SPOILERS Making Money Discussion *Spoilers*

Welcome to the Sir Terry Pratchett Forums
Register here for the Sir Terry Pratchett forum and message boards.
Sign up

raisindot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Oct 1, 2009
5,136
2,450
Boston, MA USA
I don't think MM is as bad as many of its detractors say it is. There are some great things to it. The scenes with Harry King are great. Moist's verbal spars with Vetinari reveal a lot about both men. Moist's "confession" of his past during the hearing is a great moment of narrative relief. And Mr. Bent is one of Pterry's best "pseudo-adversaries," a truly tragic figure whose narrative resolution may be the most satisfying this in the book.

But there are a lot of weaknesses to it. For one thing, the plot really is in some ways a rehash of Going Postal. Moist gets assigned by Vetinari to shake up a moribund institution and introduced an innovative, paper-based solution that helps grease the wheels of commerce. He faces enemies who are out to destroy him, although Cosmo Lavish is nowhere near the kind of threat that Reacher Gilt was.

There's also a lot of padding here. Way too much time spent on Cribbins and Pucci and the whole Cosmo-becomes-Vetinari subplot is weak And the pages spent on Moist and Spike getting the golem arm from the magic machine is pure tedium. One thing you can usuall count on in Pterry's books is that there's very little narrative fat--nearly every scene that's in the story needs to be there. For me, this is the first DW books with completely unncessary scenes, such as those mentioned above.

I think the biggest problem is that Moist doesn't really solve his own dilemma. Were it not for the deus-ex-machina appearance of Mr. Bent in his clown getup, Moist would almost surely have been hanged for stealing the gold. There was no logical way he could have gotten out of this predicament.

But I don't see the main narrative being a Moist-vs. Vetinari battle where Moist wins. Vetinari knew the "golden secret," but as Patrician he himself couldn't "order" the golems to do anything because that would have been treated as an act of war by the other cities (and quite possibly by the guilds). Vetinari needed Moist to do the things that he himself could not do to move the city forward. And he did it by giving Moist the opportunity to once again face life or death situations--the very thing that Moist thrives on. He manipulated Moist every step of the way, and gave him latitude because he knew that Moist was not the kind of man who would take advantage of an opportunity to grab violent power (i.e., the control of thousands of golem) and in fact would do his best to use his skills to mediate that threat. Now, Vetinari might not have anticipated every step Moist would take to achieve his ends (bribing Professor Fleed to provide an Umnian phrasebook, for example), but he could anticipate the outcome of Moist's actions, which he knew generally aligned with his own means.
 

=Tamar

Lieutenant
May 20, 2012
12,019
2,900
I don't see MM as a rehash. I see it as Part Two, the way TLF was part two of TCoM. The end of GP is a scene in which clerks are figuring out where the money goes, and the bank is finally saved, not by a dramatic race or just-in-time message, but by the intervention of the bankers, who play the game of money that is only real as long as everybody agrees that it's real. That is a _direct_ lead-in to MM. It just takes Vetinari a little time to get Moist into position. He has to wait until Moist is bored enough, and probably suggest him to the formidable old lady in charge of the Bank of Ankh-Morpork. I agree that the buried golems are clumsy but they serve the purpose. It may be that the commands being built into their physical clay, rather than being easily-removed chem, could be circumvented by a complete grind-to-dust-and-rebake, but that would take a lot of work; meanwhile, they remain golems of the old style. As for the steampunk magic expanding box, to each his own on that, but the era being used - Victorian era - was one that delighted in such things. (It's been written that every major piece of furniture from the name-brand builders of the 19th century has at least one small hidden compartment. Sir pTerry's favorite desk had one they had never managed to open.) The difficulty of opening it explains how the arm hadn't been investigated much before.

I'm not so sure Mr Bent's appearance is a deus-ex-machina. He is built up very well as one who cares greatly what happens to the money, and one who believes firmly in the gold standard, even watered-down as Ankh-Morpork currency has been since day one of TCoM (when Rincewind was threatened as a counterfeiter for spending solid gold). His loyalty was to The Bank, and his decline and breakdown because of the betrayal of that trust by the bankers seem believable to me. I also don't think Moist would have been hanged for stealing the gold. It didn't take much to get Pucci to spill the beans, and I'm sure that Vetinari knew already; he would have found a way to save Moist using Pucci before any execution would take place.

