Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Pratchett anger at Rowling's rise

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by LEtranger
    I think the Potter books are indeed a valuable preparation of sorts to get children to read longer works and series at all! They are 10000 times more valuable than the short concentration-killing video-clips and they are demanding in a positive way: the language is not for dummies, there is dramatic and character development in the books that they learn to discover and a general acceptation of "Fantasy" comes with these books.
    Agreed, anything that gets kids reading is good - although I'd probably draw the line at 'Racial Bigotry for Dummies' - myself I grew on a diet of Judge Dredd comics and Doctor Who novelisations, perhaps not very demanding in themselves but they were things I wanted to read (rather than being told I must read them because they were good for me).

    Of course, not all video games are 'bad' for reading - one I'm very happy to recommend is Black Isle's Planescape: Torment, which has a very literary feel to it - it is almost like reading a fantasy novel, albeit one where you can influence the storyline. Black Isle also developed the Baldur's Gate series of CRPGs (as well as the Icewind Dale series, although that was more 'hack-'n'-slash' focussed than character-driven like BG). Unfortunately, CRPGs seem to be going through one of their cyclical declines at the moment. :(
    _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
    _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
    _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
    _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

    Comment


    • #17
      http://www.gregorwright.com/burnings...0.php#comments

      :lol:

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by spaced_moorcock
        His comments do sugest an awful lot of jealousy on his part.
        Taken out of context his comments do give that impression, but they weren't really directed at Rowling. They were directed at Time Magazine.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Typhoid_Mary
          Originally posted by spaced_moorcock
          His comments do sugest an awful lot of jealousy on his part.
          Taken out of context his comments do give that impression, but they weren't really directed at Rowling. They were directed at Time Magazine.
          Quite. I doubt very much that Lev Grossman himself is "a huge fan of fantasy"... or that he'd recognize a decent fantasy novel if it impaled his heart and stole his soul. (Not that I'm suggesting he deserves such a fate, you understand... :twisted: )

          Perhaps Mike can send him a complementary copy of Wizardry and Wild Romance just to set him straight?

          Cheers,
          Ant

          Comment


          • #20
            Rowling - along with Nick Hornby & Stephen King - has been nominated for a new US literary prize - the Quills:

            http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...ts/4747807.stm

            Intended to be more high-profile than existing US book awards, the Quills cover 19 categories ranging from graphic novels to romance stories.

            Among the other categories are sports, children's and best debut fiction, with five nominees in each.

            "This is the first consumer-driven awards programme that acknowledges the power and importance of the written word and celebrates literacy," NBC TV president Jay Ireland said.
            _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
            _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
            _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
            _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

            Comment


            • #21
              Otherwise known as the 'Lowest Common Denominator' Awards? Why no 'Da Vinci Code'? :?


              (Claws out, girls... :twisted: )
              \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

              Comment


              • #22
                They have included a g/novel category though, which is rather nice of them... and "best book to film", but no "best film to book"! Sneaky way of trying to get Hollywood glamour in to the proceedings, a more cynical man might suggest. I think, by and large, that all awards are a sham, but only because I never win. :(
                "That which does not kill us, makes us stranger." - Trevor Goodchild

                Comment


                • #23
                  I most definately was NOT talking about the Harry Potter covers.

                  I mean those grotesque mockeries that Terry Pratchett has as art. You know, nasty pictures that parody things and are full on ugly.

                  And dont get sniffy just cos i critissised the PRATchett creature.

                  Anyone can critisise anything they want. Its a democracy.

                  I used to not like Harry Potter. Then i read the first one someone lent me. Its good. But Harry Potter does not show its full potential when skipped through. I was annoyed by the hype.

                  Hype does that, when somethings in your face a lot,

                  But Harry Potter at its hight of hyping, is still an inofensive, nice, straight, book.

                  Terry Pratchett on the other hand, was downright nasty, everywhere and those purtid exscuses for pictures he had where vile.

                  He gave fantasy a bad name. People thought fantsy, and saw that rubbish.

                  It was an insult to proper, straight forward , nice authers who cared about their work and put lots of effort into it. Whats wrong with a straight forward book?

                  We arnt all sad little posers who think their clever just cos they jump on the latest mocking , nasty bandwagon.

                  He was on a trip to try and flood the market with his stuff. HE was the hyped one once. Then others got popular, and he started whining.

                  He whines whenever hes not in the limelight. Hes been whining since.

                  Yes, it is wrong to say ANYONE influenced the genre so much. Its a COOPERATIVE market.

                  Shame PRATchet dosnt realise that.

                  Time magazine are idiots. They always have been.

                  I would rather people read Harry Potter, that Terry Pratchet. Harry Potter is straight forward and nice.

                  Terry Pratchet is a nasty lazy loser who mocks legitamate works by normal people, because he cant write properly.

                  Yes if you like his stuff, fine.

                  But dont get nasty when somone critisies him.

                  People shouldnt be so blinkered, its a sign youve gone too far when you cant cope with a comment against something.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by yolanda
                    People shouldnt be so blinkered, its a sign youve gone too far when you cant cope with a comment against something.
                    Yes, and you should try heeding your own advice.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by yolanda
                      I most definately was NOT talking about the Harry Potter covers.

                      I mean those grotesque mockeries that Terry Pratchett has as art. You know, nasty pictures that parody things and are full on ugly.
                      What? You mean these ones:

                      and ?

                      Or these ones:

                      and ?

                      The first two are by Josh Kirby and the second pair by Paul Kidby. So, I'll ask again (nicely): which artist are you referring to? (Kirby's dead by the way so it's a bit late to be wanting to shoot him. :))

                      Originally posted by yolanda
                      And dont get sniffy just cos i critissised the PRATchett creature.

