Magrat's Huge Tracts of Land
Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes
Yes, on the US _Witches Abroad_ cover, Magrat really does have a
chest. And a low-cut dress and a pretty face. Quite a stunner, in
fact, if you don't mind grass-green hair.
Only the ninja headband, magic wand, and proximity to two other
witches who resemble Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg to about the same
degree that the third resembles Magrat enable one to identify this
person as Magrat. (In fact, the only way to assign identities to the
other two witches is to note that one is looking at a broken mirror
and the other has a cat.)
[Hmm... regarding Magrat's chestal area... you don't suppose the
artist misinterpreted the title of the book, do you?]
Confession time: I'm not real wild about Kirby's covers. The interior
illustrations in _Eric_ were generally good, but for my taste the
covers are too busy and too grotesque. I would somewhat prefer the US
_WA_ cover to Kirby's... if there were any resemblance whatsoever to
the characters as Pratchett described them. (And even in Kirby's
cover, about the only way to distinguish Nanny Ogg from Granny
Weatherwax is by the cat and the red boots. These two are supposed to
look quite *different*, folks! The "maiden, mother, and crone" Neil
Gaiman keeps coming back to in _Sandman_. His illustrators get the
point, why don't Terry's?)
--
- Rich "mcmxciibo" Holmes
"Grown men, he told himself, in flat contradiction of centuries of
accumulated evidence about the way grown men behave, do not behave
like this." -- Douglas Adams
Whiplash
>Confession time: I'm not real wild about Kirby's covers. The interior
>illustrations in _Eric_ were generally good, but for my taste the
>covers are too busy and too grotesque. I would somewhat prefer the US
>_WA_ cover to Kirby's... if there were any resemblance whatsoever to
>the characters as Pratchett described them. (And even in Kirby's
>cover, about the only way to distinguish Nanny Ogg from Granny
>Weatherwax is by the cat and the red boots. These two are supposed to
>look quite *different*, folks! The "maiden, mother, and crone" Neil
>Gaiman keeps coming back to in _Sandman_. His illustrators get the
>point, why don't Terry's?)
This is an age old problem it seems.
I think that obviously the requirements of being a cover artist are
a) NEVER, under any circumstances to read the book
and b) Completely ignore any suggestions from the author
*&)
Actually some of the DW that I have read (albeit not many) have reasonably
relevant covers on - especially the one (I forget which completely sorry *&)
probably the second tho) where the effect of having a female warrier upon
cover artists is mentioned and the cover represents that completely. (Although
I wonder - was the joke a result of the cover artists psyche or did the joke
come first and the cover later??)
Now if you want to read a series of books that have been completely destroyed
in this way since the death of the author (not my fault this time!! She died
long before I was born I think *&) but you probably won't want to read them
anyway as they probably won't appeal, try the Chalet School series.
From relevant and accurate pictures in some of the editions I first bought
(there are 64 books in the series so even thought I have been collecting them
for over 10 years I still havent got half way!) there has been a fairly recent
edition which has obviously been illustrated by some gimp who doesnt even know
what the books are about let alone read them. For example, a matron who has
been with the school for most of the series and started off grey haired has
red hair in a french pleat on the cover of one of the later books - obviously
some miracle drug was available then *&)
But anyway - so that I don't get acused of irrelevant waffle *&)
~Whippy the waffle signs off
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
* \^/ |-| | |' |' \/ * cs...@csv.warwick.ac.uk cs...@csv.warwick.ac.uk *
* / * whi...@dcs.warwick.ac.uk neww...@dcs.warwick.ac.uk *
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
CSD...@psuvm.psu.edu
In article <RSHOLMES.93...@mothra.syr.EDU>, rsho...@mothra.syr.EDU
(Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) says:
>person as Magrat. (In fact, the only way to assign identities to the
>other two witches is to note that one is looking at a broken mirror
>and the other has a cat.)
>
-Craig D.
_______________________________________________________________________
| Trouble with Tribbles? Try | Internet: CSD...@psuvm.psu.edu |
| - N E R P S ! - | Bitnet : CSD108@psuvm |
| For Tribbles | "668: Neighbor of the Beast" |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Wald
>chest. And a low-cut dress and a pretty face. Quite a stunner, in
>fact, if you don't mind grass-green hair.
>(In fact, the only way to assign identities to the other two witches
>is to note that one is looking at a broken mirror and the other has a
which is much too small, ginger, binocular, and cute to possibly be
Greebo.
I don't know; I think this is a picture of three *other* witches.
Anyone know who they are?
-David
--
============================================================================
David Wald wa...@theory.lcs.mit.edu
"Blessed are the peacocks, for they shall be called sonship of God"
-- Matt 5:9, from a faulty QuickVerse 2.0
============================================================================
Nathan Torkington
> I don't know; I think this is a picture of three *other* witches.
> Anyone know who they are?
Quite possibly they are the three would-be witches from L&L? While
this would require clairvoyance on the part of the cover artist for
WA, I figure that their skulls must be being used for *something* :)
From all descriptions, they would have been busty, lusty and not at
all musty :-)
Nat.
Colin MacDonald
>In article <RSHOLMES.93...@mothra.syr.EDU> rsho...@mothra.syr.EDU (Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) writes:
>
>>Confession time: I'm not real wild about Kirby's covers. The interior
>
>This is an age old problem it seems.
>I think that obviously the requirements of being a cover artist are
> a) NEVER, under any circumstances to read the book
>and b) Completely ignore any suggestions from the author
According to the biography of Tolkien, one US edition of the Lord of the
Rings was produced with a pair of emus round a Christmas tree on the
cover...
The Josh Kirby covers are not too bad IMHO, except for the inevitable
glaring inaccuracies. Rincewind, for example, was described (in TCOM I
think) as having a short scrubby beard, "the sort of beard worn by
people who were never meant to wear beards" or something like that. Yet
the various covers with Rincewind on have this great flowing hairy thing
on. I'm sure folk will come up with other favourites...
Colin
--
Colin MacDonald, Dept. of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh
......... cmac @ castle.ed.ac.uk
Terry Pratchett
getting better...) at someone who looks about right for Magrat. But he
hasn't really got a clue about Granny. The artist who does the American book
club editions -- can't recall his name -- does not, I think, do good
_covers_, but he makes a very good job of getting the characters right.
