Disturbing Trend in UA and Snuff: **Major Spoilers**

[cabbagehead]

The continuity error I noticed was that Carrot already had an inflatable football in Jingo. But Discworld books always had those problems. Considering that the wizards books are my least favorite series and my lack of familiarity with many of the British football references (but always had some others going through my head like 'football is a 90 minute game' and 'the ball is round' and 'that's not the way to make a wall') it was good enough. Loved Glenda. I hope Nutt took her with him to the mountains, I hope they visited Granny Weatherwax on the way.

[high eight]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

Yes, that's right. "I shall unleash a spell which will prevent any further magic being used within these hallowed lines"... i.e. On the pitch... including himself

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection.

Not really: we get page after page of his self-doubt "Do I have worth?". etc.
But the point is that orcs are bred for fighting. Her ladyship has tried to breed a cultured one - and has (maybe) succeded in that she has bred one who is obsessive/compulsive enough to make himself good at everything he tries.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

But not subtlety in characterisation, obviously. Nutt is, imo, one of Terry's more subtle characters of recent times.

[LilMaibe]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

In UA it is older than when the events of LC occurred. With the information we get about previous Archchancellors' 'discovering' additional mealtimes, the age of the bequest, it is not only an assumptoin that in the reality of UA the nightkitchen existed ever since.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

Yes, that's right. "I shall unleash a spell which will prevent any further magic being used within these hallowed lines"... i.e. On the pitch... including himself

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection.

Not really: we get page after page of his self-doubt "Do I have worth?". etc.
But the point is that orcs are bred for fighting. Her ladyship has tried to breed a cultured one - and has (maybe) succeded in that she has bred one who is obsessive/compulsive enough to make himself good at everything he tries.

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

But point is, he makes himself TOO good. Even before Lotti takes him in.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

Yes. But what it amounts to is (aside from the obligatory cyrano-shout-out) another scene where the text tells of another trait the orc can do in absolute perfection.

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

But not subtlety in characterisation, obviously. Nutt is, imo, one of Terry's more subtle characters of recent times.

Then explain why you think he is subtle and I shall say why I don't think he is.

[DaveC]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell?

[LilMaibe]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell?

The book.

[high eight]

A bigger continuity error:
Compare the things we learn about the daily life at the UU and the characters in Last Continent, Hogfather and even Feet of Clay to the Status Quo of UA. Nearly everything from earlier books is contradicted by UA. Yes, the timeline was messy before, as discussed elsewhere, but there never was such a heap of contradictions. It goes as far as to make it doubtable if the events of LC would have even occured would the UU have been like it is in UA. (If there'd been a nightkitchen and the wizards would be still up regulary around 2/3 am they would have very likely gotten food right with them when wandering to the study, what erases the need for Mrs Whitlow to come there later and clamber through the window, which then... well I think you can imagine what consequences that would have had)

It doesn't say amywhere in UA how old the night kitchen setup is.

In UA it is older than when the events of LC occurred. With the information we get about previous Archchancellors' 'discovering' additional mealtimes, the age of the bequest, it is not only an assumptoin that in the reality of UA the nightkitchen existed ever since.

[shrug] Discworld continuity. Not that important to me. Why it is important to you, I wouldn't like to speculate.

Smaller error:
When they are singing the anthem before the game, Trevor notices the former Dean, well, screwed up as he kept his staff in the anti-magic field and therefore won't be able to use magic to enforce the rules should it become necessary. But the former Dean never casted the spell. Unless my copy is missing the line saying that he does.
In the copy I have he announces what he WILL do (blow the whistle, raise his staff and unleash the spell), asks the teams' captain's if they understood everything and then takes the megaphone to intone the singing of the anthem. No spellcasting.

You see the continuity error?

No

Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

No

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

I don't read game fiction for the same reason I don't read fan faction. Most of it is terrible.

But point is, he makes himself TOO good. Even before Lotti takes him in.

In your opinion.

And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

She doesn't need to understand: as long as it sounds impressive........ (And remember she actually asked Glenda to translate anyway)

Yes. But what it amounts to is (aside from the obligatory cyrano-shout-out) another scene where the text tells of another trait the orc can do in absolute perfection.

Its a Cyrano shout-out and that is all. I think you're getting a bit obsessive about this.

Then explain why you think he is subtle and I shall say why I don't think he is.

You already have - at great length and I don't think that any explanation from me is going to change your mind.

[high eight]

You see the continuity error? Granted, I first thought that might have been an editor's fault, accidentally deleting a line. Though then there still was the question what that line would have said, as the Dean, as mentioned, states that 'he'll blow the whistle'. And after the anthem we discover which whistle it is. So if he would have blown it before... See where I'm heading?

.

Who says the whistle isn't the spell?

That's what I thought. Blowing the whistle unleashes the spell.

[LilMaibe]

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

I don't read game fiction for the same reason I don't read fan faction. Most of it is terrible.

