Re: Pratchett on Rowling, again, sort of

222 views
Skip to first unread message

Terry Pratchett

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 12:43:49 PM12/17/06
to
In message <1166365523.6...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Sirius Kase <Siriu...@gmail.com> writes
>
>>
>> -------------
>
>He was posed a question, "Did Rowling copy you?", that he honestly does
>nt know the anwer to, only Rowling knows for sure. So he said his
>thing about cake ingredients, where he describes the says Rowlling's
>book are related to his books in a similar way to his books being
>related to Tolkein. They build on ideas of the previous author. Then
>the reporter asks almost the same question again, which Pratchett
>refuses to answer. The helpful reporter tells us he "squeaks", which
>apparently means "Yes" in the context of the article. My question, is
>that what Pratchett meant to communicate? i wonder if he has reacted to
>this interview?
>
with annoyance. And that was one of the more subtle leading questions
I've had in the past month or so. One was particularly open in
attempting to start a row (with the implication that they'd hold my
towel, of course.) They would love a fight

Ye gods, we've all been though this before. In a genre, it all comes
out of the same big pot, yadda, yadda, And that's true. As a writer
you can dip it and pull out 'Magic school' or 'dragon riders' or
whatever, and you understand that someone else might do exactly the
same thing and that's okay provided everyone understands that they
should put their own skin on the idea. I have never accused JKR of
plagiarism, although I get the impression that some of her fans think I
do so all the time

Why clam up in that interview? Because I'd said my piece. It's the
only way to be sure. A wrong phrasing, the wrong tone of voice and
there's trouble. Silence, of course, can be misinterpreted, but at
least it's silence.

I've been getting stuff like this:

Did you get the name Hogswatch from Hogwarts?

No, I made it up in The Colour of Magic, out of Hogmanay and Watch
night.

When was that?

1983.

Ah, so you're saying she stole it from you?

Silence or changing the subject are the only safe ways out, and not that
safe, at that.

--
Terry Pratchett

Thomas Zahr

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 3:53:44 PM12/17/06
to
Terry Pratchett posted:

... who plagiarised who - or why do they think so

> Silence or changing the subject are the only safe ways out,
> and not that safe, at that.

You're probably right there. AND, since there's no
controversy in silence, they'll sell less copies (or adds or
whatever), which serves them exactly right.

Anyway, hang in there and Happy Hogswatch ...

--
Ciao

Thomas =:-)
<To sig or not to sig, that is the question?>

Eric Jarvis

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 5:02:09 PM12/17/06
to
Thomas Zahr ThomasZ...@zahr-mail.de wrote in
<Xns989CDEBBFE178T...@ID-179574.user.uni-berlin.de>:

> Terry Pratchett posted:
>
> ... who plagiarised who - or why do they think so
>
> > Silence or changing the subject are the only safe ways out,
> > and not that safe, at that.
>
> You're probably right there. AND, since there's no
> controversy in silence, they'll sell less copies (or adds or
> whatever), which serves them exactly right.
>

My experience is that you have to be careful with silence too when it
comes to print journalists. At least with broadcast media they can't
simply print the answer they wanted you to give even when you've refused
to answer the question.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

GaryN

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 9:58:11 PM12/17/06
to
Eric Jarvis <use...@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote in
news:MPG.1fefcebdc...@www.motzarella.org:

Unfortunately we live in a world where "No Comment" in any context is
taken to mean either "Yes I did but I'm not going to tell you" or "Yes
they did but I'll look bad if I slag them off" according to the
questioner's preconceptions.

The preconceived attitude is what will appear in the printed media.

I do not mean this to apply only to this particular instance - it's a
general phenomenom.


gary (Who has before now been selectively quoted by the local rag)


--
"If Americans had longer attention spans, who knows the follies they
could have wrought?"

Jack Womak

Richard Eney

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 10:07:36 PM12/17/06
to
In article <MPG.1fefcebdc...@www.motzarella.org>,
Eric Jarvis <use...@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote:
>Thomas Zahr ThomasZ...@zahr-mail.de wrote
>> Terry Pratchett posted:
>>
>> ... who plagiarised who - or why do they think so
>>
>> > Silence or changing the subject are the only safe ways out,
>> > and not that safe, at that.
>>
>> You're probably right there. AND, since there's no
>> controversy in silence, they'll sell less copies (or adds or
>> whatever), which serves them exactly right.
>
>My experience is that you have to be careful with silence too when it
>comes to print journalists. At least with broadcast media they can't
>simply print the answer they wanted you to give even when you've
>refused to answer the question.

But virtually every tv "interview" is done by filming the answers and
later on, filming the presenter asking "the" questions, which have been
manufactured to make the presenter sound brilliant to have "elicited"
the answers. The camera can lie just as much as print media can.

Since this now has no specific relevance to Harry Potter, I have
set Followups to alt.fan.pratchett.

=Tamar

Pip R. Lagenta

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 10:12:22 PM12/17/06
to
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 17:43:49 +0000, Terry Pratchett
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]

>I've been getting stuff like this:
>
>Did you get the name Hogswatch from Hogwarts?
>
>No, I made it up in The Colour of Magic, out of Hogmanay and Watch
>night.
>
>When was that?
>
>1983.
>
>Ah, so you're saying she stole it from you?
>
>Silence or changing the subject are the only safe ways out, and not that
>safe, at that.

Heh! Indeed, not all that safe! People with an agenda can get a lot
of mileage out of just silence.

I am reminded of when some creationists accosted Richard Dawkins in
his own home. The creationists got a *huge* propaganda victory out of
just the silence that resulted when Dawkins realized that he had been
had.

Details:
<http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/1998/3_crexpose.htm>

>
--
內躬偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,
Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta
�虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌

-- Pip R. Lagenta
President for Life
International Organization Of People Named Pip R. Lagenta
(If your name is Pip R. Lagenta, ask about our dues!)
<http://home.comcast.net/~galentripp/pip.html>
(For Email: I'm at home, not work.)

Ed

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 11:00:11 PM12/17/06
to

Not to mention that "Hogwart" shows up in "The Labrynth" as one of the
names the Goblin King manages to mangle out of "Hoggle." Doesn't mean a
thing in the real world unless you're trying to start a fight.

