[R] the patrician and the gonne
ppint.
- hi; "Victoria Martin" revealed:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Bernard M. Earp wrote:
>> Victoria Martin writes about Patrician
>> >. Incidentally, my guess is that that's why he didn't
>> >destroy the gonne either. He was keeping it in reserve, because even if
>> >you don't want gonnes overrunning the Disc, you never
>>
>> He did`nt destroy it but.... UK h/b page147
>>
>> " I gave it to the Assasins to destroy. After all, they pride
>> themselves on the artistic quality of their work. They should be
>> horrified at the idea of anyone having that sort of power. But the
>> dammed fools did not destroy it. They thought they could lock it up.
>> And now they`ve lost it."
>>
>
>There was a discussion a long time ago (several months at least, by my
>reckoning) about whether Vetinari (a) genuinely expected the assassins to
>destroy the gonne; (b) deluded himself, ie. convinced himself that the
>assassins would destroy it as instructed but should have known better; or
>(c) knew perfectly well that the assassins wouldn't destroy the gonne, and
>only gave it to them to give himself an alibi. I used to think (b), now
>I incline more towards (c).
>
- i think that lord havelock must've known there was a very good
chance the assassins wouldn't destroy it - but he would've reasoned
they were the best people to keep its existence completely secret,
and to be unaffected by its lure - they could and did already kill
anyone they wanted to - if paid the amount they determined was suit-
able; and what the gonne threatened, was an end to this effective
monopoly upon the top end of the inhumation profession - with the
gonne, a completely un-assassins' school-trained tyro could kill a
king at a thousand paces, if s/he had a good eye and a steady hand.
- the patrician didn't need an alibi for failing to destroy it, for
he owed no explanation to anyone but himself - but _that_ could be
the point; although the assassins could under ordinary circumstances
be relied upon to keep the gonne safely hid, unused, because they'd
not be susceptible to its lure, having already as much power as they
could make use of in their profession, the same is *not* true of the
patrician.
- his verbal flaying of the assassins' stupidity is perhaps his own
conscience accusing him - by failing to have it destroyed, he kept
in existence a tool offering hitherto undreamed-of power - *and* a
threat to the safety of the city, which is his abiding passion.
- love, ppint.
[to reply, please remove both "v"s from the reply-to: line]
--
"We trained hard...but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form
up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in life that
we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising; and a wonderful method
it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion,
inefficiency, and demoralisation."
- Petronius Arbiter, c.210 B.C.
Victoria Martin
On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, ppint. wrote:
[I've snipped the citations, on the assumption that people will remember
what was said before]
[snip also neat summary of the reasons why Vetinari might give the gonne
to the assassins even if he wasn't sure they'd destroy it]
> >
> - the patrician didn't need an alibi for failing to destroy it, for
> he owed no explanation to anyone but himself - but _that_ could be
> the point; although the assassins could under ordinary circumstances
> be relied upon to keep the gonne safely hid, unused, because they'd
> not be susceptible to its lure, having already as much power as they
> could make use of in their profession, the same is *not* true of the
> patrician.
>
> - his verbal flaying of the assassins' stupidity is perhaps his own
> conscience accusing him - by failing to have it destroyed, he kept
> in existence a tool offering hitherto undreamed-of power - *and* a
> threat to the safety of the city, which is his abiding passion.
>
Indeed, his response to Leonard's subsequent remark ('But you did not
destroy it either. How interesting', or words to that effect)
rather supports this. Vetinari suddenly realises that he, too has failed
to destroy the gonne, just as the assassins have, in his own case by
passing the buck, in the assassins' case by convincing themselves that
keeping it under lock and key was just as good as destroying it. In both
instances, a degree of self-delusion appears to have been at work. What
makes me think that perhaps Vetinari's decision not to destroy the gonne
was rather more conscious than this interpretation would imply, was the
revelation from the _Jingo_ bumf that he takes Leonard of Quirm with him
to try to prevent the war against Klatch. In MAA Leonard's imprisonment is
presented not so much as a rational decision as the result of a slightly
irrational fascination and a deliberate parallel with the gonne is set up.
The Patrician does not destroy Leonard because he is fascinated by him,
because, like the gonne, he is one of a kind and one of a kind is always
special. In _Jingo_, however, this apparantly irrational response is shown
to have paid long-term dividends, Leonard turns out to be far more
_useful_ to Vetinari alive than dead, and given what we already know of
Vetinari's abilities in the field of long-term planning, it seems far more
likely that it was not _only_ irrational fascination which led him to keep
Leonard alive, but also the thoroughly rational desire to keep him, as it
were, in reserve, unable to be used by others, but available to be used
by Vetinari. Given that an explicit parallel has been drawn between
Leonard and the gonne, it seems fair to conclude that this interpretation
could be applied to the gonne as well, that Vetinari certainly didn't want
it loose, being used by (or using) other people, but his habitual concern
to plan for unforseeable eventualities led him to underestimate the danger
the gonne posed. So he kept it in reserve.
Victoria
Victoria Martin
On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, ppint. wrote:
>
> - the patrician didn't need an alibi for failing to destroy it, for
> he owed no explanation to anyone but himself -
Sorry to come back to this in a separate post, but I missed it the first
time around. I don't think it's correct to say that the Patrician owes no
explanations to anyone but himself. Yes, he's The Man with The Vote, but
there are various councils that have at least some input into the process
of government (in G!G! the Guild leaders sneer at the Patrician for
failing to deal with the dragon; in FoC this council seems to have been
expanded to include the more nouveau Guilds, and also appears to meet
regularly in a room designated for that purpose, and often in the absence
of the Patrician. This suggests a degree of official standing).
