SPOILERS Disturbing Trend in UA and Snuff: **Major Spoilers**

[high eight]

The bit with the speech:
The orc compares Trev's father to the first person to tame fire and the first one who tried to eat an oyster, saying that Trev's dad was a fool, but fools are necessary as without them some advancements would not have been made. He concludes with saying the name Dave Likely means football to many many many people and therefore Trev's dad was a good man and Trev shouldn't hate him for dieing.
Even upon the first reading (when I was still looking forward to the book after having heard and read many good things about it) I couldn't help but wonder the following:
-To how many people did Dave Likely mean 'father' 'husband' and 'family'

Eveybody who knew he was a father and husband? And as for 'family' - well, that would be everbody who supports his team

-As it is very highly doubtable that the first person to tame fire/eat an oyster did so so his clan could play football at night/have a new snack at a football match, they must have done so so the clan would be warm and safe at night/have an additional source of food so more of them would survive. AKA these people did it because they cared for their clan's/family's wellfare. Did Dave Likely ever care for his family's wellfare? As there is no mention he actually got paid for playing.'

Dave likely was a great player of The Game (capitals deliberate) - his family would be loved and respected by everybody associated with his team for that very reason.

-Did Dave Likely furthermore care for anything aside from football? Or did he just care for the crowd's cheering?

Do Christians "just care about God"? (Actually fundamentalist Moslems might be more accurate). There are no 'justs' in football. It is tribal. It is a religion, followed by fanatics. Nutt might as well have said "there is no god but Football and Dave Likely is its prophet"
And that, I think, is why a lot of people don't 'get' this book. They don't get the tribalism. They haven't stood (and it was standing until a few years ago) on a cold terrace in all weathers (Sometimes, at the ground where I used to go, so foggy you couldn't even see the pitch and news of goals or saves would be chanted from one terrace to another by the fans) and been part of the tribe.

And Terry hasn't - he admits he doesn't 'get' football himself. And yet he 'gets' everything to do with it. Another reason why I love this book.

-With the idiot ball I mean following:
Holding/Catching/Getting hit by the idiot ball basically means you have a character, who before has always been shown to be rather clever/intelligent/skilled, who suddenly acts uncharacteristically stupid/clumsy with no real explanation.

It is a completely new type of ball - nobody knows how to handle it properly.

-I know whoever came up with the bit likely wanted to say that the orc's ideas of training are so outstanding and unique that the 'average mind' could never come up with them, but it backfires:
-If these ideas are so unique, they are memorable.
-Even if we take that Ponder has no taste for sports, he should still be able to remember what he saw. And if not him the team should be capable of that. For what good is training if you can't remember what the hell you did/learned?

Not necessarily: Some ideas are so complex that they are unmemorable. Could you remember the quote that begins "First one must consider the horizons of possibilty....."? (A brilliant parody of the style of football coach Sven Goran Eriksson, btw - one of the more intellectual people involved in football and England coach while Terry was writing the book). As for what good is training if you can't remember what the hell you did/learned? - that is not Nutt's style. He trains the team subconciously. and I think he explicitly says so in one instance.

- Ponder worked on the new rules, what means he has to have at least a basic idea of what is supposed to happen on the field. What means he should have been able to come up with something on his own. (Running with the ball, shooting the ball, passing the ball, shooting at the goal, headers, stopping the ball, avoiding getting tackled and so on)

Knowing the rules and how to play the game is not the same as training somebody to be good at a game or actually being good at a game. You have obviously not played a lot of sport if you don't know this.

Yet Ponder gets portrayed as a total stuck-up, selfish, uncreative dimwit who is so inferior to the magnificent, perfect, wise, creative, talented orc.

Again - are we reading the same book?

 

[Anonymous]

The orc knows how to handle the new ball... immidiately.
You, maybe we should just forget things. I farkin' hate the book for being full of beginner's mistakes, errors and general stupidity. You like ti for...what reason ever. Let's just forget it.

 

[high eight]

The orc knows how to handle the new ball... immidiately.

He knows the theory.....

You, maybe we should just forget things. I farkin' hate the book for being full of beginner's mistakes, errors and general stupidity. You like ti for...what reason ever. Let's just forget it.

I like it because I understand it.

 

[Anonymous]

Did you just say I'm stupid and should just fack off and leave the fandom as I don't get things anyway?

 

[high eight]

Did you just say I'm stupid and should just fack off and leave the fandom as I don't get things anyway?

No. But if you feel the cap fits.........

 

[Anonymous]

How is saying 'you just don't like it because you don't get it' NOT calling someone stupid?

 

[high eight]

How is saying 'you just don't like it because you don't get it' NOT calling someone stupid?

Do you 'get' football? No? Then you probably don't understand quite a bit of UA (The blurb might say "Its not just about football, but it is mostly about football - especially the last third of the book).

Doesn't make you stupid - you just have gaps in your knowledge/interests/experience.

 

[Anonymous]

*takes a deep breath*

Football in general, the english view of it or the german view?
Keep in mind, I am from Germany, I have a different view on the game, even though the bits about groupmentality, the feeling of belonging, etc and the negative sides of those are the same here (I don't live that far from Hamburg, so I rather constantly see the worst kind of fans Germany has to offer. Andy and the rest of the shove are harmless and peaceful in comparsion.)

And, if I may, to repeat this: My main problem with the book is that I spot all the stylistic mistakes in it, because I MADE those myself in my writings and had to learn the hard and harsh way to better avoid them if I ever want to get published.
It starts with continuity errors within the story and ends with characters that are too perfect.

