Snuff
- Thread starter poohcarrot
- Start date
A
meerkat said:
Or Ankh-Morpork humour as it's known! 
EDIT: Before anyone gets it wrong:
I am not someone who likes her books clinically clean and political correct, neither am I saying that such jokes weren't there before, but before they were, well, more subtle...
Has the majority of readers really become that dull that they need everything to be told out straight and explained? Left alone have they become so dull that they don't count a book as funny, left alone entertaining, if there isn't anything about sex and sh*t in it?
I guess I'm just very indifferent to it, I only barely noticed it until you brought it fully to my attention. In this sexed up age what Terrence is doing is incredibly tame heck it was probably pretty tame in ages gone by so I'd say give it a few more books and if you think it's too raunchy just give the books a miss because it's unlikely he'll go back to the old days.
Um...I'll agree with you Meeps!
I thought MM was poor and a lot of it wasn't funny, just cheap laughs from slapstick. I put that down to TP trying to break into the US market, so the humour was dumbed down and lost its subtlety.
That's also my theory about why there were chapters in it.
But I think it was just a one-off and don't agree with UA being like that.
I thought MM was poor and a lot of it wasn't funny, just cheap laughs from slapstick. I put that down to TP trying to break into the US market, so the humour was dumbed down and lost its subtlety.
That's also my theory about why there were chapters in it.
But I think it was just a one-off and don't agree with UA being like that.
A
PoohKarrot said:
That's also my theory about why there were chapters in it.
But I think it was just a one-off and don't agree with UA being like that.
But I think it was just a one-off and don't agree with UA being like that.
As for UA, it's not that much of cheap humour, but IMHO it has different problems (weird shifts in characterisation (still waiting for an explanation over in the other thread, btw
) points where suspension of disbelief fails (at least me, and I can take a lot) and, most sadly, some scenes that breech with the general 101 of writing (the rule of 'show don't tell' comes to mind, for example)So, you are basically saying a good other has to bow to the mainstream and write as any worse or better author would instead of staying subtle and trusting in the abilities of his readers, which had no problem with subtelity before, to get things without them being said right out?
I don't quite know that I'm saying that. I reckon he simply wrote in that style because the subject matter and the characters allowed or even called for it. If this carries on into other books then he's actually changed his style and the only way it'll go back is sufficient complaint or voting with your wallet.
