'Nation': Doing the impossible

[Iceman23]

A good review Joe, I'll have to give this book a try when I get some free time.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Monstrous Regiment?

Oh dear...

Not a favourite by any stretch of the imagination.

I mean, I'm all for subtle political commentary, but Jeremy Paxman with a two by four is subtle compared to that.

Come now he's not so much overly preachy as he is too good. His messages are certainly in your face buts thats because of the confronting nature of them. I don't think it was on the fault of the author as much as it was the fault of the messages he was trying to convey.

Fair enough, they could have been less prominent, but where does that lead? If your going to tone down unsavory messages because people don't like to hear them then sooner or later your not making them at all. I concede your opinion... but to me its a bonus not a flaw.

And as pointed out, your not supposed to like Rincewind as a person, thats why Pratchett pairs him up with someone lovable and uses Rincewind as a cynical narrator for what happens. Think about it, twoflower, cohen, Cohens daughter, Eric (whos name escapes me).

Hes not likable, thats why he's such a compelling place-holder for the story.

Its odd, i agree with everything you say... but don't think of it the same way you do.

 

[Typecast]

It is a book that celebrates the splendor, the majesty, the grandeur, the wonder, the triumph that is humanity.

Worthless garbage. Every single one of us. Presumptuous garbage too.

 

[Madlarkin]

Thanks Joe.
With it being off the beaten track that Pratchett normally walks, i was some what skeptical about purchasing it.
However, i believe i will now, thankyou.

 

[Ultrajoe]

It is a book that celebrates the splendor, the majesty, the grandeur, the wonder, the triumph that is humanity.

Worthless garbage. Every single one of us. Presumptuous garbage too.

I always hated this buzzword cynicism before i read 'Nation', the book just solidified this distaste.

You find no worth in our accomplishments and potential? Where we are going? Yes, mistakes have ben made but you don't look at a child playing in the mud and condemn him to never amounting to anything. We have always had potential and have already achieved dizzying heights as a species.

Its all too easy to blame our problems on 'Humanity is hopeless' instead of trying to fix them. Its better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

Sorry, but there are too many internet philosophers who think that 'its all hopeless' is the epitome of a realist view.

I've seen plenty of evidence for why Humanity is incredible, but none for us as hopeless idiots. Yes, we make mistakes, but those are setbacks not roadblocks. And presumption? I call it audacity.

And Audacity is one of the greatest gifts we have. Audacity took one look at the 4 minute mile and said 'Screw you'. Audacity took one look at gravity and then gave it the finger from the moon.

To decry our Audacity is to curse the damn candle.

 

[awmperry]

A couple of things first... Those who say "a dying author", remember that he's only dying in the same sense that everyone is. His Alzheimers is an embuggerance, certainly, but it certainly doesn't have him at death's door. Also bear in mind that so far it's primarily affecting his vision; he doesn't have any trouble with memory or imagination, it's just that letters on his keyboard occasionally vanish.

Also, I don't remember anything about "one more book" - at the Con a month and a half ago he mentioned that he'd keep writing until he couldn't, and then he'd start dictating instead. So don't worry - rumours of his (or the Discworld's) death are greatly exaggerated.

As for Nation, it was a tricky book to get into specifically because I was expecting the usual stuff, and the utterly irrelevant quotes the publisher (not Terry himself) stuck on the back didn't do it any favours.

Anyway, I heartily agree with the review at the start of this thread, apart from one thing: Yes, Nation is about people. But that doesn't mean it's not about all those other things as well. More than any of Terry's previous books, I think, it's a sort of grand unified theory about life, people, death, the universe, and octopodes. I wrote a review of my own a while back, so I might as well post it for your perusal:

Terry Pratchett's latest,Nation, arrived in the post some time ago now - around the start of the week, I think - and I only just finished it a few minutes ago; it's not a book to go into expecting Terry's usual laugh-a-minute style. It's not an easy read, though I found it easier going as I went on, and the last 200 pages or so went by in a couple of hours; perhaps the beginning is more turgid than the rest, or perhaps - more likely? - it just takes a while to adjust one's expectations.

Anyway, I don't suppose I need to summarise the story, but just in case: island in a sort of alternate universe Pacific ocean gets hit by a cataclysm, and its sole survivor has to rebuild the eponymous Nation. And you'll get all that from the dust jacket, so that can't possibly be a spoiler. There's a hint of steampunk about it, at least the bits in the "civilised" parts of the world, and of course some bits that, in feel rather than any real substance, bring to mind Rose Macaulay's classic Orphan Island - rather aptly, in fact.