And this was the point where I stopped taking you serious.
Aside from the nonsense to excuse in-story(!) continuity-errors with 'it's the discworld-timeline':
Lord of the clans is NOT fanfiction. it is an official book. It's canon. You really should have done your research on that before stating what you said there.
If you can't do research on even that (which takes what, 2? 3? clicks on Wikipedia, google or tvtropes?) I just can't take your opinion on anything else as worthwhile anymore.

Case closed.

[Tonyblack]

Does that mean the two of you are going to stop arguing? Huh?

[LilMaibe]

Does that mean the two of you are going to stop arguing? Huh?

Don't know about height, but I will. It's no use trying to talk with someone who can't even tell official works of fiction from fanfiction. Left alone do a minuscule bit of research. Geese.

[high eight]

Maybe I am a spoiled child here, but I know exactly THAT story from Warcraft. Only better (granted, tastes differ)
Try reading 'Lord of the Clans'
Not saying Sir Terry ripped off Christie Golden, hell no. The plot itself is much older anyway.

I don't read game fiction for the same reason I don't read fan faction. Most of it is terrible.

And this was the point where I stopped taking you serious.
Aside from the nonsense to excuse in-story(!) continuity-errors with 'it's the discworld-timeline':
Lord of the clans is NOT fanfiction. it is an official book. It's canon. You really should have done your research on that before stating what you said there.
If you can't do research on even that (which takes what, 2? 3? clicks on Wikipedia, google or tvtropes?) I just can't take your opinion on anything else as worthwhile anymore.

Case closed.

I said GAME fiction. Last time I looked Warcraft was a game.

And, to be brutally frank, I stopped taking you seriously about six posts ago.

[high eight]

Does that mean the two of you are going to stop arguing? Huh?

Bloody hell, I hope so.

I could make another comment about fanfic writers here, but I wouldn't want to start her off again.

[Teppic]

As for 'perfect characters' Yes, Vimes and Granny Weatherwax were outstanding, but they were well balanced. They had flaws, quirks. The orc has nothing flawlike. He's infallible (sp?). Page over page we get to read what things he can do in perfection. And things one could consider a flaw (his way of speaking, for example) get portrayed as a 'lovable charactertrait' (when for example he's writing Juliet a poem in Trevor's name. I know Trev wanted to impress her, but he met her before, did he really think she's actually understand the stuff?)

One of the first things I learned about writing is to avoid characters that can do virtually everything and that in perfection.
A character can, of course, have one or two really outstanding abilities/talents. Like languages, music, metalwork, computers or something.
But when a character has an outstanding talent for everything/99% of everything, something is amiss.

And something is amiss. That's the point. Nutt has a huge character flaw which leads him to believe he's not worthy of others' attentions and affections unless he is perfect at everything he does. I'm sure we've all known people like that (I think I'm a bit like that myself in all honesty) and Nutt is an exagerated version of this. He makes damn well sure he is good at everything to the detriment of his own happiness and wellbeing. Nutt is like a school-kid absolutely determined to impress everyone because he fear the consequences (mostly imagined) if he doesn't. At the same time he's able to diagnose and phychoanalyse other people but is actually one of Pratchett's most emotionally immature characters and is very melancholic in this sense. The way he talks to Glenda about her bosum (I forget the exact quote), his failure to understand football for a lot of the book beyond his bookish analysis of the game, the way he talks to everyone like a smart child would without changing his tone or style to suit the context or the person he's speaking to. Him being outstanding at everything is a symptom of his huge character flaw, not of a schoolboy error in Pratchett's formation of characters in my opinion.

And actually, it's interesting you should raise this point because whilst I think Nutt is a very well-crafted character, Vimes in Snuff bothers me for similar reasons Nutt bothers you in UA. He doesn't really lose any battles, and almost becomes a supercop. Vimes' near infallibility in the latest book is a symptom of the plot Pratchett chose to write so comes across as less-convincing, whilst Nutt's (seeming) infallibility is at the very heart of his character in UA. Just my 2p worth.

[LilMaibe]

I would agree if it weren't for a tiny detail. An important detail, though:

The number of skills he has and at which he is perfect, in the flashbacks already.
That is beyond trying to do well because one thinks one has to.
There is a fine, very fine line which was crossed.

And try to think beyond the story:
He now knows he 'has worth' (which is actually argueable, depending on one's personal understanding of worth). Now what?
He is perfect at everything.
There is no point he could evolve to and no chance for actual conflict.
The only thing he can do is, be perfect and make other characters pointless and take their place.
Is creating such a character really a good thing?

(And as you think I'm whining around anyway I can just as well go and say: Geese, you folks surely have a talent for ruining an entire series for someone who held it dear once)

[cabbagehead]

He develops by becoming more accepting of himself and accepting that he, like everyone else, is deserving of kindness and happiness. IIRC. Haven't reread that book since some 2 years ago.