SPOILERS Going Postal Discussion *Spoilers*
- Thread starter Tonyblack
- Start date
A couple of problems there.
1. I only have the UK copy.
2. I don't have the US hardback.
Yes, I know they are more or less the same problem, but I feel it is an important one.
Could you tell us what is actually happening at the top of page 23 of the US HB copy so that I might find it easier to find the relevant bit.
1. I only have the UK copy.
2. I don't have the US hardback.
Yes, I know they are more or less the same problem, but I feel it is an important one.
Could you tell us what is actually happening at the top of page 23 of the US HB copy so that I might find it easier to find the relevant bit.
In the 8 days a week thing - I only just got around to re-reading GP on Saturday night and yes Octeday is mentioned around about the time Moist meets Adora for the 1st time.
The Ultimate Fate of Golems: they are sentient and they are fundamentally well-disposed to biologically sentient creatures. They are also not easily swayed in the logic dept. Perhaps when the last Golem is freed they will destroy themselves as being too much of a moral and physical threat to the rest of creation?
Too much information/analysis: I can certainly see where Tina's coming from and if the cut and thrust of debate is spoiling your enjoyment of something that's precious to you then of course choose to stay away. We all have our various comfort zones and pet theories and as we're passionate and intelligent readers things are bound to get heated at some stage. And some people's debating styles are irritating in the extreme sometimes and others press home their well thought out arguments rather too vigorously at times to the point where other people want to say "zip it for pity's sake - we get it!".
Terry's work is full of satire and that's not always hilarious or shouldn't be as it's really supposed to be thought provoking not funny haha? So the very fact that we can discuss the books in such depth (and heat at times) is actually a compliment to Terry and to his work of which humour and humanity are important keystones. Our debates on here are in general well-regulated and interesting, even when we start to get excited about the conceptual side of things, and that's to our credit, but maybe we get too serious at times about what is after all a work of fiction.
I've seen too many people ripped to pieces over petty narrow-minded arguments like 'can Balrogs fly' to take some things seriously - this is a work of fantasy FICTION albeit based on reality and Moist is not a real person. So we base our attitudes on how we'd likely react to him if he was real - so I'm seeing him as the big-headed plausible rogue who is almost totally self-obsessed, manipulates everyone he can and when he does good, does it for highly questionable reasons, although he can feel genuinely for people like Adora, Stanley and Groat. That is of course his saving grace and why he's 'better' or, more truthfully, a far more sympathetic character than Gilt (as in guilty or 'all that glitters' blah blah - sometimes even Terry's irritating in his genius comic flare - but I find very little to admire in the personality Terry's given him.
Others enjoy Moist differently and that's fine too - it's just a story that people can enjoy on many levels. And Moist is NOT like Hannibal Heyes and Kid Curry pooh - they repented! :twisted:
The Ultimate Fate of Golems: they are sentient and they are fundamentally well-disposed to biologically sentient creatures. They are also not easily swayed in the logic dept. Perhaps when the last Golem is freed they will destroy themselves as being too much of a moral and physical threat to the rest of creation?
Too much information/analysis: I can certainly see where Tina's coming from and if the cut and thrust of debate is spoiling your enjoyment of something that's precious to you then of course choose to stay away. We all have our various comfort zones and pet theories and as we're passionate and intelligent readers things are bound to get heated at some stage. And some people's debating styles are irritating in the extreme sometimes
and others press home their well thought out arguments rather too vigorously at times to the point where other people want to say "zip it for pity's sake - we get it!". Terry's work is full of satire and that's not always hilarious or shouldn't be as it's really supposed to be thought provoking not funny haha? So the very fact that we can discuss the books in such depth (and heat at times) is actually a compliment to Terry and to his work of which humour and humanity are important keystones. Our debates on here are in general well-regulated and interesting, even when we start to get excited about the conceptual side of things, and that's to our credit, but maybe we get too serious at times about what is after all a work of fiction.
I've seen too many people ripped to pieces over petty narrow-minded arguments like 'can Balrogs fly' to take some things seriously - this is a work of fantasy FICTION albeit based on reality and Moist is not a real person. So we base our attitudes on how we'd likely react to him if he was real - so I'm seeing him as the big-headed plausible rogue who is almost totally self-obsessed, manipulates everyone he can and when he does good, does it for highly questionable reasons, although he can feel genuinely for people like Adora, Stanley and Groat. That is of course his saving grace and why he's 'better' or, more truthfully, a far more sympathetic character than Gilt (as in guilty or 'all that glitters' blah blah - sometimes even Terry's irritating in his genius comic flare - but I find very little to admire in the personality Terry's given him.
Others enjoy Moist differently and that's fine too - it's just a story that people can enjoy on many levels. And Moist is NOT like Hannibal Heyes and Kid Curry pooh - they repented! :twisted:
(and Stanley and Groat too)My first reading of GP was that Terry had created a Butch Cassidy figure. A conman, yes, but a likable one. Then I read it again. And again.
Moist may differentiate himself from Gilt (whose name I read as "plated, false" rather than guilt), but he is no different. He is only unaware.
