SPOILERS Snuff *Warning Spoilers*
- Thread starter Tonyblack
- Start date
Perhaps. But given the great deal of sloppiness in the book, I wonder whether Pterry originally was going to have Gravid in the book but somehow either forgot to put him in or couldn't figure out how to give him page time, It wouldn't have been hard; he could have been with Lord Rust when Pterry bumps into the old bugger. He could have been at the dinner with all the other nobs where the Colonel walks out. Just a little scene might have added a bit of texture to an otherwise absent character.
I also find it interesting how Vimes' opinion about old Lord Rust has mellowed. After all, this is the man who removed Vimes from leadership of the Watch in Jingo and was a bumbling commander in the Klatchian battle. Not to mention his ineptitude with dealing with the Monstrous Regiment. Vimes still doesn't like the man, but he is willing to admit that the man is honest and honorable, even if he is an idiot.
I also find it interesting how Vimes' opinion about old Lord Rust has mellowed. After all, this is the man who removed Vimes from leadership of the Watch in Jingo and was a bumbling commander in the Klatchian battle. Not to mention his ineptitude with dealing with the Monstrous Regiment. Vimes still doesn't like the man, but he is willing to admit that the man is honest and honorable, even if he is an idiot.
You might not like the book, but do you really think Terry would forget to put a character in? I'm going with Tony on this one, Gravid is the faceless capitalist. I was surprised to reach the end not having encountered him, but it doesn't bother me now, and I think I can see why Terry did it this way (although it's a first for him).
Notice I said either forgot or couldn't figure out a way to work him in. If I didn't feel that this was just one of Snuff's many narrative problems I might tend to agree with the 'invisible capitalist' idea, but, I'm tending to think that he just wasn't up to the task of creating an appearance that would have given Gravid the gravitas of the best evil capitalist he ever created, Reacher Gilt, or even a lesser robber baron like Cosmo Lavish.
i
i
I still haven't read it. Still on the list at the library. Looking forward to it though.
My adult child read it this weekend (HUGE penalties if it isn't returned on the day and she wouldn't loan it to me)
She is a HUGE Pratchett fan since he wrote his first books...(introduced me to him). Truly loved it... and that says alot.
My adult child read it this weekend (HUGE penalties if it isn't returned on the day and she wouldn't loan it to me)
She is a HUGE Pratchett fan since he wrote his first books...(introduced me to him). Truly loved it... and that says alot.
I just read this incredible review from the Indepenent and SW and I both agree that we couldn't have said it better. 
Good review 
it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
Dotsie said:
Good review it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
It reminded me of all those stories where the "noble savage" is taken from his or her native environment, taught the ways of "civilized people" and then displayed as a curio.
In other words, as you say, the only reason why people on the DW now have sympathy for goblins is because they can learn to act like humans. No one has respect for their own cultural identities (other than the beauty of their ungue pots), and, despite the fact that goblins like Stinky and the ones working for Harry King can speak Morporkian, the rural people still think of them an non-sentient species until one 'civilized' girl changes their mind.
There's a huge irony here that Pterry doesn't even get into--the idea that the children's book writer mistakenly feels that the only way goblins can be saved is to "humanize" them. It's a colonial mentality, and one wishes that Pterry had examined the hypocrisy of this point of view in the same way that Mr. Shine revealed how dwarf (and human) bigotry had for so long shaped human perceptions of trolls as stupid beasts. Indeed, Detritus could have easily become the 'voice' for discussing this irony, mentioning that humans only think trolls are something other mindless rocks when they act like humans--himself being a prime example.
raisindot said:
Dotsie said:
Good review it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
it does remind me though, what would happen to the goblins if they weren't capable of making music better than humans? So yes, it can be a bit sentimental, the goblins are so sweet and lovely that we should give them rights, yes? If they were obnoxious Vimes would have had a much harder job (but they would of course still deserve the rights).
