Terry Pratchett...over-rated?

Cavehill Red

I expressed my opinion very clearly. I'm not obliged to answer your questions. I've been respectful of your opinion that Pratchett's work is good. In return, I would request that you accept my opinion is just as valid.
Literary quality is not decided by you, nor indeed on a democratic vote. It is entirely plausible that I am correct, and his work is not of great value and will not be recognised as such by posterity.
I answered your questions fully initially, and chose not to proceed further since clearly you were not interested in a discussion but an interrogation. Now, frankly, you're being personally abusive.

ixoy

Okay, let's play nice. Try and respect each other's differing opinions please.

Dades

I've only read Small Gods.

I really, really wanted to like it more, but I was indifferent to it in the end. Put me off trying any of his others, tbh.

Totally agree that Pratchett is a great character himself, though.

Mark Hamill

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I expressed my opinion very clearly. I'm not obliged to answer your questions.

You do know the point of the forum, right? To discuss opinions? Why declare something, then shy away from explaining it?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I've been respectful of your opinion that Pratchett's work is good. In return, I would request that you accept my opinion is just as valid.

Two opinions are only equally valid if they offer equal amounts (and quality) of evidence.
Don't get me wrong, I realise when talking about something you like/dislike, it can sometimes be hard to describe why, beyond just not having a taste for the particular genre or style. But you just made declarations on Pratchett being an inferior pastiches of others, on his books being too short and not having plots without explaining why you think this (ok, you started to explain on the length, but you argument there made no sense, so it was questioned again).
All I have done in return is questioned why you think length is important, what you mean by no plots and what exactly you think Pratchett is copying. Without answering these questions, how is your opinion equally valid?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Literary quality is not decided by you, nor indeed on a democratic vote. It is entirely plausible that I am correct, and his work is not of great value and will not be recognised as such by posterity.

Literary quality is subjective. You are right, if your honest opinion is that Pratchetts books are too short, plotless and derivitive. Its your opinion how could you be wrong? But the point of this forum is too discuss opinions. How long should the books be? How can they be plotless? (do you really mean by plotless?) What are they derivitive of?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I answered your questions fully initially, and chose not to proceed further since clearly you were not interested in a discussion but an interrogation.

You call answering "what was he copying?" with "the thing he was copying" as a full answer? Its an insult. You gave your declarations and are now insulted that someone is questioning them.
I think the only "discussion" you would be happy with is if no-one ever question your claims.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Now, frankly, you're being personally abusive.

What, because of "childish" and "petulant"? You post something you recognise is inflammatory and declare yourself above reproach on it, what else should I call you?

ixoy

Seriously, all of you take deep breaths and stop with the tit-for-tat. Otherwise, I'll just lock the thread. Stop getting too offended at people's opinions on a fantasy author.

Mark Hamill

ixoy wrote: »

Seriously, all of you take deep breaths and stop with the tit-for-tat. Otherwise, I'll just lock the thread. Stop getting too offended at people's opinions on a fantasy author.

I'm not offended at his opinions about a fantasy author. I'm offended at his belief that his opinions are above reproach on a discussion forum. The point of the forum is to discuss your opinions.

Corsendonk

I must have read over 15 of his books, like all authors that write a great number of works the quality can dip at times but overall his work is very funny and very intelligent how he makes fun at the world around us using the World of Discworld.

DublinWriter

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I LOVE Finnegans Wake. But I'm not going to explain why it's a work of genius to you. I'd rather let a genius do that for me.

I've been reading Elmann's biography of Joyce and I have to say I suddenly begin to see the beauty and reason of Finnegans Wake now.

I guess that the big mistake I made was in approaching it as a conventional novel, I think it's more epic poem, or song.

Corsendonk

I see on the news he is teaching creative writing at Trinity this year.

Teferi

Corsendonk wrote: »

I see on the news he is teaching creative writing at Trinity this year.

Yep. He was on Tubs show this morning. Might have to sneak into a lecture...

strobe

DublinWriter wrote: »

A trend in the later Discworld novels seems to be taking themes from the 'real' world and transposing them rather laboriously onto the Discworld trope - Moving Pictures, Soul Music and The Last Contenent being particular examples. It's although Pratchett was running out of ideas and started chucking in existing real-world constructs to ensue 'hilarious and eventful' results.