Furthermore, the individual guild leaders have, at least in
theory, the power to make demands of the Patrician. The leader of
the Thieves' Guild demands that Carrot be punished after arresting Guild
members, Dr Cruces demands that Vimes be taken off the gonne case. The
fact that Vetinari is sufficently well-informed and sufficiently skilled
at intimidating his interlocutor to emerge as the 'victor' from these
individual encounters does not detract from the fact that the Guilds
clearly have a say in the running of the city, at least in principle.
Moreover,given the perpetual crises of government that occur in A-M, it's clearly
important that Vetinari be able to justify his actions where necessary.
Imagine if he had not given the gonne to the assassins with instructions
to destroy it - it would then have clearly been his fault when the weapon
was stolen and turned against the Guild leaders. Edward's original plan
was to assassinate prominent citizens, especially Guild leaders, and
thereby to create chaos. Suppose he had lived to carry out his plan -
would the decision to replace Vetinari with King Carrot not have been
hastened once the people with the power realised that it was Vetinari who
had enabled such a weapon to fall into the wrong hands? Vetinari may be a
despot, but he doesn't have absolute, unlimited power. Instead he has to
juggle an awful lot of conflicting interests against a background of
intrigue, and his modus operandi frequently seems to involve issuing an
order he knows the recipient will disobey, which has the twofold advantage
of (a) achieving the outcome he wants whilst (b) enabling him to disclaim
publically responsibility for that outcome, should this prove politically
desirable.
Victoria
Martin Hungerford
"ppint." <vi-...@i-m-t.demon.co.ukv> wrote:
>"We trained hard...but it seemed that every time we were beginning to
>form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in
>life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising; and a
>wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while
>producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation."
>Petronius Arbiter c 210 B.C.
Is this from the Satyricon? 'cause if it is Arbiter was about 300 years
old when he died! He suicided during Nero's reign
Martin
now there's a person to talk to the patrician! Arbiter, not Nero. :)
--
jong...@netcon.net.au
To help maintain your standard of written English, what is
wrong with this actual newspaper headline:
"Drunk Gets Nine Months in Violin Case"
David Allsopp
In article <1997072908...@dc02.netcon.net.au>,
Martin Hungerford <jong...@netcon.net.au> wrote:
>>life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising; and a
>>wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while
>>producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation."
>
>>Petronius Arbiter c 210 B.C.
>
>Is this from the Satyricon? 'cause if it is Arbiter was about 300 years
>old when he died! He suicided during Nero's reign
Where does the above passge come from? I've been using a slightly different
version of it as a .sig as I liked it so much:
"Reorganisation is a splendid method of producing the illusion of progress
whilst creating confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation."
- Petronius Arbiter 60AD
Is this date more accurate?
David.
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java
that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a
warning, it is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Hathaway
Victoria Martin <sann...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> wrote in article
<Pine.OSF.3.95.97072...@ermine.ox.ac.uk>...
>
>
> On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, ppint. wrote:
>
remember
> what was said before]
gonne
> to the assassins even if he wasn't sure they'd destroy it]
> > >
To both of you:
Surely the reason Vetinari didn't actually destroy the gonne was
because the gonne had in some small way worked its magic on him too
and stopped him from destroying it as it did with the Assassins. They
may not have fallen to the full lure but were still susceptible to
the gonnes most powerful influence: to not destroy it.
--
The Official Michelena Riosa Testosterone Brigade
Founder Member and President for Life, New Members Welcome
The Bellman of Ankh, j...@burnis01.airtime.co.uk afpurity 56%
http://www.burnley.gov.uk I'm in the bit about history and stuff
Stephen Tempest
Victoria Martin <sann...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> writes about Vetinari:
>Yes, he's The Man with The Vote, but
>there are various councils that have at least some input into the process
>of government (in G!G! the Guild leaders sneer at the Patrician for
>failing to deal with the dragon; in FoC this council seems to have been
>expanded to include the more nouveau Guilds, and also appears to meet
>regularly in a room designated for that purpose, and often in the absence
>of the Patrician. This suggests a degree of official standing).
>Furthermore, the individual guild leaders have, at least in
>theory, the power to make demands of the Patrician.
Do any of the books actually say how Vetinari came to be Patrician?
I'm assuming it isn't simply a hereditary post, otherwise there'd be
no point in contrasting him with a King. I'll assume as well that it
isn't just a case of "whoever killed the last Patrician takes his
place" since that seems too unsubtle (and also too "royal" - "We have
the crown, i'faith"). The obvious alternative is that Patricians are
in fact chosen/elected (for life, however long that may be...) by the
guild leaders and chief aristocrats, doubtless with much bribery,
threats, nepotism and other political manouevering. That would fit
with the "Italian city-state" model of Ankh-Morpork.
Does this sound reasonable?
--
Stephen
Victoria Martin
On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, Stephen Tempest wrote:
>
> Do any of the books actually say how Vetinari came to be Patrician?
No! It's my great hope that one day he'll get around to telling us.
> I'm assuming it isn't simply a hereditary post, otherwise there'd be
> no point in contrasting him with a King. I'll assume as well that it
> isn't just a case of "whoever killed the last Patrician takes his
> place" since that seems too unsubtle (and also too "royal" - "We have
> the crown, i'faith").
Might be a bit unsubtle for Vetinari, but I can well imagine Laughing Lord
Scapula or Lord Snapcase opting for exactly that route to power. And given
the very high turnover in Patricians prior to Vetinari (the aristocrats in
MAA can remember a number personally) it would seem that assassination may
be shortening their life expectancy.
The obvious alternative is that Patricians are
> in fact chosen/elected (for life, however long that may be...) by the
> guild leaders and chief aristocrats, doubtless with much bribery,
> threats, nepotism and other political manouevering.
I don't think so, as it rather goes against the One Man, One Vote quote. I
suspect that whoever succeeds in occupying the post then has to deal with
intriguers planning to depose him, but this is not the same as saying the
intriguers have a constitutional right to decide upon the successor.
