I lost my best friend about 18 months ago. I was there with him in his hospice room. In some ways that feels different; we knew it was coming. We knew he was in pain. We knew what to expect. I dread the day when I hear news or discover something that I didn't have time to prepare for.
Yes, I've been waiting to read alongside Mark. This seemed like the right time. I wanted to share the experience with someone in (more or less) real time, and now through Mark Reads I feel fortunate to have the opportunity to share it with many.
I feel like I keep bringing this up, but on a reread what I keep noticing is that this is probably the Discworld book to date that talks most comfortably and openly about LGBT subjects. I mean, it's not as though anyone is sitting us down for a lecture on the subject, but several times throughout the book, it's casually mentioned in one form or another.
The queer narrative of Pepe is one that I remember noticing when I first read the book, but I only read it once when it first came out and am now revisiting it for the first time since. What's really striking me as how different my perspective on Pepe is now, with those few years of experience. (And a change in my life circumstances; coming out, getting involved in the LGBTIQ+ community in a new way, etc). I am so interested to see how my read on Pepe develops as we learn more about him.
I know this is kind of embarrassing but I absolutely sobbed while listening to Mark read this chapter. I don't think I cried when I first read it, but something about the context of my life and listening to Mark read it just reduced me to an inconsolable mess for a minute. This chapter is so powerful.
I don't know if it's a specific edition thing, but I know that his name was spelled differently (Chrysoprase vs Chrysophrase, I think) in two different books I have. I always thought it was one of those things that was refined over time.
Edit: Rereading WillR113's post again clears it up a bit. It was spelled with two Hs in at least one book. That makes sense.
To be fair, I can see how you wouldn't necessarily assume that Ankh-Morpork meant fantasy if you hadn't heard of Discworld. Maybe it was just 19th century fictional-city.
I remember when I was in primary school (elementary school, for the Americans) having an event every year for NAIDOC week, as a part of which we would learn some traditional indigenous Australian folklore. In hindsight I don't know how much of it was an accurate representation, and how much was adapted or modified. I also remember that my mother didn't like us learning that kind of thing.
We also had a weekly lesson where a Christian group would come to the school and tell Bible stories. Somehow that was fine with her.
I don't think I agree with this. If something is in the original cut of the TV show, that's the TV show canon. If something new appears in the director's cut, then that is the TV director's cut canon.
Yeah, I can think of many book descriptions that suggest a character has a certain body shape without implying that it's a character flaw, inherently bad, or otherwise cruel or judgemental. Describing a character as round or soft as you suggest, but also words like broad, wide, stocky, or descriptions in relation to other characters. (I.e. X is larger than Y). Even loaded words like fat, when used in a factual sense.
In the case of Horsefry, him being foolish, greedy, childish, etc is plain in the text from the way he speaks but doesn't need to be cruelly reinforced in a description of his physical build.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Michael 
Experiment