Misunderstanding Pratchett

[claudeb]

This morning I was reading The Digital Antiquarian's take on Pratchett, and finally realized why I never understood the latter's fiction.

Look. My stories, too, are about ordinary flawed people only trying to save their own little world, as best they can. But that's just it: they're trying in earnest. Not taking refuge in hollow irony. Sometimes they stumble or have doubts, because it's all part of life. Sometimes they fall in love, others laugh at them, or both. But their struggles are real. Not anyone's joke.

And sometimes they end up saving the capital-W world anyway. Comes packaged with getting involved in major events way over their head. That's what Tolkien got right, and Pratchett didn't: you're not too small. Your efforts matter. Even if you fail, your story can inspire others one day. Keep the flame alive.

Which is exactly what Tolkien's imitators later did. What is it with this obsession to mock Tolkien and his fans anyway? Or for that matter Star Wars? The villains in both are so obvious, down to literal color coding, precisely because subtlety doesn't work. And so many people still missed the message. Much like with cyberpunk, go figure.

At least Pratchett never fell into the trap of cynicism that ruined the next couple of generations. We could at least take this one lesson from his writing.

Comments

[claudeb]

Just skip The Colour of Magic.

[fred_mouse]

I'd expand on this - skip everything with Rincewind in it.

[cmcmck]

Apart, perhaps, from Rinso the bushranger in 'The Fifth Continent'. :o)

[fred_mouse]

Last Continent or Fifth Elephant? I'm assuming the latter, because I've re-read the former recently and don't remember any bushranging, but ah, it has not aged well (or maybe it wasn't good at the time, and I've just forgotten that).

[cmcmck]

What made me write that! :o)

I meant 'The last continent'!

[fred_mouse]

Right! I .. have seen that error more often than you might think.