Victoria
Robb Kidd
Victoria Martin (sann...@ermine.ox.ac.uk) wrote:
: On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, Stephen Tempest wrote:
: ... The obvious alternative is that Patricians are
: > in fact chosen/elected (for life, however long that may be...) by the
: > guild leaders and chief aristocrats, doubtless with much bribery,
: > threats, nepotism and other political manouevering.
: I don't think so, as it rather goes against the One Man, One Vote quote. I
: suspect that whoever succeeds in occupying the post then has to deal with
: intriguers planning to depose him, but this is not the same as saying the
: intriguers have a constitutional right to decide upon the successor.
Though there was the scene in FoC where the Guild leaders got
together to mull over Vetinari's replacement.
__________________
"Let me assure you that to us here at First National, you're not just a
number. You're two numbers, a dash, three more numbers, another dash
and another number."
-- James Estes
Robert "Father Bob" Kidd
The Eleventh Brain - http://mason.gmu.edu/~rkidd/
Terry Pratchett
In article <33e520f6...@news.lspace.org>, The Bellinghman
<al...@lspace.org> writes
>My personal feeling on this is that Vetinari became Patrician precisely
>because of the very high turnover in Patricians prior to him. I imagine
>him as a high civil servant previous to his current career, who stepped in
>much to everyone's surprise and was initially accepted by those who had
>power as a compromise candidate while everyone drew breath. Much to their
>surprise, he is still there.
>
>His motives in doing so I would take to be a desire to see orderly life in
>the city - for me, his reason in being Patrician is that he doesn't see
>any alternative candidate.
>
>Alan
This man is clever. I know, because I've done some work on this. One
day...oh dear...I really do want to map the beginnings of young
Vetinari's political career, with some reference to the keen young Night
Watchman who inadvertently helped on his way.
But then, I also want to set one book almost entirely among the
affectionate ladies of the Shades, and I really must do the one
involving the rest of Angua's family....
...so many books, so little time...
--
Terry Pratchett
Sean Eric Fagan
In article <33e520f6...@news.lspace.org>,
The Bellinghman <al...@lspace.org> wrote:
>My personal feeling on this is that Vetinari became Patrician precisely
>because of the very high turnover in Patricians prior to him. I imagine
>him as a high civil servant previous to his current career, who stepped in
>much to everyone's surprise and was initially accepted by those who had
>power as a compromise candidate while everyone drew breath. Much to their
>surprise, he is still there.
Hm. I've also wondered how Vetinari came into power... Or, more to the
point, how he instituted teh changes that he did.
Okay, so he formed the Guilds, or at least solidified them. (And made the
Thieves' Guild adhere to the rules, such as they were.) How did he do this?
The City Watch doesn't seem too effective (admittedly, mostly in the Night
Watch, but the Day Watch seems to be worse, and, besides, they don't have
Captain Carrot).
This is a man who coerced the Unseen University into paying taxes -- that
would have taken quite a threat, given that, despite generally being
ineffectual, the Wizards *are*, in some areas at least, pretty sharp.
(Those areas, of course, being the areas of sleep, and food, and continuing
to be able to do both.)
>His motives in doing so I would take to be a desire to see orderly life in
>the city - for me, his reason in being Patrician is that he doesn't see
>any alternative candidate.
He doesn't strike me as someone who set out for power, although he hasn't
rejected it. He does seem to consider Ankh-Moorpork *his* city -- and not
in a kindly, paternal way. More in the way a wizard considers that slice of
roast beef to be *his* slice of roast beef, whether or not it's still
attached to the cow. :)
In terms of governing, Vetinari seems to have stumbled onto the secret that,
if you keep the supposed rulers fighting amongst themselves, you can get a
lot accomplished. And now the Guilds are afraid to do anything directly to
him, because it would too easily give an advantage to some other Guild.
But I would like to see a book in which Vetinari was the principle character
:).
Ridcully the Brown
> >My personal feeling on this is that Vetinari became Patrician precisely
> >because of the very high turnover in Patricians prior to him. I imagine
> >him as a high civil servant previous to his current career, who stepped in
> >much to everyone's surprise and was initially accepted by those who had
> >power as a compromise candidate while everyone drew breath. Much to their
> >surprise, he is still there.
> >
> >the city - for me, his reason in being Patrician is that he doesn't see
> >any alternative candidate.
> >
>
> This man is clever. I know, because I've done some work on this. One
> day...oh dear...I really do want to map the beginnings of young
> Vetinari's political career, with some reference to the keen young Night
> Watchman who inadvertently helped on his way.
>
> But then, I also want to set one book almost entirely among the
> affectionate ladies of the Shades, and I really must do the one
> involving the rest of Angua's family....
>
> ...so many books, so little time...
So what are you doing wasting your time posting to newsgroups? Get back
to your writing this minute. I dunno about authors these days......
Ridcully the Brown
--
The Official Michelena Riosa Testosterone Brigade
Commander of the Kiwi Cadre & Defender of the New Zealand Position
Bernard M. Earp
In article <EE9A6...@kithrup.com>, Sean Eric Fagan <s...@kithrup.com>
writes
>Okay, so he formed the Guilds, or at least solidified them. (And made the
>Thieves' Guild adhere to the rules, such as they were.) How did he do this?
>The City Watch doesn't seem too effective (admittedly, mostly in the Night
>Watch, but the Day Watch seems to be worse, and, besides, they don't have
>Captain Carrot).
The Watches are not effective but we do know that he is very good at
man(person? sentient? oh, you know what I mean) management and has a
very good spy/informant network so a playing off one side against the
other, making them think that the guilds were their own idea coupled
with a little gentle blackmail would work. Indeed the only hard part
would be getting the first guild formed then when others saw the
advantages of being open and above board the rest would form themselves
with very little in the way of nudges to get them to fall in to line.
The Assasins seem to be long established and could have formed a
blueprint for the others.
