If Sir PTerry had not been so tragically snatched away by The Embuggerance...

[RathDarkblade]

I agree, this seemed very out-of-character for Carrot. For about 3 books he made it clear that he had no problem with Angua's "lifestyle"*, and now suddenly he comes across as controlling -- almost whiny.

No wonder he became a minor character in later books.

____________________
* I hate that word, but I guess it's here to stay.

 

[=Tamar]

Raisindot: "his devious side started in Guards! Guards! where he killed the villain literally by throwing the book at him while trying to make it look like a naive accident. Even Vimes (at this point) may not have resorted to such obvious violence.

"But I argue that Carrot more or less grew up by Men at Arms. He wasn't a follower any more--he was a true copper who solved crimes like an adult. Same as in Men at Arms."

I think you meant Feet of Clay for the second book.

That's a good point about Carrot's use of misinterpretation to kill the villain in Guards! Guards! I had missed that.

But I disagree that Carrot got any better. In Men at Arms, he again killed the villain, without even bothering to fake it. Contrast that with Vimes in Night Watch, carefully _not_ killing Carcer, so that he could get at least the standard trial in front of Vetinari. Yes, Vimes killed Mr Swing, at which point he was behaving more like his ancestor. But when there was a possibility of a court trial, Vimes didn't kill. In Fifth Elephant, he did kill the villain but again, there was no realistic chance of a fair trial, and it was, technically, hot pursuit of a perp who had just killed an Igor.

For all his memorizing the laws of Ankh-Morpork, Carrot doesn't follow the rule of Law.

Carrot's real attitude comes out when he is showing off. When Angua's shirt was torn in an on-duty fight, he made double-meaning remarks that sounded sympathetic but were snarky, almost cat-calling. In Jingo, he didn't have to surf down that dune in a parody of "come back with your shield or on it", he's showing off. Getting the two armies to play football was a useful distraction, but the war was ended by Vimes and Vetinari, and by not killing the villain themselves. (71-Hour probably does later, but not on the page.)

 

[RathDarkblade]

Hmm. =Tamar, I think we're unfairly blaming Carrot because he did not have the same options that Vimes had.

Let's get one thing straight: Carrot, like Vimes and Vetinari, is genuinely devoted to serving A-M (and, by extension, Vetinari). He sees himself as a servant of A-M, so whatever he does, he does "for the good of the city" as a whole.

True, Carrot does kill the villain in Guards! Guards! -- but since said villain tried to destroy A-M, Carrot feels he has no choice.

Also true, Carrot kills the villain in Men at Arms -- but again, he feels he has no choice. Said villain would have touted to all and sundry that Carrot was the long-returned King of Ankh, which Carrot wishes to avoid.

In short, although Carrot knows people's names, likes and dislikes etc., but he doesn't always think of what they want. He always assumes that other people are like him -- i.e. that they also live to serve A-M. Once they reveal that they're not -- that they're out to destroy A-M or its way of life -- he has no choice.

One last (but fun) observation: when Vimes is around, Carrot tries to arrest the "minor" antagonists. For instance:

- in G!G!, Carrot tries to arrest the Dragon (instead of Lupine Wonse) -- and also the Chief of the Thieves' Guild.
- in FoC, Carrot tries to arrest the King of Golems (instead of Dragon, King of Arms).

When Vimes isn't around, Carrot tries arresting the big fish and fails spectacularly, e.g.:

- in TFE, Carrot tries to arrest Wolfgang. (It doesn't go well).
- in TLH, Carrot tries to arrest Cohen the Barbarian. (Again, it doesn't go well).

I think Carrot is happiest when arresting the small fry, like "Done It" Duncan or the anonymous non-licensed thieves in "Jingo". What do you reckon?

 

[=Tamar]

That's an interesting observation, that Carrot only succeeds when he is arresting minor offenders, not the main villains.
He's competent at killing them without a trial, but incompetent at arresting someone who might outfight him.

But I disagree with you about exonerating him because he "had no choice." Have you ever noticed, how it is almost always a villain who claims they had no choice?
There is always a choice. It may be between two bad choices, but there is one. And Vimes doesn't generally take the easy choice.

 

[Tonyblack]

One of these days I'll post about how much the Vimes/Vetinari dynamic, reminds me of the Richard Sharpe/Duke of Wellington dynamic.

 

[RathDarkblade]

=Tamar, I am not trying to exonerate Carrot because he "has no choice". Let's take a closer look:

- In G!G!, the villain threatens to summon another dragon. Vimes appears helpless. Vetinari does nothing. Vimes orders Carrot to perform an action, and Carrot obeys in a way that is - for him - very logical.

What's so villainous about that? I don't understand.

- In MAA, the villain threatens to reveal that Carrot is the Returned King. Carrot, very properly, asks to see this evidence (and later suppresses it).

If anything, Carrot shows a proper obedience to higher authority (i.e. Vimes and Vetinari), as he had been brought up to do by his adoptive parents. How does that make him villainous? If he's a villain, then so are Vimes and Vetinari. They don't kill the GG/MAA villains, but they are on the spot and do nothing. Thus, Carrot must act to protect The City.

