SPOILERS Unseen Academicals ***SPOILERS***
- Thread starter The rat
- Start date
true, but if that were the case then Tsort and Ephebe would be effected as well, more so infact since they are direct neighbors, while omnia is not. but, if omnia is effected then klatch would be as well since it is the same distance from there as omnia is. given all that, you would think there might be SOME evidence to suggest that Djelibabi is a temporal black hole as the time dilation would be effecting so many large nations.
the other problem being that Pyramids came out 5 books before Small Gods.
the other problem being that Pyramids came out 5 books before Small Gods.
A
Sister Jennifer said:
LilMaibe said:
Well, to me it possibly was because I knew his story before from warcraft (only that it's told better there, as Thrall is nowhere near as perfect. Seriously, go and give 'Lord of the Clans' a read 
)
)
What harm would it have done to the story if he would have excelled in only one field. Mechanics for example?
Would it have really been out of the question to have him just be a character who thinks he needs to be perfect at everything to achieve worth, but isn't perfect, but in the end learns that there is no need to be perfect to have worth?
Yes he really needs to be perfect... In every way. I wasn't speaking metaophorically or whatever you said in the PM. He's the first of the orcs to live with people right? He's under alot of pressure not to mess it up. There's no point saying would it of been out of the question for him to be a character who only thinks he needs to be perfect etc. Yes it is out of the question, that's not what he's about. Within the story he's THE example that will determine the way for other orcs.
I don't know if this is right but I always thought Mr Nutt was an allegory about immigrants. I don't know the warcraft orcs but as TP also writes satire I think more about real issues in our world as comparisions.
I may have confused you even more.
I'm sorry I didn't reply earlier. 2 things: I was having a think about how to answer you and then I kind of forgot to post back. I didn't think anyone actually paid that much attention to the stuff I wrote anyway.
I don't know if this is right but I always thought Mr Nutt was an allegory about immigrants. I don't know the warcraft orcs but as TP also writes satire I think more about real issues in our world as comparisions.
I may have confused you even more.
I'm sorry I didn't reply earlier. 2 things: I was having a think about how to answer you and then I kind of forgot to post back. I didn't think anyone actually paid that much attention to the stuff I wrote anyway.
A
Happens.
It's nice if you see him as an allegory about immigrants, but look at it like this:
He doesn't fail. Not once. I know I stated this before often enough, but it stays how I see it.
Everything he tries he not only succeeds at, no, he also reaches heights noone before reached. He impresses everyone (except the bad guys). Everyone (again, except for the bad guys) loves/admires him in the end. For his wisdom, for his skills.
Unless of course Sir Terry tried to see how many deadly sins of writing he can put into a novel before people would call him out for it, this character is everything but well written.
He is young.
Yet he can do so many things without any real explanation. What we get as one from the story 'he read a lot and an Igor showed him some things'.
Great, really. Pick a random book from the fantasy shelf and chances are high your maincharacter also can do things beyond imagination with equally thin explanations.
And to make matters worse:
He's a character that has no path before him. As he has already proven infallible. Would you really want to read a book of 400, 500 pages about a character who fails only at failing?
I am judging the book by the standards I know from Discworld and by what I learned about writing. And I stay with my point: There is NO need for him to BE perfect instead of just thinking it, trying and failing.
It's nice if you see him as an allegory about immigrants, but look at it like this:
He doesn't fail. Not once. I know I stated this before often enough, but it stays how I see it.
Everything he tries he not only succeeds at, no, he also reaches heights noone before reached. He impresses everyone (except the bad guys). Everyone (again, except for the bad guys) loves/admires him in the end. For his wisdom, for his skills.
Unless of course Sir Terry tried to see how many deadly sins of writing he can put into a novel before people would call him out for it, this character is everything but well written.
He is young.
Yet he can do so many things without any real explanation. What we get as one from the story 'he read a lot and an Igor showed him some things'.
Great, really. Pick a random book from the fantasy shelf and chances are high your maincharacter also can do things beyond imagination with equally thin explanations.
And to make matters worse:
He's a character that has no path before him. As he has already proven infallible. Would you really want to read a book of 400, 500 pages about a character who fails only at failing?
I am judging the book by the standards I know from Discworld and by what I learned about writing. And I stay with my point: There is NO need for him to BE perfect instead of just thinking it, trying and failing.
So maybe it should be;
"He doesn't fail very often. Only a bit. I know I stated this before often enough, but I was factually incorrect.
Most things he tries he succeeds in (but not all), and occaisionally he reaches heights no one before reached. He impresses quite a few people (but not everybody), except the bad guys. A lot of people (again, except for the bad guys) think he's not too bad in the end.
(I can't rephrase the last sentence because there's no verb)"
I agree with you 100% on this theory Meeps. :dance:
"He doesn't fail very often. Only a bit. I know I stated this before often enough, but I was factually incorrect.
Most things he tries he succeeds in (but not all), and occaisionally he reaches heights no one before reached. He impresses quite a few people (but not everybody), except the bad guys. A lot of people (again, except for the bad guys) think he's not too bad in the end.
(I can't rephrase the last sentence because there's no verb)"
I agree with you 100% on this theory Meeps. :dance:
A
pooh, nice try, perhaps 'thank you' for trying but if I would have meant that I would have wrote that.