--
Bernard M. Earp
to reply remove z from name in address line
Donald Campbell
In article <EE9A6...@kithrup.com>,
s...@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan) wrote:
>In terms of governing, Vetinari seems to have stumbled onto the secret that,
>if you keep the supposed rulers fighting amongst themselves, you can get a
>lot accomplished. And now the Guilds are afraid to do anything directly to
>him, because it would too easily give an advantage to some other Guild.
But in recent years/books, there are more competent people coming to
power in the city;
Vetinari himself has engineered Vimes into a powerful figure, all the
more powerful for the fact that he doesn't seem to consider himself
powerful - he may have feathers in his hat now but he's still a copper.
Also, Ridcully seems to be to the University what Vetinari is to the
city. (Examples left as an exercise to the alert reader.)
How - if at all - does this trend affect the Patrician's position?
Donald.
--
Donald Campbell Spam Trap: If e-mailing with 'Reply'
don...@atuin.demon.co.uk remove the indicated section of the
La Korodimuna ^Stalo Kato address before sending.
Ingolf Ulmschneider
test
Martin Hungerford <jong...@netcon.net.au> schrieb im Beitrag
<1997072908...@dc02.netcon.net.au>...
> "ppint." <vi-...@i-m-t.demon.co.ukv> wrote:
>
>
> >"We trained hard...but it seemed that every time we were beginning to
> >form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in
> >life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising; and a
> >wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while
> >producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation."
>
> >Petronius Arbiter c 210 B.C.
>
> Is this from the Satyricon? 'cause if it is Arbiter was about 300 years
> old when he died! He suicided during Nero's reign
>
Orin Thomas
In article <sOZdNHA8...@earp.demon.co.uk>,
bern...@zearp.demon.co.uk says...
> with a little gentle blackmail would work. Indeed the only hard part
> would be getting the first guild formed then when others saw the
> advantages of being open and above board the rest would form themselves
> with very little in the way of nudges to get them to fall in to line.
> The Assasins seem to be long established and could have formed a
> blueprint for the others.
According to the DWCompanion the assassins guild was formed after
Ventinari took power (2nd Ed P22) ... although it is said that
they had been *around* for ages beforehand.
One assumes that they had some sort of legitimacy before they
became a civic guild as Vetinari himself was educated at the
assassins guild. Which begs the question ... why did they need
guildhood when they were obviously respected by the community?
Perhaps this is better left to the possilbe "young vetinari"
novel Pterry has mentioned floating around in his head.
Orin (who would love to read Vetinari's Servant)
--
Orin Thomas. Postgraduate student in HPS, University of Melbourne
Keeper of alt.fan.pratchett FAQ http://www.au.lspace.org/~orin
mailto:or...@lspace.org Creator of newsgroup alt.books.pratchett
Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
Mattheq
In article <usSfyRAn...@unseen.demon.co.uk>, Terry Pratchett
Oh, well, anything to keep the books coming...
Need a kidney? Onna stick?
Mattheq, an Omnipotent Supreme Being who just might have one going cheap,
and that's cutting his own throat
--
"And then, one Thursday nearly two thousand years after one man had been
nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change..."
Victoria Martin
On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Orin Thomas wrote:
>
> Orin (who would love to read Vetinari's Servant)
Would you really? The examples of Vetinari's literary style that were
revealed in FoC were quite remarkably turgid. I don't know that I could
cope with more than a few pages of this 'tincture of night' stuff, not
even for the sake of uncovering hard evidence of his operating principles.
Which I probably wouldn't understand anyway.
Victoria
Ulrich Porsch
David Allsopp <dna...@cus.cam.ac.uk> by means of plastics tabs authored shapes of electrical currents to make electrons form the lines:
:>In article <1997072908...@dc02.netcon.net.au>,
:>Martin Hungerford <jong...@netcon.net.au> wrote:
:>>>life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising; and a
:>>>wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while
:>>>producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation."
:>>
:>>>Petronius Arbiter c 210 B.C.
:>>
:>>Is this from the Satyricon? 'cause if it is Arbiter was about 300 years
:>>old when he died! He suicided during Nero's reign
:>Where does the above passge come from? I've been using a slightly different
:>version of it as a .sig as I liked it so much:
:>"Reorganisation is a splendid method of producing the illusion of progress
:>whilst creating confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation."
:> - Petronius Arbiter 60AD
:>Is this date more accurate?
Yup, the date is more accurate. Petronius Arbiter is a key person in
the huge novel "Quo Vadis" (also a major motion picture, including
lots of carnivorous animals, to be carnivoured early christians,
and possibly one thousand elephants). Which is set during
the reign of Nero, around the beheading of St Paul, which
makes 60 AD quite good.
I emailed ppint about this, six months ago I think. I might have
fallen prey to ppint's spam traps, or to my cluelessness. Or
the correction has fallen prey to ppint's busy schedule!
But, yes, the two of you _are_ right about the date.
Best wishes
Ulrich
--
Ulrich Porsch
Ulrich...@iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
Wer spricht vom Siegen, "Ubersteh'n ist alles
Victoria Martin
On Fri, 1 Aug 1997, The Bellinghman wrote:
>
> My personal feeling on this is that Vetinari became Patrician precisely
> because of the very high turnover in Patricians prior to him. I imagine
> him as a high civil servant previous to his current career, who stepped in
> much to everyone's surprise and was initially accepted by those who had
> power as a compromise candidate while everyone drew breath. Much to their
> surprise, he is still there.
>
Mmm, it's possible, but I rather think that young Havelock's being head of
the enormously wealthy and powerful Vetinari family militates against this
theory. He belongs to one of the merchant families who have ruled A-M for
arounbd 300 years, and it's hard to imagine one of their skions settling
for a civil service post unless they had fallen on hard times, which the
Vetinaris haven't (even assuming we'd ever been given a whiff of
something remotely resembling a civil service - which we haven't). The one
profession we find the aristocracy in is Head of Guild - I suppose it
is not impossible that in his past Lord Vetinari was a high up in the
Assassins' Guild, but there is no positive evidence in favour of this
theory (and I hope there never will be). Besides, my own impression of the
man is that he is born to power as the sparks fly upward, if only because
no-one that competent could bear to watch other people making a pig's ear
of the job. But perhaps we had better drop this topic since Mr P himself
already knows the answer?
