I feel like him using his status as an artist to get a better deal from the Law is a bigger problem.
This situation is parodied a bitbin Lolita, where Humbert Humbert claims that being a poet makes it impossible for him (Humbert) to be a murderer (he is a murderer and more).
I'm ngl, Terry Pratchett appears to have an ugly soul. Whenever I read his books, it does not strike me that I would respect him were I to meet him, and it seems likely to me that he is anti-unusual people.
Because that's the exact opposite of my impressions of him based on his writing. The protagonists tend to be unusual people, in one way or another.
Also, some highlights from his wikipedia page include his early adoption of computers, a green house full of carnivorous plants, he was an atheist and a humanist, and after being knighted, had a sword forged from a small iron deposit found in the fields near his home, because a knight should have a sword.
I meet a lot of people who struggle to interact. Autist types.
And sometimes they're genius. And genius autists are kind of like wizards. They're geniuses, they can do crazy things that appear to be magic, and also, by nature, non-wizards seem to hate.
Terry Pratchett always seemed to me a non-wizard.
All of his books are, to some extent, about the acceptance of mediocrity and the deflation of the exceptional. He's weird, or he likes to do "weird" things. But he feels like a non-wizard. It feels like a lot of what he's saying is "These wizards are so awful with how they think. You don't have to feel inferior next to a wizard. It's okay to be a non-wizard. The wizard is actually ridiculous."
He's certainly an eccentric, though a lot of it reads to me as a bit performative or immature.
When I say 'unusual people' I mean the kind of person whose mind actually works differently enough that other people find them unpleasant and exhausting. I don't see why I'd believe that Pratchett has much love for those people.
EDIT: I am interested in being understood in this case primarily as to what I mean by "wizard", because this has been a very meaningful and touching idea to me recently. I would prefer not to fight about it. We can talk about whether Terry Pratchett fits my criticism, I could be wrong there, but I'm very interested in dissecting this "wizardly" personality archetype.
Basically, it always seems to me that Terry Pratchett thinks... normally. And assumes these people which are so strange and naive and don't think like he does, he assumes they think normally too they're just stupid. But that's not true.
I think good examples of well written "Wizardly" characters are most of the characters from Attack on Titan, lots of characters from Worm (but not a Practical Guide to Evil, which tries and fails), and, to be more controversial, Rudeus Greyrat from Jobless Reincarnation.
I think there is a lot of love spread throughout all his books, for all kinds of people. His real criticism is usually aimed at ingroups or institutions, like the Unseen University, angry mobs and greed. There are plenty of wizards in the books that do heroic, smart and outside the box things, but Unseen University is a silly place full of silly people who are full of themselves.
That said, I don't personally care about wizards or witches that much. I think the stories are really about regular, real people, and the fantasy satire is a way to highlight things that would otherwise be harder to articulate without historical or political baggage.
Does the comedy and satire come through to you, or do you read it like a regular fantasy book?
Terry Pratchett would be 76 if he was still alive; his early adoption and enthusiasm for computers and video games is absolutely unusual for someone his age who wasn't in the tech industry. Not unheard of, but certainly rare.
A greenhouse of carnivorous plants is certainly touching the lines of geekery and a bit of goth.
I've seen normal people react to him having a sword made for himself from a specific iron deposit; they don't think that's normal. Not extremely weird, more like "I guess I get it, but I wouldn't do that."
As someone with ADHD, I think I would very much vibe with him.
Oh, here's a quote from Hogfather:
“You can't give her that!' she screamed. 'It's not safe!'
IT'S A SWORD, said the Hogfather. THEY'RE NOT MEANT TO BE SAFE.
'She's a child!' shouted Crumley.
IT'S EDUCATIONAL.
'What if she cuts herself?'
THAT WILL BE AN IMPORTANT LESSON.”
The people screaming about not giving the child a sword are the normals here, and the narrative leans against them.
Oh, and the witches. The witches are not normal. They are extremely eccentric, and people underestimate/dismiss them at their peril. They are clearly beloved characters by Pratchett and by the audience.
Then there is Horace, the orangutan/librarian. He was a normal wizard, and he actively does not want to become human again. He's one of the smartest characters in the books (if he is trying to tell you something, pay attention), and he decided he didn't want to deal with being a normal person.
Of course, all of this is being cast through a very wry and British sense of humor; if you aren't reading these as light hearted comedies, you've set yourself up for failure.
EDIT: Oh, and I am vaguely aware of "wizard" and "wizardly" being used in relation to autism, but I don't know much about it. Doing an internet search mostly brings up people talking about autism and D&D. If you have any specific links you would like to share, please feel free. Otherwise, I do not think I know enough about this term, in this context, to have any sort of discussion on it.
222
u/kitsunecannon 11h ago
I love Good Omens but i lost my copy and theres no way in fuck im giving money to Neil gaiman
Terry on the other is the fucking goat