It reminded me of all those stories where the "noble savage" is taken from his or her native environment, taught the ways of "civilized people" and then displayed as a curio.
In other words, as you say, the only reason why people on the DW now have sympathy for goblins is because they can learn to act like humans. No one has respect for their own cultural identities (other than the beauty of their ungue pots), and, despite the fact that goblins like Stinky and the ones working for Harry King can speak Morporkian, the rural people still think of them an non-sentient species until one 'civilized' girl changes their mind.
There's a huge irony here that Pterry doesn't even get into--the idea that the children's book writer mistakenly feels that the only way goblins can be saved is to "humanize" them. It's a colonial mentality, and one wishes that Pterry had examined the hypocrisy of this point of view in the same way that Mr. Shine revealed how dwarf (and human) bigotry had for so long shaped human perceptions of trolls as stupid beasts. Indeed, Detritus could have easily become the 'voice' for discussing this irony, mentioning that humans only think trolls are something other mindless rocks when they act like humans--himself being a prime example.
I guess I must have missed that particular comment. Considering how much more deeply he explored this same issue of "humancentricism" in Feet of Clay, Thud! and even in Unseen Academicals, that he reduced this whole point to a comment is regrettable. Goblins are so much more of a defenseless and maligned race than either trolls or dwarves (who are quite capable of defending themselves against humans should they wish) that the reality that they will need to become human-like to survive is a rich vein of narrative complexity that is reduced to a comment. It would have been perfect for Vetinari to acknowledge this irony in his long speech about the goblins at the end of the book, since he, of all people, understands human perceptions largely shape the fabric of identity on the DW.
Jeff, you seem to have missed a very great deal of what Pratchett actually wrote about the goblins and what Miss Beedle is teaching them. To describe this is a "colonial mentality" is utter tosh. I refer you specifically to Miss Beedle's response to Vimes's question about what she is teaching them (to be better citizens?). She gives him a ringing slap and gives a scathing response, beginning with:
"You are the gods' own fool, Commander Vimes! No I'm not teaching them to be fake humans. I'm teaching them how to be goblins, clever goblins! Do you know that they have only five names for colors? ... Does this mean goblins are stupid? No, they have a vast number of names for things that even poets haven't come up with, for things like the way colors shift and change, the melting of one hue into another. They have single words for the most complicated of feelings. "
She goes on to say that she is teaching some of them to speak to "people like you, who think they are dumb." She points out to him that, as Vetinari says pointedly in his final speech to Vimes that the goblins are being slaughtered because "they are just dumb nuisances." (pp. 166-167)
It is quite significant that what Tears of the Mushroom plays on the harp is not a human piece of music! What Tears of the Mushroom plays is her own composition, The Twilight Seranade, a piece of music so far beyond anything composed by humans that it changed the way the entire civilized Discworld regarded goblins forever.
SW, it's quite ironic by quoting all this you're totally supporting my thesis and that is you who are missing the point. Ms. Beedle's definition of "clever goblins" are those who can talk, act and speak like humans. She points out all of the "intelligent" attributes that goblins have, but then essentially negates their value by defining "clever" as the emulation of human qualities. It doesn't matter that the goblins have a rich culture of their own. What only counts is how well they can imitate humans.
And what about Tears of the Mushroom? Why does she have to "prove" that goblins are worth redeeming by playing a harp played by humans? Why couldn't she have played a goblin instrument or conducted some other innate goblin art form? PTerry is clearly stating here that goblins won't be recognized as being intelligent UNLESS they act like humans. The message is quite clear. Ms. Beedle is no different than all of those prim Victorian missionaries who went to the South Pacific or Africa to "civilize" the savages whom the rest of the world thought were sub-human.
What did these missionaries do? They ignored that the fact that "savages" had their own extremely sophisticated belief systems, mythologies, cultures and forced Christianity, western clothing, western technology, western values and Spam down their throats. Then they brought a sampling of these 'savages' back to the states are paraded them around Europe and the U.S. to "prove" how the savages could be 'civilized' by white people.