Embezzlement: Gilt & Co used Grand Trunk monies to buy the Trunk, but also dipped into other client's accounts to cover this. Not true embezzlement; just moving some numbers around. You know, like Moist did.
Yes, Moist blanches at Mr Pump's statement that he has killed "2.-whatever people" because he did not think through the damage he wreaked.
Wreaked is a pretty good word. How many people, now, in 1933, in 1873, lost everything because banks shuttered and paper money became worthless? And how many "did the Moist," knowingly and deliberately took advantage of those who did have a bit saved?
In GP (US paperback, pg 112), Gilt tells Horsefry that "nothing is going to go wrong" because Horsefry thinks of money in the old-fashioned way.
He goes on: "Money is not a thing. It is not even a process. It is a kind of shared dream. We dream that a small disc of common metal is worth the price of a substantial meal."
In MM (Us paperback, pg 107, 108), while being interviewed by Sacharissa, Moist uses Gilt's own analogy to describe worth when he says: "Sell the gold to the dwarfs. Money is a commodity, nothing more. A potato is worth more than gold."
Yep, these are different books. However, someone mentioned the evolution of Moist's character. Oh, yeah... he evolved.
Gilt hired Mr Gryle to kill and destroy. He knew it and accepted the consequences
.
Moist destroyed, too; the difference is he did so at two removes and only when he was shown the shadow of his damage by Spike, did he realize his actions affected real people in real time.
Moist did not think of the consequences of his actions.
Does this make him a "nicer" con man?
Does his donation of the stolen 150AM to the PO really absolve him of his damage? Does that donation truly mitigate his deliberate forgeries and grift?
Graft has always been with us. Some famous author (no, pooh, I don't remember who and am not going to look it up to satisfy your curiousity) said "8% graft is acceptable."
Ok, I could live with the county commissioners, school district and the village skimming 8.
I could even live with the bank taking 8 for their trouble.
It's when they wade into 8x arbitrary-number-here that I get upset then even more upset when I do some simple math and see just how much has been appropriated for "society."
Thing with GP, just as with all Pratchett's other novels, is that it does deal with people now and life now.
It just hits much closer to home.
I am interested what Moist will do with the A-M tax office.
Dotsie said:
I either missed that bit, or you're referring to Vetinari giving Mr Pump the power to harm on the authority of a government official. Which is a bit different. It means that Vetinari has developed an army of supersoldiers who will obey only him (if he sack all his employees ).
).
He's a licenced to kill Terminator.
In Night watch, the barrier was against the interests of the Patrician at the time. If he had had 10 Mr Pumps and ordered them to destroy the barrier it would have been a blood bath.
Sharlene--
You said Gilt and corporate decision in the same sentence.
In the US, a corp (S or C) is a legal entity, exactly like a person, with all the constraints, restraints and injunctions. Difference being that a corporation's sole aim is profit.
Figure that, as head of the Board of Directors, Gilt knows this. After all, US statutory law is based on English common law (interpretation), so the function of a corp in either country cannot be that different.
Gilt cuts employees and wages to keep or maximize profits.
Gilt eliminates other BoD members to keep or maximize his own share of those profits.
Reads like real life to me.
You said Gilt and corporate decision in the same sentence.
In the US, a corp (S or C) is a legal entity, exactly like a person, with all the constraints, restraints and injunctions. Difference being that a corporation's sole aim is profit.
Figure that, as head of the Board of Directors, Gilt knows this. After all, US statutory law is based on English common law (interpretation), so the function of a corp in either country cannot be that different.
Gilt cuts employees and wages to keep or maximize profits.
Gilt eliminates other BoD members to keep or maximize his own share of those profits.
Reads like real life to me.
poohbcarrot said:
Dotsie said:
I either missed that bit, or you're referring to Vetinari giving Mr Pump the power to harm on the authority of a government official. Which is a bit different. It means that Vetinari has developed an army of supersoldiers who will obey only him (if he sack all his employees ).
).
He's a licenced to kill Terminator.
In Night watch, the barrier was against the interests of the Patrician at the time. If he had had 10 Mr Pumps and ordered them to destroy the barrier it would have been a blood bath.
And Mr. Pump is of course still a 'tool' in this analogy - if he was a bullet he'd still kill you whether or not Vetinari had ordered him to do it in defence of the city or to execute as a personal vendetta/professional hit. You can argue it both ways.
The real test is what a free Golem would do in the same circs - of it's own free will. They wouldn't necessarily choose to kill someone - they're so strong in a fight situation they could render someone perfectly incapable without having to kill them.
The real test is what a free Golem would do in the same circs - of it's own free will. They wouldn't necessarily choose to kill someone - they're so strong in a fight situation they could render someone perfectly incapable without having to kill them.
bullets don't take the day off mr. Pump works for the government he is employed by the city of Ankh-Morpork.
Moist is not like Gilt, maybe in some ways but in some important ways he is clearly not. Gilt doesn't mind if somebody has to be killed to get at the money (Horsefry for example) Moist is very bothered by the fact that Pump thinks he killed 2,3 people. Moist never used weapons and he never killed anyone to get at the money and in the end Moist stays on the right path.
