Question about Snuff

[Who's Wee Dug]

Polythene Girl you can block the posts of the anyone, by using the control panel option so their posts are not displayed it's what I have done.

[polythenegirl]

Polythene Girl you can block the posts of the anyone, by using the control panel option so their posts are not displayed it's what I have done.

Ooo... that sounds like a good option *toddles of to play*

[raisindot]

Raisin, it was an example.
And to be honest, IMHO it doesn't matter who uses toilet humour for cheap laughs. It's still toilet humour used for cheap laughs. And agree with me or not, I'd say it becomes rather grating especially when Sir Terry does it. Especially when it seems to be there for no other reason than to be there.
On a personal note: (just read if you want to)

Spoiler: show

You folks known how to discourage someone who once wanted to write.

Meebs, you bring it on yourself. Over and over. For one thing, when you don't like a character, you refer to them not by their name but as a type. So, Nutt is "the orc." Harry King is the "S&P man." In a sense, you're doing what Granny Weatherwax feels is one of the worst things people can do--treat people not as individuals but as "things." Do this and you should expect to be boxed around by us.

Personally, I don't like any of the Rincewind books, but I would never refer to him solely as the "fraidy-cat wizard." Some people love these books; all the power to them. YMMV.

As far as your ongoing self-pity over the slings of critical arrows heading your way: GET OVER IT. This is a literary forum. If you want to participate in the discussion, be prepared to have your views agreed with, disagreed with, and, sometimes, when you push enough buttons, harshly criticized. So be it. Don't like it? Come back with logical textual arguments that support your position. You may get hit again. Fine. So what? It's words on a screen.

Obviously, none of us have met you in person, but your own screen persona sometimes comes off as a pouting, self-pitying masochist who takes every disagreement with your point of view as a personal insult. You've fed this with comments such as those above--as if it's our fault that you're not succeeding as a writer.

Well guess what? If you can't take criticism of your points of view on a forum, how are you going to handle the endless stream of rejection letters you're going to get from publishers who reject your story or novel submissions (this isn't a value judgment of your capability; this is a reality that most writers face). If you ever get published, how are you going to handle bad reviews you may receive?

[LilMaibe]

ignore this post

[Who's Wee Dug]

Straight and to the point there Rasindot.

[Paranye]

Oh dear. Just in the door and already I've walked into a pile of... disagreement.

LilMaibe, I'm sorry if my post bothered you in some way, but I don't quite understand why you were so insulted by it. You didn't really address the point I was trying to make, though that may well be because I did not express myself with sufficient clarity, in which case I again apologize.

As for all the... non-Pratchett-related discussion, I'm not touching it with a bargepole. Newbies should be on the pianissimo side for a while when it comes to conflicts, no?

Edited for html fails.

[LilMaibe]

@Paranye:
I just have some serious problems telling apart which comments are directed directy at me and which not, what is sarcasm/fooling around and what not.
Some seriously bad experiences in the past. Once bitten twice shy. When you always were the bottom of the joke you tend to get aggressive about your points and views rather quickly. (especially if they are just as legit as any other opinion, but people try to tell you they are not)
There a bit more to it, but ah well.

(On a note: Love your avatar)

[Tonyblack]

Oh dear. Just in the door and already I've walked into a pile of... disagreement.

LilMaibe, I'm sorry if my post bothered you in some way, but I don't quite understand why you were so insulted by it. You didn't really address the point I was trying to make, though that may well be because I did not express myself with sufficient clarity, in which case I again apologize.

As for all the... non-Pratchett-related discussion, I'm not touching it with a bargepole. Newbies should be on the pianissimo side for a while when it comes to conflicts, no?

Edited for html fails.

You have no reason to apologise, Paranye. I just hope you don't think we are all attacking someone. We aren't like that. This is a long standing issue that seems to come to a head now and again.

[Paranye]

You have no reason to apologise, Paranye. I just hope you don't think we are all attacking someone. We aren't like that. This is a long standing issue that seems to come to a head now and again.

Thanks boss! I understand how it is. Every forum has one - an issue that doesn't quite get resolved, and probably never will be unless they bring back dueling

@Paranye:
I just have some serious problems telling apart which comments are directed directy at me and which not, what is sarcasm/fooling around and what not.
Some seriously bad experiences in the past. Once bitten twice shy. When you always were the bottom of the joke you tend to get aggressive about your points and views rather quickly. (especially if they are just as legit as any other opinion, but people try to tell you they are not)
There a bit more to it, but ah well.

(On a note: Love your avatar)

Oh thank you! I'm fond of it myself.

I understand that it can be upsetting when people disagree with you, especially if you're the lone voice on your side of the debate. But remember, the validity of any opinion rests on the strength of the argument. So when people argue for the other side, don't get mad - get logical! Just address the points of their argument with points of your own, and don't let it upset you

[post]

I just wanted to say this was a very interesting post, Paranye I do my research on Ancient Greek comedy, where even gods poop, and what you said was quite illuminating about the mechanics of this kind of subversive humour. (In Aristophanes' Frogs, the main character is Dionysus, the god of theatre, in whose honour every play was performed, so you'd think, rightly, he would be especially revered; and yet, he's depicted as a ridiculous buffoon who craps himself when he's frightened. And asks his slave for something to wipe his bottom with. I'm not even going into the other instances of scatological comedy in the other plays, because I'd be here all day)

Thanks! That is really interesting about Dionysus being depicted as a fool. And it sort of reminds me of the bit in Gargantua where he describes all the things he's wiped his bum with - including, if I recall, a pigeon

I think the use and meaning of scatological humour across the ages would be well worth writing a book about. I wonder has anyone done it already?

[Tonyblack]

Apparently, you can't beat the neck of a goose.

[meerkat]

Use once and throw away I hope?

[LilMaibe]

Of course scatological humour has been used throughout the ages, but, to pick a crass example, would you give it a thumbs up if in the next book there'd be a lot of underage sex depicted as something positive and 'normal'?
After all, Romeo&Juliet were what 13? 14? and the old greeks and romans had sex with adulescent boys.
I am a bit exaggerating here, yes, but thing is you have to see and judge everything in the context of the time it was written and in the context of the text itself. When a joke, if not concept comes out of nowhere there is the sore feeling of it is just there, at mildest, for having a certain joke-per-page count.
YMMV of course.

[raptornx01]

You think this kind of stuff is new?

Nanny Smiling broadly at a bathtub being filled in the next room, or her "sightseeing" on long coach rides (hell, nanny overall really)
Privy jokes exist through the series
the Garderobe in L&L
Fool Varence using Privy as punctuation
Constant references to widdling in Maurice
The Long Man
Big Fido's gaseous problem
Moist landing in something soft
Doctrine of signatures and Nobby's love of a certain shaped mushroom
Cohen's love of soft lavatory paper
Living compost in reaperman
References to the odd placement of the trapdoor on trojan horses

and ofcourse without TP (heh) and Errol, we wouldn't have these lovely examples of moving picture entertainment





and thats just off the top of my head. if you think that Terry is somehow above low brow humor, well, thats just a phallusy.

[LilMaibe]

But with all the things you listed, they had the readers thinking about what was implied.
Agree with it or not, but I think it would have lost a lot if things would have gotten an explicit explanation. Take L&L for example.
Would the text have really been better/just as good if instead of what it says about the closet it would have been said outright what's there?
It had been said in another thread, but one of the things that somehow made Discworld Discworld was that Sir Terry left to the readers imagination what didn't need an explanation.

[Ziriath]

Lil, wouldn't be better to try to forget about that book, or simply pretend UA doesn't exist or take place in a different trouserleg, as your headcanon says?