Now, Pratchett's books have always contained a fair bit of philosophy, with more philosophy and subtler humour as the Discworld series has progressed. But the Discworld books have always been humour first and foremost; dark humour in recent books, but humour nevertheless. Nation feels more like a Victorian adventure novel, and not just because of its setting; even Miss Prism's thoughts on fiction are, to a degree, espoused. But Nation is a harder, slower read, and here's why:

Nation demands philosophy. The Discworld books, even the more philosophical ones, gently insinuated philosophy, like a special operations unit of thought sneaking in under cover of comedy. You'd laugh your way through Small Gods, or Jingo, or Monstrous Regiment, and you wouldn't realise until a week later that you'd been thinking philosophical thoughts ever since about religion, or war, or nationalism, or whatever. But Nation has an overall much more earnest feel about it, like a... I'm trying to avoid using that ghastly litcrity word "exploration", but it's the only one that fits, an exploration (ptui ptui) of someone's personal philosophy... which, I suppose, may well be what it is.

The odd thing is that it works. Setting it in an alternate almost-Real World helps; the tone of the book is so very different from the other DW books that I think it would have become a very difficult read, so the setting not only provides an automatic, pre-packaged backstory but also prepares the reader for the tonal shift of the story. (Indeed, much as I love the cover, it would probably have been a good idea to make it visually distinct from the DW books.)

Hm. I'm having trouble here; I'm not used to writing seriously about literature, so I find myself cringing at every sentence I write. But ho hum, Nation deserves a good stab at it.

There are parts where the book feels rather contrived - an unexpected and conveniently timed arrival, for instance, which you'll see when you get to it - but in most cases I suspect they're of the sort that were common in those Victorian adventure novels I mentioned, and so I'm quite happy to chalk them up as deliberate stylistic references. The bits that do grate, though, are a few recurring lines (I should go through the book with a click counter some time and count the number of times "DOES NOT HAPPEN!" appears...) that get rather tiresome after a while. But they're minor complaints and nothing that really detract from the story.

Where it really shines, of course, is in the characterisation and backstory. Pratchett has a remarkable knack for character, effortlessly shifting point of view from character to character, and changing style in the body text as he does so. When he's telling the story from Mau's point of view, the narration is flummoxed by trousers; when the Ghost Girl takes over the viewpoint, you get the impression that the narrator's constantly self-censoring. It's how POV should be done, and it works spectacularly well - so well, in fact, that you don't even notice it unless you look for it.

And then there's backstory, of course. In particular, the Ghost Girl's backstory; by the time it's explicitly stated you already know more or less what the backstory is, but it's all implied and suggested. In terms of storytelling, then, it's an expert at his best.

Then of course there's the book itself. The chapters are headed with marvellous little pen drawings that reminded me of the woodcuts so often found in, well, Victorian adventure novels. And it's well worth examining the maps inside the covers... There's a nice little touch there. And the cover illustration, in case I haven't mentioned it more than once, is phenomenal. Can we have it textless as a poster, please?

So there you have it. It's a very good book, if you can avoid thinking of it as a Pratchett book; a caveat that, ironically, might make it more enjoyable on the first read-through for people who haven't read any Pratchett before. Now, at school, we had compulsory philosophy lessons, with reading on everyone from Socrates to Kant - and I think you'd be hard pushed to find more philosophy, on death, gods, dogma and bullets, in their scribblings than in this. And Nation is a better read, too.

http://awmperry.livejournal.com/29459.html

 

[awmperry]

I agree; Nation wasn't a funny book. It had a few funny moments, but it certainly wasn't funny as a whole. But it, unlike the Discworld books, wasn't intended as humour.

Which is why it's so annoying that the publishers blithered on about it being hilarious. Because they're wrong, and missed the point like a very point-missing thing.

 

[AuntyEthel]

He's retiring? That seriously sucks.

 

[awmperry]

People keep asking if he's retiring, dying, moving to Swaziland... he's not, y'know. He said himself, he'll keep writing until he has to stop.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Come now he's not so much overly preachy as he is too good. His messages are certainly in your face buts thats because of the confronting nature of them. I don't think it was on the fault of the author as much as it was the fault of the messages he was trying to convey.

Spoiler

It's more the fact that..."Oh, he's a woman." "Oh, he's a woman" "Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, she's a man""Oh, he's a woman"...seriously...enough first time. I like a good feamle protagonist but both Pratchett and Adams simply can't write normal human women.

