SPOILERS Guards! Guards! Discussion Group *Spoilers*

[Trish]

Women are not logical for one thing -

Women? Mad as snakes, the lot of'em! Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em!

True, Jan, but we are much more pragmatic.
Again, reference Sybil: she does what she can how she can and lets go of the rest.

Yes, poohb. But I'm in America and I can fire back.
Soon as I get the laser sight for my Mossberg back from whichever cat has it under the couch.
Again, reference Sybil. What's considered outlandish by many (feeding and breeding dragons) is just plain enjoyable for others. Except the under the couch bit.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Women are not logical for one thing - not with affairs of the hearts anyway and with animals in particular.

I'm getting quoted slightly out of context here - so just for the record

I do agree on pragmatic as well - men are actually far more inclined to be romantic than women in some ways I think. However, a lady like Sybil who's been unlucky or unkindly overlooked in love, whilst she might feel she has to compromise quite a lot, wouldn't necessarily go and grab whatever she can get because she's doesn't see things so superficially or indeed desperately.

Having been on the receiving end of rejection so long, she tends to look deeper and find the value and quality of the beings she's inclined to love - with Errol she hasn't given up on him just because he's a poor runt of a pedigree and so she doesn't really want to do what most fanatical of breeders would do and get him neutered or even put down. She gives him to Sam because she feels sorry for them both and perhaps she thinks they will bond - and it's her opening 'negotiations' with Sam as well of course, but also she's testing him a little as well, seeing if there's more to him and not completely trusting her instincts?

I'm explaining myself badly, but when you know you're not naturally 'lovable' you're also very careful who you give your heart to because in part you can't see how they could love you back - it'd be too hurtful. But Sybil's looking for something real on both sides - certainly not romance as such, because she knows she's not cut out for that. Also she's a sensibly compassionate person so she sees clearly and assesses what's important on both sides before deciding that Sam is worth the risk of falling in love with. Then she goes for it with the pink bunny dressing gown!

 

[Tina a.k.a.SusanSto.Helit]

Women are not logical for one thing -

Women? Mad as snakes, the lot of'em! Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em!

True, Jan, but we are much more pragmatic.
Again, reference Sybil: she does what she can how she can and lets go of the rest.

Yes, poohb. But I'm in America and I can fire back.
Soon as I get the laser sight for my Mossberg back from whichever cat has it under the couch.
Again, reference Sybil. What's considered outlandish by many (feeding and breeding dragons) is just plain enjoyable for others. Except the under the couch bit.

Have you looked at the owners, breeders, and show-ers of dogs? And how Ugly some of them can be? Cats are included, ungh hairless breeds make me nuts. shivers

 

[Tina a.k.a.SusanSto.Helit]

I must be very accepting though. I simply immerse myself into whatever book I am reading/devouring/memorizing.

Sybil had Sam's heart from the beginning, once he got over the fear of being killed by her or having to arrest her for murder. He had never been in a real relationshipship before. As least from what I have gleaned from the series.

I am living proof that a Sybil can marry a Sam. I am the one who proposed to my husband 6 1/2 years ago. He was 50 at the time and had never been married. I used to fix robots for a ridiculously large amount of money from Chrysler. It put most men off, I found (the money, and well, the brains to fix robots...). I wore/wear durable and sensible type clothing, but clean up fairly well. I even own a couple of Corsets. Though not Whalebone.

I thoroughly enjoyed the shock when Sam realized that "Brenda Rodley" was actually the Duchess of Quirm. It makes sense, especially given the nature of breeders. You would simply have to have clothing for acidic, explosive creatures, and a sensibility to sew up, or bandage said animals. hmm sort of like a mixture of a Horse sense and exploding rabbits with Large Pointy Teeth.

I was taught manners at a very young age, but even I would be confused with a complete battery of cutlery.

 

[Tonyblack]

I agree - there certainly seems to be some chemistry between Sam and Sybil from quite early on - although I'm not sure how aware they both are of this, I'd say that Sybil was more aware than Sam and actually flirts with him somewhat.

I wonder if Terry had planned this as the first book in a series about the Watch or whether it was going to be a one-off. A few of the characters certainly get tweaked in the later books. As was mentioned, Sybil's wigs are never mentioned again (I'm pretty sure).

Carrot is an important character in this book. It's through Carrot's eyes that we see the city and how it works. In some ways he's used as a device to explore - in later books he's used as a sort of go-between with the dwarfs and we find out Dwarf culture through his eyes.

Is he the king in this book? It's interesting that Terry hints at it throughout the book but never actually supplies any evidence. Had this been a one-off book and we never saw the Watch again, we could just chuckle that somewhere in the city is a simple hick who may or may not be the rightful heir to the throne.

 

[The rat]

If I remember correctly, i think Terry said that the Watch books were going to be about Carrot and not Vimes, but he likes Vimes as a primary character over Carrot. I am glad that he did, since Carrot has flattened out as a main character a while ago.

 

[poohbcarrot]

Hmmm? I'm wondering here whether you're a younger man than I thought Kakaze... You may have overlooked some important womanly attributes - and for once I think pooh may actually back me up with (some) of this...

Women are not logical for one thing -

I'll back you up, no worries!

Women? Mad as snakes, the lot of'em! Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em!

My apologies for that, I couldn't resist it.

To appear fair and balanced;

Women have many faults.
Men have only two,
Everything they say
And everything they do

 

[mspanners]

Is he the king in this book? It's interesting that Terry hints at it throughout the book but never actually supplies any evidence.

Sorry I am a little late joining in but been v busy!

True in Guard! Guards! there is little to show carrot is anything other then a quite nice Dwarf (adopted) apart from Vetinari taking an interest in the sword, but in later books we see more evidence of this which may also be circumstantial we just don't know because Carrot took the book and hid it.. so is there any concrete proof of Carrots Royal Blood line?

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

The sword of the King of course!

The swordiest sword ever with not a hint of magic in its makeup, unlike the flash 'legendary' job that Wonse (squiggle) got his nephew and was of course completely useless. King's don't need magic or indeed legends, although they can make them - they just need the bloodline and a very good strong sword arm :twisted:

On this evidence Carrot is most certainly a contender, but any relationship to the last king of A-M is well dodgy as it must have been many generations back and so any bloodline would be hopelessly diluted and debased in the meantime. And that ties into Vime's ancester too of course so certainly as far back as that .
Isn't there some old pre-urban myth that all the aristocracy of England could claim descent from Edward III (who had bucket loads of kids) over a few generations to Tudor times and that by now most indigenous English people would have some kind of link to that royal Plantagenet line?

Oh and pooh - thanks v. much for the back up. I couldn't have asked for more support than you gave there!

 

[Dotsie]

I completely agree with you about Sybil, but I just don't think she's very attractive in GG, whereas in later books she really comes into her own (as Tony says, because she probably got more story lines than was originally intended).

As for Carrot, we were lead to believe the evidence was pretty concrete by Wossname, the head of the Thingy guild (no spoilers!). If it wasn't, why the need to hide it anyway? And of course, the trick with the sword gives it away, not to mention the birthmark...

 

[Tina a.k.a.SusanSto.Helit]

Women are not logical for one thing -

Women? Mad as snakes, the lot of'em! Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em!

True, Jan, but we are much more pragmatic.
Again, reference Sybil: she does what she can how she can and lets go of the rest.

Yes, poohb. But I'm in America and I can fire back.
Soon as I get the laser sight for my Mossberg back from whichever cat has it under the couch.
Again, reference Sybil. What's considered outlandish by many (feeding and breeding dragons) is just plain enjoyable for others. Except the under the couch bit.

Hey Trish, we can work together and perhaps even take over part of Indiana and make a bi-directional Trebuchet... it has possibilities.

Does your espoused-sig-other ride those silly machines I mentioned earlier? It is altogether too much testosterone.

 

[Tonyblack]

As Wonse and the Brotherhood say - if the city is in peril then the rightful king will turn up to save the day. Of course they don't really believe that and therefore they create a king.

If we assume Carrot is the rightful king, then his arriving in A-M when he did is more than coincidence - it's destiny that he should be there. And he certainly plays a large role in saving the city.

So right from the start Terry is suggesting that Carrot is the king, but he's leaving doubt in the mind of the reader and allowing us to make up our own minds. At the end of the book it still isn't certain that he is the heir - but there's some slight evidence that suggests it.

The sword is unmarked and apparently very ordinary. Who is to say that it's not the sword that cut the fancy one in half but the person holding it? Terry certainly doesn't and although Vetinari shows a great deal of interest in the sword, we never find out for certain what it is that catches his interest.

As far as the birthmark goes - as Colon says - his brother has a birthmark shaped like a boat, but that doesn't make him an admiral.

The later books make things very clear, but at this stage and in this book, they are far from being clear.

 

[Tina a.k.a.SusanSto.Helit]

Carrot doesn't Want to lead. He just wants everyone to get along. I suspect that between the Patrician and himself, they both realize that he is supposed to be the rightful heir, but they both are happy with the status quo, and Carrot is happy where he is.

I rather like Carrot as a Captain of the Watch. He is amusing as he learns the ways of the City. He is so naive as well as smart in his own way, and as evidenced in later by the "games" he sets up with everyone to prove that "Come along now, we can all get along can't we" that it amazes Nobby and Colon and Angua, and well everyone... hehehe especially when they are arch enemies in thier real world.

Oh, and where Carrot goes into the Drum and takes them all on!! Oh it is too rich, he even beats up Detritus, I could not stop laughing when Nobby tried to kick him "inna rocks". It all added up to a very good book.

P.S. Terry says in The Art of Discworld, if Carrot and Angua actually get together it will cause issues with the whole kingship thingy.

 

[swreader]

Heavens to Murgatroyd! Miss a day or so here, and there's a whole volume to read and try to condense to reply to various points people have made.

First, as to the kingship-- Terry is, I think, going to use Carrot as a special kind of rightful king and is perhaps setting it up that way in this book. In real world terms, the heritage of Carrot as King makes no biological sense. But Pratchett's going to develop him into a King in the next book, before Terry either gets bored or "painted into a corner" with the character of Carrot. In my opinion, there is a slow but steady decline in the interest and likability (by the reader and also by the author) in the character of Carrot. He's too perfect most of the time.

But in this book--Carrot is the comic character par excellence -- he's the BIG, DUMB HICK FROM THE COUNTRY, a standard comic type. (Think Gomer Pyle) And as such, he's funny in the kinds of mistakes he makes (or almost makes) because of his naivete and his 'dwarfish simple-minded-focused-no metaphors' nature. (He arrests the Head of the Guild of Thieves, lives in a bawdy house, etc., etc. ,etc. )

But I really doubt that Terry ever intended this book to be a stand alone. I think that all the things about the sword, the birthmark and HIS ABILITY TO GET PEOPLE TO DO WHAT HE WANTS - are foreshadowing of the kingly abilities that will come out in the next book.

Sybil, I think, is big because of Terry's original intention to use her as another comic character--the "mad old lady who raises swamp dragons". But Sybil, even in this book, has signs of her noble blood. If you compare the passage of Vimes drunken ramblings about his love for the city--so big, so overwhelming, so lovable--and then she'll kick you in the teeth (paraphrased) with his later description of Sybil as having a heart like the city, you'll see that their relationship (and possibly their dragon cohorts relationship) are the real million to one chances that come true in Discworld. There's a great deal more I want to say about Sybil, but not in this post.

And, as Tina said of her man, I too am living proof that million to one chances "just might work."

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Tina - certainly will! Go look at Cheery's Aurora story in Games

 

[mspanners]

I am inclined to agree that Carrot is the Rightful King BUT there is no empirical evidence to prove His lineage.... but there is one person on the Disc who would know for sure and have the proof too.... DEATH.

Unfortunately He is never inclined to give out information freely so...

.... in DEATHS domain the books form, I assume, a part of L space.. now IF someone (The Librarian or Wizards) were to use L space to raid DEATHS Library the proof of lineage could be found.. it is sure to be there.... sounds like the bones of a good story!

 

[The rat]

One question I have is when Vimes is drunk in the sewer and starts talking about comparing the city to being a women and breaking your heart, is it because of the city or women? In a later book his life is passing in front of his eyes and he begs not to see the part about a girl named Daisy something or other (not the real name of course)? Was it the women who broke his heart and made him a drunk or the city and lack of humanity in AM made him the drunk?

 

[Tonyblack]

One question I have is when Vimes is drunk in the sewer and starts talking about comparing the city to being a women and breaking your heart, is it because of the city or women? In a later book his life is passing in front of his eyes and he begs not to see the part about a girl named Daisy something or other (not the real name of course)? Was it the women who broke his heart and made him a drunk or the city and lack of humanity in AM made him the drunk?

We may never know. Colon talks about Vimes being 'brung low by a woman', but who that is and whether it's (I think) Mavis Trouncer, only Terry knows.

 

[Cheery]

One question I have is when Vimes is drunk in the sewer and starts talking about comparing the city to being a women and breaking your heart, is it because of the city or women? In a later book his life is passing in front of his eyes and he begs not to see the part about a girl named Daisy something or other (not the real name of course)? Was it the women who broke his heart and made him a drunk or the city and lack of humanity in AM made him the drunk?

I suppose it was the city. I don't think Vimes would be the kind of person who would start to drink just because of a girl. I've always thoght he started to drink because he couldn't carry the realisation that the world was so cruel and heartless. He thinks about it a lot in all of the books.
He didn't want to think about it, so he just got drunk.
Or maybe it was both.

 

[mspanners]

Think it was Fred who mentioned that Vimes had been brought low by a Woman, I assume that is a part of vimes life that has not been covered in a book so far.... but He was Drunk as He lay in the gutter so any musings must be taken in context.. I think He was feeling sorry for Him self and was comparing His personal life to His life in relation to the city, both treat Him badly but He still loves them....