They're not _my_ idea of the characters, but they're certain based squarely
on the plot. His Granny on the cover of Equal Rites was notable.
May I add that I'm pleased to see so many Weird Al and They Might Be Giants
sigs around, and add totally gratis that the TMBG number 'Where your Eyes
don't Go' was the scariest song I ever heard...
Oh, and sig stuff from 'Into the Woods', too -- wish I'd seen it before I
wrote Witches Abroad...
Terry
Andrew Waugh
>The Josh Kirby covers are not too bad IMHO, except for the inevitable
>glaring inaccuracies. Rincewind, for example, was described (in TCOM I
>think) as having a short scrubby beard, "the sort of beard worn by
>people who were never meant to wear beards" or something like that. Yet
>the various covers with Rincewind on have this great flowing hairy thing
>on. I'm sure folk will come up with other favourites...
The annotated Pratchett should contain a section containing all the
cover errors...
andrew waugh
Eccles
>May I add that I'm pleased to see so many Weird Al and They Might Be Giants
>sigs around, and add totally gratis that the TMBG number 'Where your Eyes
>don't Go' was the scariest song I ever heard...
Here's something that may scare Melbourne-people too.....
MMM played a They Might Be Giants song, during the day ooooo!
Eccles
For those of you outside MMM plays 'straight' rock and rolll....
constantly.
Eccles
"I love using a machine that thrashes its swap space"
Michael Peter Berzonsky
>"The annotated Pratchett should contain a section containing
>all the cover errors."
It's not just the cover that are screwed up on this side of the
pond. On my copy every page has the author's name spelled
incorrectly. Also, interestingly enough, my copy was from the
future. Check out the print date: February 1993. Publishers
must be using a different calendar than I'm used to.
Just a couple of observations...
Mike
"Do what we say and nobody gets hurt." -Texxon
Dominic Dunlop
gn...@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (Nathan Torkington) writes:
> Quite possibly they are the three would-be witches from L&L? While
> this would require clairvoyance on the part of the cover artist for
> WA, I figure that their skulls must be being used for *something* :)
>
> From all descriptions, they would have been busty, lusty and not at
> all musty :-)
Oh. I pictured those three as goths -- wispy (or would-be wispy --
those of a northern disposition seem to me to have a tougher time
achieving wispiness than those from the soft south) young women who
like to cover as much of their pallid skins as possible with black
clothing. Velvet is a particular favourite.
(Blimey. ``goth'' is in the Pocket Oxford Dictionary. What's the
world coming to? ``heavy metal'' is in there too.)
--
Dominic Dunlop
Leo Breebaart
> >I think that obviously the requirements of being a cover artist are
> > a) NEVER, under any circumstances to read the book
> >and b) Completely ignore any suggestions from the author
>
> The Josh Kirby covers are not too bad IMHO, except for the inevitable
> glaring inaccuracies.
I beg to differ. There is a huge difference between artists who won't
bother (or aren't allowed) to read the book and consequently screw up,
and artists who *do* read the book but just don't choose to follow the
textual descriptions one hundred percent.
Josh Kirby clearly falls into the second category: it is immediately
obvious from the details he puts into the drawings that he reads the
books quite carefully. But having done that, he just takes the text as
a starting point for the cover, and blasts off into a direction and
universe of his own.
Rincewind's beard is not a 'glaring inaccuracy' -- it's a *deliberate
decision*. Photo-realism is overrated, anyway.
Anecdote: it is also possible for cover artists to read the book *too
well*. When I read Agatha Christie's "The Hollow" (one of her worst,
so don't bother), the cover showed a wireframe model of a horse, with
a gun inside it. Guess where, at the very end of the book, the missing
murder weapon (upon which the entire plot hinged) turned out to have
been hidden...?
--
Leo Breebaart (leo @ cp.tn.tudelft.nl)
Paul S. Winalski
In article <leo.728314765@draconis>,
l...@cp.tn.tudelft.nl (Leo Breebaart) writes:
|>Josh Kirby clearly falls into the second category: it is immediately
|>obvious from the details he puts into the drawings that he reads the
|>books quite carefully. But having done that, he just takes the text as
|>a starting point for the cover, and blasts off into a direction and
|>universe of his own.
An example is Kirby's rendition of Twoflower on the covers of THE COLOUR OF
MAGIC and THE LIGHT FANTASTIC. One of the first people to meet Twoflower
expresses mental astonishment at Twoflower having four eyes. Since there's
no more remarks about this, it's pretty clear that Twoflower actually wears
glasses and the "four eyes" remark is one of PTerry's throw-away lines.
Josh Kirby draws him literally with two eyes on each side of his nose. I'm
sure PTerry was delighted to have his own "four eyes" joke thrown back at him.
--PSW
D MORGAN
>In article <RSHOLMES.93...@mothra.syr.EDU>, rsho...@mothra.syr.EDU
>(Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) says:
>>person as Magrat. (In fact, the only way to assign identities to the
>>other two witches is to note that one is looking at a broken mirror
>>and the other has a cat.)
>>
>...and red boots.
>-Craig D.
Don't blame the artists; blame the stupid Americanist sensationalism. You
shoulda seen the hash they made of Red Dwarf! All the casting was way out;
instead of a useless heap of down and outs, they looked like the cast off
baywatch or dallas!
Get this; Cat was (bloody goodlooking)female (where is the humour in that;
the humour was that Cat largely from the fact that he was so concerned about
his looks. This all dies if the cat is female)
Lister was a handsome, musclebound white male (again, the humour comes from the
fact that he was just a complete bum; unfit, unhygenic, with socks that would
stick to teflon...and melt it. The humour wasn't destroyed by having the
character white; it was the handsome musclebound bit that ruined it.)
Rimmer was a...well he looked reminiscent of that guy Hanibal Lecter;a psycho.
Holly did not look stupid. Or ugly. She looked intelligent and good looking.
Which goes to show that a little humour is easyest created by REAL people,
like in Pterry's books, where the humour is often the stark reality of the
characters, ie Cohen.
And all the others in fact...
--
Take a 20*20 b/w pixel square, and write a program on a 486-33 that tries every
combination of pixels, 100000 comb.s per sec. The human race would have gone,
and the sun and even the galaxy would have died by the time it had finished.
Thus my PC is slow. This is very depressing. Need a uninterrupteble PS, too.