 

[high eight]

*takes a deep breath*

Football in general, the english view of it or the german view?
Keep in mind, I am from Germany, I have a different view on the game, even though the bits about groupmentality, the feeling of belonging, etc and the negative sides of those are the same here (I don't live that far from Hamburg, so I rather constantly see the worst kind of fans Germany has to offer. Andy and the rest of the shove are harmless and peaceful in comparsion.)

*takes a deep breath of my own*

English, of course - that is the football Terry knows and I know. I know about football hooligans. I used to live near Millwall's ground (No, I don't support them, but I have seen them play and ducked to avoid the darts and bricks thrown from the back of the crowd) and have seen both Manchester Utd and Chelsea back in the day when their fans killed people on a regular basis. I know Andy Shank. I've seen him in action. Actually, Carcer would be more like it, with the odd Mr Teatime for good measure.

And, if I may, to repeat this: My main problem with the book is that I spot all the stylistic mistakes in it, because I MADE those myself in my writings and had to learn the hard and harsh way to better avoid them if I ever want to get published.
It starts with continuity errors within the story and ends with characters that are too perfect.

I don't spot anything like that. A few minor problems, mainly with style, early on as Terry gets used to dictating rather than using a keyboard. And that is it.

Continuity errors? Discworld continuity isn't the same as real world cxontinuity and I haven't spotted anything Glaring anyway.

Characters that are too perfect - What, like Vimes? Granny Weatherwax? A lot of Terry's heroes are a bit too good to be true. That's why they are heroes.

 

[Anonymous]

Continuity errors? Discworld continuity isn't the same as real world cxontinuity and I haven't spotted anything Glaring anyway.

Characters that are too perfect - What, like Vimes? Granny Weatherwax? A lot of Terry's heroes are a bit too good to be true. That's why they are heroes.

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection. And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

 

[cabbagehead]

The continuity error I noticed was that Carrot already had an inflatable football in Jingo. But Discworld books always had those problems. Considering that the wizards books are my least favorite series and my lack of familiarity with many of the British football references (but always had some others going through my head like 'football is a 90 minute game' and 'the ball is round' and 'that's not the way to make a wall') it was good enough. Loved Glenda. I hope Nutt took her with him to the mountains, I hope they visited Granny Weatherwax on the way.

 

[high eight]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

Yes, that's right. "I shall unleash a spell which will prevent any further magic being used within these hallowed lines"... i.e. On the pitch... including himself

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection.

Not really: we get page after page of his self-doubt "Do I have worth?". etc.
But the point is that orcs are bred for fighting. Her ladyship has tried to breed a cultured one - and has (maybe) succeded in that she has bred one who is obsessive/compulsive enough to make himself good at everything he tries.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

But not subtlety in characterisation, obviously. Nutt is, imo, one of Terry's more subtle characters of recent times.

 

[Anonymous]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

In UA it is older than when the events of LC occurred. With the information we get about previous Archchancellors' 'discovering' additional mealtimes, the age of the bequest, it is not only an assumptoin that in the reality of UA the nightkitchen existed ever since.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

Yes, that's right. "I shall unleash a spell which will prevent any further magic being used within these hallowed lines"... i.e. On the pitch... including himself

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection.

Not really: we get page after page of his self-doubt "Do I have worth?". etc.
But the point is that orcs are bred for fighting. Her ladyship has tried to breed a cultured one - and has (maybe) succeded in that she has bred one who is obsessive/compulsive enough to make himself good at everything he tries.

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

But point is, he makes himself TOO good. Even before Lotti takes him in.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

Yes. But what it amounts to is (aside from the obligatory cyrano-shout-out) another scene where the text tells of another trait the orc can do in absolute perfection.

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

But not subtlety in characterisation, obviously. Nutt is, imo, one of Terry's more subtle characters of recent times.

Then explain why you think he is subtle and I shall say why I don't think he is.

 

[DaveC]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell? :whistle:

 

[Anonymous]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell? :whistle:

The book. :shifty:

 

[high eight]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

In UA it is older than when the events of LC occurred. With the information we get about previous Archchancellors' 'discovering' additional mealtimes, the age of the bequest, it is not only an assumptoin that in the reality of UA the nightkitchen existed ever since.

[shrug] Discworld continuity. Not that important to me. Why it is important to you, I wouldn't like to speculate.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

You see the continuity error?

No

Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

No

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

I don't read game fiction for the same reason I don't read fan faction. Most of it is terrible.

But point is, he makes himself TOO good. Even before Lotti takes him in.

In your opinion.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

Yes. But what it amounts to is (aside from the obligatory cyrano-shout-out) another scene where the text tells of another trait the orc can do in absolute perfection.

Its a Cyrano shout-out and that is all. I think you're getting a bit obsessive about this.

Then explain why you think he is subtle and I shall say why I don't think he is.

You already have - at great length and I don't think that any explanation from me is going to change your mind.

 

[high eight]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell? :whistle:

That's what I thought. Blowing the whistle unleashes the spell.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

I don't read game fiction for the same reason I don't read fan faction. Most of it is terrible.

And this was the point where I stopped taking you serious.
Aside from the nonsense to excuse in-story(!) continuity-errors with 'it's the discworld-timeline':
Lord of the clans is NOT fanfiction. it is an official book. It's canon. You really should have done your research on that before stating what you said there.
If you can't do research on even that (which takes what, 2? 3? clicks on Wikipedia, google or tvtropes?) I just can't take your opinion on anything else as worthwhile anymore.

Case closed.

 

[Tonyblack]

Does that mean the two of you are going to stop arguing? Huh? ray: ray: ray:

 

[Anonymous]

Does that mean the two of you are going to stop arguing? Huh? ray: ray: ray:

Don't know about height, but I will. It's no use trying to talk with someone who can't even tell official works of fiction from fanfiction. Left alone do a minuscule bit of research. Geese. :shhh: