SPOILERS Monstrous Regiment Discussion *Spoilers*

[Tonyblack]

Not suggesting that Jade was a lesbian at all. Don't Ask, Don't Tell was used as a (somewhat clumsy) way of getting around the recruitment of gay and lesbians into the military. It basically said something along the lines of: homosexuals are not allowed in the armed forces, so don't tell us that you are one and we won't ask. But if you do anything gay, you're out. It was a way to increase recruitment without actually changing the rules.

In MR they can't afford to turn anyone away - they simply don't have the choice as there's almost no one left to recruit. So in effect, we'll turn a blind eye to your species, gender and sexual preferences as long as you act like a man.

 

[raisindot]

I really hated this book the first time I read it a few years ago, for a lot of reasons other say.

I then, "listen-read-it" (this is one of Briggs' finer efforts, considering the variety of characters) and grew to appreciate it more. Still not anywhere near my favorites list, but it's still leagues ahead (in my view) the "P" book (ducking).

Some of the things that still bug me about the book.

o The characterization of Lt. Blouse. He's introduced as a totally incompetent desk-bound goofball. But then he does some incredibly intelligent things with the lamp coders, showing Jackram's ineptitude in these areas. But then he become a figure of silliness again when he dresses up as a washerwoman (a very tired parody of those British war movies where soldiers dress in drag for theatricals) and shows himself to be utterly incompetent in the fortress. But, in the end, we're supposed to be believe (according to Polly) that while he is a dip, he's not as bad an officer as he seems. I don't know--his portrayal shows to me Pterry's indecision of what kind of character Blouse is supposed to be. Admirable? Stupid? Caring? Clueless? He's all of this, and none of this.

o The Deus ex machina of the Duchess channeling through Wazzer. I don't know--this seemed like a bad solution to a narrative lockbox--no one in the Borogravian military knew exactly what they should be doing, so, instead of resolving it through discussion and narrative, they had to drop the Duchess in out of nowhere to clarify things, and then it simply takes the free will of the regiment's actions out of the picture, since we have to believe that the Duchess herself was guiding everyone's actions, including Polly's.

o The presence of the Watch here. I really just don't get it. If Wazzer and the Duchess were guiding their actions to make sure the regiment got to the right place, was the Duchess responsible for having AM and the Watch come there, too? Other than "meddling," what does Vimes really add to the mix here? It almost seems that PTerry felt that no one would read a book that didn't have any known DW characters in it so he threw in Vimes and Angua (and Wm. De Worde, although his presence made sense) to provide the familiar, in the same way he felt that Agnes couldn't carry "Maskerade" and therefore he needed to include Granny and Nanny.

In spite of the "serious" themes that have been mentioned already, overall the book just didn't grab me. Maybe because, like the "P" book, the setting is too unfamiliar to be compelling for me.

J-I-B

 

[Tonyblack]

Regarding the presence of the Watch. I'd say it was more a case of Sir Samuel Vimes, Duke of Ankh-Morpork and his staff rather than the Watch. He's been sent there by Vetinari to make sure Lord Rust doesn't get out of control. Rust owns his own regiment, but Vimes out ranks him.

This is like the diplomatic role Vimes played in T5E, but thankfully without Carrot.

 

[sheilaj]

Some of the things that still bug me about the book.

o The characterization of Lt. Blouse. He's introduced as a totally incompetent desk-bound goofball. But then he does some incredibly intelligent things with the lamp coders, showing Jackram's ineptitude in these areas. But then he become a figure of silliness again when he dresses up as a washerwoman (a very tired parody of those British war movies where soldiers dress in drag for theatricals) and shows himself to be utterly incompetent in the fortress. But, in the end, we're supposed to be believe (according to Polly) that while he is a dip, he's not as bad an officer as he seems. I don't know--his portrayal shows to me Pterry's indecision of what kind of character Blouse is supposed to be. Admirable? Stupid? Caring? Clueless? He's all of this, and none of this.
He's an intelligent person in his own specialised way AND he can learn. he's a victim of his social background and the expectations of the army, not without courage...just like loads of other people who end up in the wrong job but do their best to make the best of it


o The Deus ex machina of the Duchess channeling through Wazzer. I don't know--this seemed like a bad solution to a narrative lockbox--no one in the Borogravian military knew exactly what they should be doing, so, instead of resolving it through discussion and narrative, they had to drop the Duchess in out of nowhere to clarify things, and then it simply takes the free will of the regiment's actions out of the picture, since we have to believe that the Duchess herself was guiding everyone's actions, including Polly's.
I don't actually think its a bad solution or the narrative is in fact a lock box. The Army was fighting for something that people actually didn't care about ("kissing the Duchess" aka "lip service" geddit??) so what better denoument than to have the one person who really really believes in her actually demonstrate that she existed?

o The presence of the Watch here. I really just don't get it. If Wazzer and the Duchess were guiding their actions to make sure the regiment got to the right place, was the Duchess responsible for having AM and the Watch come there, too? Other than "meddling," what does Vimes really add to the mix here? It almost seems that PTerry felt that no one would read a book that didn't have any known DW characters in it so he threw in Vimes and Angua (and Wm. De Worde, although his presence made sense) to provide the familiar, in the same way he felt that Agnes couldn't carry "Maskerade" and therefore he needed to include Granny and Nanny.

I think the AM characters are put there to show the contrast between the real world as portrayed by AM(cynical, pragmatic, capable of deep nastiness when needed but also multicultural, accepting of minorities, capable of gender equality, anti war (bad for business) and merit based) and the life as experienced by the main characters in the book. I also think that TP likes Vimes and likes to show us how he is growing and developing

In spite of the "serious" themes that have been mentioned already, overall the book just didn't grab me. Maybe because, like the "P" book, the setting is too unfamiliar to be compelling for me.

J-I-B

 

[sheilaj]

I really liked the don't ask don't tell comment applied to Jade. Its taking the whole thing to its logical ludicrous conclusion

 

[sheilaj]

I think its a great pity when TP is pigeon holed as a debunker and a satiriser. He "tells it like it is" (horrid phrase) and I think surrounding such stories as Wazzers with humour and debunk makes the brief passages when reality breaks through even more shocking and touching. Yes TP makes me laugh but the reason I read and re read all his books is that he has grown into an author of stature, one who can make the reader THINK. He is IMO a philosopher and one of the greatest present day commentators on the human condition AND he makes the pill so tasty that it slips down without a murmur.

 

[Turtles4Ever]

Can't say as Monstrous Regiment is my favourite Discworld novel, but I appreciate what it's trying to say and will no doubt read it again some time.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Just in case anybody didn't quite assign the lesbian aspect that was most definitely Tonker and the seriously deranged Lofty...

I certainly don't 'need' Terry to be funny and, with the 2 novels closest to MR (Jingo and Small Gods, the latter being unshakeably my favourite book still and the former a really enjoyable deconstruction of poltical posturing on both sides of the fence with a farcical raison d-etre in the occasionally surfacing island of Leshp) on paper I was more than prepared to like MR at first reading and certainly on re-reading which is usual for me and all of Terry's books (yes even the Moist ones as I now love to hate him! ).

I've nailed why I don't and won't ever like this one, but I do applaud it for trying to raise the 'nastier' areas alongside the more 'frivolous' reasons for girls signing up to get killed - especially the characters of Tonker, Lofty and Wazzer. Also for Shufti as well whom, it could be argued joined the army more because she didn't want to end up in the bad girl place like the other three, than for finding her sleazy love and making him marry her. That's righteous satire when she finally wises up and clouts him a good one after he's been hunted down amongst the PoWs and I really like her end story with finding a kind, if rather dopey man and father in Paul and providing Polly with an excuse to leave the Duchess once more.

But going back to the workhouse girls, why three of them? Tonker's a dead end from the messianic aspect, but in several ways Lofty and Wazzer are very close to being the same character who would certainly have attracted Tonker's protection as a lover as well as a guardian in either case, in terms of how they were abused, although poor Wazzer was clearly the more persecuted and systematically crushed. There are hints of abuse by the maniac priest (who plagued Polly's family too away from the workhouse) and that got such a slight mention in dialogue I think Terry purposely almost glossed himself clear of the very thorny subject of institutional abuse across all the planes it's possible to be abusive in, which is all too prevalent in such places. So Tonker and the incendiary Lofty carry most of the focus for the less palatable aspects of joining up as both are clearly death-seeking, with the army being the only route they can take that's 'safe' in their desparate bid to escape being hounded in their sorry homeland.

So yes, there had to be three workhouse girls in there. The Duchess is MR's Om and Wazzer is her Brutha, only not as compelling because really all you can do with her is use her as a vessel for sympathy and accrued shame that someone could be that broken and terrified, with nothing really to cheer on as she is so obviously delusional and with such a negative and misguided fixation on the pointless 'sanctity' of the Duchess. The Duchess in whose name so many good people have gone to their deaths is also a pathetic figure throughout the book. Husbandless, childless and also friendless in a way because of the violence and ignorance practised in her name and for her 'glory'. I find Terry's treatment of her and Wazzer peculiarly touching with her saying that she hears the Duchess crying when she sleeps and so gradually builds on what Wazzer has joined up for. What I don't find too satisfying or indeed logical with how Terry's written them, is the way in which insight and mania to the point of charisma of the religious variety are so closely allied with pain and degradation (my favourite word in this debate apparently ). Again shades of Small Gods in there (not to mention the suffering of Christ before he gets crucified) and what I think Terry did with Wazzer in some ways, was to create a fusion of a 'reversed out' Vorbis as well as Brutha in her? The first time I read the book I was completely astonished that this was the aetherial, damaged little person doing the Joan of Arc thing - I basically couldn't see how she was capable of doing it because Terry had written her as this ineffectual broken little girl - someone who couldn't say boo to a very small pacifist goose.

Haven't quite worked that one out yet, so I would be very interested in everyone's views on the metaphysical side of this book and the lack of exploration thereof, that might have given Wazzer more justification in how the deadlock was resolved, rather than have her as some kind of faintly embarassing, frail possessed zombie almost, with consequent shock value?

 

[swreader]

I think its a great pity when TP is pigeon holed as a debunker and a satiriser. He "tells it like it is" (horrid phrase) and I think surrounding such stories as Wazzers with humour and debunk makes the brief passages when reality breaks through even more shocking and touching. Yes TP makes me laugh but the reason I read and re read all his books is that he has grown into an author of stature, one who can make the reader THINK. He is IMO a philosopher and one of the greatest present day commentators on the human condition AND he makes the pill so tasty that it slips down without a murmur.

sheilaj, except for your comment about TP being pigeonholed as a debunker & satirizer (which may refer to my comments, but I don't see him in that way)I think I agree with everything else. The rest of your comment is brilliant! He does write about the human condition. Sometimes that's funny. But sometimes he's all too perceptive about the darkness of the human condition.

I will add that I'm particularly discouraged about the world's apparent stupidities, which make Borogravia seem almost sane. We've got a "Christian" minister (reminds me of Prince Heinrich) saying he's going to burn the Koran because it's evil. Over half of the people in the US seem not to understand that the only way to salvation is not to give everything back to the same rich & powerful who got us into this mess in the first place. They worry about their grandchildren's having to pay a federal debt--if we don't spend some money trying to find the answer to global warming (which would provide jobs), their grandchildren won't be able to live on this world anyhow. And that's just the US--not that the rest of the world seems any more sane.

But back to Pratchett--this may well be his darkest book. But Vimes is there as envoy to keep Lord Rust under control--and because he Like Pratchett I think) regards war as murder. He's there to try to stop the war. And the Duchess as she appears here is the creation of the people--who have made her into a god. But she's a god without much if any power. She does, however, use Alice (Wasser) to deliver a command to the armies who claim to have been fighting in her honor for years. And that command is to follow the clear-sightedness of these young females--the "leaders" of that country need to take responsibility for their own people. They need to rescue their land. And that means getting rid of their dead god, Nuggan and letting the Duchess go.

The reason I think it is dark is that although things seem to be improving after everyone goes home (or to wherever they want), after 6 months Prince Heinrich is invading again. And so Polly (and Maladicta) are called to service again. War never ends, but maybe, just maybe, this one can be fought with brains not bloodshed. It's a small hope, but there is a ray of light at the end of this very dark book.

 

[BatrickPatrick]

The lesbian aspect completely passed me by.
I was focusing on the cross-dressing I suppose xD

 

[poohcarrot]

I mentioned this before, but as I've just finished re-reading it I'm going to go into more detail. 8)

This is not just an anti-war book, it is an ANTI-INVASION OF IRAQ book.

1. It was written and published within 6 months of the Invasion.
2. It refers to the Iraq invasion - "Shock and Awe".
3. Substitute The Grand Trunk Clacks for Oil.
4. Substitute Borogravia for Iraq.
5. Substitute the Monstrous Regiment for the Insurgency.
6. Substitute the A-M Times for Fox News;
"Why This Mad State Must Be Stopped
Bewildered, her eyes picked up phrases from the sea of letters: disgraceful invasions of neighbouring states, deluded worshippers of a mad god, a strutting bully, outrage after outrage, flying in the face of international opinion..."
7. Substitute women for Iraqis (Both "inferior" races)
8. Substitute the Kneck Keep for the Green Zone.
9. Substitute Lord Rust for George Bush.
10. Vimes said he travelled 2,300 miles to get there.
The straight line distance between London / Heathrow Airport and Baghdad is approximately 2556 miles

 

[Tonyblack]

Ok - so in your little fantasy of Monstrous Regiment = Iraq Invasion, who is Sam Vimes supposed to be?

 

[poohcarrot]

Nobody.

You must admit that A-M Times quote is straight from Fox News, though.

 

[Tonyblack]

Well yes, but the A-M Times is a much more honest and reliable source of news than Fox. I can't see William de worde as Glen Beck somehow.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Why does it have to be Iraq? - the sound bytes are better granted, but let's see how your point list breaks down taking other parts of the world into account? My comments in blue on purpose

1. It was written and published within 6 months of the Invasion.
Terry's fast and has got great timing but it takes longer than 6 months to write, edit proof and publish a (good, well-considered) book doesn't it...? The manuscript will naturally take some sneaky updates to help things along, but I can't admire this inclusion except as a whopping great cynical exercise in bandwagon-jumping - possibly originating with the Transworld editorial team
2. It refers to the Iraq invasion - "Shock and Awe".
Kneeing someone in the nuts and tying them up 'au naturel' may be awful but unlikely to cause awe in that sense - Shock value for lesbians of a delicate nature I'll accede - virgins too - Nuggan definitely :twisted:
3. Substitute The Grand Trunk Clacks for Oil.
Where - Kuwait? Venezuela and surrounding 'unfriendly' states? The whole of the Middle East in the early 1970's?
4. Substitute Borogravia for Iraq.
Or Zimbabwe? USSR? Eritrea? Somalia? Bangladesh? Biafra? Famine and war go hand in hand - like no ham, no eggs...
5. Substitute the Monstrous Regiment for the Insurgency.
Which one and how far back? Cambodia? Vietnam? American War of Independence or the Civil one? French revolution sir? Korea? India/Pakistan? How about Eire for the last 500 years (give or take a century) with breaks for a spot of potato famine and partition...?
6. Substitute the A-M Times for Fox News;
"Why This Mad State Must Be Stopped
Bewildered, her eyes picked up phrases from the sea of letters: disgraceful invasions of neighbouring states, deluded worshippers of a mad god, a strutting bully, outrage after outrage, flying in the face of international opinion..."
Did nobody say that (eventually) about Hitler? Thought of asking the Kurds for their take on what happened to them? Or the marsh arabs? Let's get more international with the Jews - how friendly were Germans; Poles; Cossacks; Spanish Inquisition; England's Angevin/Planagenet dynasty; Imperial Rome; the Pharoahs?
7. Substitute women for Iraqis (Both "inferior" races)
Marsh Arabs and Iraqi Kurds (again) and Shi'ite Muslims - or just people who didn't like men in moustaches and natty western suits making them run their lives to his designs? He was remarkably fair in the spread of his racial and religious prejudices was Saddam wasn't he? But he did persecute the men as well as the girlies so don't try to pin gender oppression on him
8. Substitute the Kneck Keep for the Green Zone.
Has this got something to do with Greenpeace? How about Masada (Israel)? The Tower of London (not just for political killings)? Khartoum? Isandlwana (Rourke's Drift)? Little Big Horn anyone?
9. Substitute Lord Rust for George Bush.
Please! Lord Rust's got some brain cells and doesn't attempt to get gung-ho under Vetinari in A-M at least...
10. Vimes said he travelled 2,300 miles to get there.
The straight line distance between London / Heathrow Airport and Baghdad is approximately 2556 miles
I thought that it was all Bush's fault? Why not from NYC where it allegedly began - Oh yeah, that's doesn't fit so well does it? PS the UK military normally use their own or NATO's airstrips so Heathrow doesn't work either.

