Next up on my Terry Pratchett reading list was Sourcery, the second Rincewind book. Pratchett has described it[1] as his least favorite book; that he only wrote it due to the enormous demand for another Rincewind book. I can see why that is.
Sourcery does introduce some important aspects of Discworld, like a less nuanced Lord Vetinari, expansion of the Librarian character, and a final end to the "old fantasy" feel of Unseen University. It also wouldn't be a Discworld book without skewering some cliches, in this case with the intriguing idea of an naturally talented barbarian heroine who was born to it but would much rather be a hairdresser, as well as a parody of the quintessential poetic Sultan character. The ending is also refreshingly unusual.
But in general, the book doesn't really go anywhere. There aren't any of the meaty issues that most later books explore and even invent. The bad guys are pretty one-dimensional and most of the middle part of the book consists of things staying more or less the same. Compared to the madcap adventures of, say, _Interesting Times_, it almost plods along. Not saying it's not entertaining, not by a long shot, but it's one of the weaker entries in the series.
The one thing that really bugs me is the cover art. Pratchett has made a snipe in this direction before, in _The Light Fantastic_, where he castigates fantasy cover artists for being overimaginative before describing his character Herenna as being dressed quite sensibly. Josh Kirby, the artist, apparently didn't listen, as Herenna is shown as a half-naked, white-skinned sylph-like creature.
Unfortunately Kirby hasn't learned his lesson. Despite Pratchett twice describing Conina as wearing a white dress with flowers on it, Kirby instead depicts her as an incredibly buxom girl with '80s hair, wearing what appears to be a bra made out of *bones* and little else. It's the quintessential Contemptible Cover.[2]
On 19 Oct 2009, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote:
Excellent review. One nitpick:
> The one thing that really bugs me is the cover art. Pratchett has made > a snipe in this direction before, in _The Light Fantastic_, where he > castigates fantasy cover artists for being overimaginative before > describing his character Herenna as being dressed quite sensibly. Josh > Kirby, the artist, apparently didn't listen, as Herenna is shown as a > half-naked, white-skinned sylph-like creature.
I'm not sure that *is* Herenna. It looks to me like the scene is near the end of the book; Rincewind, Twoflower, Cohen and Lockjaw the dwarf, facing a mob (just visible on the bottom edge) in Ankh-Morpork.
And Herenna isn't in that part of the book. The character is more likely to be Bethan. Not that Bethan dresses like that either, of course, she wears a white robe and a golden torc.
-- Dave "All those with psychokinesis, raise my hand." The Room With No Doors, Kate Orman
Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote: > On 19 Oct 2009, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent review. One nitpick:
>> The one thing that really bugs me is the cover art. Pratchett has made >> a snipe in this direction before, in _The Light Fantastic_, where he >> castigates fantasy cover artists for being overimaginative before >> describing his character Herenna as being dressed quite sensibly. Josh >> Kirby, the artist, apparently didn't listen, as Herenna is shown as a >> half-naked, white-skinned sylph-like creature.
> I'm not sure that *is* Herenna. It looks to me like the scene is near the > end of the book; Rincewind, Twoflower, Cohen and Lockjaw the dwarf, > facing a mob (just visible on the bottom edge) in Ankh-Morpork.
> And Herenna isn't in that part of the book. The character is more likely > to be Bethan. Not that Bethan dresses like that either, of course, she > wears a white robe and a golden torc.
I never thought any of Kidby's covers ever tried to show a particular part of the book. For example, _Interesting Times_ showed his classic four-eyed Twoflower but his daughters are nowhere to be found. Also, everyone always seems to be kind of flying in the air for no particular reason. Anyway, the red hair and dagger by her side are probably very large clues in this case.
Richard Cole wrote: > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:58:11 -0400, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Next up on my Terry Pratchett reading list was Sourcery, the second >> Rincewind book. Pratchett has described it[1] as his least favorite >> book; that he only wrote it due to the enormous demand for another >> Rincewind book. I can see why that is. > Daniel
> I know the books you are reviewing are all quite old and early (so far), > but there might still be group readers who haven't actually read that > particular book for whatever reason.
> Can I ask that you put 20 or so line of spoiler space before each post and > possibly also include the word 'Spoiler' in the title so that that > particular post can be ignored.
> Thanks
> Richard
I don't think I *did* spoil anything. It's a review, like any review (as described by the word "review" in the post title) and there's only as much plot detail as you might expect in a review. Other than the basic plot elements, most of which you might glean from the back cover, there's almost nothing about the story contents in there.
If others really think I need to add spoiler space for such a post I will, but I think it's overkill.
Daniel Orner wrote: > Richard Cole wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:58:11 -0400, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Next up on my Terry Pratchett reading list was Sourcery, the second >>> Rincewind book. Pratchett has described it[1] as his least favorite >>> book; that he only wrote it due to the enormous demand for another >>> Rincewind book. I can see why that is. >> Daniel
>> I know the books you are reviewing are all quite old and early (so far), >> but there might still be group readers who haven't actually read that >> particular book for whatever reason.
>> Can I ask that you put 20 or so line of spoiler space before each post >> and >> possibly also include the word 'Spoiler' in the title so that that >> particular post can be ignored.
>> Thanks
>> Richard
> I don't think I *did* spoil anything. It's a review, like any review > (as described by the word "review" in the post title) and there's only > as much plot detail as you might expect in a review. Other than the > basic plot elements, most of which you might glean from the back cover, > there's almost nothing about the story contents in there.