D MORGAN
>andrew waugh
Like the number of legs on the chest? (OK, OK, I know the things are hard to
draw...)
Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y
> CSD...@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
> Don't blame the artists; blame the stupid Americanist sensationalism. You
> shoulda seen the hash they made of Red Dwarf! All the casting was way out;
> instead of a useless heap of down and outs, they looked like the cast off
> baywatch or dallas!
>
Um. . . . I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have a clue as to what,
exactly, Red Dwarf is. Please elucidate?
Ken Haylock
made in America, to impose their values on it? We are capable of watching
Miami Vice without it being re-filmed in Gerards Cross with British Actors,
and yet apparently our TV isn't good enough (ha!) for an American audience...
This isn't new; I understand Porridge was remade in the states, set in a jail
in Hawaii - and full of beautiful people.
Incidentally, the very small number of shows (I exclude game-shows from this,
they are no more or less cr@p than the originals, whether they are home grown
or not) that we HAVE ripped off from an American original, and remade based
on the original scripts, are comparitively cr@p...
Ken Haylock
>>>MATRIX version 1.21e
Donal K. Fellows
Red Dwarf is a wonderful piece of real British culture. It is a very
funny satirical TV series (several series in fact, and it is set in a
spaceship several million years from home.
I think that a real RD guru would have to come up with a better
description, as I tend to watch very little TV at the moment.
Donal.
--
A new supply of round tuits has arrived and are available from Mary.
Anyone who has been putting off work until they got a round tuit now
has no excuse for further procrastination.
Paul S. Winalski
In article <1993Jan30....@ugle.unit.no>,
|>exactly, Red Dwarf is. Please elucidate?
Red Dwarf is a British comedy TV series. The series involves the misadventures
of the incompetent crew of the mining spaceship Red Dwarf. The background
story is that David Lister, a neer-do-well engineer's assistant on the
spaceship, is sentenced to 6 months in a stasis field when the captain
discovers that he'd smuggled a pregnant black cat on board. When he comes out
of stasis, he finds out that he's been in stasis for 10 million years. It
seems that shortly after he went into stasis, the ship's radiation shielding
failed, flooding the ship with radiation and killing the entire crew. Holly,
the ship's computer, waited 10 million years for the radiation hazard to
dissipate before letting Lister out of stasis. The crew of the Red Dwarf
thus consists of Lister, Holly, Cat (a lifeform descended from Lister's cat,
who was safe in the cargo hold when the radiation blast occurred), and the
hologram of Arnold Rimmer, the overbearing, martinet, and incompetant junior
engineer who was Lister's immediate superior. Rimmer was the one whose faulty
repairs to the radiation shield caused the explosion. Holly has brought him
back as a hologram because he calculated that Rimmer was the companion most
likely to keep Lister from going insane.
The show is great fun.
As a previous posting indicated, an American production company attempted to
do a US version of the show, and from all reports, they missed the point
entirely. Thankfully, the American series died before it was ever broadcast,
although it sounds like a pilot program was perpetrated.
--PSW
Fox
>
> May I add that I'm pleased to see so many Weird Al and They Might Be Giants
> sigs around, and add totally gratis that the TMBG number 'Where your Eyes
> don't Go' was the scariest song I ever heard...
>
Did you manage to catch Weird Al's 'UHF' when it was shown on BBC1 this
Christmas?
Mike T Person Who Almost Had A Heart Attack Trying To Find A Blank Video
--
|\_/| F "Remember, hi-tec means breaks down next week
\O O/ O while cutting edge means breaks down this afternoon."
\o/ X -- Bruce Sterling
Vos MC
It can never beat Terry or Doug.
--
And now again my awfully long sig...
Great Greetings,
mcv
\_ \_ \__ \_ \_
\__\__ \_ \_\_ \_
\_\_\_ \_ \_ \_
\_ \_ \_ \_ \_\_
\_ \_ \__ \_
=======================================================================
These are my opinions and mine only. Copying them is not allowed.
Reproduction only after thoughtful consideration of what they are about
=======================================================================
_
<_><
(mc...@cs.vu.nl)
Mik Stevens
|> > > Don't blame the artists; blame the stupid Americanist sensationalism. You
|> > > shoulda seen the hash they made of Red Dwarf! All the casting was way out;
|> > > instead of a useless heap of down and outs, they looked like the cast off
|> > > baywatch or dallas!
|> > >
|> > [Stuff deleted]
|> >
|> >Um. . . . I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have a clue as to what,
|> >exactly, Red Dwarf is. Please elucidate?
|> >
|>
|> Red Dwarf is a wonderful piece of real British culture. It is a very
|> funny satirical TV series (several series in fact, and it is set in a
|> spaceship several million years from home.
|>
|> I think that a real RD guru would have to come up with a better
|> description, as I tend to watch very little TV at the moment.
|>
|> Donal.
Just subscribe to alt.tv.red-dwarf and all will be revealed
mik
Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes
>In article <leo.728314765@draconis>,
>l...@cp.tn.tudelft.nl (Leo Breebaart) writes:
>
>|>Josh Kirby clearly falls into the second category: it is immediately
>|>obvious from the details he puts into the drawings that he reads the
>|>books quite carefully. But having done that, he just takes the text as
>|>a starting point for the cover, and blasts off into a direction and
>|>universe of his own.
Which is what I'm complaining about. You've got Terry Pratchett's
concept of the characters inside the book, and Kirby's inconsistent
concept on the cover. Some people might enjoy having two entirely
different representations of Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg for the
price of one; not me -- I feel it undermines Pratchett's creativity to
have the cover so thoroughly contradict the author.
Of course, I suspect that if Terry himself were upset over this, Kirby
would've stopped being the cover artist years ago.
>An example is Kirby's rendition of Twoflower on the covers of THE COLOUR OF
>MAGIC and THE LIGHT FANTASTIC. One of the first people to meet Twoflower
>expresses mental astonishment at Twoflower having four eyes. Since there's
>no more remarks about this, it's pretty clear that Twoflower actually wears
>glasses and the "four eyes" remark is one of PTerry's throw-away lines.
>Josh Kirby draws him literally with two eyes on each side of his nose. I'm
>sure PTerry was delighted to have his own "four eyes" joke thrown back at him.
Or he may have been chagrined that Kirby completely misunderstood the
remark.
