1,173 comments posted · 15 followers · following 1
I'll check out the HP close reading! I was rather surprised to find myself using Potter as a positive example as I'm not much of a fan, but looking at GO through this lens made me appreciate what Rowling does well a lot more!
And thanks for reading and your comment :D
But on the subject of Pratchett-related crit, I wrote a longform essay on why I think the Good Omens miniseries fails to engage successfully with the comedy storytelling techniques of the book: https://www.kathrynrosamiller.com/post/good-omens.
It's kind of borne out of having a Lot Of Feelings about the miniseries and what I perceived as its shortcomings, and how those illuminate what the book/Pratchett does so well - and being frustrated that the only response I could find were people wholeheartedly lauding the show (not that I resent them loving it, just that I craaaave a critical discussion like wot we do here).
I ended up being really proud of what I wrote so I'd love anyone who thinks it sounds interesting to take a look!
Otherwise I'll just have to hope that the Good Omens series gets covered in MarkWatches at some point and I get to foist my opinions on everyone int he comments then :D
I'll bite my tongue for the most part here, as I know I'm massively in the minority in not adoring the GO miniseries, and I don't want to be churlish. And I'll rot13 it for expectation spoilers, but I will just say V'z tynq gur znexrgvat vaibyirq fbzr gvzr va gur fcbgyvtug sbe gur ahaf orpnhfr V gubhtug gur frevrf engure ehfurq cnfg gur Punggrevat Beqre naq vg vf n cbvag V qvfphff va zl sbegupbzvat qvffregngvba 'V Yvxrq Tbbq Bzraf Svar Ohg Cyrnfr Qba'g Yrg Crbcyr Jub Unir Bayl Cerivbhfyl Jbexrq Ba Qenzn Ybbfr Ba Nal Zber Cengpurgg Gunaxf'
Re. the Horsemen, I would say V nofbyhgryl trg jul fbzrbar zvtug or fpnerq ol gur ubefrzra va gur obbx ohg V'q or fhecevfrq vs gur GI irefvbaf jbhyq ryvpvg gung xvaq bs srne, gurer'f abguvat ernyyl nobhg gurz va gur nqncgvba gung'f perrcl, ivfhnyyl fpnel be cflpubybtvpnyyl fpnel. Boivbhfyl gung'f irelLZZI naq qbrfa'g nppbhag sbe nal fcrpvsvp gevttref naq frafvgvir fcbgf na vaqvivqhny zvtug unir. UBJRIRE, vg'f qrsvavgryl jbegu abgvat gung gurer ner bgure bar be gjb tebff naq ubeevslvat ovgf, gubhtu gur fubj vf trarenyyl yvtug va zbbq pbzcnerq gb gur obbx - n cnegvphyne fprar frg va n pnyy prager, gnxra fgenvtug sebz gur obbx, va cnegvphyne.
(vague Good Omens spoilers)
But yeah, though we've seen plenty outside of characters who you could call working class (or whatever terms are the closest appropriate term in settings like Lancre or A-M), they've all tended to have a lot of power and self-determination.
And yes, you're right - from the POV of representative of organisations who have the power to affect that organisation...
I love that in this period of Discworld Pterry was finding new interesting challenges in the various corners he'd written himself into, and in territory he had tended towards. I.e. Moist as conman hero and William's automatic sense of privaleged right to autonomy were borne at least partly out of needing characters who wouldn't engage with the Watch.
And here, as you say, people who are concerned with the stuff at the other end of the ladder of big organisations.
I'm super interested in status as a character/storytelling issue at the moment. My favourite podcast for a while has been Rule of Three, where two comedy writers (who have worked on lots of Charlie Brooker stuff, Philomena Cunk, the Paddington films and loads bsides) have a comedian guest to talk about something they love.
They have a good old pick apart why it all works, and something that comes up over and over is the idea of having a very clear idea of everyone's status relationships being essential to comic fiction. At least in British comedy, where, of course, it usually interplays with class significantly...
(https://www.ruleofthreepod.com/ if anyone fancies it)
E.g. the Broccoli/Candi joke is just a straight dumb blonde joke, isn't it?
Maybe the Sally/Angua interaction bores/fustrates me partly because Angua rarely actually comes to life on the page for me. I like her loads when she's not a POV character. She ACTS in a way I really like. But when you see her thoughts she never really thinks about anything other than a. werewolf angst and b. Carrot angst.
This book puts a new spin on her preoccupations but in the most tiresome way - by giving her a romantic rival. Even if Pratchett doesn't really go there with the love triangle thing, which I'm glad of, it's hard to enjoy something on the basis of 'it could have been a lot worse'.
I just wish Angua was preocupied with something other than her romance and her werewolfiness (which is itself frequently spoken about in temrs of how it relates to her relationship with Carrot, or with reference to how it leaves her naked a lot oo-er missus).
Naq pbafvqrevat gung guvf gur ovt pyvznk fprar erfgf ba gur vzcerffvbag ung guvf fprar znxrf, vg xvaq bs raqf hc jrnxravat gur raq. Urer jr frr Ivzrf vf pncnoyr bs whfg sbetrggvat gur nccbvagzrag. Yngre uvf vagreany pybpx jvyy or na nyzbfg zlfgvpny sbepr!
It IS clear that this level of trouble is a rare (maybe unique) exception, and that normally, when not caught up in events important enough for a book to be about them, presumably Vimes just plans better and gets home without much fuss.
But this is the version of him getting home at 6 that we're shown, and it doesn't frame Vimes as a person who has done practical things to draw the line between work and family. It shows him (even unwittingly) putting everyone else to a lot of trouble and inconvenience so he doesn't really have to prioritise and can get his family time without having to compromise on his work time.
Considering he doesn't really visibly afford Sybil the same dedication to time and from what we can see, he spends just as much time at work as he did in FOC, Jingo etc... hmm.
To be fair there's plenty of reference of off-screen time where Sybil gets to spend time with her husband and he even supports her in things only she enjoys or values (like going to fancy parties etc).
But all in all I'm forced to feel like though this isn't a bad scene, it doesn't quite sell the angl Pratchett wants us to buy quite as effectively as it might. He writes so persuasively and has made Vimes so sympathetic that I can pack those critical thoughts away and just go with the sentiments that were intended (i.e. 'this is a heartwarming display of fatherly devotion'), but yeah, Pratchett could have written a better version fo this Vimes-rushes-to-get-home-for-bedtime idea I think.