UK vs US editions

[Burkshifter]

One strange thing I've noticed with discworld books--along with a lot of other books by non-American authors--is that the editions published in the author's country tend to read better. Being American, I started reading discworld with the American books, but then when I was on a trip to London I picked up a few UK editions. The ones with the Josh Kidby covers.

The difference is huge. Something about Americanizing the spelling, punctuations, and colloquialisms really takes a lot out of the books. I couldn't imagine if, say, Tolkien or Lewis or Dickens were Americanized.

Has anybody else noticed this? Does this stand true for other authors?

[poohcarrot]

Can you give me an example of an American colloquialism in a Discworld book, please?

Apart from using the word "gotten" instead of "got", I don't recall ever seeing one, and I've read a few US editions.

Incidently, I believe Unseen Academicals wasn't altered in any way for the US market. Zero proofs were made available in the US. The US had to accept the British version.

[Tonyblack]

With me going back and fore to America so much, I read a lot of the American versions and have to say that apart from a few small spelling differences and the covers, there's very little difference.

A couple of things I have noticed though are the use of fonts in the UK versions that don't always transfer to the US versions. In Reaper Man, for example, Bill Door's story is written in a slightly different font to the Wizards' story in the UK edition.

The political cartoon is missing in the US version of Monstrous Regiment. As is (I think) the invitation card that Daphne sends to Mau in Nation - although I haven't actually seen the US copy of Nation, I'm told that's the case.

[poohcarrot]

You woz told wrong, Tony. The only Nation I've read is the US version and the invite was there.

And, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the US covers are complete pants!

[Tonyblack]

Damn! I'll have to shoot my informant now.

Another difference is the golems in Feet of Clay - in the UK version their comments are written like this:



It's a different font in the US.

And there's the "Badda Boom" as opposed to the "Boom Boom" comment in Thief of Time.

[raisindot]

And, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the US covers are complete pants!

I don't agree very much on things with Pooh, but on this one I totally concur. So much so that when I decided to build my own library of every DW book (except Pyramids, of course ), I ended up paying a small king's ransom to get all the Josh Kirby cover paperbacks, which occupy an honored space on my bookshelf.

J-I-B

[raisindot]

I never read the US version of (FOC) Feet of Clay. I always loved this font in the UK version because whoever chose it rightly did so to emulate Hebrew lettering. I wonder if Pterry himself suggested this look. If not, the typesetter made a great choice. If the US version doesn't use this style, it TOTALLY misses the allusion.

J-I-B

[Dotsie]

The only book I've read from two different countries wasn't Pratchett, it was L'Etranger by Camus, or The Outsider. The UK version was pants compared with the French one - completely different books.

[king dwarf]

i collect all terrys books in first editions.what i was wondering was are american 1st editions as valuable as british ones

[The_Discworldaholic]

Put quite simply NO lol

[Tonyblack]

i collect all terrys books in first editions.what i was wondering was are american 1st editions as valuable as british ones

Welcome to the site, king dwarf.

[Fizz]

I live in Canada and when it comes to book covers as well as editions, it's definitely a mixed bag.

Sometimes we get the UK editions and sometimes we get the US editions, and then there are times we get the Canada editions, it's all very confusing and great. It provides more variety.

The first discworld book I picked up has a rather toned down feel to it, similar to how the Harry Potter books were given an "adult cover" treatment.



I have the one on the right. Cheers.

[Tonyblack]

Those tend to be known as the 'black' covers and, yes, I think they are indeed like the Potter 'adult' covers. The only novel that you can't seem to get in that format is 'Eric' - I think that's because it was originally a novel with illustrations and they used a different publisher.

[Fizz]

Considering how much I'm enjoying Pratchett's first novel, I think I'll continue purchasing in this format. I am sure there are some purists on this board who will insist that it's just not a Discworld novel without the mad covers, but I like the simplicity of it. Cheers.

[The_Discworldaholic]

No i agree with you Fizz im a purist collector with over 500 in my collection now but i do like the new covers, its just a shame they fall apart so quickly, (theyre not glued very well i think )