*sigh*. This may be heresy, but I don't think the true Discworld
artist has come along yet. I've seen the American covers, "Eric" and
some of the Kirby covers, and the Innovation adaptation of "The Light
Fantastic". In some ways I like the latter best. There too there are
some discrepancies, but I object to them less given that it's a
retelling of the story, not just an illustration of it.
But where's John Tenniel when you need him?
- R
D MORGAN
>In article <1993Jan30....@ugle.unit.no> lei...@Lise.Unit.NO (Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y) writes:
>>
>>Um. . . . I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have a clue as to what,
>>exactly, Red Dwarf is. Please elucidate?
>>
>Red Dwarf is a wonderful piece of real British culture. It is a very
>funny satirical TV series (several series in fact, and it is set in a
>spaceship several million years from home.
>I think that a real RD guru would have to come up with a better
>description, as I tend to watch very little TV at the moment.
Apparently it has been shown in america (the British version I mean).
Anyway, I shall try not to clog up too much net space with it, as you could
just take a quick peek in alt.fan.reddwarf (although it could be spelled
differently, perhaps red dwarf, Red_Dwarf or somethiing. Scan the alt.fan
groups, it should be in there.)
If your network hasnt shown it then shoot them all.
Terry Pratchett
gags. Personally, the 'Supplies Cupboard' creased me up...
Terry
Eyvind Bernhardsen
> Anyway, I shall try not to clog up too much net space with it, as you could
> just take a quick peek in alt.fan.reddwarf (although it could be spelled
> differently, perhaps red dwarf, Red_Dwarf or somethiing. Scan the alt.fan
> groups, it should be in there.)
alt.tv.red-dwarf, actually :)
-Eyvind
--
//| | DISCLAIMER: My opinions belong to me.
// | | Anybody else who feels this way should
\\ //--|miga: There can be only one. | see a professional.
\X/ | eyv...@lise.unit.no | Quote me and EAT LAWYER, asshole!
Eccles
*laugh* Try looking for the books, one Red Dwarf, the sequal Better
Than Life , authored by rob Grant and Doug Naylor
they are absolutely brilliant, but there is also a tv show
from Britain that is a precursor to the novels....
Eccles a
Eccles
>But don't read the book. It gets boring after reading helf of it.
>It can never beat Terry or Doug.
The books take the (unrelated) episodes and create a.....
PLOT
Eccles
Read em
Terry Pratchett
Dwarf was that it could so easily have worked hads they thought it out
properly. Lister could have been some guy from East LA, Rimmer some Ivy
League idiot -- the Cat, Kryten and Holly didn't really need to change at
all.
Terry
Leo Breebaart
> Did you manage to catch Weird Al's 'UHF' when it was shown on BBC1 this
> Christmas?
Don't know about Terry, but I did.
And I've had better times watching Benny Hill reruns, frankly. Even
whalegutting in the Arctic comes to mind as better way to occupy one's
time than watching 'UHF', a movie so uninspired, dull and just plain
unfunny that the mere thought of Terry Pratchett actually *liking*
it makes my brain fry.
Am I getting my point across here?
Alastair McKinstry
based on the colour of Magic. Its for a number of computers, his is
a Sinclair Spectrum.
The problem is..
How do you get past the troll on the second level ? Its been bugging
us for ages, we've even tried going back to the first level and being
kind to all the beggars, etc.
Spoiler by e-mail if you don't want to wreck the game for everybody.
Any help would be appreciated.
Alastair McKinstry,
--
-^-
| Alastair McKinstry
(am...@maths.tcd.ie)
Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes
>Good:
> Magrat's green hair
I must have missed something. Where is it written that her hair is green?
> Magrat wearing the dress - though IMO she should have trousers on
The dress certainly isn't her travelling clothes, and probably not her
normal at-home clothes, and probably not the ball gown (not gaudy
enough). It could be her fairy godmothering gown. It's a little weird
that she'd be wearing her ninja headband with it, though.
>Not given:
> Magrat's flat chestedness is not mentioned in this book, except
> a passing reference to her as built like a maypole. Many
> maypoles have a knob/bulge on top :).
You must have missed something. Check the scene where they put Magrat
into Ember's dress. They have to pad it. Either the cover's wrong, or
Ember had one *hell* of a pair of hooters.
- R
Paul S. Winalski
In article <RSHOLMES.9...@rodan.syr.EDU>,
rsho...@rodan.syr.EDU (Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) writes:
|>
|>But where's John Tenniel when you need him?
Lewis Carroll and John Tenniel quarreled incessantly over the illustrations for
Carroll's books. One entire chapter from THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS was
omitted because Tenniel thought the concept of a wasp with a wig was too silly
and he refused to do an illustration for the chapter.
It just goes to show that the author vs. illustrator problem is timeless.
--PSW
Rob Bakie
>But where's John Tenniel when you need him?
Why Tenniel? Lewis Carrol wanted alice to have shorter dark hair, but Tenniel
refused.
>- R
Slinkie
Paul S. Winalski
In article <memo....@cix.compulink.co.uk>,
I'm surprised that they actually showed the US version of Red Dwarf in the UK.
They didn't show it in the US.
--PSW
Geoff Landergan
> When he comes out
>of stasis, he finds out that he's been in stasis for 10 million years.
^^^^^^^^^^
3 million
>hologram of Arnold Rimmer, the overbearing, martinet, and incompetant junior
>engineer who was Lister's immediate superior. Rimmer was the one whose faulty
>repairs to the radiation shield caused the explosion. Holly has brought him
>back as a hologram because he calculated that Rimmer was the companion most
>likely to keep Lister from going insane.
Rimmer repaired the coffee machines. His most responsible jobs was to
make sure that the food dispensers didn't run out of fun-sized crunchie
bars. Noboby but Rimmer would ever give Rimmer a task more important
that this!
It should be noted that Holly was most likely insane to make this decision.
--
Geoff Landergan geo...@kells.demon.co.uk
Mitcham, Surrey, UK
+44 81 646 2605
Geoff Landergan
>Anyway, I shall try not to clog up too much net space with it, as you could
>just take a quick peek in alt.fan.reddwarf (although it could be spelled
>differently, perhaps red dwarf, Red_Dwarf or somethiing. Scan the alt.fan
>groups, it should be in there.)
alt.tv.red-dwarf
Leo Breebaart
> >|>Josh Kirby clearly falls into the second category [...] he just
> >|>takes the text as a starting point for the cover, and blasts off
> >|>into a direction and universe of his own.