Cosmo is a red herring in the sense of not being the primary source of conflict, but his existence and his methods are a set of extended metaphors. He literally tries to step into Vetinari's shoes, which don't fit. He tries to take what he sees as the symbol of Vetinari's power by copying the ring, but again, it doesn't fit him. His disease and eventual life-saving by the stygium explosion is a metaphor in action: daylight - transparency - burns out the disease in the banking system.

ETA: Cosmo and Pucci et al are "bloated plutocrats". (Pluto being a famous dog-name.)
 

raisindot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Oct 1, 2009
5,136
2,450
Boston, MA USA
RathDarkblade said:
Actually (and for non-British readers here), Mr Bent is a clear reference to John Major (the British PM after Maggie Thatcher): at the time of his accession to the Premiership, the joke was that he ran away from the circus to become an accountant (because Major's father was a circus acrobat). Mr Bent is the same.

Comments? ;)
Hmmm, unless Pterry said this himself I'm not sure if I buy this. There's a whole hoary mythology about "normal dull" people in unexciting lives running away from home to join the circus, and Mr. Bent's story is a reverse twist on that old chestnut. I see a much clearer reference to the old Monty Python skit where a chartered accountant tells a job counselor he wants to become a lion tamer, and, after seeing what a real lion looks like, decides in fear to take small steps--like moving into banking.
 
I re-read Making Money (aloud to my girlfriend) only a few months ago, here's what I wrote in my Goodreads review:

Although Moist von Lipwig is a great character to read, and this book contains a lot of Vetinari's cleverness, on the whole, it doesn't feel as consistently good as some of the earlier novels. The plot kind of meanders, as Moist is very much a character who reacts rather than acts, so the entire thing seems to be just going with the flow rather than building up to any sort of climax. Don't get me wrong, there *are* story-related climaxes, they just have little to no build up and the resolution has a very much deus-ex-machina feel, even if it's actually deus-ex-Moist's-head. Still, the book has many funny moments and the contents aren't dark and dreary, it just seems to be lacking the strong plotting of Terry's "middle period"
I consider the "middle period" to start around Men At Arms/Witches Abroad and goes through until The Fifth Elephant/Carpe Jugulum, and I also consider it Terry at his best. This is because the books (mostly) all have a great mix of plot, character, and humour. Some of the later books lose the humour in exchange for deeper, darker plots and characters, and then there are some like Making Money which are much funnier but the plot is a bit all over the place. But that's just my opinion and I'm happy for others to have a completely different one.
 

=Tamar

Lieutenant
May 20, 2012
12,019
2,900
This isn't so much a discussion point as a very minor annotation attempt.
Owlswick Jenkins was recently referred to on another site as O.Jenkins.
For some reason, that reminded me of another Jenkins: in Diana Wynne Jones's book, Howl's Moving Castle, wizard Howl is named Howell Jenkins (but uses a few other names as well). He dresses flamboyantly, tricks everyone, is an expert slitherer-outer, and yet has a Heart of Gold (or at least goldish). If you give the name Howl a mockney accent and drop the H, it becomes Owl. Owl Jenkins? Owlswick Jenkins? pTerry was friends with Diana Wynne Jones. I venture to suggest that O. Jenkins was a friendly nod and hat tip to DWJ.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
16,081
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
I wonder if the "Mr Bent pies almost everyone" has anything to do with this very fun scene from the 60s movie "The Great Race". Biggest pie fight ever filmed - in total, 256 pies thrown! (And only one hitting Tony Curtis, at least on camera - although he had to go and get changed several times, because he had to remain pristine on camera until Natalie Wood hits him with a pie). ;)

Fun and amusing music, too! :) The clarinettist was clearly having fun that day. *LOL*
 

raisindot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Oct 1, 2009
5,136
2,450
Boston, MA USA
I tend to doubt it. The pie fight is one of the oldest vaudeville/movie shticks of all time that long stopped being funny at all decades ago. The great thing that Pterry does with it in MM is make it very, very, very sad--an act of rather pathetic rebellion by a man who was unable to do it any other way.....
 

