Moving Pictures (tiny spoilers for MP and SM, maybe)
Mervyn Dean
Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people who
didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series. If
we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then SM is
definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the wizards
group
What do other readers think?
James Dean
Patrick MARCEL
> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
> Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people who
> didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
> and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series.
Quite. Like "Soul Music", it's definitely not one of my favourite
Pratchett novels, in spite of my being a fan of cinema. It's a basic DW
book (big wacky menace gets loose, big wacky menace gets crushed)
without the extra bits.
I don't care it doesn't fit into one of the main "cycles", though (where
do you put "Pyramids", then?).
Patrick
--
"We are all born as molecules in the heart of a billion stars; molecules
that do not understand politics or policies or differences. Over a
billion years, we foolish molecules forget who we are, and where we came
from. In desperate acts of ego we give ourselves names, fight over lines
on maps, and pretend our light is better than everyone else's. The flame
reminds us of the piece of those stars that lives on inside us, the
spark that tells us, 'you know better'." JMS
Robert Craine
"Mervyn Dean" <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote:
> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
> Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on
people who
> didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
> and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series.
> we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then
SM is
> definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the
wizards
> group
> What do other readers think?
> James Dean
anyway. Along with SM, I didn't get many of the jokes/references but pop
and movies are things you are always learning new things about (I seem
to, anyway) and every so often I either here something or reread the
book and think 'so that's why.....' I like that.
As to the second point, so what? Pyramids and Small Gods were, IMHO, two
of his best, and they didn't fit in with your system. MP did however
feature the UU faculty quite strongly, and you could link it in with the
rincewind(wizards) books or with the 'other book' within Reaper Man.
Robert
--
I could, of course, be wrong...
------------
I'm me, no-one else is, don't even think of saying otherwise.
Any claims to be me will be dealt with severely.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Miq
>To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
>Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people who
>didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
<shrug> Everyone has their own preferred order. Personally, I rate MP
a lot higher than SM, but I'm sure others' mileage varies tremendously.
>and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series. If
>we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then SM is
>definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the wizards
>group
> What do other readers think?
Why would we want to split the books up into anything? Why would that
be a disadvantage? I dislike the idea of categorising the books like
that: "This one's about Death, that one's about Rincewind", and so on.
It obscures the fact that the books are about so much *more* than the
protagonists.
In this case, for instance, it obscures the fact that SM has a lot more
in common, plotwise, with MP than it does with, say, 'Mort'. Maybe
Terry, dissatisfied with MP, decided to take a second shot at the story
about a cultural force from our world invading the Disc; but this time,
instead of the Dungeon Dimension creatures spotting the possibility and
exploiting it, music is treated as something that lives and thinks and
takes the initiative for itself.
For my money, this doesn't really work - I'm happier with the more
conventional story of MP. But I'd be hard pressed to explain why.
--
Miq
New to afp/abp? check http://www.lspace.org/
Still stuck? Mail the Clue Fairies at afp-...@lspace.org
afp welcome message: http://www.lspace.org/fandom/afp/welcome.html
Davina Spafford
Mervyn Dean wrote in message <871hvm$2h8$1...@epos.tesco.net>...
>To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
>Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people
who
>didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
>we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then SM is
>definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the wizards
>group
> What do other readers think?
>
>
well, MP was my first actual Discworld book, thought it was a hoot, and is
what led me in search of the rest of them (and the HUGE expense at a little
bookshop in Canterbury on my one lil trip thru England... hehehee)
it may not be the best one he's written, but then... we all have our own
opinions on that for our own reasons... i found it to be an enjoyable read
Davina
pia
> Moving Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same
> effect on people who didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1)The plot's not as good(IMHO)and
> 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the
> series. If we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and
> Death, then SM is definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits
> comfortably into the wizards group
> What do other readers think?
> James Dean
I cannot see why not fitting in a series would be a disadvantage. Where
is it written that they all ought to fall into clear-cut categories?
Besides, all books *should* be able to stand alone, even those which
undoubtedly are part of a cycle.
As for my opinion about MP, I got the in-jokes all right, I'm quite
enough of a Cthinema enthusiast for that (btw I haven't read SM yet,
but being pathetically unfamiliar with history of rock I probably won't
enjoy it as much as I could otherwise). Despite of this, MP left me
curiously underinvolved in the emotional level. I'm not sure why this
is so. Possibly because Victor & Ginger are just not sympathetic enough
to be cared about?
The psychology of fame I found well dealt with. People with no
ambition, no skills, no talents. Wanting to be known by everyone.