Victoria
Jason Lancaster
Ridcully the Brown wrote:
>
> Terry Pratchett wrote:
<snipped about books 'n stuff>
> > ...so many books, so little time...
>
> So what are you doing wasting your time posting to newsgroups? Get back
> to your writing this minute. I dunno about authors these days......
<in the manner of irate old man...>
I remember when authors used to sit down in front of a typewriter with a
box of blank paper and stay there 'til the book was damn well finished.
These "modern" authors with their fancy bloody "word processors" and
their "spell checkers"...I mean, what happened to dictionaries, eh?
What ever happened to sitting there, flicking through your Collins or
your miniture Oxford and just looking the bloody word up? And then
there's thesaurus's! Ooh, don't start me on them!
And when they finally start the damned book, it's "Ooh, I'll just go and
write a paragraph then I'll have to stop to stir the custard" or "just
got time for a quick page before Neighbours". Whatever happened to
graft, eh? Honest and decent hard work, toil, sweating over a book,
honing it delicately with attention to the detail that make a classic.
And this Terry Pratchett bloke. He's the worst of the lot! He sits
there, tapping away on his "computer", no doubt armed with winchester
drives and RAM and his fancy 5 1/4 inch floppy discs, talking to his
fans on the "internet", the world wide web, no doubt. And every six
months or so he drops one of his "humerous fantasy" books on the market
and expects to get to number one in the best seller charts every time.
And you know what's so galling about it...it does! You don't want jokes
on a fantasy book. Whatever happened to proper fantasy, your Tolkein,
hmm? I remember...
<...and so on ad nauseum>
Jase.
--
Beware...The Wildebeest Cometh.
To reply, simply remove "spam-free-zone." from address.
Victoria Martin
On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Bernard M. Earp wrote:
> In article <EE9A6...@kithrup.com>, Sean Eric Fagan <s...@kithrup.com>
> writes
> >Okay, so he formed the Guilds, or at least solidified them. (And made the
> >Thieves' Guild adhere to the rules, such as they were.) How did he do this?
This is described in reasonable detail in, I think. G!G!.
Victoria
David Roy
Jason Lancaster <j.d.la...@spam-free-zone.staffs.ac.uk> a écrit dans
l'article <33E5AA...@spam-free-zone.staffs.ac.uk>...
> Ridcully the Brown wrote:
> >
> > Terry Pratchett wrote:
>
> <snipped about books 'n stuff>
>
> > > ...so many books, so little time...
> >
> > So what are you doing wasting your time posting to newsgroups? Get back
> > to your writing this minute. I dunno about authors these days......
(rant snipped)
>
> And this Terry Pratchett bloke. He's the worst of the lot! He sits
> there, tapping away on his "computer", no doubt armed with winchester
> drives and RAM and his fancy 5 1/4 inch floppy discs, talking to his
> fans on the "internet", the world wide web, no doubt. And every six
> months or so he drops one of his "humerous fantasy" books on the market
--------------
As in full of legs? Am I missing something? Am I going to have to
re-read the entire series again? (OBSadFact : Which I did over the
winter.)
David
Colen McAlister
Victoria Martin <sann...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> carefully scribes
>> Orin (who would love to read Vetinari's Servant)
>
>Would you really? The examples of Vetinari's literary style that were
>revealed in FoC were quite remarkably turgid. I don't know that I could
>cope with more than a few pages of this 'tincture of night' stuff, not
>even for the sake of uncovering hard evidence of his operating principles.
>Which I probably wouldn't understand anyway.
That was justb when he was temporarily mad, I thought... the rest
(quoted in other books) seems less bizarre.
--
"I am Pentium of Borg. Division is futile. / Mail me at:
You will be approximated." \ co...@bryanmac.demon.co.uk
--> Chipchat, PCW / Or check out:
Remove a from daemon to autoreply http://www.bryanmac.demon.co.uk/colen
Christopher Davis
DR> == David Roy <Davi...@Computerchannel.com>
>> "humerous fantasy"
DR> As in full of legs? Am I missing something?
How soon you forget...the LUGGAGE.
--
Christopher Davis <c...@kei.com> <URL: http://www.kei.com/homepages/ckd/ >
Geographic locations in DNS! <URL: http://www.kei.com/homepages/ckd/dns-loc/ >
Jason Lancaster
David Roy wrote:
>
<my own virtual rant snipped>
>
> > And this Terry Pratchett bloke. He's the worst of the lot! He sits
> > there, tapping away on his "computer", no doubt armed with winchester
> > drives and RAM and his fancy 5 1/4 inch floppy discs, talking to his
> > fans on the "internet", the world wide web, no doubt. And every six
> > months or so he drops one of his "humerous fantasy" books on the market
> --------------
>
> As in full of legs? Am I missing something? Am I going to have to
> re-read the entire series again? (OBSadFact : Which I did over the
> winter.)
Oooooh! How very, very dare you! Picking up on my mistakes is simply
NOT allowed. I may have to do one of my virtual rants at you if you're
not careful. :)
It's funny you should say about your reading all the books recently
(funny strange, not funny ha ha), 'cause I was just thinking I could do
that before Jingo comes out...perhaps not that funny...oh well, I say
potential there...
mmes...@mindspring.com
David Roy wrote:
>
> Jason Lancaster <j.d.la...@spam-free-zone.staffs.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Ridcully the Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > Terry Pratchett wrote:
(pract'ly a cascade, almost)
> >
> > <snipped about books 'n stuff>
> >
> > > > ...so many books, so little time...