                      Anyone can critisise anything they want. Its a democracy.

                      I used to not like Harry Potter. Then i read the first one someone lent me. Its good. But Harry Potter does not show its full potential when skipped through. I was annoyed by the hype.

                      Hype does that, when somethings in your face a lot,

                      But Harry Potter at its hight of hyping, is still an inofensive, nice, straight, book.

                      Terry Pratchett on the other hand, was downright nasty, everywhere and those purtid exscuses for pictures he had where vile.

                      He gave fantasy a bad name. People thought fantsy, and saw that rubbish.

                      It was an insult to proper, straight forward , nice authers who cared about their work and put lots of effort into it. Whats wrong with a straight forward book?

                      We arnt all sad little posers who think their clever just cos they jump on the latest mocking , nasty bandwagon.

                      He was on a trip to try and flood the market with his stuff. HE was the hyped one once. Then others got popular, and he started whining.

                      He whines whenever hes not in the limelight. Hes been whining since.

                      Yes, it is wrong to say ANYONE influenced the genre so much. Its a COOPERATIVE market.

                      Shame PRATchet dosnt realise that.

                      Time magazine are idiots. They always have been.

                      I would rather people read Harry Potter, that Terry Pratchet. Harry Potter is straight forward and nice.

                      Terry Pratchet is a nasty lazy loser who mocks legitamate works by normal people, because he cant write properly.

                      Yes if you like his stuff, fine.

                      But dont get nasty when somone critisies him.

                      People shouldnt be so blinkered, its a sign youve gone too far when you cant cope with a comment against something.
                      Woah, Yolanda! Take a breath! Pardon me for saying, but it rather looks like its you who's getting 'nasty' here, what with calling Pratchett 'creature', 'nasty', 'lazy loser', 'mocking', etc. Okay you don't like Pratchett but is that any excuse for the name calling?

                      And I've got to say, I don't understand were this antagonism is coming from. What's Pratchett's crime exactly? I mean he took the fantasy genre by the scruff of the neck in The Colour of Money* and gave it a hefty injection of comedy, which it probably needed imho. Whether its Terry Brooks or David Eddings or the Dragonlance books, a lot of fantasy novels coming out in the '80s off the back of 'Dungeons & Dragons' was rather po-faced (or seems that way now). Pratchett did for fantasy what Douglas Adams arguably did for SF with Hitch-hikers.

                      So, what are all these things he's supposedly mocking? I really didn't get that all from his early novels (can't speak for the most recent ones 'cos I've stopped reading them). Please come back with a counter-argument if you want to 'cos I'd really like to hear what you think, but please let's stop with the name-calling, yes?

                      *Of course, what I meant to type was The Colour of Magic not some reference to a Martin Scorsese film. Thanks to Ant for pointing my error a couple of posts down.
                      _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
                      _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
                      _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
                      _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Typhoid_Mary
                        Originally posted by spaced_moorcock
                        His comments do sugest an awful lot of jealousy on his part.
                        Taken out of context his comments do give that impression, but they weren't really directed at Rowling. They were directed at Time Magazine.
                        I've re-read the article (with full concentration this time) and I see what you mean.

                        Originally posted by yolanda
                        I mean those grotesque mockeries that Terry Pratchett has as art. You know, nasty pictures that parody things and are full on ugly.
                        I thought the artwork on Terry Pratchett books weren't that bad (although the cover for Reaper Man did give me the creeps when I was younger) although I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder. They always caught my attention because they were different, with all the weird characters all over the place. The covers I've seen for the American releases are less interesting (and imho a touch boring when compared to the UK covers) and quite plain. Sorry I haven't linked any examples.

                        Originally posted by yolanda
                        He gave fantasy a bad name.
                        How did he do that? I can understand how his style of writing and the book covers would be not to everyone's taste and may have disueded some from delving further into the fantasy genre but I don't get how he gave the whole genre a bad name. Do you think he gave people a bad fantasy experience prevented them from finding more thought-provoking authors working in the genre?

                        For anyone who likes Pratchett, now seems like a good time to buy a few of his books, seeing as they have 20% off. :)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          This sounds like a case of "Tread softly because you tread on my dreams". I would have thought the fantasy genre could cope with a bit of parody, but it's not really to my liking, which is why I haven't read Pratchett! For the record, though, I prefer his covers to her.

                          And I don't think of Rowlings as a fantasy writer, but as a children's writer.

                          But down with all hype, whoever is being hyped!!!
                          \"...an ape reft of his tail, and grown rusty at climbing, who yet feels himself to be a symbol and the frail representative of Omnipotence in a place that is not home.\" James Branch Cabell

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by demos99
                            ... I mean he took the fantasy genre by the scruff of the neck in The Colour of Money and gave it a hefty injection of comedy, which it probably needed imho. ...
                            That may surprise Newman and Cruise, not to mention Walter Tevis...

                            Cheers,
                            Ant

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Ant
                              Originally posted by demos99
                              ... I mean he took the fantasy genre by the scruff of the neck in The Colour of Money and gave it a hefty injection of comedy, which it probably needed imho. ...
                              That may surprise Newman and Cruise, not to mention Walter Tevis...
                              D'oh! :oops: I meant, of course, The Colour of Magic - not the Cruise/Newman vehicle. I often confuse the two somehow. :roll:

                              Mind you, I suppose its because I can sort of just imagine Paul Newman stripped down to a loin cloth as Cohen the Barbarian. :lol:
                              _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
                              _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
                              _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
                              _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Ok , lets ALL be nice and stick to sensible critisism.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X