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

And I agree about taking real-world stuff and transposing it to Discworld, it can be irritating

Isn't that the entire point of the discworld. Pratchett is a parodist and satirist and the discworld is his medium. The series would be a completely different body of work if it wasn't to reference the real world.

============================================================================================================

In terms to his work in general I would not say he was over-rated. Although I do think the Discworld novels are pretty hit and miss and think his work outside them is superior. I don't care for the Wizard/Rincewind centric ones at all. Where as I think all the City Watch/Vimes novels are top quality, my personal favourite being Night Watch. Which has a very strong central plot, great narration, and due to it's format allows a lot more character development than some other novels allow. I think Nation is by far his best novel and suffers from none of the things people are complaining his Discworld novels can. "lack of character development" "weak over all plot" etc. In fact it excels in these things. It is not just a great Terry Pratchett novel but a great novel in it's own right which can stand up there and beyond with any other novel I have read which was released in the last five years. I would place Good Omens second after that and it is also very strong in the area of strong character development and solid plot, which considering it is a pretty short novel which introduces a dozen main characters is an exceptional accomplishment and really shows his talent.

============================================================================================================

But that's just me innit. I certainly wouldn't sit down and read one Discworld novel after the other after the other anymore than I would sit down and watch episodes of a TV show one after the other after the other. Series novels like the Wheel of Time etc would be different as it is one continuous story, but that is not the case with Discworld where they are loosely affiliated individual stories written in the same style.

So I'd advise you to check out Nation before you write him off as over rated OP and maybe come back to the odd Discworld every once and a while rather than reading them all the time which is bound get stale pretty quickly.

Rubecula

I will come straight out and say I am a Terry Pratchett fan. Yes one or two of his books have been a little below par, but he has come up with some wonderful things.

The Wee Free Men (Nac Mac feegles) are brilliantly funny at times, and my favourite book so far in the Discworld series is "Night Watch" both funny and dark (very dark in parts)

Yes I agree with something said above that he is a satirist and his stories are meant (IMO) as parodies of real life. The stories point out the ridiculous in our real existance very well.

If you don't like his stuff then your opinion is as valuable as my own, but if we all liked the same things it would be a very boring world to live in.

Dan_Solo

Feel pretty much the the same as the OP. Some of the books are entertaining, but I never felt any need to re-read them. Plus those witches are the amongst the most annoying characters I've ever had the misfortune to encounter in a work of fiction.

jimbling

The only Pratchett book I've read so far is Good Omens. I must say, I found it very enjoyable.

I'm going to be doing another book buy on amazon soon enough, think I'll throw another Pratchett book in the mix. What would be the one to get?

RedXIV

jimbling wrote: »

The only Pratchett book I've read so far is Good Omens. I must say, I found it very enjoyable.

I'm going to be doing another book buy on amazon soon enough, think I'll throw another Pratchett book in the mix. What would be the one to get?

I'd be a fan of some of his later works but I like the correlations between our world and the discworld. For a pure fantasy setting, I'd suggest maybe "Small Gods" or "Guards! Guards!"

Later ones I'd be inclined to go with the "The Truth" or "Going Postal" which deal with the founding of newspapers and post offices in a world without them.

petebricquette

RedXIV wrote: »

I'd be a fan of some of his later works but I like the correlations between our world and the discworld. For a pure fantasy setting, I'd suggest maybe "Small Gods" or "Guards! Guards!"

Later ones I'd be inclined to go with the "The Truth" or "Going Postal" which deal with the founding of newspapers and post offices in a world without them.

I'd agree with you there. Avoid Making Money if you can though. I'm a huge Pratchett fan but that and Unseen Academicals weren't great at all. Guards! Guards! was the first book of his I read so I've always held it as one of his best. My absolute favourite is Night Watch though. Always liked Vimes as a character and he's brilliantly written in this one.

I can understand why he can be perceived as being poor at times (especially in the wizard novels, Sourcery excluded) but the overall world he's created is great and there's plenty to get your teeth into in the later stuff.