SPOILERS Wyrd Sisters Discussion *Spoilers*
- Thread starter Tonyblack
- Start date
He was, and I have no idea what had happened to his mother although I suspect she was in a 'subservient woman's role' looking after the house, etc. and Verence's grandfather was responsible for discipline, education, and being the breadwinner.
However, I got the impression from the end of the book that Verence's and Tomjon's father was the Old Fool and I think it would Terry's sense of humour to have the Old Fool 'fooling around' with the Queen, so to speak, with Tomjon as the unforeseen result. Also, could the Old Fools naming of his son Verence be seen as his attempt at making an original joke, at the King's expense, and a secret act of rebellion against the guild?
However, I got the impression from the end of the book that Verence's and Tomjon's father was the Old Fool and I think it would Terry's sense of humour to have the Old Fool 'fooling around' with the Queen, so to speak, with Tomjon as the unforeseen result. Also, could the Old Fools naming of his son Verence be seen as his attempt at making an original joke, at the King's expense, and a secret act of rebellion against the guild?
Hold it! hold it! hold it! - which is what Verence I (and his jester perhaps) should have done... 
The way I read it was that Verence Snr. did indeed get a wrong side of the blanket heir namely Verence II with his jester's wife, so Verence II does have royal blood albeit murkily. I think it's Nanny Ogg (naturally ) who comes out with the minor bombshell about Verence Snr's dalliance and that the jester was most friendly with the Queen around Tomjon's conception. The inference being that Tomjon (the younger heir more apparent) may not have sprung from the King's seed. This would also make him a little basket (the jester's) and not of the royal line at all, assuming Verence Snr has the bloodline for Lancre (and with the land 'mourning' him, he was monarch in his own right).
Being a little basket doesn't matter that much when it comes to succession necessarily - to whit William the Conqueror was most definitely a bastard heir to both the Dukedom of Normandy (his father the Duke having subsequently married a noblewoman, but never having kids with her) and to the English throne (which came to him via his paternal Auntie's eldest Edward the Confessor - quite a girl was Emma of Normandy!). Interestingly Macbeth is historically set by Shakespeare in Edward the Confessor's reign and so Verence II's murky birthright (as testified by Nanny) needn't and indeed wasn't that big a deal
The best that Tomjon and Verence II would have been were half-brothers in which case Tomjon's claim is superior - I was left with the impression that the right heir got the gig and justice was done all round
:twisted:
The way I read it was that Verence Snr. did indeed get a wrong side of the blanket heir namely Verence II with his jester's wife, so Verence II does have royal blood albeit murkily. I think it's Nanny Ogg (naturally
) who comes out with the minor bombshell about Verence Snr's dalliance and that the jester was most friendly with the Queen around Tomjon's conception. The inference being that Tomjon (the younger heir more apparent) may not have sprung from the King's seed. This would also make him a little basket (the jester's) and not of the royal line at all, assuming Verence Snr has the bloodline for Lancre (and with the land 'mourning' him, he was monarch in his own right).Being a little basket doesn't matter that much when it comes to succession necessarily - to whit William the Conqueror was most definitely a bastard heir to both the Dukedom of Normandy (his father the Duke having subsequently married a noblewoman, but never having kids with her) and to the English throne (which came to him via his paternal Auntie's eldest Edward the Confessor - quite a girl was Emma of Normandy!). Interestingly Macbeth is historically set by Shakespeare in Edward the Confessor's reign and so Verence II's murky birthright (as testified by Nanny) needn't and indeed wasn't that big a deal
The best that Tomjon and Verence II would have been were half-brothers in which case Tomjon's claim is superior - I was left with the impression that the right heir got the gig and justice was done all round
:twisted:
Well now I'm definitely confused. When I read it I was sure that they were half-brothers, and although it was implied that this was because Verence's mother had dallied with the King, it turned out that his father had dallied with the Queen. I thought that Tomjon's parents were King and Queen.