Moist is not like Gilt, maybe in some ways but in some important ways he is clearly not. Gilt doesn't mind if somebody has to be killed to get at the money (Horsefry for example) Moist is very bothered by the fact that Pump thinks he killed 2,3 people. Moist never used weapons and he never killed anyone to get at the money and in the end Moist stays on the right path.
You may have guessed that I have no patience with this stuff. Scale doesn't matter.
Two things that happened.
First.
18 mos ago, I ordered 6 custom budd wheels for my motorhome from a company in Maryland.
$17-hundred-something. I paid up front with a money order.
The wheels came. They were 5-bolt, not 6 and were 19.5", not 17.5".
Owner apologized, wah-wah. Could or would not give me a firm date on new wheels. His original date of July 15, 08 was a joke --I didn't get the 'wrong wheels until Aug 25, 08. So I'm really going to give him more time. Right.
Long story short, he stiffed me out of $765. I raised so much hell I actually managed to get $1000. of my own money returned to me.
What a guy.
Second.
Rewind a few years. My mother, god love her, was good at guessing markets. She sucked at picking stockbrokers.
She had this one. Sleazy, smarmy, oily bugger.
I did nop like him and my dad didn't like him, either, but oh hey, he's a nice guy.
When Peg died, I had to go through all her papers. I knew we had lost some $$ in the dot-com-noise. I was looking for life insurance, stocks from Daddy, the stuff you accumulate.
What I found were 13 cancelled checks for $89, 890.00.
That's almost 90thousand dollars.
Made out IN the broker's name BY the broker himself and cashed jointly by him and his wife.
So, it's ok to con for little amounts, but not big ones.
It's ok to con "if they have enough."
Maybe it's ok to con if it's for a luxury purpose like custom wheels or if you're taking money from someone who invests --hey, they oughtta know better, it's a risk!
The only difference is scale.
We are out a LOT of cash. We are hurting BAD.
Some creep like Moist, even a literary character, is slime.
Moist Von Lipwig was born on a small farm to honest and hard-working parents. When he was very young he had a love for animals, especially dogs, cats and horses.
One year, when he was eight, there was a bad harvest and the farm was repossessed by a greedy and uncaring bank, in order to sell it to a property developer. When his parents tried to complain they were ruthlessly killed by the bank's hired thugs.
Moist was put in an orphanage, not dissimilar to the one in Monstrous Regiment. He was regularly beaten and abused, but learnt how to con people from the other kids in the orphanage. He also learnt how to get on with people, because failure to do so would have resulted in his almost certain death.
When he was 14, after recovering from a particularly nasty beating, he ran away from the orphanage to try and make his own way in the world. His only talent was in conning people, so "Moist Von Lipwig" disappeared and was replaced by a string of aliases.
It was never a love of money, or greed that made him cheat banks, but a lust for revenge for his parents' deaths.
He was eventually caught when he was cornered by a 75 year-old part-time bank security guard. He could have easily fought his way out, but he was against all forms of violence and he knew his parents wouldn't have approved, so he gave himself up.
So at the tender age of 26, an age when most people are still trying to find out who they really are in the world, he found himself with a noose round his neck on an AM gallows.
Despite not having had any love since the age of 8, he still managed to become a person with a positive and optimistic outlook on life.
How can you not love him?
One year, when he was eight, there was a bad harvest and the farm was repossessed by a greedy and uncaring bank, in order to sell it to a property developer. When his parents tried to complain they were ruthlessly killed by the bank's hired thugs.
Moist was put in an orphanage, not dissimilar to the one in Monstrous Regiment. He was regularly beaten and abused, but learnt how to con people from the other kids in the orphanage. He also learnt how to get on with people, because failure to do so would have resulted in his almost certain death.
When he was 14, after recovering from a particularly nasty beating, he ran away from the orphanage to try and make his own way in the world. His only talent was in conning people, so "Moist Von Lipwig" disappeared and was replaced by a string of aliases.
It was never a love of money, or greed that made him cheat banks, but a lust for revenge for his parents' deaths.
He was eventually caught when he was cornered by a 75 year-old part-time bank security guard. He could have easily fought his way out, but he was against all forms of violence and he knew his parents wouldn't have approved, so he gave himself up.
So at the tender age of 26, an age when most people are still trying to find out who they really are in the world, he found himself with a noose round his neck on an AM gallows.
Despite not having had any love since the age of 8, he still managed to become a person with a positive and optimistic outlook on life.
How can you not love him?
Sorry I am late to this discussion group ( Again! ) but not sure where poohbcarrot got all this info from about Moist, been listening to the Audio book in the bath at Night (to busy/knackered to read my hard copy) and can't recall most of what is said about Moist early life...... is this in the book? I have the UNABRIDGED audio book..... :
:Share this page
Latest posts
-
-
-
Tiffany Aching's Guide To Being a Witch (Warning: Minor Spoilers)- Latest: Who's Wee Dug