Wanting to be famous and important, not by doing but just by being. And
Gaspode/Laddie relationship had great tragedy in it. It connects with
the fame thing: what is important is how you appear, not what you do.
Some spoiler space just in case
.
1
2
3
4
5
.
.
But what I found weak in the plot was the workings of the Hollywood
Dream and Uncle Osric. I suppose they were meant to be quite distinct
things - the idea and its guard (was the guard in form of Oscar because
that is the price for best manufactured illusion, i.e. reminder for us
that movies are not for real?). Still they worked in the same way,
creeping into people's minds and using them for something. It was
difficult to differentiate when it was the Bad Force in action and when
the Good One.
pia, Sister of Vetinari
*I do have a life but I try to avoid it*
-to reply remove NOPiSPAM+invalid
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Matthew Hambley
"Mervyn Dean" <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote:
> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
> Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people
> who didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO) and 2) It never really seems to fit
> in with the rest of the series. If we're splitting them up into wizards,
> witches, guards and Death, then SM is definitely Death, but I don't think
> MP fits comfortably into the wizards group
Obviously people who don't like SM because it's referential wont like MP.
However I think it's folly to try and catogarise Pratchetts books as you
have. The wizards, witches, guards and Death are all great characters
which is why they keep being returned to. However Small Gods doesn't
really fall into any of these groups and neither does Piramids. Then
there's TCoM, TLF, E, IT, HF and TLC which also don't fall into your
catagories. Some of them could be regarded Rincewind books I supose but
that is to miss the point. I find that the most fun is to be gained by
taking each book one at a time while keeping in mind the rest of the
continuity. Not by trying to partition them off.
--
(\/)atthew Hambley ----------------\ "You'd better hope there's intelligent
\ life somewhere out in space because
snow...@therealm.freeserve.co.uk \ there's bugger all down here on
http://www.therealm.freeserve.co.uk/ \ Earth" - The Galaxy Song, M. Python
Lucio
Mervyn Dean <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:871hvm$2h8$1...@epos.tesco.net...
> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
> Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people
who
> didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO)
> and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series. If
> we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then SM
is
> definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the wizards
> group
> James Dean
>
>
But MP has GASPODE!!!!!
Okay, well, if that isn't reason enough to like it, here's some other
things. Both SM and MP have an absence of an easily definable evil. Think
about it. In L&L it's the elves. In M@A it's the dude with the gonne. In
CJ it's the vampires. Even in IT, it's Lord Hong (Though I wish it was Lord
MacSweeney). In SM, the music's pervasive, and bad, but it also does good
things. In MP, you don't know who to root for, the Hollywood dreams, or the
Oscar (At least, I was frightened by the Oscar). I dunno. It wasn't my
favorite book, but it certainly wasn't BAD.
But again I say, IT HAD GASPODE!!!!
Richard Eney
Matthew Hambley <snow...@therealm.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> "Mervyn Dean" <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote:
>> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about Moving
>> Pictures. In my mind, this would have exactly the same effect on people
>> who didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
>> 1) The plot's not as good(IMHO) and 2) It never really seems to fit
>> in with the rest of the series. If we're splitting them up into wizards,
>> witches, guards and Death, then SM is definitely Death, but I don't think
The main character in MP is trained as a wizard, and Ridcully is
introduced and begins his assault on the Bursar. I'd say MP is rather
important in the 'wizards' series, as it sets up UU in the 'new' pattern
to which we are now accustomed.
>Obviously people who don't like SM because it's referential wont like MP.
>However I think it's folly to try and catogarise Pratchetts books as you
>have. The wizards, witches, guards and Death are all great characters
>which is why they keep being returned to. However Small Gods doesn't
>really fall into any of these groups and neither does Piramids. Then
>there's TCoM, TLF, E, IT, HF and TLC which also don't fall into your
>catagories. Some of them could be regarded Rincewind books I supose
TCoM, TLF, E, IT and TLC _are_ Rincewind books. They are 'wizards' books
because the viewpoint character, R, is a wizard. That is partly true of
Hf but IMO the main character of Hf is Susan, or perhaps the relationship
between Susan and Death, which makes it a Death book.
> but that is to miss the point. I find that the most fun is to be
>gained by taking each book one at a time while keeping in mind the
>rest of the continuity. Not by trying to partition them off.
