Pratchett

I didn't like him much back when I only read a few novels by him.

Now I've been on a huge Pratchett reading spree and read mostly everything famous, and some of the earlier novels, and even some of the other stuff, too.

So, he's entertaining. but GOD DAMN IT, he really is nothing special. More often than not he's really fucking mediocre. "Night Watch" is the best thing he wrote, and probably the only one that doesn't have horrible boring segments. Then stupid fucker destroyed the good character in "Thump!" Whatever the hell was that shit!? The best in-depths (lawd) description of dwarfs I've ever seen, but hell, Vimes was really awful in that, and the whole plot was retarded.

And I don't think there's a single other novel worth mentioning.  I know faggots like "Mort", but it's really fucking boring. Many other novels I read ("Guards", "Hat Full of Sky", "Soul Music", "Equal Rites", "Small Gods" etc.) are really nothing special at fucking all. Perhaps "Hat Full of Sky" had something to it. SOMETHING. And only a litle bit of it.

The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents was great.

Terry Pratchet is the most shoplifted author in Britain, and has been for a long time. Make of that what you will.

>>3
I say that as someone who has read everything he has ever wrote by the way.

>>3
So, he's popular among really cheap people?

Anyway, it's obviously due to popularity. And I wasn't questioning his popularity. It has nothing to do with this, and I'm perfectly okay with him being popular, because he's okay, and okay is often enough to be VERY popular, although quite easily forgotten, too. It has nothing whatsoever to do with my post.

>>5
i love all his work. I'm glad he wrote so many books

>>6
OP here,
well, I'm sincerely glad for you, sir. I mean it.

Nothing special in comparison to what?

>>8
shakespeare

Forsooth, I write in an old and boring esotoric way, therefore, forsooth, it must be far finer than any modern prose. Forsooth.
GAAAAY

>>8
OP here,
nothing special in comparison to all things in literature that are really good.

Neither is Douglas Adams, but no one is complaining

>>10
hey it's not my problem if you aren't intelligent enough to understand shakespeare (you'd have to be pretty stupid not to btw)
>>12
doug adams is worthless. there I complained

I'd personally rate him a lot higher than shakespeare, but that has mostly to do with the cultural barriers. So, you're saying what Pratchett needs is some sort of literary superpower before he's considered worthy to set foot in the halls of the ancestors?

>>12
OP here,
wait, don't compare that ahck to Pratchett. Pratchett is at least okay, and sometimes good. Hitchhiker's Guide books were some of the shittiest books I ever read. Fifth one was particularly atrocious.

>>15
You are an idiot

>>13
I understand Shakespeare fine, I've read a few of his works. That doesn't mean I have to like them.
Shakespeare did write a lot of shit as well as some good stuff.
Favourite Shakespeare character? Iago.

>>17
If you don't think Shakespeare is one of the greatest writers who ever lived then you don't understand Shakespeare.

>>17
Whatever buddy.

>>18
Whatever buddy.
I'm drunk, fail quoting etc

>>16
You have no taste and are stupid.

>>21
No u

reading some of it for the first time I actually caught myself saying "hahaha... is he serious?"

That feeling was awesome. He is an awesome writer because he can DO that.

>>23
What were you reading, sir?

"Guards! Guards!" was the first Pratchett book I ever read, and it's still my favorite.
It's funny - I didn't read it for ages because of the cover.