=Tamar

Lieutenant
May 20, 2012
12,019
2,900
That's an interesting take on it. I read it rather differently. On the Disc, the full-fledged clowns have always been portrayed as sinister, humorless, and basically cruel. Occasionally one will escape, but the wounds of the training persist - King Verence II of Lancre will never be entirely free of his history. Mr Bent is even shaped to it, his genes having been possibly magically altered so that he has the large feet that only fit clown shoes. I don't see his "coming out" as a sad thing. He finally found a way to use his hidden self to defend his beloved bank by attacking the Lavishes, revealing their crimes and at the same time making them ridiculous in public. With the same act he freed himself from Cosmo's blackmail.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
16,081
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
Yes, I think I agree with Tamar. :)

The only reason I raised the "pie fight scene" from "The Great Race" is because the king is hit with a pie, which he tastes and declares to be brandy. During the pie scene in MM, Vetinari's finger is hit by a splatter of pie, which he tastes and declares to be pineapple.

I'm sure that's not a coincidence! :)
 

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,854
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
Listening to Mark Reads, doing this book. I'm enjoying his speculation on Mr Bent's secret. I can't remember what I thought he was when I first read the book. The reveal that he was a clown is obvious once it is revealed. The clues are all there - not least of which is his incredible timing.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
16,081
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
Yes, I loved that scene in MM too. Harry's reply to Moist's question ("But I'm about to be arrested") is gold ... pardon the pune. ;)

I never understood how Hubert's glooper caused all the gold to disappear. *shrug* I suppose it could be said that the glooper (which mimics large-scale ecnomics in our world) is a kind of magic that most laymen couldn't possibly understand (like large-scale economics), but saying "It's magic!" and leaving it at that is just lazy. Any ideas?
 

raisindot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Oct 1, 2009
5,136
2,450
Boston, MA USA
The gold was never in the vault. It was just gold-painted bricks. The Lavishes had stolen all the gold ages ago and made it into jewelry. So, technically, the glooper didn't "steal" the gold; it simply and more accurately reflected the actual reality of the lack of physical gold. The only glooper "magic" came at the end, when Hubert and Igor manipulated it to magically "restore" the gold that was never stolen (by Moist) to the vault.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
16,081
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
Oh dear. Then, when the vault starts filling with gold again, I'm not sure why Moist is so annoyed. I thought he'd be used to it by now.

He lives in a world full of magic and wonder, yet he sometimes acts like he isn't aware that it exists. Sometimes, he may as well just stand there with his mouth open (e.g. in the vault scene, or when he goes with Adorabelle Dearheart to visit Professor Pelk at UU).

I thought about asking why, but I think I know the answer: this makes him a more rounded and three-dimensional character. If he always knew what to say and how to act, that would make him less believable as a character. :) He knows what to do most of the time, but when confronted with things beyond his knowledge, all he can do is go with the flow until he can grab onto something that he does understand and run away with it. What do you think - does that sound plausible about Moist? :)
 

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,854
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
The reason he is so annoyed is because he has spent a large part of the story convincing everyone that the gold isn't needed. That was why the Lavishes were able to water it down so easily without anyone noticing. The whole economy of A-M depended on a shiny metal that, to all intents and purposes, was just sitting there. The economy was based on the premise that the A-M$ was worth a small amount of real gold and could be traded for goods and services as long as (and this is important) nobody ever asked for a real Dollar's worth of the bank's gold. Moist moved the premise to the fact that the City would guarantee the worth of a Dollar and allow trade based on that promise.

So, economics was never my strong subject, but I think that covers it. The gold reappearing just makes things more complicated for Moist.
 

Dotsie

Sergeant-at-Arms
Jul 28, 2008
9,069
2,850
I don't really know much about economics either, but I do know that no economist thinks it would be a good idea to return to the gold standard.
 

User Menu

Newsletter