I have a short story from a collection Isaac Asimov compiled. The story
is from the 50s and is called "The Wall Around The World." It deals
with a young man whose father has disappeared (no mention of what
happened to his mother) and who is forced to live with an overbearing
uncle and a bullying nephew (again, the aunt is there, but a
non-entity) while attending a school for wizards! Being that it
appeared in a science fiction magazine, technology is given as the
savior of the story when the boy develops a glider to lift his
underpowered broom over the mysterious wall that runs around their
entire village (the "world" of the title).

I doubt very much that Rowling "stole" anything from this story any
more than she "stole" anything from you. (Or you from her for that
matter!) The tapestry just has things that run along similar threads.

eirde...@yahoo.se

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 11:13:56 PM12/17/06
to

Silly journalists - don't they know that Terry Pratchett and Jo
Rowling *both* stole the idea of a wizarding school from Ursula K
LeGuin? :-P

Richard Eney

unread,
Dec 17, 2006, 11:42:44 PM12/17/06
to
In article <1166415236.0...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,

Wizard school in fiction goes back to the 14th century.
Do a Google search for "wizard schools".

=Tamar

FrancoGroenewald

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 12:35:19 AM12/18/06
to

Funny thing is these journalist never ask JKR anything about Pratchett
or the Discworld.

David Chapman

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 3:01:34 AM12/18/06
to
From the Collected Witterings of Richard Eney, volume 23:

Yes, Tamar, but it is rather more difficult for them to *film* you saying
something you never said.


Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 4:24:39 AM12/18/06
to
eirde...@yahoo.se said:

Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU will also know why,
one day, it may well become KC.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 4:54:54 AM12/18/06
to
Pip R. Lagenta said:

<snip>


>
> I am reminded of when some creationists accosted Richard Dawkins in
> his own home. The creationists got a *huge* propaganda victory out of
> just the silence that resulted when Dawkins realized that he had been
> had.
>
> Details:
> <http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/1998/3_crexpose.htm>

This is very saddening, if true (about which I am sceptical). It seems some
people don't understand that truth is way more important than religion.
After all, God didn't say "You shall know lies, and lies shall set you
free." Quite the opposite, in fact.

Tiny Bulcher

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 5:10:46 AM12/18/06
to

Ed wrote:
>
> Not to mention that "Hogwart" shows up in "The Labrynth" as one of the
> names the Goblin King manages to mangle out of "Hoggle." Doesn't mean a
> thing in the real world unless you're trying to start a fight.

There's a 'hoggwarts skool' in nigel molesworth, too. (One of the
skools that beat st.custards at foopball, iirc).

--
tiny

Ed

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 5:21:35 AM12/18/06
to

I don't know what "nigel molesworth" is.

And while I'm responding, in my post, I obviously ment "overbearing
uncle and bullying <cousin>" not nephew!

mrslant

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 6:30:41 AM12/18/06
to

Ed wrote:
> Tiny Bulcher wrote:
> > Ed wrote:
> > >
> > > Not to mention that "Hogwart" shows up in "The Labrynth" as one of the
> > > names the Goblin King manages to mangle out of "Hoggle." Doesn't mean a
> > > thing in the real world unless you're trying to start a fight.
> >
> > There's a 'hoggwarts skool' in nigel molesworth, too. (One of the
> > skools that beat st.custards at foopball, iirc).
> >
> > --
> > tiny
>
> I don't know what "nigel molesworth" is.
>

The Nigel Molesworth books ("Down With Skool!", "How To Be Topp",
"Whizz For Atomms" and "Back In The Jug Agane") by Geoffrey Willans and
Ronald Searle - fictitious 1950s schoolboy diaries with cartoon
illustrations. Highly recommended, if somewhat dated. Now available in
an omnibus edition entitled "Molesworth".

It seems to have slipped Terry's mind above that he made up "Hogswatch"
some time before TCOM - it's mentioned in "The Dark Side of the Sun"
too. ;-)

Colin

Deevo

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:08:44 AM12/18/06
to
"mrslant" <Co...@unfortu.net> wrote in message
news:1166441441.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
<snip>

> The Nigel Molesworth books ("Down With Skool!", "How To Be Topp",
> "Whizz For Atomms" and "Back In The Jug Agane") by Geoffrey Willans and
> Ronald Searle - fictitious 1950s schoolboy diaries with cartoon
> illustrations. Highly recommended, if somewhat dated. Now available in
> an omnibus edition entitled "Molesworth".

That wasn't related to the 80s stage play 'Diarys of Adrian Mole' by any
chance? Just curious.
--
Deevo
Geraldton Western Australia
http://members.westnet.com.au/mckenzie/index.htm


Daibhid Ceanaideach

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:22:57 AM12/18/06
to
The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: "David Chapman" <jedit_...@hotmail.com>

I don't know if it's ever been done, but it occurs to me you
can, for instance, find an example in your interview footage
of Pterry saying "Oh, yes, absolutely", and making the post-
production question "So, did Rowling rip all her stuff from
you or what?"

--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The need to compile lists is a personality disorder,
as is the need to assert the superiority of some things
over other things."
-Jeremy Hardy

Tiny Bulcher

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:26:59 AM12/18/06
to

Deevo wrote:
> "mrslant" <Co...@unfortu.net> wrote in message
> news:1166441441.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> <snip>
> > The Nigel Molesworth books ("Down With Skool!", "How To Be Topp",
> > "Whizz For Atomms" and "Back In The Jug Agane") by Geoffrey Willans and
> > Ronald Searle - fictitious 1950s schoolboy diaries with cartoon
> > illustrations. Highly recommended, if somewhat dated. Now available in
> > an omnibus edition entitled "Molesworth".
>
> That wasn't related to the 80s stage play 'Diarys of Adrian Mole' by any
> chance? Just curious.

