skygiants | (no subject)

I think The Fifth Elephant marks the turning point for me from mediocre mid-late Discworld to excellent late Discworld.

Not that I don't have things to complain about with The Fifth Elephant! (I always have things to complain about.) Which, number one is, I remembered The Fifth Elephant as the book with the most Sybil, and it is true that there is more Sybil than in any book since Guards, Guards, but IT'S NOT ENOUGH. I demand more Sybil!

I also don't care at all about the "Colon is comically terrible at leadership, news at 11" storyline.

But having the book squarely in Vimes POV for almost all of it makes some other things work for me that might not, because of course Vimes thinks life as an immigrant in Ankh-Morpork is Better For Everyone when this is not in fact necessarily true. I do really like how often Vimes' assumptions get stomped on and the fact that the dichotomy between "good modern dwarf/bad fundamentalist dwarf" gets broken down at the end.

Sidenote: when I first read this book as a teenager, I automatically read dwarf culture as a metaphor for Judaism all the way. But, I mean, it's also not a big leap from 'dwarf stereotypes' to 'Jewish stereotypes' in general -- big noses, long beards, hoard goald, you know how this goes. Anyway, this time around I think that is less so, or at least only partially so and probably as much or more a metaphor for the other minority religious elephant in the room, though I don't know if that's better.

This is also the book that as a teenager put me firmly into the "CARROT IS TERRIFYING" camp. This may have been due to a misreading of the text; I was positive at that point that Pratchett was implying that Carrot knowingly manipulated a situation so that he would survive and his romantic rival would not, rather than the other way around, and now I think that was not necessarily implied, but . . . well, I mean, I believe it? WHAT CAN I SAY. Thoughts?

Crossposts: http://bookelfe.livejournal.com/312558.html

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

innerbrat

As that other minority religious elephant is less of a minority and more obviously visual in the UK than Judaism, I always always read that as the metaphor. But then I figured it was probably a liberal application of taking about both and all such religious cultures.

YOUR READING OF CARROT IS TERRIFYING AND I REFUSE TO SHARE IT.

Mostly because Carrot is terrifying, but he's also good in my reading, and that is morally out of his capacity, not intellectually.

From:

skygiants

Yeah, and I mean, it's not surprising that a Jewish kid would see that and jump to one application without thinking of the others, really.

I don't actually think I'm right! Just that I read it that way when I was fourteen, and now that interpretation has been in my head ever since so I can't shake it.

I mean, I do think Carrot is good, but there's always the question in the back of my mind: but what if he wasn't?

From:

tree_and_leaf

The other reason that the dwarfs seem quite Jewish to me (as opposed to Muslim, though there are definitely moments when their situation in Ankh-Morpork is meant to make you think of British Muslims) is that their arguments tend to be about practice and how one lives as a good dwarf. The deep-downers hate Ankh-Morpork because they think it stops dwarfs from keeping the law.

From:

skygiants

This is true! In terms of actual religious practices, it parallels Judaism much more strongly than Islam. But the way the Ankh-Morporkers react to it is much more the way people react to religious Muslims these days than Orthodox Jews, I think (though this is just from my perspective, I could be wrong!)

From:

tree_and_leaf

Yes, I think that's right. The average gentile British response to seeing even the very frum is more likely to be mild bemusement than hostility (not that there's no British anti-Semitism any more, alas, but it's very much less prevalent than hatred/ suspicion/ fear of practicing Muslims)

From:

batyatoon

I had much the same reaction. The line that actually brought me to tears with how deeply it resonated to me as Jewish was actually in Thud!:

It wasn't just a random crowd [of dwarfs], when you looked closely. It was also a queue ... moving very slowly toward a side door. They were waiting to see the grags. Please come and say the death words over my father ... please advise me on the sale of my shop ... please guide me in my business ... I am a long way from the bones of my grandfathers, please help me stay a dwarf ...

That last line.

Mind you, as I understand it, practice and how one lives as a good [____] is a thing in Islam as much as it is in Judaism.

From:

ceitfianna

I think Fifth Elephant is one of my most reread Discworld novels as I love the culture clashes and Sybil.