I'm going to read it again
I'm going to read it again
The ending of the novel (where the "rightful" king is found, as in the comedies where everyone is going around cross-dressed) is positively Shakespearean.
But I think it's pretty clear that although Verence I may have exercised his droit with the Fool's wife, this particular child (eventually Verence II) is named for the King by his Mother (as he tells Magrat when she's opening the door of the dungeon). TomJohn's father is (by Nanny's implication) was in fact the Old Fool.
The crucial bits of information have to do with the striking resemblance between the two young men--which wouldn't be true probably if they didn't have the same father. And Hwel has noticed the similarity of resemblance back in AM, as has Magrat and eventually Nanny. And Nanny is the one who sees a way out of the mess that Granny has created by bringing TomJohn back to be the King--and deluding herself that he is the rightful heir and, more importantly, wants to be King of Lancre.
Since Nanny delivered both children, she'd know which one was the elder of the two. And although there's some question as to whether the Queen was able to count right, there's also Nanny's comment that the Old Fool could "climb walls like nobody's business", all of which leads up to what is the real clincher.
It would make more sense of neither mother was good at counting, but Granny acknowledges tacitly that Verence II isn't the son of Verence I (and that Magrat is not to tell him so) when she says:
"Royalty has to start somewhere. It might as well start with him. It looks as though he means to take it seriously, which is a lot further than most of them take it. He'll do." The final confirmation, of course, is that the land accepts him also--as he truly cares about the land.
But I think it's pretty clear that although Verence I may have exercised his droit with the Fool's wife, this particular child (eventually Verence II) is named for the King by his Mother (as he tells Magrat when she's opening the door of the dungeon). TomJohn's father is (by Nanny's implication) was in fact the Old Fool.
The crucial bits of information have to do with the striking resemblance between the two young men--which wouldn't be true probably if they didn't have the same father. And Hwel has noticed the similarity of resemblance back in AM, as has Magrat and eventually Nanny. And Nanny is the one who sees a way out of the mess that Granny has created by bringing TomJohn back to be the King--and deluding herself that he is the rightful heir and, more importantly, wants to be King of Lancre.
Since Nanny delivered both children, she'd know which one was the elder of the two. And although there's some question as to whether the Queen was able to count right, there's also Nanny's comment that the Old Fool could "climb walls like nobody's business", all of which leads up to what is the real clincher.
It would make more sense of neither mother was good at counting, but Granny acknowledges tacitly that Verence II isn't the son of Verence I (and that Magrat is not to tell him so) when she says:
"Royalty has to start somewhere. It might as well start with him. It looks as though he means to take it seriously, which is a lot further than most of them take it. He'll do." The final confirmation, of course, is that the land accepts him also--as he truly cares about the land.
One of the things that I find interesting about Wyrd Sisters is that it shows Pratchett feeling his way into a significant part of Discworld. While it's true that he's already made clear from the first that this is a world with Magic, and that there are witches and wizards, it seems to me that he has decided by this point that wizards will play a relatively minor part. In fact the wizards of Equal Rites bear only a general resemblance to those in Sourcery and I've always thought that Sourcery had the feel of something that happened in the distant past--except that Rincewind plays such an important role.
For whatever reason, Pratchett has decided to develop the witches as an important factor in Discworld, though they seem to be found primarily in the Ramtops. In this novel, we get an introduction to Granny (in some of her less attractive ways), Nanny (who changes very little) and Magrat.
Granny doesn't want anyone questioning her, or challenging her powers and understanding. But in this novel, she is almost embarrassingly ignorant. She has no idea what the theatre is, or what actors are. But she is not about to admit it--especially to Magrat. Nor does she understand drama at all. I remember the first time I read it, I was a bit embarrassed for her in her behavior at the play. Nanny doesn't know anything about the players and drama either, but she keeps her mouth shut.