Not even slightly. Here, have a look at some molesworth:

http://www.stcustards.free-online.co.uk/

--
Tiny

Eric Jarvis

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:48:30 AM12/18/06
to
Daibhid Ceanaideach daibhidc...@aol.com wrote in
<Xns989D7E2A...@130.133.1.4>:

> The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: "David Chapman" <jedit_...@hotmail.com>
>
> > From the Collected Witterings of Richard Eney, volume 23:
> >> In article
> >> <MPG.1fefcebdc...@www.motzarella.org>, Eric
> >> Jarvis <use...@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>> My experience is that you have to be careful with silence
> >>> too when it comes to print journalists. At least with
> >>> broadcast media they can't simply print the answer they
> >>> wanted you to give even when you've refused to answer the
> >>> question.
> >>
> >> But virtually every tv "interview" is done by filming the
> >> answers and later on, filming the presenter asking "the"
> >> questions, which have been manufactured to make the
> >> presenter sound brilliant to have "elicited" the answers.
> >> The camera can lie just as much as print media can.
> >
> > Yes, Tamar, but it is rather more difficult for them to
> > *film* you saying something you never said.
>
> I don't know if it's ever been done, but it occurs to me you
> can, for instance, find an example in your interview footage
> of Pterry saying "Oh, yes, absolutely", and making the post-
> production question "So, did Rowling rip all her stuff from
> you or what?"
>

Where it's that blatant you'd have no difficulty making a complaint and
having it upheld by the wossname that deals with broadcasting standards.
You might also be able to force a retraction from a newspaper if you had
your own record of the interview, however you'd need to be able to prove
the recording covered the entire interview.

Les

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 10:47:35 AM12/18/06
to

Pip R. Lagenta wrote:

(stuff deleted)

> I am reminded of when some creationists accosted Richard Dawkins in
> his own home. The creationists got a *huge* propaganda victory out of
> just the silence that resulted when Dawkins realized that he had been
> had.

It was slimier than that. By making sure the presenter and Richard
were being filmed seperately, they edited Richards's moment of silence,
followed by an answer to a question *after* the presenter asking him a
completly different question, making it look as though he was trying to
change the subject. Michael Moore would have been proud.

> Details:
> <http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/1998/3_crexpose.htm>

(rest of post deleted)

Les

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 11:14:04 AM12/18/06
to

FrancoGroenewald wrote:
> Funny thing is these journalist never ask JKR anything about Pratchett
> or the Discworld.

That would ruin the entire theme: Established and well-read author
(Pratchett) gets overshadowed by a newcomer(JKR), and starts a feud out
of jealousy. Since JKR is making more millions than Pratchett at the
moment, it would be "obvious" Pratchett would be more jealous of her
than vice versa.

As Pratchett has already said, repeatedly denying this can be used
against him, particularly if his answers start conveying the irritation
of being asked such questions repeatedly.

This isn't the first time select members of the media have tried to
create a rivalry between celebrities. Some actors like Jack Benny
managed to make it work for them. Pratchett doesn't have Benny's
options, IMHO, so about the best he can do is try to make light of such
questions (like joking about how his lawyer would have him refuse to
answer the question), and keep silent. Hopefully, JKR is aware of how
anything Pratchett says or doesn't say is going to be used against them
in the court of gossip, and can laugh off such attempts.

Lawrence Watt-Evans

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 11:52:48 AM12/18/06
to
On 17 Dec 2006 20:00:11 -0800, "Ed" <edrh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I have a short story from a collection Isaac Asimov compiled. The story
>is from the 50s and is called "The Wall Around The World." It deals
>with a young man whose father has disappeared (no mention of what
>happened to his mother) and who is forced to live with an overbearing
>uncle and a bullying nephew (again, the aunt is there, but a
>non-entity) while attending a school for wizards! Being that it
>appeared in a science fiction magazine, technology is given as the
>savior of the story when the boy develops a glider to lift his
>underpowered broom over the mysterious wall that runs around their
>entire village (the "world" of the title).

Nota bene: It's by Theodore Cogswell.


--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
The second issue of Helix is at http://www.helixsf.com
A new Ethshar novel is being serialized at http://www.ethshar.com/thevondishambassador1.html

Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 11:58:37 AM12/18/06
to
Lawrence Watt-Evans said:

> On 17 Dec 2006 20:00:11 -0800, "Ed" <edrh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a short story from a collection Isaac Asimov compiled. The story
>>is from the 50s and is called "The Wall Around The World." It deals
>>with a young man whose father has disappeared (no mention of what
>>happened to his mother) and who is forced to live with an overbearing
>>uncle and a bullying nephew (again, the aunt is there, but a
>>non-entity) while attending a school for wizards! Being that it
>>appeared in a science fiction magazine, technology is given as the
>>savior of the story when the boy develops a glider to lift his
>>underpowered broom over the mysterious wall that runs around their
>>entire village (the "world" of the title).
>
> Nota bene: It's by Theodore Cogswell.

Nota molta bene: It's a great story.

I'm fairly sure the collection is entitled "Tomorrow's Children", but I
haven't checked.

Alan Williams

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 12:00:02 PM12/18/06
to

I've also read an attempt to create a feud between JKR and Philip
Pullman where his answer to a question about the "greater depth" in his
books (Northern Lights etc.) was slanted to read as an attack on JKR.

Alan

Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 3:12:38 PM12/18/06
to
in article HYjlHjcV...@unseen.demon.co.uk, Terry Pratchett at

This whole attempt on the part of the media at manufacturing a feud where
none exists is bizarre. I suppose it makes good press or something, but it
obviously has no connection in reality with you or JKR. When discussing this
here (afp) before, you said something about "the consensus", which I took to
mean the underlying body of myths and legends and the established fiction
based on them, all using the same concepts that are generally accepted as
being part of the genre. This makes sense, but apparently not to the media.

Perhaps this new round of annoyances is caused by the success of the
dramatisation of Hogfather, so it's actually a Good Thing, but it would be
even better if they could get it right.

--
Lesley Weston.

Brightly_coloured_blob is real, but I don't often check even the few bits
that get through Yahoo's filters. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca,
changing spelling and spacing as required.


Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 3:17:12 PM12/18/06
to
in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at

r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:

> eirde...@yahoo.se said:
>
>>
>> Silly journalists - don't they know that Terry Pratchett and Jo
>> Rowling *both* stole the idea of a wizarding school from Ursula K
>> LeGuin? :-P
>
> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU will also know why,
> one day, it may well become KC.

Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?

Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 3:24:30 PM12/18/06
to
in article 4586...@quokka.wn.com.au, Deevo at mcke...@NOSPAMmidwest.com.au

wrote on 18/12/2006 4:08 AM:

> "mrslant" <Co...@unfortu.net> wrote in message
> news:1166441441.1...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> <snip>
>> The Nigel Molesworth books ("Down With Skool!", "How To Be Topp",
>> "Whizz For Atomms" and "Back In The Jug Agane") by Geoffrey Willans and
>> Ronald Searle - fictitious 1950s schoolboy diaries with cartoon
>> illustrations. Highly recommended, if somewhat dated. Now available in
>> an omnibus edition entitled "Molesworth".
>
> That wasn't related to the 80s stage play 'Diarys of Adrian Mole' by any
> chance? Just curious.

In much the same way that Discworld is related to Harry Potter - IOW not at
all, except that both are purported to be the diaries of schoolboys, and
neither being derived from the other. However, I think Molesworth is at prep
school, which makes him somewhat younger than Adrian Mole and perhaps
explains his spelling. And "The Secret Diary of Adrian Mole, Aged 13 and
3/4" by Sue Townsend is an excellent book as well as a play.

eirde...@yahoo.se

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 3:32:10 PM12/18/06
to

Richard Eney skrev:

Don't try to convince me, try to convince journalists interviewing
Terry Pratchett. :-)

Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 6:28:05 PM12/18/06
to
Lesley Weston said:

> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at
> r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:
>
>> eirde...@yahoo.se said:
>>
>>>
>>> Silly journalists - don't they know that Terry Pratchett and Jo
>>> Rowling *both* stole the idea of a wizarding school from Ursula K
>>> LeGuin? :-P
>>
>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU will also know why,
>> one day, it may well become KC.
>
> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?

No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint: IC -> RS)

Daibhid Ceanaideach

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 6:29:27 PM12/18/06
to
The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid>

> Lesley Weston said:
>
>> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com,
>> Richard Heathfield at r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on
>> 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:

>>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU


>>> will also know why, one day, it may well become KC.
>>
>> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?
>
> No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint:
> IC -> RS)

Well, I know Unseen University is a play on Invisible College,
and I know the Invisible College was the percursor to the
Royal Society, but I'm afraid I still can't work out KC 8-(...

Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 6:51:29 PM12/18/06
to
Daibhid Ceanaideach said:

> The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid>
>
>> Lesley Weston said:
>>
>>> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com,
>>> Richard Heathfield at r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on
>>> 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:
>
>>>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU
>>>> will also know why, one day, it may well become KC.
>>>
>>> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?
>>
>> No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint:
>> IC -> RS)
>
> Well, I know Unseen University is a play on Invisible College,
> and I know the Invisible College was the percursor to the
> Royal Society, but I'm afraid I still can't work out KC 8-(...

"Kings' Club" was what I had in mind. Too obscure? Well, that's me all over.

Alec Cawley

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:09:45 PM12/18/06
to
Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote:
> The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: "David Chapman" <jedit_...@hotmail.com>
>
>> From the Collected Witterings of Richard Eney, volume 23:
>>> In article
>>> <MPG.1fefcebdc...@www.motzarella.org>, Eric
>>> Jarvis <use...@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> My experience is that you have to be careful with silence
>>>> too when it comes to print journalists. At least with
>>>> broadcast media they can't simply print the answer they
>>>> wanted you to give even when you've refused to answer the
>>>> question.
>>> But virtually every tv "interview" is done by filming the
>>> answers and later on, filming the presenter asking "the"
>>> questions, which have been manufactured to make the
>>> presenter sound brilliant to have "elicited" the answers.
>>> The camera can lie just as much as print media can.
>> Yes, Tamar, but it is rather more difficult for them to
>> *film* you saying something you never said.
>
> I don't know if it's ever been done, but it occurs to me you
> can, for instance, find an example in your interview footage
> of Pterry saying "Oh, yes, absolutely", and making the post-
> production question "So, did Rowling rip all her stuff from
> you or what?"

One of the things I found out recently is that in these interviews they
are very careful with the timecode on these interviews. If the timecode
goes backwards, it can be seen that they are taking things out of order,
But if the timecode goes forward, albeit with holes, then they are only
editing, which is allowed. So they would have to find a an answer,
before the next question they wanted to keep, which suited their needs.
Quite a hard task, which probably keeps them honest in thei particular
circumstance.

Daibhid Ceanaideach

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:13:07 PM12/18/06
to
The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Alec Cawley <al...@spamspam.co.uk>

> Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote:
>> The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
>> speaker: "David Chapman" <jedit_...@hotmail.com>
>>
>>> From the Collected Witterings of Richard Eney, volume 23:

>>>> But virtually every tv "interview" is done by filming


>>>> the answers and later on, filming the presenter asking
>>>> "the" questions, which have been manufactured to make
>>>> the presenter sound brilliant to have "elicited" the
>>>> answers. The camera can lie just as much as print media
>>>> can.
>>> Yes, Tamar, but it is rather more difficult for them to
>>> *film* you saying something you never said.
>>
>> I don't know if it's ever been done, but it occurs to me
>> you can, for instance, find an example in your interview
>> footage of Pterry saying "Oh, yes, absolutely", and making
>> the post- production question "So, did Rowling rip all her
>> stuff from you or what?"
>
> One of the things I found out recently is that in these
> interviews they are very careful with the timecode on these
> interviews. If the timecode goes backwards, it can be seen
> that they are taking things out of order, But if the
> timecode goes forward, albeit with holes, then they are
> only editing, which is allowed. So they would have to find
> a an answer, before the next question they wanted to keep,
> which suited their needs. Quite a hard task, which probably
> keeps them honest in thei particular circumstance.

If I understand Tamar correctly though, the interview
questions are being dubbed in in the studio, after the answers
have been recorded. Why they do it this way, I don't know, but
it does seem to give them the oppertunity to make the
questions anything they like that the answer fits.

Alec Cawley

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 7:31:40 PM12/18/06
to

The reason to do it that way is to use only one camera and cameraman.
During the interview it is kept pointing at the interviewee, then
afterwards they record the interviewer. However, they have the full
sound track with the interviewer off-camera, so they have to keep to that.