Carrot and Gavin are terrifying, Carrot is a character I've always found intellectually interesting but I don't really care about. I think some of that is his weird destiny manipulating powers, I don't think they're meant to read as purposeful. They just do sometimes and especially when looking at him through Angua's or others eyes like in Jingo, he's powerful and strange. I want Angua to be happy and she loves Carrot, so I care about Carrot through her but am also mystified by him. Pratchett is odd with romances, there are some that are just perfect like Vimes and Sybil, Verence and Magrat, who feel real and right and others that are odd like Moist and Spike or Angua and Carrot. I can see how its meant to work but I don't fully buy it but find it intriguing reading. Also I really need to get my hands on Snuff.

Edited Date: 2012-11-12 03:16 pm (UTC)

From:

skygiants

Interestingly, this was actually the first book in my reread where I found myself understanding Angua/Carrot a little bit -- I think partly because this is the first book where Carrot actually seems really invested in and even a little insecure about the relationship, whereas before we've only ever seen it from Angua's side.

. . . what that says about me and/or Carrot that this is also the book where Carrot freaks me out the most, I'm not sure.

From:

ceitfianna

*nods* Yes, I see what you mean but he's not that insecure or seems that way to me. I need to reread this one once I find out which box has all my Pratchetts.

Carrot is a complicated character.

From:

scifantasy

Jewish dwarves: Well, given that Pratchett is playing with the stereotypes from others (namely the Norse), and those have always had a Jewish overtone, it's hard for the stereotypes not to be there. And some of the traits Pratchett adds definitely play that too. No destroying words, for example. And the whole question about wanting to be modern and assimilated but still being sort of grateful that the traditionalists are there...

A lot of which applies to that other religious elephant, too, of course. And then you get Thud!. In the end, I think the dwarves represent both, because they're a lot alike, and most importantly, they're not the majority.

Carrot: I don't think he did manipulate the situation, and I don't think Angua believes it either. I think it's worse than that.

I don't think he had to.

That's why Carrot is scary. He doesn't manipulate, because destiny manipulates for him. And now, most terrifyingly of all, he's figured it out. (cf. The Last Hero.)

From:

skygiants

Yeah, it's definitely a blend. Which, I mean, is interesting, because there's already been this borrowing of Islamic culture in Jingo in an entirely different context, but then it's like the religious issue is this whole other divorced thing, which I don't know how I feel about that!

Well, here's the thing: if he's figured out that destiny manipulates for him, and using that, then isn't that essentially the same thing as manipulating the situation/destiny himself? (Bear in mind I haven't read The Last Hero yet.)

From:

scifantasy

No, it's not the same thing. It's worse.

If he manipulates events himself, that's work. That's a process of him figuring out what needs to be done and doing it. That's what Vetinari does so well. We like seeing him do it, not only because it leads to good results, but because it requires work and planning on his part (he knows the island will sink in Jingo because we saw him investigate, he knows people and how they will react, he knows what levers to push). We even see Vimes get into this act in Thud! (and when he does it, he thinks "this is how Vetinari is all the time!") and Moist (when we meet him) is likewise getting his apprenticeship.

Someone who figures out the angles and plans and prepares, actively, is a protagonist.

Someone who has destiny do all that for him so he can waft through the world and have it bend to his will...is a hero.

Heroes are far scarier.

From:

ceitfianna

I really like this explanation and it sums up a lot of why Vimes, Moist and Vetinari are some of my favorite Discworld characters and why Carrot makes me go hm a lot.

I RP Moist and this is a useful perspective on him, he knows how to play many of the angles but he like Vimes still does a lot of thinking on his feet. Vetinari does too but Vetinari is also doing that long range thinking.

From:

scifantasy

Vetinari is training Moist to be the next Patrician. But because Vetinari is creating a system to last, one that does not depend on the Patrician being perfect (and that can even survive the Patrician being malicious), he is setting up Vimes to be Moist's counterbalance...and setting up Sammies, heirs of Vimes (including heirs of Vimes's inheritance of regicide) to be the Patrician's counterbalance after that. The historical rehabilitation of Old Stoneface was planned long before it was a useful lever for getting Vimes to accept dukedom.

It could work. Very well.

But Carrot...destiny is guiding his steps and guarding his path. If Carrot wanted to he could reclaim the throne and upset the entire applecart. He would be a true king, a good king...but he wouldn't live forever, and the next king might not be so good, might not be so true. Or the one after that. Or the one after that. Ankh-Morpork has been down that road before. No, thank you.

The darkest Discworld book would be where Vetinari and Vimes have to solve the Carrot Problem. Without Carrot's help.

Edited Date: 2012-11-12 03:59 pm (UTC)

From:

ceitfianna

*nodsnods* Yes, Vetinari has a rather mechanical mind in terms of seeing all the levers and counterbalances.