>
> Which is what I'm complaining about. You've got Terry Pratchett's
> concept of the characters inside the book, and Kirby's inconsistent
> concept on the cover. Some people might enjoy having two entirely
> different representations of Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg for the
> price of one; not me
Well, we must agree to disagree then, because (in this case) I don't
mind in the least. I can only repeat myself: photo-realism is overrated.
> > [ Kirby's Twoflower literally has four eyes ]
> >I'm sure PTerry was delighted to have his own "four eyes" joke
> >thrown back at him.
>
> Or he may have been chagrined that Kirby completely misunderstood the
> remark.
Well, if he managed to latch on to a throwaway remark like that, at
least you can't accuse Kirby of not reading the book carefully (which
was how this whole discussion got started, remember?). In any case, I
thought *you* were the one who wanted Josh Kirby to take Terry's
descriptions literally ;-)
> *sigh*. This may be heresy, but I don't think the true Discworld
> artist has come along yet.
Again, I disagree. While I am not as particular a big fan of Kirby's
work as some of the other people on this newsgroup, I do think that he
is 'the' Discworld artist, if only by the sheer familiarity of his
work by now. Some of his covers are better than others, though:
"Witches Abroad" and "Lords and Ladies" are particularly bad, but
"Small Gods", "Wyrd Sisters" and the illustrations for "Eric" are
nothing short of miraculous.
Maybe I should add that the colorful covers were also the final straw
that caused me to make up my mind and buy my first three Discworld
paperbacks sight unseen. I wonder how many other people have picked up
Terry's novels because the covers attracted their attention...?
> But where's John Tenniel when you need him?
Do you really think he would be appropriate? Tenniel was allright in
the assorted animals department, but I think his portrayal of humanoids
is rather bad. I can't imagine what a Tenniel Troll would look like...
Leo Breebaart
[ About Weird Al's movie "UHF" ]
> No, had it on video already. Definitely a fannish film, chockful o' side
> gags. Personally, the 'Supplies Cupboard' creased me up...
Well, it's a very old joke, so I can't say I was really, eh, surprised
by it.
The one that I really liked was the "Badgers? Badgers? We don't need
no steenkin' badgers!" line...
But apart from those few brighter moments I still think that movie was
a complete waste of time. Or maybe it's just my sense of humor going
on the blink, because that same weekend I saw Woody Allen's "Sleeper",
and I thought that was miserably unfunny as well.
Mik Stevens
Amazing, Eccles speaks the truth. Wonderfully crafted version
of TV series which begat it. TV series has a *bit* of a plot, though,
especially first two.
New series of Red Dwarf coming soon. Does Terry watch it?
For more info subscribe to * alt.fan.red-dwarf *
and ftp the toaster.
mik
Neil L Cook
Er, I think I missed something here... What is Terry alluding to?
Would it be possible to include a few lines of reference (like above) when
replying to questions PTerry? Otherwise, those of us with screwed news feeds
get confused mightily.
Neil.
Donal K. Fellows
>In article <1993Jan30.2...@e2big.mko.dec.com> wina...@adserv.enet.dec.com writes:
>
>>hologram of Arnold Rimmer, the overbearing, martinet, and incompetant junior
>>engineer who was Lister's immediate superior. Rimmer was the one whose faulty
>>repairs to the radiation shield caused the explosion. Holly has brought him
>>back as a hologram because he calculated that Rimmer was the companion most
>>likely to keep Lister from going insane.
>
>Rimmer repaired the coffee machines. His most responsible jobs was to
>make sure that the food dispensers didn't run out of fun-sized crunchie
>bars. Noboby but Rimmer would ever give Rimmer a task more important
>that this!
>
Despite this fact, it was Rimmer's faulty repair which caused the
explosion, though i can't remember the exact details. I don't have the
books with me.
>It should be noted that Holly was most likely insane to make this decision.
>
Definitely! :)
po...@brokendrum.stack.urc.tue.nl
In <1993Jan28.0...@mel.dit.csiro.au> Andrew Waugh writes:
> The annotated Pratchett should contain a section containing all the
> cover errors...
Well, what about the picture of the MOON present on the cover of Reaper
Man?
Is it really possible for it to look like that on the discworld? I don't
think so :) (Not that it is important at all...)
pooh
Peter Galbavy
>Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
>Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
>Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
>That one still irritates me.
Hang on, one is Gaspode, but the other one must be Laddie ???
May the laugh be with you,
---
Peter Galbavy e-mail: P.Ga...@wonderland.org
Wonderland
"Nothing's forgotten. Nothing's ever forgotten."
Ron Dippold
>>Good:
>> Magrat's green hair
>I must have missed something. Where is it written that her hair is green?
There's a scene where it says that Margat's hair is the wrong color
and they need to change it to the same color as the princesses. I
think he picked up the green from the green theme. There must been
something that did it, because unless something specifically states
otherwise, DKS colors all hair red-brown.
>enough). It could be her fairy godmothering gown. It's a little weird
>that she'd be wearing her ninja headband with it, though.
Well, I can handle a combination of stuff - the wand and the knife are
combined into one on the cover as well.
>>Not given:
>> Magrat's flat chestedness is not mentioned in this book, except
>> a passing reference to her as built like a maypole. Many
>> maypoles have a knob/bulge on top :).
>You must have missed something. Check the scene where they put Magrat
>into Ember's dress. They have to pad it. Either the cover's wrong, or
>Ember had one *hell* of a pair of hooters.
Whoops, you got me! I just forgot this scene. Ummm... Maybe Ember
resembled Samantha Fox.
--
Teenagers complain there's nothing to do and then stay out all night doing it.
Mik Stevens
A lot of the versions printed now contain Carroll's own illustartions.
Also, is there any truth behind the urban myth of Carroll being
a heroin addict, and was he a molester of little girls.
mik
Shepherd A J
was shown on BBC 1 the monday before Christmas. This is the moment where
one of the bad guys hears a noise behind the supplies cupboard door,
and opens it to be confronted by Karate teacher and some of his pupils.
"Suplise!" yells the Karate teacher before they beat up the baddies (off
vision).
--
---> Antony J. "Doppelganger" Shepherd - sh...@essex.ac.uk <---
"So,if you're a young ovum or spermatozoa thinking of taking
up living, don't. 100% of Doctors agree that living leads
to death."