It seems to me that Granny is particularly hard on Magrat (with some justification) because she is the "New Witch on the Block", but she is far more talented and powerful than Granny is willing to concede. Magrat has considerably more guts and perception, at some points in the book, than Granny does. She has tried to get the coven formed, though she's in awe of Granny. And having met the Fool in the meadow and fallen for him, she asks what his name is. The two senior witches basically discount him and don't really see him. Magrat calls them "a pair of silly old women," and says she's going home. And this leads to the quarrel between the two. And it is Magrat who actually save Nanny by the spell which Granny tries to say probably won't work--but it does. Granny is so sure of herself that she deludes herself about TomJohn and his destiny to be King.
Magrat is, in a strange way, a threat--which explains some of the reasons Granny treats her like a child. But it is Magrat who spots the resemblance and thereby saves the Kingdom of Lancre.
And it is Verence the Fool who is accidentally, the means of almost defeating the witches power, because he introduces the magic of words. Words are important to Pratchett. Ideas about good and evil and what makes things good or bad are important to him. And he will use the witches to explore some of this.
But, it's clear that Pratchett was working quickly, and making small errors (not caught by his publishers) at this stage. For example, Verence (as ghost) see the coach being pulled by his own horse go tearing out of the castle when he goes looking for the baby he believes is his son.
But one horse has turned into multiple horses by the time it arrives at where the witches are. And while Granny works the death of the primary confederate guard and sends him off to be a sailor, they all go home and apparently leave the coach and horses where they were meeting.
It's a fun book, but it's not as serious in it's theme and exploration as his later witch books will be.
For whatever reason, Pratchett has decided to develop the witches as an important factor in Discworld, though they seem to be found primarily in the Ramtops. In this novel, we get an introduction to Granny (in some of her less attractive ways), Nanny (who changes very little) and Magrat.
Granny doesn't want anyone questioning her, or challenging her powers and understanding. But in this novel, she is almost embarrassingly ignorant. She has no idea what the theatre is, or what actors are. But she is not about to admit it--especially to Magrat. Nor does she understand drama at all. I remember the first time I read it, I was a bit embarrassed for her in her behavior at the play. Nanny doesn't know anything about the players and drama either, but she keeps her mouth shut.
It seems to me that Granny is particularly hard on Magrat (with some justification) because she is the "New Witch on the Block", but she is far more talented and powerful than Granny is willing to concede. Magrat has considerably more guts and perception, at some points in the book, than Granny does. She has tried to get the coven formed, though she's in awe of Granny. And having met the Fool in the meadow and fallen for him, she asks what his name is. The two senior witches basically discount him and don't really see him. Magrat calls them "a pair of silly old women," and says she's going home. And this leads to the quarrel between the two. And it is Magrat who actually save Nanny by the spell which Granny tries to say probably won't work--but it does. Granny is so sure of herself that she deludes herself about TomJohn and his destiny to be King.
Magrat is, in a strange way, a threat--which explains some of the reasons Granny treats her like a child. But it is Magrat who spots the resemblance and thereby saves the Kingdom of Lancre.
And it is Verence the Fool who is accidentally, the means of almost defeating the witches power, because he introduces the magic of words. Words are important to Pratchett. Ideas about good and evil and what makes things good or bad are important to him. And he will use the witches to explore some of this.
But, it's clear that Pratchett was working quickly, and making small errors (not caught by his publishers) at this stage. For example, Verence (as ghost) see the coach being pulled by his own horse go tearing out of the castle when he goes looking for the baby he believes is his son.
But one horse has turned into multiple horses by the time it arrives at where the witches are. And while Granny works the death of the primary confederate guard and sends him off to be a sailor, they all go home and apparently leave the coach and horses where they were meeting.
It's a fun book, but it's not as serious in it's theme and exploration as his later witch books will be.
theoldlibrarian said:
Whatever happened I think the fool and Tomjon must have been related because Hwel says they look very similar when they're all in the pub or maybe it's just coincidence.