> If others really think I need to add spoiler space for such a post I > will, but I think it's overkill.
I don't. I haven't read UA yet[0], and the fact that everyone has provided spoiler space when discussing it is greatly appreciated. It's just a matter of good manners. I also only recently read the Tiffany Aching books, so I'm glad that people haven't discussed it with spoilers.
[0] Or his next book.
-- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
> Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote: > > On 19 Oct 2009, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Excellent review. One nitpick:
> >> The one thing that really bugs me is the cover art. Pratchett has made > >> a snipe in this direction before, in _The Light Fantastic_, where he > >> castigates fantasy cover artists for being overimaginative before > >> describing his character Herenna as being dressed quite sensibly. Josh > >> Kirby, the artist, apparently didn't listen, as Herenna is shown as a > >> half-naked, white-skinned sylph-like creature.
> > I'm not sure that *is* Herenna. It looks to me like the scene is near the > > end of the book; Rincewind, Twoflower, Cohen and Lockjaw the dwarf, > > facing a mob (just visible on the bottom edge) in Ankh-Morpork.
> > And Herenna isn't in that part of the book. The character is more likely > > to be Bethan. Not that Bethan dresses like that either, of course, she > > wears a white robe and a golden torc.
> I never thought any of Kidby's covers ever tried to show a particular > part of the book. For example, _Interesting Times_ showed his classic > four-eyed Twoflower but his daughters are nowhere to be found. Also, > everyone always seems to be kind of flying in the air for no particular > reason. Anyway, the red hair and dagger by her side are probably very > large clues in this case.
Are we still on Kirby (RIP) or now Kidby? Anyway, yes, Kirby covers are usually a chase scene involving all characters in the story which may be either an approximate actual scene or a total Benny Hill- flavoured fantasy, and also fleshy[*] and yet un-erotic unless you are /really/ keen.[**] But presumably most of the people involved have more than one set of clothes, or will willingly dress up in whatever the artist deems necessary to increase sales and their personal appearance fee. Maybe - in the early days - get spotted by a more serious writer. Do you suppose that the girl in _Atonement_ first appeared in a Pratchett novel and Kirby cover?
[*] (Tries to remember _Mort_, _Reaper Man_, etc., as possible exceptions.)
[**] (Tries to recall any cover with Magrat, who might consider Kirby a flattering artist if he did the usual.)
> On Oct 19, 4:10 pm, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Daibhid Ceanaideach wrote: >>> On 19 Oct 2009, Daniel Orner <dmor...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Excellent review. One nitpick: >>>> The one thing that really bugs me is the cover art. Pratchett has made >>>> a snipe in this direction before, in _The Light Fantastic_, where he >>>> castigates fantasy cover artists for being overimaginative before >>>> describing his character Herenna as being dressed quite sensibly. Josh >>>> Kirby, the artist, apparently didn't listen, as Herenna is shown as a >>>> half-naked, white-skinned sylph-like creature. >>> I'm not sure that *is* Herenna. It looks to me like the scene is near the >>> end of the book; Rincewind, Twoflower, Cohen and Lockjaw the dwarf, >>> facing a mob (just visible on the bottom edge) in Ankh-Morpork. >>> And Herenna isn't in that part of the book. The character is more likely >>> to be Bethan. Not that Bethan dresses like that either, of course, she >>> wears a white robe and a golden torc. >> I never thought any of Kidby's covers ever tried to show a particular >> part of the book. For example, _Interesting Times_ showed his classic >> four-eyed Twoflower but his daughters are nowhere to be found. Also, >> everyone always seems to be kind of flying in the air for no particular >> reason. Anyway, the red hair and dagger by her side are probably very >> large clues in this case.
> Are we still on Kirby (RIP) or now Kidby? Anyway, yes, Kirby covers > are usually a chase scene involving all characters in the story which > may be either an approximate actual scene or a total Benny Hill- > flavoured fantasy, and also fleshy[*] and yet un-erotic unless you > are /really/ keen.[**] But presumably most of the people involved > have more than one set of clothes, or will willingly dress up in > whatever the artist deems necessary to increase sales and their > personal appearance fee. Maybe - in the early days - get spotted by a > more serious writer. Do you suppose that the girl in _Atonement_ > first appeared in a Pratchett novel and Kirby cover?
> [*] (Tries to remember _Mort_, _Reaper Man_, etc., as possible > exceptions.)
> [**] (Tries to recall any cover with Magrat, who might consider Kirby > a flattering artist if he did the usual.)
Dangit, I always get the two confused (after all, their names are only one letter off!)
A.Reader wrote: > On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:22:05 -0700 (PDT), > Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-orig...@moderators.isc.org > <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote: >> [**] (Tries to recall any cover with Magrat, who might consider Kirby >> a flattering artist if he did the usual.)
> WS, WA for sure, and I think CJ as well but am too bone-idle to > go look
She definitely didn't look flattering in any of her appearances, I'm afraid. In fact, Sourcery, Moving Pictures, and TLF are the only times I can think of Kirby doing an overly sexy woman. In MAA, Angua is featured prominently, and while she looks quite attractive (as the book itself states she is), she's dressed in a regular guard's uniform. Susan in Hogfather looks normal, and even whatsername from Maskerade (the thin girl with the extra ! on her sentences) has an expression like she just realized she had something foul for breakfast. Sybil on the back of G!G! is shown quite meatily, and I wager most people wouldn't find it salacious.
|