Andy Holyer
>rsho...@rodan.syr.EDU (Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) writes:
>
>
>> > [ Kirby's Twoflower literally has four eyes ]
>> >I'm sure PTerry was delighted to have his own "four eyes" joke
>> >thrown back at him.
>>
>> Or he may have been chagrined that Kirby completely misunderstood the
>> remark.
>
>Well, if he managed to latch on to a throwaway remark like that, at
>least you can't accuse Kirby of not reading the book carefully (which
>was how this whole discussion got started, remember?). In any case, I
>thought *you* were the one who wanted Josh Kirby to take Terry's
>descriptions literally ;-)
>
Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
That one still irritates me.
I've been having a running
battle the last few months to try and get my regular drinking buddies (as
against my *ir*regular etc. etc.) to get into Pratchett. Still hasn't worked.
Haven't managed to get 'em past the covers (literally!! that's the objection
they bring up!).
&.
--
&ndy Holyer, School of Cognitive and |"In the beginning, there was
Computing Studies, University of Sussex, | nothing, which exploded."
JANET: an...@cogs.sussex.ac.uk | - Terry Pratchett
Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes
>Lewis Carroll and John Tenniel quarreled incessantly over the illustrations for
>Carroll's books. One entire chapter from THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS was
>omitted because Tenniel thought the concept of a wasp with a wig was too silly
>and he refused to do an illustration for the chapter.
>
>It just goes to show that the author vs. illustrator problem is timeless.
and In article <1kmnac...@shelley.u.washington.edu> sli...@stein.u.washington.edu (Rob Bakie) writes:
>Why Tenniel? Lewis Carrol wanted alice to have shorter dark hair, but Tenniel
>refused.
I was unaware that Carroll specifically wanted Tenniel to draw Alice
with shorter, dark hair (though I know the real Alice, and Alice as
drawn by Carroll himself, had shorter, dark hair); but in any case,
Tenniel's choice of long blonde hair doesn't contradict anything in
the texts.
As for the "missing chapter" -- actually a section of a chapter -- my
understanding is that it was deleted not only because Tenniel couldn't
come up with an illustration for it, but because he disliked the
entire episode and persuaded Carroll the book would be better without
it.
Yes, Tenniel and Carroll had their fights. So have practically all
artistic collaborators worth mentioning. The point, though, is that
(a) Tenniel did a splendid job in the judgment of many and (b) none of
Tenniel's illustrations are grossly inconsistent with Carroll's
descriptions, unlike both the American and English covers for some, at
least, of Pratchett's books.
Look, I don't want to come down too hard on Kirby. I thought his
illustrations for Eric were excellent, and he's got a much more
distinctive, personal style than most. I just happen to dislike the
"Where's Waldo" pandemonium style he tends to use for the DW covers;
and it bugs me a great deal that he draws nearly-indistinguishible
stereotypical witches for Granny and Nanny instead of following TP's
descriptions and making them quite different from each other and, at
least in the case of Granny, somewhat different from the stereotype;
that he put the _WA_ hut on chicken's legs instead of duck's legs;
that for _L&L_ he put Magrat in a suit of armor that's quite different
from what TP described; that he drew Twoflower with four eyes, clearly
not what TP intended; etc., etc., etc.
--
- Rich "mcmxciibo" Holmes
"Grown men, he told himself, in flat contradiction of centuries of
accumulated evidence about the way grown men behave, do not behave
like this." -- Douglas Adams
David Jenkins
In article <1993Feb...@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>, stev...@p4.cs.man.ac.uk
(Mik Stevens) writes:
|>
|> Also, is there any truth behind the urban myth of Carroll being
|> a heroin addict, and was he a molester of little girls.
|>
|> mik
Dunno about the heroin, but he did like to photograph young girls -
although all the pictures I've seen have been clothed, so he wasn't all
bad. ;-)
David Jenkins
Thought for the day...
Why don't "minimalists" find a shorter name for themselves?
Alex Poole
>Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
>Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
>Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
Hmmm... I always assumed one of them was Laddie... one certainly looks in much better
condition than the other.
Still, what does my opinion matter? I'm just a student <sigh>. Well, in my spare time,
obviously.
Alex
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Badly planned projects take three times as long as expected.
Well planned projects take only twice as long.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Woodhams
had Tenniel use a different girl as a model. I have a volume of
Wonderland & Lookingglass with illustrations from many different
publications of the books, but not one of them has chosen to
illustrate Alice as she really was (mostly they follow Tenniel's
Alice.)
Dodgeson (Carrol's true name) was also an amateur photographer
(perhaps the second best English portrait photographer of the 19th
century) and he took many photographs of Alice. The young Alice in
the movie "Dreamchild" has a very good resemblance. (An excellent
movie. The only glaring inaccuracy is that when old Alice attends the
American celebrations of the centenary Dodgeson's birth, she was
accompanied by her only surviving son, not a maid.)
Michael W.
P.S. Ob Pterry: I can't recall any Carrolian references in the
diskworld books, but surely they must exist. (ER must abound with
opportunities.) Can anyone else think of one?
Paul S. Winalski
In article <1993Feb4.1...@Princeton.EDU>,
wood...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael Woodhams) writes:
|>
|>P.S. Ob Pterry: I can't recall any Carrolian references in the
|>diskworld books, but surely they must exist. (ER must abound with
|>opportunities.) Can anyone else think of one?
|>
in the forest after rescuing Greebo from Lancre Castle, that goes something
like this:
He [Greebo] let the grin fade until only the cat remained, which
is at least as disconcerting as the other way around.
A clear reference to the Cheshire Cat.
--PSW
Matthew Crosby
>In article <1993Feb...@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>, stev...@p4.cs.man.ac.uk
>(Mik Stevens) writes:
>|> Also, is there any truth behind the urban myth of Carroll being
>|> a heroin addict, and was he a molester of little girls.
>
>although all the pictures I've seen have been clothed, so he wasn't all
>bad. ;-)
>
a) He liked little girls
b) He took photos of at least a couple of them nude.
However, there is absolutely no evidence that he did anything else to them,
he was virtually always chaperoned, and he almost always gave back the pictures
afterwords. Note also that it wasn't that unusual for Victorian photographers
to take shots of naked little kids, usually made to look like angels or similar.