This being published within spitting distance of the Iraq Invasion was tremendously 'fortunate' but please don't try to say that this is all about Iraq - it's about any number of idiotic politically-manipulated and militarily-advantageous wars of attrition that lose all sense of purpose and reason however flimsy. It's yet again about de-humanisation and just plain wrong 'us and them' mentality taken to imbecilic extremes with no regard for loss of any kind of life - armed forces or civilian.

 

[pip]

How about Eire for the last 500 years (give or take a century) with breaks for a spot of potato famine and partition...? Rolling Eyes

This could work better than the Iraqi analogy.
We Irish have a terrible tendency to worship long dead leaders.
Also Mad declerations from a crazed God.
We did have a minister chased out for proposing free medical care for Mothers and babies because the church that it would interfere with Gods natural order. And that one was just the tip of an iceberg of mad comandments.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

But they do make great beer and whiskey (wiv an 'e') - that and a highly robust not to mention innovative sense of humour

 

[The Mad Collector]

But they do make great beer and whiskey (wiv an 'e') - that and a highly robust not to mention innovative sense of humour

They certainly do and I'll be in Dublin sampling the beer and whiskey for a few days at the beginning of November. It's a hard life but somebody has to do it

 

[pip]

Glad to say i spent my weekend sampling beer and whiskey in Dublin. Had to find something to do .
Might do the same this weekend.
Ah the fun.
Well done on remembering the e Jan . Most people miss the distinction.
Gold stars all round.

 

[raisindot]

While there certainly seem to be specific references to Iraq (like "Shock and Awe," perhaps the second stupidest phrase to emerge from the war other than Bush's wildly inaccurate "Mission Accomplished" statement), I agree with Jan that the whole thing isn't based on Iraq. Without re-quoting Pooh's list, some random thoughts on why this isn't only about Iraq.

1. Iraq was not a theological state, like North Korea or even Iran. People didn't worship Saddam Hussein like the Borogravians worshipped Nuggan and the Empress. Saddam did countless evil things, but he was a secular leader who rarely used religion as a means of unifying the population--fear was a far more effective motivator.

2. Iraq was never a 'small, impoverished state' surrounded by hostile neighbors as Borogravia was that would have led to a 'paranoid culture.' Iraq was one of the most modern and heavily militarized countries in the Middle East and, until the invasion of Kuwait was an ally of the U.S., particularly in its decade long war against Iran, another modern and heavily militarized state.

3. Iraq never even came close to depleting its army in the Iraq War to the point where it would need women to volunteer. Most soldiers surrendered. Others left the now decimated arm and joined pockets of mostly local religion faction-based insurgents (or those backed by Iran and Al-Queda) that spent as much time fighting each other as they did the U.S. army.

4. Of course the Iraq War ultimately was about oil. as the Borogravian War was about clacks access for AM. This is not unique to Iraq, however. The US didn't 'rescue' Kuwait in the Gulf War because we particularly loved Kuwaitis--they did it to protect US oil interests both in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Not commenting about the morality of such an action--pointing out that most military actions by the US in the middle east are about oil.

5. Lord Rust was no George Bush. Rust wouldn't have been there unless, as Jan said, Vetinari hadn't sent him (and Vimes) there. Rust may be more of a typical US general in way over his head, but he was not the chief decision-maker there.

6. There are many, many better examples of smaller, surrounded, poor theocracies or dictatorships that waged stupid suicidal fanatical wars or belligerent actions against their hostile neighbors than Iraq. North Korea and Cambodia during the Pol Pot era immediately comes to mind. Chechnya and Georgia may arguably be other examples. Although not industrially poor, Germany and Japan certainly fit this category in the years up to and including WWII.

The main difference between these roundworld countries/wars and those fighting in MR is that the Borogravians and their enemies at least 'respected' the rules of war. Can't say that about today's nasty warmongers.

J-I-B