I also remember that Magrat discovered that Verence 2nd wasn't an heir at all.
I also remember that Magrat discovered that Verence 2nd wasn't an heir at all.
I didn't notice the horses in the beginning, but I did find some typos (3 I think). There's a paragraph where Granny and Nanny get mixed up, and another where Verence II and Tomjon (I think) get mixed up.
I figured it was because I had a overseas (America) paperback printing. Anyone else see anything like this?
Tomjohn and the fool have to be related because they look like each other.
The fool's father and the queen are the parents of Tomjohn.
Therefore;
a. The fool's father is the father of both.
or
b. The Queen is the mother of both.
or
c. The fool's father AND the Queen are the parents of both.
I still think it's c.
The Queen, 18 years ago, before she got married to the king, could have had an affair with the fool's father and a baby could have been born.
The fool's father and the queen are the parents of Tomjohn.
Therefore;
a. The fool's father is the father of both.
or
b. The Queen is the mother of both.
or
c. The fool's father AND the Queen are the parents of both.
I still think it's c.
The Queen, 18 years ago, before she got married to the king, could have had an affair with the fool's father and a baby could have been born.
I've only recently started posting in the forums and so I'm coming into this discussion 5 pages late. Dotsie - thanks for the invitation to this forum.
Where to start
Shakespeare references - I think that if you don't know a bit of Shakespeare you would really miss a lot in Wyrd Sisters. If you think about it, Nanny Ogg could even be described as the perfect Shakespearean audience member. she loves a good joke and a lot of innuendo.
The witches - is Granny weatherwax really being that harsh with Magrat? When Magrat uses her 'natural' approach on the dungeon door Granny says 'wouldn't have thought of that myself' or something similar. praise like that from Granny would be highly valued because its so rarely given.
Nanny Ogg - I don't think she is as bland a character as some might think. One of the big roles Nanny plays is the bawdy relief from seriousness - just like in Shakespearean plays. The other big thing she does is save Granny from cackling. She almost like a 'good devil' on granny's shoulder reminding granny of what is important. When a witch as powerful as Granny weatherwax doesn't have someone like that around they turn into a Lilith de Tempscire.
the Tomjon / Verence II thing - i always thought that they had the same father - the fool. Now I'm just confused.
Typos and inconsistencies don't worry me too much. (bits of) the turtle moved and it made for a good storyline. I love the stories being told and the characters in those stories. the story is the thing and the whole of the thing. If i start over analysing it all I feel that I would be doing to Terry what has been done to Shakespeare i.e. over-analysed all the fun out of it.
cheers
Sue *hands protecting head, she ducks for cover*
Where to start
Shakespeare references - I think that if you don't know a bit of Shakespeare you would really miss a lot in Wyrd Sisters. If you think about it, Nanny Ogg could even be described as the perfect Shakespearean audience member. she loves a good joke and a lot of innuendo.
The witches - is Granny weatherwax really being that harsh with Magrat? When Magrat uses her 'natural' approach on the dungeon door Granny says 'wouldn't have thought of that myself' or something similar. praise like that from Granny would be highly valued because its so rarely given.
Nanny Ogg - I don't think she is as bland a character as some might think. One of the big roles Nanny plays is the bawdy relief from seriousness - just like in Shakespearean plays. The other big thing she does is save Granny from cackling. She almost like a 'good devil' on granny's shoulder reminding granny of what is important. When a witch as powerful as Granny weatherwax doesn't have someone like that around they turn into a Lilith de Tempscire.
the Tomjon / Verence II thing - i always thought that they had the same father - the fool. Now I'm just confused.
Typos and inconsistencies don't worry me too much. (bits of) the turtle moved and it made for a good storyline. I love the stories being told and the characters in those stories. the story is the thing and the whole of the thing. If i start over analysing it all I feel that I would be doing to Terry what has been done to Shakespeare i.e. over-analysed all the fun out of it.
cheers
Sue *hands protecting head, she ducks for cover*