Ed

unread,
Dec 18, 2006, 8:09:06 PM12/18/06
to

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> Lawrence Watt-Evans said:
>
> > On 17 Dec 2006 20:00:11 -0800, "Ed" <edrh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I have a short story from a collection Isaac Asimov compiled. The story
> >>is from the 50s and is called "The Wall Around The World." It deals
> >>with a young man whose father has disappeared (no mention of what
> >>happened to his mother) and who is forced to live with an overbearing
> >>uncle and a bullying nephew (again, the aunt is there, but a
> >>non-entity) while attending a school for wizards! Being that it
> >>appeared in a science fiction magazine, technology is given as the
> >>savior of the story when the boy develops a glider to lift his
> >>underpowered broom over the mysterious wall that runs around their
> >>entire village (the "world" of the title).
> >
> > Nota bene: It's by Theodore Cogswell.
>
> Nota molta bene: It's a great story.
>
> I'm fairly sure the collection is entitled "Tomorrow's Children", but I
> haven't checked.

That's probably the first anthology. The one I was thinking of was
Asimov's "The Best SF" followed by the year. I think it was volume 13.

Elin

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 5:16:46 AM12/19/06
to
Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <1166365523.6...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>Sirius Kase <Siriu...@gmail.com> writes
>>
>>>
>>> -------------
>>
>>He was posed a question, "Did Rowling copy you?", that he honestly does
>>nt know the anwer to, only Rowling knows for sure. So he said his
>>thing about cake ingredients, where he describes the says Rowlling's
>>book are related to his books in a similar way to his books being
>>related to Tolkein. They build on ideas of the previous author. Then
>>the reporter asks almost the same question again, which Pratchett
>>refuses to answer. The helpful reporter tells us he "squeaks", which
>>apparently means "Yes" in the context of the article. My question, is
>>that what Pratchett meant to communicate? i wonder if he has reacted to
>>this interview?
>>
>with annoyance. And that was one of the more subtle leading questions
>I've had in the past month or so. One was particularly open in
>attempting to start a row (with the implication that they'd hold my
>towel, of course.) They would love a fight

I don't get this whole thing at all, it must be just britain. I
haven't heard anything about accusations of plagiarism, copying,
allusions etc etc etc between JKR and Pratchett anywhere except on
afp.

It's a non-discussion in Sweden as far as I'm aware.

--
Elin
The world makes perfect sense, as a black comedy

Gideon

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 6:39:42 AM12/19/06
to
Elin wrote:

> Terry Pratchett <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <1166365523.6...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>Sirius Kase <Siriu...@gmail.com> writes
>>>

>>>
<snip>

> I don't get this whole thing at all, it must be just britain.

It's the old Highlander attitude: "There can be only one!"

In this case, there's a bizarre assumption that there is only
*one* 'best-selling fantasy author' (BSFA) out there; and anyone who writes
fantasy wants to be that person; which (according to this frankly idiotic
assumption) means that all the other *non*-BSFAs out there are really
horribly jealous and secretly looking for opportunities to put the boot in.

It's not just limited to journalists, of course; pretty much any fandom
contains those who will worship the Creator's toenail clippings, simply
because of their origin.

(Batshit insane loony 'fen, in other words.)

To such people, anything that might *possibly* somehow be seen as a slur on
their idol (in the right light, if you stand on your head and squint hard
enough) is ipso facto evil and wrong and to be condemned by all and
sundry - without reservation or restraint.

Not everyone in any fandom is a loony fan; but all fandoms are prone to the
occasional outburst of such behaviour; go and read Fandom Wank[1] for many
fine examples.

cheers,

Gideon.

[1]http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/

Deevo

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 6:43:37 AM12/19/06
to
"Tiny Bulcher" <RSGD...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1166444819.0...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...

Cheers for that, not really my style though. :)

Arthur Hagen

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 9:55:03 AM12/19/06
to
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 11:39 +0000, Gideon wrote:

> It's not just limited to journalists, of course; pretty much any fandom
> contains those who will worship the Creator's toenail clippings, simply
> because of their origin.
>
> (Batshit insane loony 'fen, in other words.)

Unfortunately, Terry Pratchett isn't immune to insane worship either,
and I'm quite certain we have at least a few of these sad people here on
afp too. (If you're willing to travel for hours and queue up for even
more hours just to get a book signed, you might want to analyse how
healthy your fandom is -- it might be fine, but it might also be
approaching The Edge. If you'd be willing to keep something he
discarded, like a paper napkin or chewing gum, you're over the edge and
need help quickly. I'm not joking.)

Because extreme hero worshipping seems to transcend cultures, I wonder
whether this behaviour originally served a biological purpose, and
whether the inclination towards it is inheritable?

Regards,
--
*Art

Daibhid Ceanaideach

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 10:39:29 AM12/19/06
to
The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Arthur Hagen <a...@broomstick.com>

> On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 11:39 +0000, Gideon wrote:
>
>> It's not just limited to journalists, of course; pretty
>> much any fandom contains those who will worship the
>> Creator's toenail clippings, simply because of their
>> origin.
>>
>> (Batshit insane loony 'fen, in other words.)
>
> Unfortunately, Terry Pratchett isn't immune to insane
> worship either, and I'm quite certain we have at least a
> few of these sad people here on afp too.

I don't view it as a binary state; either you're a Loony
Obsessive Fan or you aren't. I'm well aware that *sometimes*
I'm a Loony Obsessive Fan, but I'm pretty sure that most of
the time I'm a normal one.

> Because extreme hero worshipping seems to transcend
> cultures, I wonder whether this behaviour originally served
> a biological purpose

It's just the old "pack leader" instinct, innit?

Gideon

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 11:10:56 AM12/19/06
to
Arthur Hagen wrote:

> On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 11:39 +0000, Gideon wrote:
>
>> It's not just limited to journalists, of course; pretty much any fandom
>> contains those who will worship the Creator's toenail clippings, simply
>> because of their origin.
>>
>> (Batshit insane loony 'fen, in other words.)
>
> Unfortunately, Terry Pratchett isn't immune to insane worship either,

Hence my generalisation in the previous post; I know of AFP posters and
people elsewhere in Pratchett fandom who have expressed the opinion that
Terry /can't/ write a book that is anything other than shining and
brilliant.

(I don't think that this is the case, obviously.)

