SPOILERS Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents Discussion Group

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

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,856
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
#81
poohbcarrot said:
Tonyblack said:
And the rats are trying to be people.
No they aren't. The rats are trying to be intelligent rats. If they were trying to be people, they would invent a religion then start slaughtering other rats in the name of their non-existent God, and rape, pillage and destroy the planet they live on purely for financial gain.

Spider acts more like a human than the changelings, probably because he was created by humans.
Sorry - wasn't clear. I was referring to the comment at the start about people and rats. The people were acting somewhat ratlike and the rats were acting somewhat humanlike.

I didn't mean they were actually trying to become human. :)
 

kakaze

Lance-Corporal
Jun 3, 2009
488
1,775
#85
The longer the post, the less likely it will be read. And, if read, the less likely it will be understandable.

I think the story is an analogy of human-kind's moral evolution. How people treat each other as the general level of intelegence grows.

In the beginning the cat & rats were non-sentient animals. They had no morals and would fight with, steal from, or kill each other without any guilt.

As their intelligence and knowledge grows, their treatment of one-another and other animals changes (rats don't eat each other or fight, cat doesn't kill talking rats, etc...). Eventually, the rats treat each other more "humanely" than the humans do (who are kind of backwards and dumb, and therefore less moral)!
 
Dec 31, 2008
1,289
2,100
Japan
#86
Tonyblack said:
It's called making posts too early in the morning before I've had any coffee! :p

Where as YOU can make mistakes on quite short posts. :laugh:
That was intentional! :rolleyes:

It was the same joke as Chris 2 posts above. I also spelled "mistakes" wrong and on the next line I got the grammar the wrong way round because I was talking about grammar. :laugh:

(And I didn't mean "you" Tony, I meant "one" makes mistakes with longer posts - I've done it, swreader's done it and Jan's done it.)
 
Dec 31, 2008
1,289
2,100
Japan
#87
I look at Maurice as a typical wandering Shane-type hero. After he'd saved everyone and every rat in Bad Blintz, his work was done. It was time to move on to the next person who needed his help ie; the Dick Whittington character at the end of the book.

In fact the 5th from last sentence in the book explains the whole manipulation principle of Maurice,

"If you knew their dreams, you could handle people."

But that's only my impression. What are your thoughts?

Why didn't Maurice stay in Bad Blintz?
 

Dotsie

Sergeant-at-Arms
Jul 28, 2008
9,069
2,850
#88
poohbcarrot said:
Dotsie said:
But after that he comes to lack the strength of will necessary to be truly manipulative.
Um...the bit in the Ratthaus when he was sitting in the middle of the table, he was quite manipulative, wasn't he?

Um... the bit when his plan freed all the keekees was quite manipulative, wasn't it?

Those two bits are right near the end.
OK let me make myself clearer.

Um...what I'm saying is, Maurice is not the master manipulator both he and you think he is. He is manipulative that's true, but his newly found conscience lets him down later in the book, and he can't manipulate (or abandon) as easily as he used to.

I see what you mean about him being a hero, but you make it sound as if moving on to the next person was because he sees they need his help. Actually, he needs the boys help, to make money.

And why doesn't he stay in Bad Blintz? The wandering accidental hero never does. It's narrative imperative ;)
 

Jan Van Quirm

Sergeant-at-Arms
Nov 7, 2008
8,524
2,800
Dunheved, Kernow
www.janhawke.me.uk
#90
kakaze said:
.... I think the story is an analogy of human-kind's moral evolution. How people treat each other as the general level of intelegence grows.

In the beginning the cat & rats were non-sentient animals. They had no morals and would fight with, steal from, or kill each other without any guilt.
:oops: But we still do that anyway - so it's the guilt that makes us sentient? :x

Bloody conscience! Die! DIE! DIE! DIE!

poohbcarrot said:
I meant "one" makes mistakes with longer posts - I've done it, swreader's done it and Jan's done it.
Only because we all care about the words pooh - passion is a dangerous thing *I just get these headaches tic starts up - again* ;)
 
Dec 31, 2008
1,289
2,100
Japan
#91
Dotsie said:
I see what you mean about him being a hero, but you make it sound as if moving on to the next person was because he sees they need his help. Actually, he needs the boys help, to make money.
Maurice is the same as Moist. He's in it for the thrill of making money, not for the actual money itself. That's why he lets the rats keep his share of the money they'd already made. He doesn't really need money - he's a cat! But it's fun to get.

Dotsie said:
...but his newly found conscience lets him down later in the book, and he can't manipulate (or abandon) as easily as he used to.
I don't agree. Throughout the whole book he is manipulative. By not abandoning the rats when he had a chance (because of his newly acquired conscience) is nothing to do with the waning of his manipulative ability.

Maurice is a cat. Cats manipulate people.

"Since then (becoming intelligent) he'd done what cats always did. He steered people. Now some of the rats counted as people too, of course. But people were people, even if they had four legs......"

(BTW nice reverse "Um..." :laugh: )
 
Dec 31, 2008
1,289
2,100
Japan
#93
The changelings are complex, but have simple desires.

You could write pages about their theological discussions and how the Mr Floppsy book is their Bible etc etc.

Maurice is simple, but has complex desires.

"I suppose there isn't a Big Cat in the sky, is there?"
"I'M SURPRISED AT YOU, MAURICE. OF COURSE THERE ARE NO CAT GODS. THAT WOULD BE TOO MUCH LIKE....WORK."
Maurice nodded. One good thing about being a cat, apart from the extra lives, was that the theology was a lot simpler.

This book was written by a cat owner. :laugh:
 

kakaze

Lance-Corporal
Jun 3, 2009
488
1,775
#96
Do you suppose Darktan's trap-scar was like stigmata? Like he's a parody of Christ?

It seems interesting to me that it was a rat (Darktan) who was stable, steady, intelligent, rational, and completely non-metaphysical who turned into some kind of messiah.
 

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,856
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
#97
He's certainly (with Sardine's advice) using the trap scar to full advantage and I can see the analogy. Dark Tan does become very much the leader after that and Dangerous Beans seems to disappear from the story pretty much after Maurice saves him. :)
 
Dec 31, 2008
1,289
2,100
Japan
#98
A lot of respect for the rats I had disappeared when Darktan was prepared to lie about religion purely as a means to cling on to power. Sadly, the other rats were prepared to believe him, so already the seeds of the rats' society's self-destruction have already been sown.

Whereas the true hero not only actually met the bone rat, but also leapt on him making his little scythe skitter away across the floor.

At least Maurice was honest! :laugh:
 

User Menu

Newsletter