren't related to anything going on in Discworld (and haven't showed up again since) while the Elves playing a major part in the story of Wee Free Men, along with Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg showing up at the end. My point was that it's kind of ridiculous to criticize Wee Free Men for somehow being disconnected from the rest of the series and then praise Monstrous Regiment in the same sentence. The elves were never a major part of Discworld overall and the Monstrous Regiment's cameo count is higher!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2007 08:00
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:The main story and the main characters of Monstrous Regiment weren't related to anything going on in Discworld (and haven't showed up again since) while the Elves playing a major part in the story of Wee Free Men, along with Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg showing up at the end. My point was that it's kind of ridiculous to criticize Wee Free Men for somehow being disconnected from the rest of the series and then praise Monstrous Regiment in the same sentence. And for bonus points, Vimes reads something in the newspaper (or maybe Drumknott tells Vetenari) about "the trouble with the Borogravia" in an earlier book. I don't know which book it was in though, but I'm fairly certain nothing similar foreshadows the appearance of the Nac Mac Feegle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2007 12:17
|
|
|
The Wee Free Men were in Carpe Jugulum as well as the Tiffany books. Carpe Jugulum predates Wee Free Men by 3-4 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2007 19:25
|
|
|
Are Carpe Jugulum and Lords and Ladies nearly the same book, or am I hallucinating?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2007 05:39
|
|
|
No, they're really really similar and I don't know why/how he ended up doing that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2007 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
I think it's because Nanny and Granny suffer a bit from Rincewind syndrome. Their characters can't really change, so they're a bit limited in their narrative conflicts. Granny Weatherwax is never going to see the error of her ways and decide to stop messing with people's heads. They've already made peace with themselves, the gods, and nature, so they're pretty much limited to Man vs. Man or Man vs. Society conflicts. They can either go out into the world and fight something, (Witches Abroad, Maskerade) or stay home and fight some external threat. (Lords and Ladies, Carpe Jugulum) This doesn't mean I dislike the characters, just that a lot of storytelling paths are blocked by their nature. Of course one of my favorite jokes is the scene in Maskerade with Nanny blending in with a crowd, standing around shouting, "Rhubarb, rhubarb!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2007 08:01
|
|