> (If you're willing to travel for hours and queue up for even
> more hours just to get a book signed, you might want to analyse how

> healthy your fandom is.

Fandom isn't merely personal; it is also a community thing.

So while I might well have gone to one signing on my own (the Maskerade
signing in Dillons in Gower St, back in 1995); all of the other signings
I've been to have /primarily/ been to see friends; of course it was good to
get the books signed, but the major reason for going was to head to the pub
with a bunch of mates and AFPers.

Once you've got a critical mass of regular fans, then the RL community
itself starts to happen; as everyone lives somewhere, and people inevitably
end up bumping into other people or arranging RL meets; and someone
suggests a big party over a weekend.

(...and the rest is history.)



> -- it might be fine, but it might also be
> approaching The Edge. If you'd be willing to keep something he
> discarded, like a paper napkin or chewing gum, you're over the edge and
> need help quickly. I'm not joking.)

And if the napkin should, say contain a doodle by Graham Higgins (like the
great one he did of Kim at a CCDE once); or be the memento of a public
joke?

Hard and fast rules on what is 'over the edge' tend to be flimsy and to
depend on the situation; and, in my experience, the only really useful
rules of thumb are:

1) Don't annoy or freak out Terry.
2) Don't make Colin's life difficult.
3) Don't be obnoxious to various other people; especially guests and so
forth.


One other thing to consider; what is viewed as odd in one place would be
viewed as explicable or even admirable in another; even among the same
community of people.

A couple of weeks ago, in Wincanton, I spent *mumble* on a prop from the set
of Hogfather; not because I viewed it as holy or special (or valuable!);
but because it was a charity auction, and because it was the right thing to
do at the time according to the unwritten dynamics of the situation.

(Another case in point: pickled onions; available to the occasional lucky
Wincanton auction bidder at ~£35 per jar, IIRC.)

There's far more I could say on this, but I really don't have the time or
energy at the moment, and work is pressing.

cheers,

Gideon.


Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 12:25:03 PM12/19/06
to
in article Xns989E9F7F...@130.133.1.4, Daibhid Ceanaideach at

daibhidc...@aol.com wrote on 19/12/2006 7:39 AM:

> The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: Arthur Hagen <a...@broomstick.com>
>
>> On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 11:39 +0000, Gideon wrote:
>>
>>> It's not just limited to journalists, of course; pretty
>>> much any fandom contains those who will worship the
>>> Creator's toenail clippings, simply because of their
>>> origin.
>>>
>>> (Batshit insane loony 'fen, in other words.)
>>
>> Unfortunately, Terry Pratchett isn't immune to insane
>> worship either, and I'm quite certain we have at least a
>> few of these sad people here on afp too.
>
> I don't view it as a binary state; either you're a Loony
> Obsessive Fan or you aren't. I'm well aware that *sometimes*
> I'm a Loony Obsessive Fan, but I'm pretty sure that most of
> the time I'm a normal one.

I prefer not to think of myself as a fan - of TP or anyone else. I like his
books, as I like those of many other authors, but that's it. If afp really
were a fan group, I wouldn't be part of it; whenever afpers start behaving
like the fans in "Cruise of the Gods" or "Galaxy Quest" (which does happen
from time to time), I become uncomfortable and embarrassed. But I do enjoy
TP's books, there's no doubt of that, so I guess technically I am a fan,
same as everybody else here.


>
>> Because extreme hero worshipping seems to transcend
>> cultures, I wonder whether this behaviour originally served
>> a biological purpose
>
> It's just the old "pack leader" instinct, innit?

To cross threads for a moment, I've never seen how the alpha-pair system can
be advantageous to a species, so I wonder how pack-leader worship in humans,
which undoubtedly exists, benefits mankind. And if it doesn't, how come it's
still around?

Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 12:37:35 PM12/19/06
to
in article qMCdnZoatK9KvhrY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at

r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 3:28 PM:

> Lesley Weston said:
>
>> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at
>> r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:
>>
>>> eirde...@yahoo.se said:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Silly journalists - don't they know that Terry Pratchett and Jo
>>>> Rowling *both* stole the idea of a wizarding school from Ursula K
>>>> LeGuin? :-P
>>>
>>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU will also know why,
>>> one day, it may well become KC.
>>
>> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?
>
> No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint: IC -> RS)

I give in - you'll have to tell us.

Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 12:44:32 PM12/19/06
to
in article qMCdnZQatK_PtBrY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at

r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 3:51 PM:

> Daibhid Ceanaideach said:
>
>> The time: 18 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
>> speaker: Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid>
>>
>>> Lesley Weston said:
>>>
>>>> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com,
>>>> Richard Heathfield at r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on
>>>> 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:
>>
>>>>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU
>>>>> will also know why, one day, it may well become KC.
>>>>
>>>> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?
>>>
>>> No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint:
>>> IC -> RS)
>>
>> Well, I know Unseen University is a play on Invisible College,
>> and I know the Invisible College was the percursor to the
>> Royal Society, but I'm afraid I still can't work out KC 8-(...
>
> "Kings' Club" was what I had in mind. Too obscure? Well, that's me all over.

Ignore my previous post, in that case. So you meant the Royal Society?
That's valid as an analogue of the faculty members of UU, along with those
of any other university (scientists do tend to be rather... odd. There's the
story of an Oxford don who was so eccentric that even the other dons
noticed), but Ankh-Morpork is slightly fervent about not having a king; I
can't see Carrot in the persona of Charles II.

Lesley Weston

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 12:52:49 PM12/19/06
to
in article Xns989E26F0...@130.133.1.4, Daibhid Ceanaideach at

That does go along with the concept of "noddies": Interviews outside a
studio often use just one camera focused at all times on the interviewee,
yet from time to time we see the interviewer nodding, smiling, frowning or
whatever in response to things the interviewee has said. These are filmed in
the same location but after the interviewee has left. The interviewer
provides a whole range of possible responses and the editor picks the ones
to be used and the points at which to use them.

Kieran Sanders

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 1:20:29 PM12/19/06
to
Lesley Weston wrote:
> To cross threads for a moment, I've never seen how the alpha-pair system can
> be advantageous to a species, so I wonder how pack-leader worship in humans,
> which undoubtedly exists, benefits mankind. And if it doesn't, how come it's
> still around?