> > >
> > > So what are you doing wasting your time posting to newsgroups? Get back
> > > to your writing this minute. I dunno about authors these days......
>
> <snip>
>
> > And every six
> > months or so he drops one of his "humerous fantasy" books on the market
> --------------
>
> As in full of legs? Am I missing something? Am I going to have to
> re-read the entire series again? (OBSadFact : Which I did over the
> winter.)
No, no, I'm quite sure the humerous is the arm.
-Mary
<snip>
Glenn Andrews
Victoria Martin wrote in article ...
>
>
>On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Orin Thomas wrote:
>
>>
>> Orin (who would love to read Vetinari's Servant)
>
>Would you really? The examples of Vetinari's literary style that were
>revealed in FoC were quite remarkably turgid. I don't know that I could
>cope with more than a few pages of this 'tincture of night' stuff, not
>even for the sake of uncovering hard evidence of his operating
principles.
>Which I probably wouldn't understand anyway.
That was a section he wrote under the influece of arsenic. I don't think it
counts as part of his work.
I'd imagine his writing style to be very simple, very logical. You'd read
the book, and be amazed how everything drops into place, the /obviousness/
of what he's saying, the way to make people do exactly what you want them
to do, whilst all the time they think it's exactly what /they/ want to do.
In a literary sense, the writing may not be all that enthralling, more like
a textbook, almost. But the ideas and concepts behind the book would leave
you stunned.
Then you'd close the book, try and put some of it into practice. And a few
days later, when the angry mob presses round you, at that last instant,
/then/ you'd understand exactly what he wrote.
Well, possibly.
Glenn
--
If replying in E-mail, please remove the letter 'h' from the end of the
address.
Thank you.
Thomas Down
A while ago, Jason Lancaster wrote:
>
> And when they finally start the damned book, it's "Ooh, I'll just go and
> write a paragraph then I'll have to stop to stir the custard"
Oooh, I thought that was the fans, not the authors...
Thomas
--
- ----- Begin AFPCodeblock -----------
AFP Code 1.0 AB/C$ d(-) s+:- a- U- R--(++) F++ h+ P3a++ OSU-:++ C++++ M-
pp L+ c- B+ Cn+ PT+ !Pu !5 !X MT e+>+++ r++ y?
- ------ End AFPCodeblock ------------
Ross Smith
Mattheq wrote:
>
> In article <usSfyRAn...@unseen.demon.co.uk>, Terry Pratchett
> <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Need a kidney? Onna stick?
>
> Mattheq, an Omnipotent Supreme Being who just might have one going
> cheap,
> and that's cutting his own throat
Really? That's a bloody funny place to keep your kidneys... :-)
--
Ross Smith (Wellington, New Zealand) ...... <mailto:al...@netlink.co.nz>
......... <http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/3699/> ..........
"While I'd like to claim that it was a bitter and satirical
attack upon the mindless brutalities of war, it was really
just plain bloody violent..." -- Alan Moore
Dave 'The Lard Man'
mmes...@mindspring.com wrote in article <33E622...@mindspring.com>...
Somewhere near the funny-bone I suspect.
Ouch! alright alright I won't do it again now stop hitting me... ouch
--
The Lard Man
LARD! The Food of Champions - .sig sponsored by the Lard Marketing Board
AFP Code 0.4beta AM d s--: a U R-- F++ h- P= OS: ?C M-- pp--- L+ c-- B+
Cn PT-- Pu100@ 5 X- MT- eV !r x++++
Gideon Hallett
On Mon, 4 Aug 1997 18:56:47 +0100, "Glenn Andrews"
<gand...@dra.hmg.gbH> was a jolly decent type and shared with
us:
<snip>
>>Would you really? The examples of Vetinari's literary style that were
>>revealed in FoC were quite remarkably turgid. I don't know that I could
>>cope with more than a few pages of this 'tincture of night' stuff, not
>>even for the sake of uncovering hard evidence of his operating
>principles.
>>Which I probably wouldn't understand anyway.
>
>That was a section he wrote under the influece of arsenic. I don't think it
>counts as part of his work.
>
How badly poisoned was the Patrician? If he knew someone was
trying to poison him using a candle (as he did), then it would
have been far easier to burn it a token amount (to look
convincing) and dispose of the rest (say, burn it next to the
window). It's more probable that he would put on an act than that
he would put himself in real danger. I doubt that the doctors of
Ankh could really tell the difference, given their usual trouble
in diagnosing life or death...
I think he was putting on a show to satisfy those attempting to
kill him whilst trying to give hints to Vimes about who was
responsible (I have to wonder if Vimes' initial trip to the
heralds was entirely coincedental...).
I also have to wonder if it was the Patrician who sent the
assassin at the beginning (just to make sure Vimes was on his
toes for the day.) Maybe that's a little far-fetched though.
>Then you'd close the book, try and put some of it into practice. And a few
>days later, when the angry mob presses round you, at that last instant,
>/then/ you'd understand exactly what he wrote.
>
*grin*
Trust the Patrician! The Patrician is your friend! The Patrician
wants you to be happy! If you are not happy you may be used as a
troll's football...
Gideon.
--
(((( | Gideon_...@3Com.com.========================|
o__))))) | - Bringing permed '70s-retro hedgehogs to the =|
__ \'((((( | common people since he got bored one afternoon.=|
Victoria Martin
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Gideon Hallett wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 1997 18:56:47 +0100, "Glenn Andrews"
> <gand...@dra.hmg.gbH> was a jolly decent type and shared with
> us:
>
[of 'the tincture of night suffuses the soup of the afternoon']
> >
> >That was a section he wrote under the influece of arsenic. I don't think it
> >counts as part of his work.
> >
Spoilers, Gideon, spoilers! (For FoC)
> How badly poisoned was the Patrician?