It certainly wasn't like today where any photographer of naked children is
automatically considered a pedophile.
Mind you, there where an awful lot of Pedophiles among the Victorians, and the
children tended never to be believed, so it was quite possible.
As to the heroin, I'm not sure, though that is quite likely.
--
-Matt
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the net!
mcr...@nyx.cs.du.edu -or- cro...@cs.colorado.edu
Richard Kershaw
>>hologram of Arnold Rimmer, the overbearing, martinet, and incompetant junior
>>engineer who was Lister's immediate superior. Rimmer was the one whose faulty
>>repairs to the radiation shield caused the explosion. Holly has brought him
>>back as a hologram because he calculated that Rimmer was the companion most
>>likely to keep Lister from going insane.
This was because Lister had had the most speaking words with him.
(Lister replied something like, "and they where all smeg-off")
>Rimmer repaired the coffee machines. His most responsible jobs was to
>make sure that the food dispensers didn't run out of fun-sized crunchie
>bars. Noboby but Rimmer would ever give Rimmer a task more important
>that this!
True. The actual leak (no explosion, think of a N-bomb) was caused
by someone spilling some coffee in the book. I don't think they
detailed it in the series.
You may be confusing reality with Rimmers guilt (Justice/Justice Zone?).
Rimmer feels that he caused the deaths, even though there was no
chance of this
: >It should be noted that Holly was most likely insane to make this decision.
Not insane, senile. IQ somewhere between a housebrick and a diseased
hedgehog.
-Veltyen
"Hastur la hastur, Hastur."
unfortunate paraphrasing from T2.
guess you gotta be a cthulu-bunny
Geoff Riley
Fox
He was talking about Weird Al's film UHF which didn't do too well in
America, wasn't released in Britain three years ago when it was first
given the rounds and was finally shown on Beeb one this Christmas.
Personally I think it's got the same humor quality as Howard the Duck
but then I was about the only person on the planet who liked that film.
Just as an aside, if you want to see a truly superb piece of piss-taking
in a film and you are also a fan of the Alien/Predator/bladerunner sort of
sci-fi films then go and grab a copy of Split Second. The American audience
hated it but I get a feeling this was because it went over their heads.
Anyway, any film with Rutger Hauer in it can't be all bad.
Mike
"Badgers? BADGERS? We don't NEED no steenkin BADERS!"
--
|\_/| F That which I say is reality and the absolute truth as I see it.
\O O/ O Disagree if you like but the reality remains the same and only
\o/ X I have the power to change it.
Fox
> ma_b...@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Fox) writes:
>
> > Did you manage to catch Weird Al's 'UHF' when it was shown on BBC1 this
> > Christmas?
>
> Don't know about Terry, but I did.
>
> 'UHF', a movie so uninspired, dull and just plain
> unfunny that the mere thought of Terry Pratchett actually *liking*
> it makes my brain fry.
>
Is that fried brains with relish or just fries? *8)
By the way. Next time anyone in Britain goes into a Burger King and
has a 'hold what you like' type burger as advertised on TV, try
asking for a 'Quarter pounder, hold the bun'. The reaction is rather
amusing.
Ok ok, so I'm bored
Mike
Erik Bunn
>Maybe I should add that the colorful covers were also the final straw
>that caused me to make up my mind and buy my first three Discworld
>paperbacks sight unseen. I wonder how many other people have picked up
>Terry's novels because the covers attracted their attention...?
Umm. I refused to buy The Color of Magic when I saw the cover. Oh,
all right, Colour of Magic.
My thoughts were something like "A book that actively repulses potential
buyers with a cover like that _can't_ be good." (No, I don't usually
chose books by their covers. Disqualifying one by the cover is
a completely different subject, right? =)
I'm not sure exactly how one of the first books ended up with us,
but I've learned to tolerate the covers by now.
IMHO, the best cover scheme I've seen is on Varley's Titan series.
Pure white with big fonts, gold or black, and just a stylized
little pictoid. It would be even better if they dropped all the
blurbs - only the name of the book and the author would be quite fine.
Provided the fonts are nice.
--
Erik Bunn // // full-time unrealist
Erik...@hut.fi // e...@niksula.cs.hut.fi // e...@vipunen.hut.fi
(358-0)455-1041 // (358-71)227-493 // (1-206)638-1002
Terry Pratchett
Terry
ps Okay, guys. I'm now seriously talking to the Demon people about becoming
an Internet nodule or whatever, so you won't get these gnomic
pronouncements...
Eccles
><<<<<[ So I nuked the headers, you know who you are ]>>>>>
>: >It should be noted that Holly was most likely insane to make this decision.
>Not insane, senile. IQ somewhere between a housebrick and a diseased
>hedgehog.
*grin* Toast anyone?
>-Veltyen
>"Hastur la hastur, Hastur."
> unfortunate paraphrasing from T2.
>guess you gotta be a cthulu-bunny
^^^
Cthulhu... guess you gotta be :)
Eccles
Eccles
>Umm. I refused to buy The Color of Magic when I saw the cover. Oh,
>all right, Colour of Magic.
Thats better :)
>IMHO, the best cover scheme I've seen is on Varley's Titan series.
>Pure white with big fonts, gold or black, and just a stylized
>little pictoid. It would be even better if they dropped all the
>blurbs - only the name of the book and the author would be quite fine.
>Provided the fonts are nice.
The covers of the Anne Rice Vampire Chronicles are also really well
done (except for the candelabra on Interview with a Vampire. bizarre)
with just the main character of each book, lit by an 'offshot' candle
I like the blurbs. Especially Pterry's author descriptions...
'..and is still not dead.' had me in the giggles for a few
minutes.
Eccles
"Life has once again vomited into my trousers"
Eccles
>"Badgers? BADGERS? We don't NEED no steenkin BADERS!"
^^^^^^
Ooops.
*grin*
Eccles
Ross Smith
>
>In article <1993Feb4.1...@syma.sussex.ac.uk>, an...@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Andy Holyer) writes:
>
>>Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
>>Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
>>Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
>
>Hmmm... I always assumed one of them was Laddie... one certainly looks in much better
>condition than the other.
Take another look. There are *three* dogs on the MP cover. One is obviously
Laddie, *both* of the others just as obviously Gaspode.
--
...... Ross Smith (Wanganui, NZ) ...... al...@acheron.amigans.gen.nz ......