Still, the categories are a handy way to discuss the ways the books link
together. They are not mutually exclusive, and can't be, because minor
characters in one book will show up in others. The longer Terry keeps
writing them, the more this will happen. Pyramids was an Assassins book;
it comes before Hf. Hf is a Susan/Death/Wizards/Assassins book. SG is a
standalone but it could be called an Omnian book for the purpose of
linking it with MaA and the following Watch books, and also with CJ, which
is primarily a Witches book. However, if we want to discuss Uberwald, we
will find references in both Witches and Watch books. And so on. (No
wonder Terry is planning to write books set in other areas of the Disc!)
It may be more useful for the heavier discussions to consider the books
that are linked by similar themes, as Miq has, but even then I think a
case might be made for a given theme being handled differently according
to which type of character is encountering it. The theme of Identity, for
instance, I think may be approached differently from the Witch and Wizard
points of view. Granny has no personal experience of an identity crisis
in WA, though she is shown having some intellectual understanding of it
from the outside by the time of M!M and CJ. Rincewind's identity as a
wizard is called into question every time, overtly in S by the Librarian,
and at first he isn't entirely sure he wants it and occasionally considers
giving it up, but doesn't - it is about the only thing he will fight for.
Wizards seem to have more choice in the matter than Witches. ICBW.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
In article <09920fb9...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com>,
pia <Pia.Gerts...@genetik.uu.se.invalid> wrote:
>"Mervyn Dean" <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote:
>> To add to the Soul Music, debate, what did people think about
>> Moving Pictures.
<snips>
>> 1)The plot's not as good(IMHO)
>> What do other readers think?
>> James Dean
>
>As for my opinion about MP, I got the in-jokes all right, I'm quite
>enough of a Cthinema enthusiast for that (btw I haven't read SM yet,
>but being pathetically unfamiliar with history of rock I probably won't
>enjoy it as much as I could otherwise). Despite of this, MP left me
>curiously underinvolved in the emotional level. I'm not sure why this
>is so. Possibly because Victor & Ginger are just not sympathetic enough
>to be cared about?
<snips>
>Some spoiler space just in case
>
>The psychology of fame I found well dealt with. People with no
>ambition, no skills, no talents. Wanting to be known by everyone.
>Wanting to be famous and important, not by doing but just by being. And
>Gaspode/Laddie relationship had great tragedy in it. It connects with
>the fame thing: what is important is how you appear, not what you do.
>But what I found weak in the plot was the workings of the Hollywood
>Dream and Uncle Osric. I suppose they were meant to be quite distinct
>things - the idea and its guard (was the guard in form of Oscar because
>that is the price for best manufactured illusion, i.e. reminder for us
>that movies are not for real?). Still they worked in the same way,
>creeping into people's minds and using them for something. It was
>difficult to differentiate when it was the Bad Force in action and when
>the Good One.
Fantasy and illusion are neutral as long as they are under control. From
the point of view of high philosophy, they are always bad because they
block us from perceiving reality. However, on a purely human level,
blocking reality a bit isn't always a bad thing. (Compare being knurd.)
Victor is trained as a wizard, but doesn't want to actually work hard at
anything. This laziness is one reason he is less appealing as a main
character - yet Victor has worked harder, intellectually, at being a
student wizard than most graduated wizards have, and he has worked harder
physically at being fit than most ordinary people do, let alone wizards -
it is the paradox of his situation that his laziness has made him work
very hard at some things.
His situation might be defined as a desire not to have to be on his own;
he depends on the shelter of UU and the student stipend. Only the glamour
(which is a magical term) of HolyWood can pull him out of UU. The power
of fantasy and illusion lead him to try being on his own, with all the
personal failure that happens before he takes firm action and forces his
way into the picture. This is a turning point, because it's the first
time he's shown actually taking a hand in his own destiny. If he hadn't,
he would have been just another failure.
The other main characters are not drawn by the same motives. Ginger
wants a job that isn't limited by the options available up to then, a
highly acceptable motive IMO. Dibbler wants to be a success at something,
and in fact, he _is_ a success as long as other people restrain both his
ambition and his greed.
Victor's success at the end is based on a mixture of what he has learned
as a wizard and what he has learned in HolyWood, and it's the same overall
Discworld theme used in other books: if you work it right, the magic will
work * just long enough *, and that's all you need. At the end, Victor
and Ginger have become themselves, and it doesn't really matter what they
do for a living after that; they'll find something acceptable because they
no longer are defining themselves by what they do.
Hmm, another book about Identity Theme.
IMO
=Tamar
Marc Oldenhof
pia <Pia.Gerts...@genetik.uu.se.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
> Some spoiler space just in case
> .
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> .
> .
