Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.29 AVERAGE
4.29 AVERAGE
I’ve never gotten into Terry Pratchett but someone recommended this to me as a guaranteed favourite when I was a teen. So for many years now this has been on my To Read list.
I’ve finally gotten around to it after my boyfriend bought me a copy as he is very much a fan of Sir Pratchett and would like me to see the light.
I went into this having read The Colour of Magic, The Light Fantastic (which didn’t impress me), Night Watch (which I actually really enjoyed) and Good Omens (one of my favourite books). I also knew the big “twist” of the story, but I feel like it’s barely a twist at all so that shouldn’t affect the reading too much.
Did this book finally kickstart my love for Sir Pratchett’s writing?
Dear Nuggan, no.
I see value in the work and I enjoyed parts, I honestly really wanted to like this and I was expecting that I would.
All the time I was reading there was something that just felt off. Something I couldn’t quite put my finger on that annoyed me. It was also just hard to continue reading at points because the story felt so dull to me. Most of the characters have the depth of a kiddie pool and feel like stand-ins for a one-note joke that gets repeated into oblivion.
Then it all started to add up and I think I put my finger on the thing that was bothering me: even though the plot is what it is - it’s still full to the brim with casual everyday sexism. I wasn’t really able to come to terms with it until I had almost finished the book, but there it is and I can’t unsee it.
It’s something that would turn into an essay if I’d have to explain all the instances, and I don’t want to spend my time on that. But just for a few highlights:
-The fact that the “socks” have such an effect on Polly/the women. Did Pratchett not understand that women have their own “socks”? They should be fully capable to be angry, confident and “take over” without “socks.” “It’s like the whole world spins around your socks.” “[Polly] cursed herself for the idiot bravado. It must have been the socks talking.” “Polly couldn’t help herself. Maybe it was the socks.” “But inside there was a certain . . . sock-ness that felt ashamed and wanted to kick out.” (When Polly is temporarily “pretending” to be a trembling, frightened girl.) “The socks were doing the thinking again.” “You don’t have to let a pair of socks do the talking.” “Men take over. It is probably because of socks.” (this collection of sock quotes was taken from L.J. Smith’s (yes, the author of The Vampire Diaries) review here on Goodreads)
-Women are not ‘less than’ without “socks”/an actual penis, but that is the case here. “But you don’t have everything, Sarge. Sarge? You don’t, do you?” This could so easily have been phrased a different way, common.
-The endless "good, for a girl” phrases. There are so many! Why are they needed? We get it, girls are not strong or able or anything, but these few are actually quite decent… for girls that is. /s *eye-roll*
It would of course be one thing if this were just dialogue from people within the story, but no, this is also the authors voice.
-“It was women’s work, and therefore monotonous, backbreaking, and social. It had been a long time since Polly had got her hands in a washtub. . . . [She] enjoyed the work, in a dumb kind of way.”
-“It is an established fact that despite everything society can do girls of seven are magnetically attracted to the color pink.” /SIGH/ Oh how whimsical and let me just go and bang my head against a wall.
-Old women sure are the worst, right? They’re all horrid and nosy ammIright?
-"you only thought the world would be better if it was run by women if you didn’t actually know many women. Or old women, at least.” Just… I don’t want to spend more time listing things here, I’m done.
I could rant about this for hours face to face and actually go into more detail and how the grand scheme of the story itself is affected by this. How incredibly dull and “realistic” this story is made instead of allowing the women to be swashbuckling and heroic (like other Discworld heroes that are male). The whole “But it won’t work . . . We’ve just been lucky. You know it won’t work, Maladict. You all know it won’t work, right?” “Because we’re girls.” scene and how it turns out to be true. But I don’t want to spend my time doing that here and writing the aforementioned essay. I’ve read the book, and I’ll leave it at that. I highly recommend L.J. Smith’s deep-dive on these issues in the comments of her own review here, as she makes excellent points and puts in the time to write her thoughts down.
Look, there’s a bunch in this story to like. A lot of wonderful thoughts and I’m not judging any of that. I’m just pointing out to a few things that rubbed me the wrong way while I was reading. It just felt odd given the context of the story.
Maybe Terry Pratchett is just not for me, maybe I would have loved his books if I would have read them as a teenager. As is, I think I won’t be reading more by him anytime soon.
I’ve finally gotten around to it after my boyfriend bought me a copy as he is very much a fan of Sir Pratchett and would like me to see the light.
I went into this having read The Colour of Magic, The Light Fantastic (which didn’t impress me), Night Watch (which I actually really enjoyed) and Good Omens (one of my favourite books). I also knew the big “twist” of the story, but I feel like it’s barely a twist at all so that shouldn’t affect the reading too much.
Did this book finally kickstart my love for Sir Pratchett’s writing?
Dear Nuggan, no.