I'd guess that hanging around the group and being subservient (at least
until you get the chance to hit the boss over the head with a rock one
dark night and take his place) gives you better odds of passing on your
genes than simply saying "sod this for a game of soldiers" and taking
off on your own.

Of course, it doesn't necessarily have to benefit the *species*, just
the individual gene's odds get reproduced, depending on where you stand
on Group Selection vs Individual Selection vs the "Selfish Gene".

--
Kieran Sanders

Richard Heathfield

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 1:36:25 PM12/19/06
to
Lesley Weston said:

> in article qMCdnZoatK9KvhrY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield at
> r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 3:28 PM:
>
>> Lesley Weston said:
>>
>>> in article 8vSdnck5kou6wxvY...@bt.com, Richard Heathfield
>>> at r...@see.sig.invalid wrote on 18/12/2006 1:24 AM:
>>>
>>>> eirde...@yahoo.se said:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Silly journalists - don't they know that Terry Pratchett and Jo
>>>>> Rowling *both* stole the idea of a wizarding school from Ursula K
>>>>> LeGuin? :-P
>>>>
>>>> Those who know where Terry really got the idea for UU will also know
>>>> why, one day, it may well become KC.
>>>
>>> Kansas City? Kentucky Creature? Katherine Christ?
>>
>> No to all of those. Care to try again? :-) (Here's a hint: IC -> RS)
>
> I give in - you'll have to tell us.

Well, I did, but I'll repeat it here. UU is drawn from the Invisible
College, which became the Royal Society. So I thought UU might one day
become "Kings' Club". Yeah, okay, my coat's over there...

Sofia

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 1:36:06 PM12/19/06
to
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:39:42 +0000, Gideon wrote:


> In this case, there's a bizarre assumption that there is only *one*
> 'best-selling fantasy author' (BSFA) out there; and anyone who writes
> fantasy wants to be that person; which (according to this frankly
> idiotic assumption) means that all the other *non*-BSFAs out there are
> really horribly jealous and secretly looking for opportunities to put
> the boot in.


Hi Gideon, it's funny you say this as I was saying once on afp how I've
been several times to buy Pterry's books from WHSmiths, and each time the
cashier saw the name PRATCETT on the cover, she immediatley offered me a
J.K.Rowling "Harry Potter" book at a special price.

I then began getting my books from a Amazon, and Ottakers, and I've still
had Harry Potter books offered to me occasionally as an accompanyment. No
less to say, I always refuse of course!

BTW. While I'm here, can I answer Pterry's last question, that as for
me, then *yes*, I've alway's called your "Hogfather" book "HOGSWATCH"
inside my head, it's really confusing sometimes! I even went to my
sister's house to watch the movie as I don't have sky television, and told
her the RT had gotten the name wrong. It wasn't till I got back home
afterwards and found the book, that I realised how stupid I was. We
watched the second half of the movie together the night afterwards, and I
brought the Hogfather book along for her to read your own version of it to
apologise!


Sofie

--
Please visit my deviantART page: http://sofen.deviantart.com/

Daibhid Ceanaideach

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 2:33:41 PM12/19/06
to
The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Sofia <pinkmonste...@ALLCAPSyahoo.com>

> I then began getting my books from a Amazon, and Ottakers,
> and I've still had Harry Potter books offered to me
> occasionally as an accompanyment. No less to say, I always
> refuse of course!

Why "no less to say"? They're fairly good books, as these
things go.

Arthur Hagen

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 3:45:18 PM12/19/06
to
Sofia <pinkmonste...@ALLCAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Gideon, it's funny you say this as I was saying once on afp how
> I've been several times to buy Pterry's books from WHSmiths, and each
> time the cashier saw the name PRATCETT on the cover, she immediatley
> offered me a J.K.Rowling "Harry Potter" book at a special price.

Well, she had to find a substitute, cause the books with PRATCETT on them
are obviously misprints...

--
*Art

CCA

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 4:35:22 PM12/19/06
to
Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote:
> The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> speaker: Sofia <pinkmonste...@ALLCAPSyahoo.com>

> > I then began getting my books from a Amazon, and Ottakers,
> > and I've still had Harry Potter books offered to me
> > occasionally as an accompanyment. No less to say, I always
> > refuse of course!

> Why "no less to say"? They're fairly good books, as these
> things go.

I enjoyed them.
I think the reason for offering a Rowling along with a Pratchett is
that they're two of Britain's best known authors, and both write in
(pretty much) the same genre. People are more likely to say yes when
offered (for instance) twenty per cent off a HP book when they buy a
Discworld one, than they would be if offered one by a lesser known
author.

CCA

Sofia

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 5:46:24 PM12/19/06
to
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:31:40 +0000, Alec Cawley wrote:

> The reason to do it that way is to use only one camera and cameraman.
> During the interview it is kept pointing at the interviewee, then
> afterwards they record the interviewer. However, they have the full
> sound track with the interviewer off-camera, so they have to keep to that.


I've seen this a lot on these news reports, when a news reader interviews
politicians and he/she practically hounds them to death with these really
killjoy questions - the camera remaining on the interviewee, and they get
outwitted, made fools of and caught on film a lot by these trained
reporters - Jeremy Paxpan's a great example of this. It's strange though,
I never really thought about it till you just said it!

Len Oil

unread,
Dec 19, 2006, 6:59:51 PM12/19/06
to
Arthur Hagen wrote:
> Unfortunately, Terry Pratchett isn't immune to insane worship either,
> and I'm quite certain we have at least a few of these sad people here on
> afp too.

How dare you suggest that!

Burn the heretic! Then throw him off the edge!

Paul Harman

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 4:22:35 AM12/20/06
to
"Gideon" <diog...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:em92ur$9kd$1...@mud.stack.nl...

> I know of AFP posters and
> people elsewhere in Pratchett fandom who have expressed the opinion that
> Terry /can't/ write a book that is anything other than shining and
> brilliant.


They have obviously not read "Dark Side of the Sun".