> But what I found weak in the plot was the workings of the Hollywood
> Dream and Uncle Osric. I suppose they were meant to be quite distinct
> things - the idea and its guard (was the guard in form of Oscar
because
> that is the price for best manufactured illusion, i.e. reminder for us
> that movies are not for real?).
<snip>
Actually, I liked the image of the Oscar restraining the Wild Idea
(i.e. boundless creativity) in movies. I don't know if Pratchett meant
it like that, though...
Marc
David Chapman
news:876rof$h2s$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
No; the point was that people had forgotten the purpose of the guardian.
YMMV.
--
I was always going to be something someday.
And eventually, they're going to find out what it is.
Mervyn Dean
Lucio wrote in message <872e7u$8mv$1...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>who
>> didn't like SM, and has the disadvantages that,
>> and 2) It never really seems to fit in with the rest of the series. If
>> we're splitting them up into wizards, witches, guards and Death, then SM
>is
>> definitely Death, but I don't think MP fits comfortably into the wizards
>> group
>> James Dean
>>
>>
>
>
Actually, I like MP, if only because I'm a bit of a film buff. The point I
was making is that everyone was criticising SM, but MP is very similar.
I gotta agree with you on Gaspode, though. I wish he'd been in some
more books, not just MP and MAA.
Also, when I tried splitting them up, I should have put 'Rincewind'
books seperately, and P and SG still don't fit in.
James Dean
Richard Eney
tiny not-really-spoiler for MP, FoC and T5E
In article <877j1e$s4m$1...@barcode.tesco.net>,
Mervyn Dean <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote:
>Lucio wrote in message <872e7u$8mv$1...@jetsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
>>Mervyn Dean <mervy...@tesco.net> wrote
<snips>
>>> what did people think about Moving Pictures.
x
x
x
>>But MP has GASPODE!!!!!
> I gotta agree with you on Gaspode, though. I wish he'd been in some
>more books, not just MP and MAA.
You'll be happy to know Gaspode appears briefly in FoC and has a
significant role in T5E.
=Tamar
Domsablos
> I didn't get many of the jokes/references but pop
> and movies are things you are always learning new things about (I seem
> to, anyway) and every so often I either here something or reread the
> book and think 'so that's why.....' I like that.
Oh yes like the Gormanghast ref in L&L :) that was one that was bugging
me for yonks, what was it? oh yes the castle in genua looked like the
person who designed it had seen gormanghast but didnt have the budget.
Only got that one after it came on TV recently.
--
I am a poet without a pen
an artist without inspiration
I run without moving
trapped within another's dreams
Mike Putnam
wrote:
>
>> I didn't get many of the jokes/references but pop
>> and movies are things you are always learning new things about (I seem
>> to, anyway) and every so often I either here something or reread the
>> book and think 'so that's why.....' I like that.
>
>Oh yes like the Gormanghast ref in L&L :) that was one that was bugging
>me for yonks, what was it? oh yes the castle in genua looked like the
>person who designed it had seen gormanghast but didnt have the budget.
>Only got that one after it came on TV recently.
I remember that reference, though without looking it up I'm fairly
sure it's not quite right. L&L isn't about Genua. I'm sure the quote
is either not L&L or not Genua. Besides, Genua was more Disneyworld
than Gormenghast.
But the thing that's troubling me about the Gormenghast reference is
that I know there's another one somewhere, where something is
described as making Gormenghast look like a toolshed on a railway
allottment[1]. I can't remember where. Help?
Until I can find both, I can't rid myself of the feeling that both
quotes refer to the same thing (Lancre castle, I think), which would
be a contra^H^H^H^H^H^Halternative past.
[1] For non-Brits, a railway allottment is where the railway company
hires out small strips of land that don't fit well into the geometry
of the track plan to local people, who then grow vegetables on their
allottments. Each of them needs to store their tools in a shed on
their own allotment. Obviously, the sheds are not big.
--
Mike Putnam, Windsor UK
mi...@mikeput.demon.co.uk
MikeXXXX
Mike Putnam wrote in message ...
you've probably looked it up now - but what the heck
Gormenghast on a budget is wyrd sisters
Railway shed is Equal Rites
This was by putting gormenghast in the search box on http://www.lspace.org/
Has anyone got the urls for the unofficial annotation collections ? My
bookmarks recently went the same way as the lost chapter
oorroo
Mike
--
New to afp/abp? check http://www.lspace.org/
"No man can tell you I'm an unreasonable chap.
THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT"
Terry Pratchett, Hogfather.