I see value in the work and I enjoyed parts, I honestly really wanted to like this and I was expecting that I would.
All the time I was reading there was something that just felt off. Something I couldn’t quite put my finger on that annoyed me. It was also just hard to continue reading at points because the story felt so dull to me. Most of the characters have the depth of a kiddie pool and feel like stand-ins for a one-note joke that gets repeated into oblivion.
Then it all started to add up and I think I put my finger on the thing that was bothering me: even though the plot is what it is - it’s still full to the brim with casual everyday sexism. I wasn’t really able to come to terms with it until I had almost finished the book, but there it is and I can’t unsee it.
It’s something that would turn into an essay if I’d have to explain all the instances, and I don’t want to spend my time on that. But just for a few highlights:
Spoiler
-The “all women always have half an onion on them after cooking” jokes. Like, I get that it’s whimsical and “cute” (to male readers, that is, let’s be honest here) but it’s also very much dividing women and men of the Discworld. The fact that all women in the Discworld cook is as fundamental as all men guard their balls. ”A woman always has half an onion left over, no matter what the size of the onion, the dish, or the woman.” … ”But a mere twitch of a leg was enough, just to see the idiot collapse in the ridiculous, knock-kneed, protective crouch that is as instinctive to a man as saving half an onion is to a woman.”-The fact that the “socks” have such an effect on Polly/the women. Did Pratchett not understand that women have their own “socks”? They should be fully capable to be angry, confident and “take over” without “socks.” “It’s like the whole world spins around your socks.” “[Polly] cursed herself for the idiot bravado. It must have been the socks talking.” “Polly couldn’t help herself. Maybe it was the socks.” “But inside there was a certain . . . sock-ness that felt ashamed and wanted to kick out.” (When Polly is temporarily “pretending” to be a trembling, frightened girl.) “The socks were doing the thinking again.” “You don’t have to let a pair of socks do the talking.” “Men take over. It is probably because of socks.” (this collection of sock quotes was taken from L.J. Smith’s (yes, the author of The Vampire Diaries) review here on Goodreads)
-Women are not ‘less than’ without “socks”/an actual penis, but that is the case here. “But you don’t have everything, Sarge. Sarge? You don’t, do you?” This could so easily have been phrased a different way, common.
-The endless "good, for a girl” phrases. There are so many! Why are they needed? We get it, girls are not strong or able or anything, but these few are actually quite decent… for girls that is. /s *eye-roll*
It would of course be one thing if this were just dialogue from people within the story, but no, this is also the authors voice.
-“It was women’s work, and therefore monotonous, backbreaking, and social. It had been a long time since Polly had got her hands in a washtub. . . . [She] enjoyed the work, in a dumb kind of way.”
-“It is an established fact that despite everything society can do girls of seven are magnetically attracted to the color pink.” /SIGH/ Oh how whimsical and let me just go and bang my head against a wall.
-Old women sure are the worst, right? They’re all horrid and nosy ammIright?
-"you only thought the world would be better if it was run by women if you didn’t actually know many women. Or old women, at least.” Just… I don’t want to spend more time listing things here, I’m done.
I could rant about this for hours face to face and actually go into more detail and how the grand scheme of the story itself is affected by this. How incredibly dull and “realistic” this story is made instead of allowing the women to be swashbuckling and heroic (like other Discworld heroes that are male). The whole “But it won’t work . . . We’ve just been lucky. You know it won’t work, Maladict. You all know it won’t work, right?” “Because we’re girls.” scene and how it turns out to be true. But I don’t want to spend my time doing that here and writing the aforementioned essay. I’ve read the book, and I’ll leave it at that. I highly recommend L.J. Smith’s deep-dive on these issues in the comments of her own review here, as she makes excellent points and puts in the time to write her thoughts down.
Look, there’s a bunch in this story to like. A lot of wonderful thoughts and I’m not judging any of that. I’m just pointing out to a few things that rubbed me the wrong way while I was reading. It just felt odd given the context of the story.
Maybe Terry Pratchett is just not for me, maybe I would have loved his books if I would have read them as a teenager. As is, I think I won’t be reading more by him anytime soon.
adventurous
funny
mysterious
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
adventurous
emotional
funny
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Women should not be soliders.
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
funny
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
dark
funny
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Lesbians? Women with swords? A vampire addicted to coffee? Sign me up, Terry.
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
In these dire times, we could all do with some socks and trousers.
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Who’da thought Terry would have a proper go at gender in 2003? Typical silly, fun, loveable comic fantasy, but with some social-commentary steel beneath the soft gloves. Militarism, the patriarchy and gender identity are all turned over, upside down and inside out, made to seem both real, present, dangerous and dumb enough to laugh at. You read this and - though it is just a silly diversion - you’re left with some hope, some optimism for fellow humans. A welcome relief from… everything.