If I recall the time frame correctly, the Patrician is found poisoned on
the morning of Day 1, is better in the afternoon and poisoned again that
night (found collapsed in the early hours of Day 2) and by that evening
has figured out who did it. I haven't got my copy to hand to check it, but
I *think* he does the writing on the afternoon of Day 1, thus allowing
Pterry to bring in the diary as a red herring.
If he knew someone was
> trying to poison him using a candle (as he did), then it would
> have been far easier to burn it a token amount (to look
> convincing) and dispose of the rest (say, burn it next to the
> window).
The implication, both of the time scale and the way the episode is
narrated, suggest that he really was 'under the influence' when he wrote
that appalling little line about Soup of the afternoon.. In fact, I assume
it was intended to indicate
how far his mental processes were clouded. The candle is burning on his
desk all the time he writes and he does seem a little off balance
mentally. We are no explicitly told that he has figured out about the
candle until the next day, and whilst he might have worked it out by Day
2, it seems unlikely, given how very ill he is the next day.
It's more probable that he would put on an act than that
> he would put himself in real danger. I doubt that the doctors of
> Ankh could really tell the difference, given their usual trouble
> in diagnosing life or death...
Possibly not the doctors, but i think Vimes could, and Vimes describes as
looking worse than if he were dead. I don't think even Vetinari could fake
that (or, if he could, why would he bother?)
>
>
> I also have to wonder if it was the Patrician who sent the
> assassin at the beginning (just to make sure Vimes was on his
> toes for the day.) Maybe that's a little far-fetched though.
I think it was the aristocracy who set the assassins on him, more
specifically the families Selachii and Rust, both of whom are smarting
from having had two of their skions hauled up by the law and actually
punished for the minor peccadilloes of rape and murder. This fuels their
rage against both Vetinari and Vimes and, in the short term, provides a
psychological motive for the conspiracy against Vetinari. In the
long-term, it's an indicator of the kind of far-reaching social change
Vetinari is introducing as he ushers A-M towards a more meritocratic
society. A lot of the background details of FoC deal with this kind of
social change and the painful adjustments it brings with it (the rise of
the nouveau guilds, the daughters of tripe merchants demanding coats of
arms, Carry's candle factory, the problem of ethnic minorities like the
undead, the exploitation and abuse of the weakest sectors of society and
the essentially racial prejudice against the golems etc.) The opening
attack on Vimes is far more significant than it at first appears - it
isn't just a jolly romp to get the book started, but a foreshadowing of
the more sustained attack on Vetinari (I doubt very much that it is a
coincidence that the attempt to murder Vimes occurs more or less
simultaneously with first dose of poison. The conspirators know perfectly
well that they need Vimes out of the way and an assassination is the
easiest way to achieve that. The only reason they don't try the same
approach on Vetinari is that they know the assassins couldn't cope).
Victoria
Victoria Martin
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Gideon Hallett wrote:
>
>
> <spoiler space>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> (after all, a graduate of the Assassin's Guild should be able to
> recognize the onset of poison early on...)
Yes, he does, and he gives Cheery a massive hint as he rambles on about
his school days - though i suppose that, too, could be attributed to
dissembling, if you wanted to. But realising that you're being poisoned is
rather different from working out *how* it's being done, and the first
dose is definitely genuine as we're given Vetinari's subjective
impressions of the effects, how his hair ached and that sort of thing.
>
>
> I think I need a bit of a rest, maybe my brain has started to
> overheat a bit, at least, I don't think I'd normally post
> something quite so dim. Eeep, stress is unpleasant.
Gosh, people don't usually climb down quite so gratifyingly. I wouldn't
have used the word "dim" , though - I thought it was rather an interesting
idea, if ultimately untenable. Like most interesting ideas.
Victoria
Nikt
In article <33E622...@mindspring.com>,
<URL:mailto:mmes...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> David Roy wrote:
> >
> > Jason Lancaster <j.d.la...@spam-free-zone.staffs.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > And every six months or so he drops one of his "humerous fantasy" books
> > > on the market
Next to the humerous nerve AKA the funny bone....
HTH...
> -Mary
ttfn
Nikt
--
Nick Denny, Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK. mailto:ni...@bitsmart.com
My Amazing Webpages http://www.netforward.com/bitsmart/?nikt
.. Madness takes its toll - please have exact change
Marina
Gideon Hallett wrote:
Spoilers for FoC and a bit for G!G! ahead...
> I think he was putting on a show to satisfy those attempting to
> kill him whilst trying to give hints to Vimes about who was
> responsible (I have to wonder if Vimes' initial trip to the
> heralds was entirely coincedental...).
>
I don't think he was, in fact giving Vimes hints - sinse he debates with
himself upon the possibility of doing so quite late into the story.
Although it is abvious he fugured out what was poisoning him eventually,
and managed to avoid death, it is also apparent that he was quite sick
to begin with. It is tempting, based on the example of G!G! and the
dungeon sequence there, to assume that this was all some bizantine plot
by Vetinary himself in order to increase his influence, but I do not
think this was initially the case.
Once he cracked the plot, as it were, he does make use of this poisoning
to his needs - presenting the city with the horrible possibility of
having to choose his succssor, for one, and also motivating Vimes. But
someone did try to kill him, without asking his permission...
> I also have to wonder if it was the Patrician who sent the
> assassin at the beginning (just to make sure Vimes was on his
> toes for the day.) Maybe that's a little far-fetched though.
>
But I seem to recall that the assassins were a regular part of Vimes'
morning rutine. Also, and do correct me if I'm wrong, didn't Vimes
question the assassin while he was hanging above the dragon pens, and
was told that one of the aristocratic families sent him?
Marina
--
===================================================
Marina Strinkovsky Macom Networking Ltd.
mar...@macom.co.il http://www.macom.co.il
===================================================
I am but a pen in the hand of God writing love letters
to humanity.