"I blame you for the moonlit sky and the dream that died with the Eagle's flight
I blame you for the moonlit nights when I wonder why are the seas still dry
Don't blame me, sleeping satellite" (Tasmin Archer)
--
Gary Smith
> >rsho...@rodan.syr.EDU (Rich 'mcmxciibo' Holmes) writes:
> >
> Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
> Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
> Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
> That one still irritates me.
I can't remember the exact details (read the book a long time ago and far,
far away; also the book's at home) but there were two separate dogs.
The second one was based on Lassie. Laddie, perhaps?
My vague memory is that the second illustration resembled my imagining
of the second dog.
So there. :)
Gary
Paul Mc Auley (in the Barron-O'Reilly)
|> it makes my brain fry.
|>
|Is that fried brains with relish or just fries? *8)
|By the way. Next time anyone in Britain goes into a Burger King and
|has a 'hold what you like' type burger as advertised on TV, try
|asking for a 'Quarter pounder, hold the bun'. The reaction is rather
|amusing.
Shades of Bloom County... "... shake, Hold the cup."
|Ok ok, so I'm bored
By a .303 bookworm?
Paul.
--
__________________________.
Paul Mc Auley | God is real . . . . . .
--------------------------|
AKA pmca...@maths.tcd.ie | . . . . . . . . Unless Declared an Integer.
Evan Kirshenbaum
>By the way. Next time anyone in Britain goes into a Burger King and
>has a 'hold what you like' type burger as advertised on TV, try
>asking for a 'Quarter pounder, hold the bun'. The reaction is rather
>amusing.
Back when my brother was on a completely sugar-free diet due to tooth
problems, we did this regularly at McDonald's. It turned out that the
burgers (and, I believe, mustard) were fine, but the buns and ketchup
were off limits. We'd bring in two slices of sugar-free bread and ask
them to put a burger on it. They looked at you funny, and sometimes
called a manager over, but they always complied.
This, of course, has nothing to do with Pratchett. Sorry.
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories | It is a popular delusion that the
3500 Deer Creek Road, Building 26U | government wastes vast amounts of
Palo Alto, CA 94304 | money through inefficiency and sloth.
| Enormous effort and elaborate
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | planning are required to waste this
(415)857-7572 | much money
Dan Johnson
>Andrew Waugh writes...
>future. Check out the print date: February 1993. Publishers
This is typical for paperpacks. Many of the paperbacks I buy have
this sort of month offset (at least, the ones I buy in the later half
of the month tend to).
--
Daniel W. Johnson Applied Computing Devices, Inc.
Home: 7152...@CompuServe.COM Work: d...@iedv1.acd.com
Dani...@aol.com 39 25 02 N / 87 19 55 W
- this space unintentionally left blank -
Ian Palmer
: In article <1993Feb4.1...@syma.sussex.ac.uk>, an...@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Andy Holyer) writes:
: >Yea, but it's when he gets it so obviously *wrong*. Get out your copy of
: >Moving pictures. open it out so you can see both the front and back covers.
: >Count the dogs. Go on. Count 'em again. Two Gaspodes. *Who*are*different!!!
: Hmmm... I always assumed one of them was Laddie... one certainly looks in much better
: condition than the other.
Ah, but count them again - 3 dogs (two one the front, one on the
back). It's not that there are possibly two *different* Gaspodes in
the picture that worries me, it's the fact that there's two *Gaspodes*
in the picture that worries me (in the same picture). Unless there's a
third dog somewhere.
Of course I may have missed something 'cos I'm still readin MP at the
moment, one day I'll catch up :-)
Ian
--
E-mail : i...@doc.ic.ac.uk
___ __ Snail mail : Department of Computing, Huxley Building,
/ _ _ /_/ _ / _ _ _ _ Imperial College, 180 Queens Gate,
_/_ (_|_| ) / (_|_(_| ) )_|/_) London. SW7 2BZ. England.
Daniel R Barlow
>IMHO, the best cover scheme I've seen is on Varley's Titan series.
>Pure white with big fonts, gold or black, and just a stylized
>little pictoid. It would be even better if they dropped all the
>blurbs - only the name of the book and the author would be quite fine.
>Provided the fonts are nice.
Argh, no. Makes it look like something by Craig Thomas. Anything but
that.
Daniel
--
Daniel Barlow, | Pilot did this song in a plane like that one
jo9...@ox.ac.uk | She is selling faith on a hotel crusade
I speak for nobody | Locomotive 8, Southern Crescent hear the bells ring again
but me. Sometimes | This field of wheat is looking thin -REM, Driver 8
WEITZMAN, ANDREW
>In article <1993Jan30....@bradford.ac.uk>, D.Mo...@bradford.ac.uk (D MORGAN) writes:
> > CSD...@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
> >
> > Don't blame the artists; blame the stupid Americanist sensationalism. You
> > shoulda seen the hash they made of Red Dwarf! All the casting was way out;
> > instead of a useless heap of down and outs, they looked like the cast off
> > baywatch or dallas!
> >
> [Stuff deleted]
>
>Um. . . . I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't have a clue as to what,
>exactly, Red Dwarf is. Please elucidate?
Red Dwarf is a British SF series (are there any other kind) that is
humourous. Think of it as the Blackadder (and if you don't understand that,
there's no hope for you ;)) of SF tv. The basic plot has Rimmer, an anal
retentive minor functionary in the space navy, cause an explosion which
kills him--and everyone eles on a giant starship--while it is blasting
off into space. He is resurected as a hologram--he has a big H on his
forehead--and discovers that a few million years have passed. He also
discovers that there is only 1 survivor--a dreadlocked slob named Lister
who is the exact opposite of his personality. Oh yeah, there's a very
incompetent computer, the ship's cat has evolved into a vain humanoid,
and they eventually find a robot named Kryten somewhere along the way.
That completes the simple(!) rundown on Red Dwarf. The humour in the
early episodes is a bit forced, but it one of the few SF humour shows
that actually uses SF concepts as humour, and not merely the props of
the genre.
Andrew Weitzman
Dr. C.D. Wright
can't eat anything with wheat, oats, barley or rye. We
used to go into McDonalds and ask for a BigMac without the
bun. Funny looks, and sometimes the manager was called,
but we always got it. My hat goes off to them for this.
(Metaphorically)