Fair enough, they could have been less prominent, but where does that lead? If your going to tone down unsavory messages because people don't like to hear them then sooner or later your not making them at all. I concede your opinion... but to me its a bonus not a flaw.

Again, I liked the point, but it was when it was rammed home for the eleventeenth time, I felt I was reading something by Germaine Greer.

And as pointed out, your not supposed to like Rincewind as a person, thats why Pratchett pairs him up with someone lovable and uses Rincewind as a cynical narrator for what happens. Think about it, twoflower, cohen, Cohens daughter, Eric (whos name escapes me).

The thing was that in "The Last Continent", where it's basically Rincewind on his own, he was actually likeable. It's just when he runs into someone he turns into a bit of a prat.

 

[Lord Harrab]

I Love all of his books, but my favorite character has to be The Luggage, the Universe's most homicidal travel accessory

 

[Ultrajoe]

Come now he's not so much overly preachy as he is too good. His messages are certainly in your face buts thats because of the confronting nature of them. I don't think it was on the fault of the author as much as it was the fault of the messages he was trying to convey.

Spoiler

It's more the fact that..."Oh, he's a woman." "Oh, he's a woman" "Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, he's a woman""Oh, she's a man""Oh, he's a woman"...seriously...enough first time. I like a good feamle protagonist but both Pratchett and Adams simply can't write normal human women.

Fair enough, they could have been less prominent, but where does that lead? If your going to tone down unsavory messages because people don't like to hear them then sooner or later your not making them at all. I concede your opinion... but to me its a bonus not a flaw.

Again, I liked the point, but it was when it was rammed home for the eleventeenth time, I felt I was reading something by Germaine Greer.

True about the women thing, but the fact that a third of command were all... them... was necessary i thought. If there were just 2 or 3 in the ranks then it would be quite reasonable. It was his going beyond what would have been deemed necessary that made it so compelling (to me, anyway, i hated it first reading for the reasons you outlined but it did grow on me)

And Awmperry, very good review.

I know i said it's about people, but i didn't say it wasn't also about those other things, i just said they weren't the purpose. The point i was trying to make (i see why it wouldn't have come across particularly well to someone who wasn't me) was that those things are in there because it is about people, as more of a side effect than a deliberate goal on behalf of Pratchett.

And as for his 'death', i never said he was dying, but i'm sure i read somewhere he only thought he would do 2 more books.

I sincerely pray to the lord (bad Joe, get out of the habit, you an atheist now damnit you don't need a god!) hope i'm wrong.

And Root, Rincewind did have others in 'the last continent'. He had Scrappy, Mad, the Drag queens and the Ever present side story of my personal favorite Discworld 'group'... the faculty of UU.

"I'd have you up in front of the university masters in the morning... if it weren't for the fact that you are the university masters..."

To all that read this, i'm very grateful my review has received so much attention, apparently it wasn't as horrific as i first thought.

 

[Tahmoh]

im reading nation at the moment and so far im enjoying it alot more than some of the other books ive read recently. i used to read pratchetts stuff alot till about 10 years ago when they got abit boring imo so i stopped (except for a couple dips into the discworld every now and then to see if it got better) this is the best of his books ive read so far so if he were to suddenly become unable to write more then this would be the book to end with.

 

[curlycrouton]

Poor old Terry, he's developed Alzheimer's. Shame that.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

My personal favorite Pratchett is Nightwatch, but I had a chance to read Going postal while on vacation and I really liked that as well.

 

[Ultrajoe]

My personal favorite Pratchett is Nightwatch, but I had a chance to read Going postal while on vacation and I really liked that as well.

Nightwatch is extremely high on my list also.

If i may ask, do you like it more for characters or plot?

I argue with a friend and i say it is a character driven book, but he says plot... thoughts?

 

[Alotak]

In a way it is life balanceing out, he has brought such joy to the world now life has to take its toll (Or so my mate says). I was genuinly upset when he said he has Alzeimers. Look at steven hawkin.
Lifes a *****.

Nightwatch is great, Character driven definitly, Vimes contrast to him younger self and Carcer.

My favorite so far (havent read them all) has to be Carpe Jugulum, or Any of the ones which feature Death as he is my favorite character.

 

[hippo24]

Very valid point, i hope to read more of your reviews in the future.

 

[Geamo]

I just finished the book, and I must agree, it is fantasically written. I would compare it in theory to Lord of the Flies, but this one just blows it away. Awsome book. Best i've read in a long time (Since I read the last TP book)

Great review.

 

[Anarchemitis]

Fascinating.
But I find argument with the belief that Religion is referred to as a constraint much like a fear.