Paul


Gideon

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 5:53:41 AM12/20/06
to
Lesley Weston wrote:

> in article Xns989E9F7F...@130.133.1.4, Daibhid Ceanaideach at
> daibhidc...@aol.com wrote on 19/12/2006 7:39 AM:
>
>> The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
>> speaker: Arthur Hagen <a...@broomstick.com>
>>
>>> On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 11:39 +0000, Gideon wrote:

<snip>



> I prefer not to think of myself as a fan - of TP or anyone else. I like
> his books, as I like those of many other authors, but that's it. If afp
> really were a fan group, I wouldn't be part of it

Why?

Not only is AFP a fan group, but many of the people who've been on AFP over
the years have been unashamed members of SF&F fandom in general.

Lest you forget, Terry was an active member of SF fandom well before the
Discworld series was written; I remember seeing a picture of him sometime
during the 1970s at some sort of fandom event in London.

(Possibly a Tun meeting; the London Group SF Fan meetings have been going on
on the first Thursday of every month since 1946 - the first generation of
Tun-goers included ACC, John Wyndham and John Christopher; and I'm sure
Terry's been to a few.[1])

Charlie Stross, who also invented the footnote on AFP[2], is now a
Hugo-winning author as well as being a convention regular.

Pete Morwood? Diane Duane? Dave Langford? Juliet McKenna? - all of them
die-hard fans, generally found at cons propping up panels[3] or chatting in
the bar.

(It might be reasonable to posit that the majority of current SF&F authors
have become authors after being fans.)


> ; whenever afpers start
> behaving like the fans in "Cruise of the Gods" or "Galaxy Quest" (which
> does happen from time to time), I become uncomfortable and embarrassed.

If it happened in a public space, I might agree with you to a small degree;
I occasionally look at some of the sillier fandom activities and wince
slightly.

However; we're talking about people engaging in something that a) they enjoy
and b) something that doesn't harm anyone else (often quite the reverse).

Where's the beef?

If you want to dress up like Butcher[5] and wander around the streets of
Wincanton, well, that's *your* business and it doesn't directly affect *me*
(and Butcher is in fact a nice bloke, for all that he wears a slightly odd
costume).

If such activities were exclusive, then I'd disagree strongly with them; but
they're not: everyone I've met in Pratchett fandom is entirely free to
express their fandom in whichever way and to whatever degree they want; and
(generally speaking) all the branches of the fandom tend to co-exist
peacefully (notwithstanding occasional ructions like the Hogfather extras
snafu).


Consider this also: if you're dressed in normal clothes, and in the same
room as those wearing costume, you might feel embarrassed; but do you think
people are really going to be looking at *you* - as opposed to the people
in costume?

(Galaxy Quest is a great film, FWIW.)

Yes, people in fandom do things that appear somewhat odd to the non-fans;
and fans can sometimes express themselves in disturbing or harmful ways;
but is being part of a fandom ultimately any more silly or pointless than,
say, going to church or a football match or an opera?


> But I do enjoy TP's books, there's no doubt of that, so I guess
> technically I am a fan, same as everybody else here.

It's a wide and tolerant fandom; no-one insists that anyone dress funny, or
speak funny; or that anyone who doesn't conform is persona non grata.

I suspect that you're using the term 'fan' only for certain predefined
concepts of the extreme ends of fandom, rather than the whole spectrum.

Look at the guy in the middle of the photo:
http://www.lspace.org/art/carpet-people/bigheals1.html

- that'd look pretty similar to a lot of peoples' stereotype of a 'fan',
wouldn't it?

cheers,

Gideon.


[1] http://news.ansible.co.uk/london.html - as mentioned, ACC's 'Tales from
the White Hart' is a fictionalised account of the SF Circle meetings.

[2] Strange but true.

[3] Or, in Peter's case, usually waving real or imaginary swords around;
vide last P-Con[4], when we realised that the sword he was showing to
everyone in the room had fresh blood on it. His comment was 'Damn; that
hurt!"; he patched himself up, and went on with the demonstration.

[4] http://www.slovobooks.com/phoenix/ - one of the best little Cons around.

[5] See http://www.dwcon.org/gallery/Costumes/PICT0022-resized.jpg

Anery

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 6:46:22 AM12/20/06
to
Lesley Weston wrote:
> in article Xns989E9F7F...@130.133.1.4, Daibhid Ceanaideach at
> daibhidc...@aol.com wrote on 19/12/2006 7:39 AM:
>
> > The time: 19 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
> > speaker: Arthur Hagen <a...@broomstick.com>
> >> Because extreme hero worshipping seems to transcend
> >> cultures, I wonder whether this behaviour originally served
> >> a biological purpose
> >
> > It's just the old "pack leader" instinct, innit?
>
> To cross threads for a moment, I've never seen how the alpha-pair system can
> be advantageous to a species, so I wonder how pack-leader worship in humans,
> which undoubtedly exists, benefits mankind. And if it doesn't, how come it's
> still around?
>
In wolves it works like this:
The alfa-pair is usually strong and fit, and is more likely to have
healthy offspring. So it is more beneficial for the species, when the
younger or the weaker ones help raising the young of the alpha couple -
there is higher probability of survival.
Also, absolute devotion to the pack leader, who is mostly more skilled
and experienced than the average member of the pack, and probably more
intelligent, too, leads to quicker actions, for example during the
hunting.

Obviously, in humans it is more complicated, as genes which are not
exactly beneficial for the species are more likely to persist, with
modern healthcare and all.

Anery

mcv

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 7:36:05 AM12/20/06
to

Does WHSmith also offer Discworld books at a discount if you buy a
Harry Potter book?


mcv.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel

mcv

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 7:39:27 AM12/20/06
to

That's a brilliant book! And shining too.

Paul Harman

unread,
Dec 20, 2006, 7:53:32 AM12/20/06
to
"mcv" <mcv...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:45892eff$0$321$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...

> Paul Harman <chatt...@doctorwhowebguide.net> wrote:
>> They have obviously not read "Dark Side of the Sun".
>
> That's a brilliant book! And shining too.


Sorry, I can't agree. There are a few interesting ideas, granted, but it's a
pretty standard quest-based space adventure, with little to recommend it
that you haven't already come across in hundreds of other space adventures.
It has none of the trademark Pratchett satire or comedy.

It's well written, that's a given, just not particularly *good*.

Mind you, I found the TV adaptation of "Johnny and the Bomb" boring and
derivative, so what do I know? <grin>

Paul