Ms. Beedle's hypocrisy would have been a very rich topic to explore, but Pterry plays it straight here, turning her into a 'savior' rather than a 'civilizer.' Is Pterry making a understated comment on brand of misguided missionarianism that has, on our world, has resulted in the destruction of thousands of distinct cultures over the centuries? It's hard to say. Since every other idea in Snuff seems to be stated explicitly and long-windedly, the fact this is not stated explicitly here suggests either that Pterry believes that this kind of missionarianism is a good thing or that it's the only way other races can possibly be saved on DW.
And what about Tears of the Mushroom? Why does she have to "prove" that goblins are worth redeeming by playing a harp played by humans? Why couldn't she have played a goblin instrument or conducted some other innate goblin art form? PTerry is clearly stating here that goblins won't be recognized as being intelligent UNLESS they act like humans. The message is quite clear. Ms. Beedle is no different than all of those prim Victorian missionaries who went to the South Pacific or Africa to "civilize" the savages whom the rest of the world thought were sub-human.
What did these missionaries do? They ignored that the fact that "savages" had their own extremely sophisticated belief systems, mythologies, cultures and forced Christianity, western clothing, western technology, western values and Spam down their throats. Then they brought a sampling of these 'savages' back to the states are paraded them around Europe and the U.S. to "prove" how the savages could be 'civilized' by white people.
Ms. Beedle's hypocrisy would have been a very rich topic to explore, but Pterry plays it straight here, turning her into a 'savior' rather than a 'civilizer.' Is Pterry making a understated comment on brand of misguided missionarianism that has, on our world, has resulted in the destruction of thousands of distinct cultures over the centuries? It's hard to say. Since every other idea in Snuff seems to be stated explicitly and long-windedly, the fact this is not stated explicitly here suggests either that Pterry believes that this kind of missionarianism is a good thing or that it's the only way other races can possibly be saved on DW.
TheBookseller.com
Terry Pratchett's Snuff (Doubleday) was narrowly the bestselling book in the UK last week, outselling Martina Cole's 18th novel, The Faithless (Headline), by just 768 copies.
Snuff, which last week became the fastest-selling hardback novel by a British novelist since records began, sold 31,904 copies in its first full week in UK bookshops, while Cole's The Faithless (Headline) scored sales of 31,136 copies in its opening week in stores.
The latter officially hit shelves on Tuesday last week, and helped by better-than-half-price deals at Amazon.co.uk and Sainsbury’s, sold more than 30,000 copies in just five days.
It is the first time since October 2009 that two hardback adult-audience novels have sold more than 30,000 copies in the same week.
However, there is a strong chance The Faithless could have been number one overall were it not for the fact that some retailers broke the strict embargo on the title with the result that it sold more than 1,000 copies the previous week.
Terry Pratchett's Snuff (Doubleday) was narrowly the bestselling book in the UK last week, outselling Martina Cole's 18th novel, The Faithless (Headline), by just 768 copies.
Snuff, which last week became the fastest-selling hardback novel by a British novelist since records began, sold 31,904 copies in its first full week in UK bookshops, while Cole's The Faithless (Headline) scored sales of 31,136 copies in its opening week in stores.
The latter officially hit shelves on Tuesday last week, and helped by better-than-half-price deals at Amazon.co.uk and Sainsbury’s, sold more than 30,000 copies in just five days.
It is the first time since October 2009 that two hardback adult-audience novels have sold more than 30,000 copies in the same week.
However, there is a strong chance The Faithless could have been number one overall were it not for the fact that some retailers broke the strict embargo on the title with the result that it sold more than 1,000 copies the previous week.
I just finished Snuff and i have to say that it was actually really good I don't understand where some of you are bickering about this is a good Vimes book. I got really excited in some parts. I haven't felt such excitement in books since my mum first read Harry Potter and the Philosopher Stone to me when I was 5. That's how much I enjoyed it