Slantaholic wrote:Does anyone think that Terry Pratchett's version of World of Poo is different to Miss Beadle's book published on Discworld? Her stories sound like they should be read by a younger generation than the style Pratchett wrote in, which was altogether too weird for me. I'm ashamed to admit I stood in W H Smith's bestselling books aisle to read it.
I think Miss Beadle may be a better writer for very young children than Sir Terry Pratchett himself.
We didn't get to read much of Miss Beadle's work, which was in any case written by Sir Terry (at least the bits we saw (-;) so presumably it was written by the "Miss Beadle" subroutine in his head. I agree that the World of Poo as published in Roundworld has a more advanced vocabulary than was implied by the subject matter as represented in Snuff. However, the culture of Discworld is so far only in the very early Victorian era, when books for young children were considerably more advanced than modern ones. It is reliably reported that five-year-olds in 1865 loved Alice in Wonderland and understood it perfectly. The vocabulary in the Alice books is now considered suitable for ages 9-15.
Possibly a bright six-year-old on the Disc would have no trouble with the vocabulary and situations in The World of Poo. It may even be that part of the point is that the vocabulary is much more advanced than that in A.A.Milne's Winnie The Pooh and in books such as Everyone Poops (both recommended for ages 4-7).