-- Mother Teresa
Terry Pratchett
In article <33e8bd4d...@news.lspace.org>, The Gonzo Lager
<b...@iac.net> writes
>Well, IT has only just come out in hardback---glitzy cover & all,
>courtesy of Harper Collins/Harper Prisms. I wish they wouldn't do the
>covers like that but, oh well, it beats the faux-Josh Kirbys that used
>to grace most of the Merkin books.
>
>I'm wondering if it's wise of Pterry to have his books released
>through Harper Collins. They've got initiated a round of layoffs (420
>employees). From a Reuters article I gleaned:
Yeah, I know all this stuff, but remember I've been with them for some
years now. I signed a three book deal with them a couple of months ago.
Nothing's been said to suggest it won't be honoured.
--
Terry Pratchett
The Gonzo Lager
On the last episode of alt.books.pratchett, Fau^H^H^HEric said:
>Does anyone know when the next book is out? You probably all know this, but
>I've been in merkia for a while, and by definition out of touch.
Well, IT has only just come out in hardback---glitzy cover & all,
courtesy of Harper Collins/Harper Prisms. I wish they wouldn't do the
covers like that but, oh well, it beats the faux-Josh Kirbys that used
to grace most of the Merkin books.
I'm wondering if it's wise of Pterry to have his books released
through Harper Collins. They've got initiated a round of layoffs (420
employees). From a Reuters article I gleaned:
HarperCollins "will focus its publishing efforts on a defined
number of strategic areas," and a spokesman said it will scale
back in non-commercial fiction.
"That's a fairly significant writedown," said Chris Dixon, an
analyst at PaineWebber. "There are clearly a number of
problems at HarperCollins."
A spokesman said the writeoff would be a mixture of cancelling
and buying out author contracts as well as writing off
inventories of unsold books.
Industry executives said HarperCollins has gone through its
author lists and "cleaned out" unprofitable ones. Like other
publishers, HarperCollins has suffered from problems facing
the industry such as the financial burden of accepting returns
of unsold books from booksellers.
I only bring this up because in the SFX DW special, I recall Pterry
saying something to the effect that he sells enough books in the US so
he's not a miserable failure. Terry? Any comments?
BTW, the whole article can be seen at
http://www.yahoo.com/text/headlines/970804/entertainment/stories/industry_harpercollins_2.html
(Yeesh, where's a word-wrap when you need it?)
--
The Gonzo Lager, a complete latitudinarian.
ps "What eez a figgin?" ;)
Reinier
Simon Slavin <sla...@hearsay.demon.co.uk.NOJUNK> wrote in article
<B01003E6...@0.0.0.0>...
<SNIP>
> The best authors write the kind of books they'd want to read.
> Their sole reason for writing the book is to see how it turns out.
I beg to differ. I have read claims of people (whom I consider to be
pretty good authors) whose paraphrased opinion comes down to:
"The best of authors tend to write in order to feed themselves and their
dependants."
The statement comes from Dickens, Twain and Heinlein (even though I think I
'heard' from Heinlein that Twain thought so too). I think Heinlein said he
preferred writing to doing any "honest work", and that his inspiration came
from what he thought would please the punters.
Groeten,
Reinier.
--
----- Begin AFPCodeblock -----------
AFP Code 1.0 AC d+ s++:- a U+ R F+ h P-- OS:-- ?C M- !pp L+ c- B+ Cn PT---
Pu70@ 5-- X? MT e++ r++ x++
------ End AFPCodeblock ------------
Terry Pratchett
In article <01bca3d8$590b2fa0$c87a...@NL0382.europe.logica.com>,
Reinier <Sjo...@logica.com> writes
>
>Simon Slavin <sla...@hearsay.demon.co.uk.NOJUNK> wrote in article
><B01003E6...@0.0.0.0>...
><SNIP>
>> The best authors write the kind of books they'd want to read.
>> Their sole reason for writing the book is to see how it turns out.
>
>I beg to differ. I have read claims of people (whom I consider to be
>pretty good authors) whose paraphrased opinion comes down to:
>"The best of authors tend to write in order to feed themselves and their
>dependants."
>The statement comes from Dickens, Twain and Heinlein (even though I think I
>'heard' from Heinlein that Twain thought so too). I think Heinlein said he
>preferred writing to doing any "honest work", and that his inspiration came
>from what he thought would please the punters.
Yes, but authors also lie a lot. I think popular writers tend to be
*professional* -- they work at it, they do the tours, they answer the
mail, they start another book...they don't lounge around waiting for
ideas. And they don't waste time.
Dickens, as you know, never got round to starting his home page.
--
Terry Pratchett
Mattheq
In article <33E57B44...@netlink.co.nz>, Ross Smith
<al...@netlink.co.nz> wrote:
> Mattheq wrote:
> > In article <usSfyRAn...@unseen.demon.co.uk>, Terry Pratchett
> > <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > > ...so many books, so little time...
> > Oh, well, anything to keep the books coming...
> > Need a kidney? Onna stick?
> > Mattheq, an Omnipotent Supreme Being who just might have one going
> > cheap,
> > and that's cutting his own throat
> Really? That's a bloody funny place to keep your kidneys... :-)
Actually, it's cutting someone else's throat, to procure the kidney.
Wanna buy a lung? Inna bun?
Mattheq
Mike Knell
In article <33e9e5b1...@news.demon.co.uk>,
David Howe <Webmaster@Tecsun> wrote:
>Probably off-topic, but whatever happened to ROT13 for spoiler posts?
>Do many people have trouble with it?
Hmm.. not really a convention on AFP. The acceptable minimum is (a) a
warning in the subject line along the lines of [SPOILERS] *and* (b) a
couple of screenfuls of spoiler space. ROT13 seems to be reserved for
B5 discussions at the mo.. *growl*
Light & stardust,
mpk
--
Mike Knell -- Officially Too Clueless To Admin Solaris (tm) [MK771]
Mr. Tony Blair! You are a thirsty gonk! --- http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~mpk/