# Sanderson Jumps the Shark on Pratchett



## Steerpike (May 2, 2013)

At first I thought this was maybe satire, but now I think he's serious(ly nuts):

Terry Pratchett


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (May 2, 2013)

I think it's a bit of fanboy self-indulgence, not that there's anything wrong with that in moderation. Sometimes you feel like an author just totally _gets it_ and you can't help but share your elated glee with everyone on the planet. It's entirely possible that Sanderson's evident love of Pratchett will simmer down in the next few years, and he'll look back on that post in 2025 and say "Eh, you know, maybe I was overdoing it there."

I've never really been able to get into Pratchett (not that I've given up trying), but I've had similar experiences with other authors. When I read Greg Egan's _Diaspora_, I basically said, "That's it, universe over, everyone go home," but now that it's been ten years I have a little more perspective.


----------



## Sparkie (May 2, 2013)

> In five hundred years, it won’t be the Nobel laureates who are being studied. It’s going to be this guy.



*scoffs and mutters curses under his breath*


----------



## Feo Takahari (May 2, 2013)

> In five hundred years, it won’t be the Nobel laureates who are being studied. It’s going to be this guy.



I guess it's not unprecedented . . .

Personally, I would definitely call Pratchett a great writer in the formal sense of the word, and would further add that he stands beside Poe as one of the most accessible of the greats.  At the very least, he must be conceded to have his share of great lines. "What can the harvest hope for, if not for the care of the Reaper Man?", "Humans need fantasy to be human. To be the place where the falling angel meet the rising ape", "Bishops move diagonally. That's why they often turn up where the kings don't expect them to be", etc. etc. etc.


----------



## CupofJoe (May 2, 2013)

> I find Vimes, Pratchett’s unpretentious captain of the city watch, one of the most complex and endearing characters in fiction.


I think Sanderson is bang on. Pratchett has made me laugh, cry, rage, weep, go "ahhh....", be late for work and pay money to see an opera.


----------



## Ankari (May 2, 2013)

CupofJoe said:


> I think Sanderson is bang on. *Pratchett has made me laugh, cry, rage, weep, go "ahhh....", be late for work and pay money to see an opera.*



 That made me laugh. I never considered Terry Prachett. With such a ringing endorsement, I may reconsider.


----------



## brokethepoint (May 3, 2013)

Sir Terry while having a large following is greatly under appreciated.

I am glad that Sanderson was able to write that while Sir Terry is able to read it.


----------



## Steerpike (May 3, 2013)

He's hugely successful.

I'm not saying he's bad, I'm just saying when you get to the point of going back to Shakespeare to try to find a comparable talent, you've made your own essay look silly. That's the problem with Sanderson's piece.


----------



## brokethepoint (May 3, 2013)

My comment in regards to being under appreciated was more of a general comment.

Who do you think are some other great satirical authors?

In Sanderson's _The Way of Kings_ there is a part where they are discussing going overboard in your argument(don't have the book on me at the moment and can't remember the term he used), maybe he is doing this.


----------



## Steerpike (May 3, 2013)

brokethepoint said:


> Who do you think are some other great satirical authors?



Sanderson didn't limit his comment to satirical authors, but to the whole of authors generally. I can name plenty of authors just in SF/F that I like better than Pratchett, personally, and when when you start pulling in all the greats of literature over the decades, the comment just really looks over the top (or it looks like Sanderson isn't that familiar with literature generally, which I don't think is the case).

In Speculative Fiction, think of authors like Gene Wolfe, Guy Gavriel Kay, Mervyn Peake, Angela Carter, Shirley Jackson (if you count Hill House), Glen Douglas, Fritz Leiber, Jack Williamson, Robert Sheckley (a humor/satirical writer), Ursula K. LeGuin, and so on. Moving into classics, you have the likes of Nabokov (who leaves Pratchett and just about everyone else in the dust), Joyce, Faulkner, Melville, Dostoevsky,[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]BolaÃ±o (more contemporary but would be put in the same category, likely), Woolf, Thomas Mann, Joseph Conrad, and many more. 

If Sanderson's statement is taken literally, then Pratchett is elevated far above any of those. Well, I've read those, and I've read some Pratchett (I didn't get through any of his, but I'm trying again with Guards, Guards!), and I can only think it is a good thing Sanderson was typing because that argument can't be made with a straight face


----------



## brokethepoint (May 3, 2013)

I have reread the article to see if I can see what you are saying.  I guess I am just reading it different, or am rereading it differently.

I think the points he is making is that Sir Terry is a great author.

The comment on Shakespeare was this:  The closest thing to Pratchett out there is Shakespeare. Yes, really.
-I take this as purely a style thing.

As for his last comment:
In five hundred years, it won’t be the Nobel laureates who are being studied. It’s going to be this guy.

I think he is probably right, have you looked at the Noble laureate winners?  I had to go back to the 50's before any names stood out.  (ok, yeah I don't read enough outside the fantasy genre)

But I think the point he was trying to make with it was that in his books there are many issues that are addressed in an easy to read book that is absolutely fun to read.  (ok, yeah I know it is British humor but I like it)

I do not think that he was trying to elevate him above the authors that you have listed, but trying to make a point that he should be included among them.

The great thing is that all our lists of great authors are different.


----------



## Steerpike (May 3, 2013)

I don't have a problem putting him on a list of great authors. He has a large number of fans that feel that way. Maybe Sanderson was just engaging in hyperbole for the sake of effect. Or maybe he wanted to write something glowing because of Pratchett's health, and he felt this was the time to pour everything into it. I do think it's a terrible shame about Pratchett, and reading some of the author's own comments about it is a sad experience. 

I'll look at it again in a less literal manner and see if that helps


----------



## Steerpike (May 3, 2013)

The first Nobel Prize winner I recognize is Rudyard Kipling - 1907. Then you have to get into the 20s where I start recognizing a lot of them.


----------



## brokethepoint (May 3, 2013)

lol, I started from most recent and the first I recognized was Hemingway.


----------



## Feo Takahari (May 3, 2013)

Completely off-topic, but I was amazed to discover that Doris Lessing won a Nobel in 2007. Sure, she wrote a lot of realistic fiction, but she always said her best work was her sci-fi series _Canopus in Argos_. 

On-topic, looking at the list, I see a few other authors who could easily be remembered--Morrison, Golding, arguably even Coetzee.


----------