But he does not fail. Not once. Everything that happens to him turns out to be in his favour. Even when he dies it's just a way of showing his incredible self-healing skills. And that even DEATH has no idea of these self-healing skills, left alone that he is an orc. Let that sink in: Death has NO idea that the one before him is an orc.
And it is all played straight. With Nobby back in Hogfather it was played as a joke. Here? Here the sole purpose is to force suspense.
Try and name one, just one, occassions where he actually fails. Fails without anything in his favour coming of it.
But he does not fail. Not once. Everything that happens to him turns out to be in his favour. Even when he dies it's just a way of showing his incredible self-healing skills. And that even DEATH has no idea of these self-healing skills, left alone that he is an orc. Let that sink in: Death has NO idea that the one before him is an orc.
And it is all played straight. With Nobby back in Hogfather it was played as a joke. Here? Here the sole purpose is to force suspense.
Try and name one, just one, occassions where he actually fails. Fails without anything in his favour coming of it.
A
okay, granted, i missed pooh's post there.
But okay, if you want to make fun of me.
Thanks, it's not as if I am taking medication against depression by now. Thank you very much for ensuring me my depression and paranoia is justified.
Sorry that I DO take this serious. Sorry that things matter to me.
But okay, if you want to make fun of me.
Thanks, it's not as if I am taking medication against depression by now. Thank you very much for ensuring me my depression and paranoia is justified.
Sorry that I DO take this serious. Sorry that things matter to me.
A
Well, I know pooh is an insensible bugger. And I don't ask you to walk on eggshells around me. I just ask you to not look at me and handle me like a crazy person for hating this one book. And to put down my reasons as idiotic because everyone who hates that book must be crazy.
I hate having to defend my opinion like this. I'll gladly leave you yours if you'll leave me mine and stop acting as if I'm dimwitted for seeing these errors.
I hate having to defend my opinion like this.
I'll gladly leave you yours if you'll leave me mine and stop acting as if I'm dimwitted for seeing these errors.
LilMaibe said:
Well, I know pooh is an insensible bugger. And I don't ask you to walk on eggshells around me. I just ask you to not look at me and handle me like a crazy person for hating this one book. And to put down my reasons as idiotic because everyone who hates that book must be crazy.
I hate having to defend my opinion like this. I'll gladly leave you yours if you'll leave me mine and stop acting as if I'm dimwitted for seeing these errors.
I hate having to defend my opinion like this.
I'll gladly leave you yours if you'll leave me mine and stop acting as if I'm dimwitted for seeing these errors.
Go here.
A
well, the usual thing I hear when I say I don't like the book is 'how can you do that? it's discworld' *shrugs* I think I should just find peace in the assumption Sir Terry did write it bad on purpose for him not liking the topic but the publisher wanting a book on football for the cups. (Yes, Tony, I remember we went over that, but I still have my doubts)
EDIT: But on the bit pooh dug up: let's see. the book is 400 to 541 pages long (hardcover/paperback). Aside from that one scene, which doesn't even fill a page, there is no occassion where he fails. Not to mention something even worse:
It's a sight-gag.
It's the attempt to have a sight-gag in written form. Another No-go at writing.
I recently got my hands on 'How not to write a novel' and dear gods in their heavens, everything I before disliked about the book is in there. at least the kind of mistake I disliked in the book. Each and every bit
(And I can explain this much better in spoken form )
EDIT: But on the bit pooh dug up: let's see. the book is 400 to 541 pages long (hardcover/paperback). Aside from that one scene, which doesn't even fill a page, there is no occassion where he fails. Not to mention something even worse:
It's a sight-gag.
It's the attempt to have a sight-gag in written form. Another No-go at writing.
I recently got my hands on 'How not to write a novel' and dear gods in their heavens, everything I before disliked about the book is in there. at least the kind of mistake I disliked in the book. Each and every bit
(And I can explain this much better in spoken form
)I don't like Making Money or Monstrous Regiment, I think Night Watch is overrated, and ISWM is by far the worst Tiffany book. There are even some deluded people who don't like Pyramids. It's impossible to like every Discworld book, so why worry about it? :dance:
Page 35 (Half the page)
Mr Nutt fails to communicate.
Mr Nutt and Trev have obviously had lots of conversations in the past, but for some reason Mr Nutt uses fancy language he should have known that Trev wouldn't be able to understand. :dance:
Page 35 (Half the page)
Mr Nutt fails to communicate.
Mr Nutt and Trev have obviously had lots of conversations in the past, but for some reason Mr Nutt uses fancy language he should have known that Trev wouldn't be able to understand. :dance:
A
Yes, but in the end it gets portrayed as yet another 'lovable character quirk'. And the other characters go and look things up instead of calling him out on it. He keeps talking swollen and even in the end when he starts using 'common phrases' the way he speaks them give it the undertone of 'how do you inferior beings say again in your unbelievable incompetence?'
As for the first bit: Imagine all the 'arguments' people could muster to support their claim that MM or MR are 'best book ever' is 'cause it's pratchett and you are just too stupid to realise that'. Or if the only argument you could come up with in defense of Pyramids (I btw still need to check if I got the version with the soup-add or the cleaned up one) would be that.
As for the first bit: Imagine all the 'arguments' people could muster to support their claim that MM or MR are 'best book ever' is 'cause it's pratchett and you are just too stupid to realise that'. Or if the only argument you could come up with in defense of Pyramids (I btw still need to check if I got the version with the soup-add or the cleaned up one) would be that.