I'd still be interested to read more of a take on the Carrot problem from Vetinari instead of all the asides that do happen. Its clear that Vetinari has options in mind if something changes, I just want to know what they are.

From:

skygiants

I'm actually voting for Glenda for next Patrician, but that's a topic for another post. (And poll!)

From:

scifantasy

That would be fun, but I'm talking about Vetinari's plan. (And remember--One Man, One Vote. Vetinari is the Man, he gets the Vote.)

From:

skygiants

Well, I'm not necessarily saying it was Vetinari's plan pre-Unseen Academicals, but Vetinari is an infinitely flexible man.

From:

scifantasy

Point.

From:

batyatoon

The darkest Discworld book would be where Vetinari and Vimes have to solve the Carrot Problem.

No, the darkest Discworld book would be where Vetinari and Vimes wind up on opposite sides of the Carrot Problem.

Or vice versa, picking any two.

From:

scifantasy

Well, I suppose, technically. But I can't quite see it, in a consistent universe. Both of them would agree what needed doing.

Wait, no, I'm wrong.

One of them (guess which) would favor a, shall we say, effective but permanent method. The other would not, unless he had to, and he would have to, and he would be the one to, ahem, effect the effective method.

There you go.

From:

batyatoon

Pretty much.

Or, I reiterate, vice versa. Picking any two.

From:

scifantasy

Well said.

From:

batyatoon

Thank yew. :D

I am constantly fascinated by the idealism-pragmatism axis as embodied by those three. Vetinari is so very pragmatic that he approaches pure idealism from the other side. Carrot is so very idealistic that he approaches pure pragmatism from the other side. Vimes is ... both, in near-constant internal struggle.

From:

scifantasy

Vetinari is pragmatic about achieving his ideal. (Vetinari Meets the Operative, a Short Story: "'How inefficient,' said the Patrician, as he cleaned the Operative's sword where the Operative had fallen on it.")

Carrot is idealistic, and the universe takes pragma (actions) to support it.

Vimes is no longer an idealist, having seen too much reality. He is no longer a pragmatist, having seen how it only leads to more need to take the pragmatic action. He is a realist.

Edited Date: 2012-11-13 02:17 am (UTC)

From:

kd7sov

I think The Fifth Elephant marks the turning point for me from mediocre mid-late Discworld to excellent late Discworld.

You know, it's interesting. Most of the Disc books I particularly like to read are the later ones, particularly Moist's arc. But most of the ones I'd particularly want to have on hand are earlier ones, such as Reaper Man.

(Also, anyone care to hint at what this "other minority religious elephant" you're all euphemising about might be? There are, as far as I can tell, approximately infinity minus one valid possibilities.)

From:

skygiants

The early ones are the ones I've read approximately a dozen times over, so they're the ones I know best/have the most nostalgia factor. But I think a lot of the late ones -- like The Truth, Night Watch, Thief of Time -- are the best ones.

(Islam is what I meant! It has a depressing tendency to be the go-to Scary Othered Religion for Western authors.)

From:

pedanther

I would assume it's the Muslim religious elephant, except didn't we already just do that with the Klatchians in Jingo?

From:

skygiants

We did! But the Klatchians were kind of an Arabic-Indian amalgam metaphor, and the dwarves are a Muslim-Jewish amalgam metaphor, which reads as very different cultures on the page but makes it a very weird split once you realize what's going on . . .

From:

pedanther

I remember this as being the book where the Schrodinger box opened. Up to now, there's been the deliberate ambiguity about whether Carrot's a subtle schemer who just presents as naive and optimistic or if he's genuinely naive and optimistic and it just works out for him. But there's bits in this book where he's clearly being a deliberate schemer.

(Which, ironically, means that he's being less subtle than usual. I put it down to him being put off his stride by being worried about Angua.)

It's been a while since I read the book, though, so I don't remember specifically which bits I'm talking about, or whether the Gavin thing is one of them. Helpful, unna?

From:

scifantasy

His conversation with the wolves after Gavin, and Angua's thought about how Gavin threw himself at Wolfgang, are what spring to mind.

From:

skygiants

The Gavin thing is definitely one of them, but he's also a lot more calculating and steely all through in his interactions with various people -- I think the most explicit examples of scheming is when he tracks down Angua by working out that if he goes out into the snowy woods with inadequate preparation and has a near-death experience, she'll come and rescue him.