I'm not saying that Carrot is innocent, but he makes these hard choices because no-one else will. That doesn't make him a villain. As Dr Lawn says in NW, "You do the job that's in front of you, or people die."

Granted, his actions in TLE are dumber and less easy to understand. But in TLH, he is (again) the man on the spot. He does his best the only way he knows how - and maybe that's what being a king (in the LOTR/Lavaeolus/etc. meaning of the word) is all about: solving a problem with the edge of your sword. Even Stoneface Vimes (and Sam Vimes), though not being kings, understood that: sometimes there are no more options left. Sam himself (in Jingo) is ready to kill a foreign monarch if need be.

What would happen, in Jingo, if Vetinari hadn't got there in time? Would Vimes have pulled the trigger, knowing that Prince Cadram tried to murder his brother? If he had, Cadram would die, there would be a terrible massacre, and Klatch would invade A-M. Does that make Vimes a hero? I don't think Carrot wouldn't go as far as that.

Thoughts?

 

[=Tamar]

Carrot's "obedience to higher authority" makes him a powerful henchman, not necessarily a hero.
Carrot twists words to cover doing what he wants to do. So does Vimes. But Vimes doesn't want to run Ankh-Morpork. Vimes wants Ankh-Morpork to be ruled by the law, not by a king. He swears his oath to the city. Vetinari agrees. They both serve the City. Carrot in his beginnings wants to be a watchman. it's later that he seems to be getting ambitious (The Fifth Elephant). At some point, someone - possibly Carrot himself - says he shouldn't be in charge simply because he is "good at being obeyed". I would like to believe that was a sign of maturity. But it could easily have been a snark at Vetinari, who is good at being obeyed, as is Vimes in his own way.
I prefer Vetinari, who says free people pull in all different directions in a way that shows he thinks that is a good thing.

 

[RathDarkblade]

I agree with you, but Carrot doesn't want to run Ankh-Morpork. (When does he say that? I'm confused).

 

[=Tamar]

Carrot doesn't _say_ he wants to run the city. But he makes "suggestions" to Vetinari and Vetinari goes along with them. The phrasing of a letter from Vetinari to Vimes (about reorganizing the expanded Watch, I think) is very Carrot-like, which Vimes notices.
I believe it was Carrot who suggested to Vetinari that he make Vimes a Duke. This is all very well for improving Vimes's social credit, but it also makes him a member of the aristocracy which is supposed to support the king. It forces him into a dual allegiance, to the city but also to a hypothetical king. So if Carrot ever did take over "because it was necessary", he could claim Vimes had to obey him.

 

[raisindot]

Hmm. =Tamar, I think we're unfairly blaming Carrot because he did not have the same options that Vimes had.

Let's get one thing straight: Carrot, like Vimes and Vetinari, is genuinely devoted to serving A-M (and, by extension, Vetinari). He sees himself as a servant of A-M, so whatever he does, he does "for the good of the city" as a whole.

True, Carrot does kill the villain in Guards! Guards! -- but since said villain tried to destroy A-M, Carrot feels he has no choice.

Also true, Carrot kills the villain in Men at Arms -- but again, he feels he has no choice. Said villain would have touted to all and sundry that Carrot was the long-returned King of Ankh, which Carrot wishes to avoid.

In short, although Carrot knows people's names, likes and dislikes etc., but he doesn't always think of what they want. He always assumes that other people are like him -- i.e. that they also live to serve A-M. Once they reveal that they're not -- that they're out to destroy A-M or its way of life -- he has no choice.

One last (but fun) observation: when Vimes is around, Carrot tries to arrest the "minor" antagonists. For instance:

- in G!G!, Carrot tries to arrest the Dragon (instead of Lupine Wonse) -- and also the Chief of the Thieves' Guild.
- in FoC, Carrot tries to arrest the King of Golems (instead of Dragon, King of Arms).

When Vimes isn't around, Carrot tries arresting the big fish and fails spectacularly, e.g.:

- in TFE, Carrot tries to arrest Wolfgang. (It doesn't go well).
- in TLH, Carrot tries to arrest Cohen the Barbarian. (Again, it doesn't go well).

These statements make the assumption that Carrot would prefer to arrest the small fish, but this is not necessarily so. As the books progress, Carrot gradually loses sight of the "big picture" that Vimes gradually gains in each story. In GG, neither Carrot nor Vimes knew Wonse's role as the dragon summoner. That was really only revealed at the end. When Carrot did try to arrest the dragon, it made sense at the time, because at the point he was still a legal literalist (Vimes knew how crazy that idea was). In FoC Vimes and Carrot were working in parallel. While Carrot's investigation into the golems was the "B" crime, it still was important. After all, the golem king had murdered several people. In TFE Carrot doesn't try to arrest Wolfgang, since he is not at that moment a Watchman. He's trying to keep Wolfgang from killing Vimes and Company (Vimes is certainly around in that scene). Much different than trying to arrest someone. And at Men at Arms, Carrot does solve all of the crimes (Vimes has a mostly minor role until the end) and delivers rough justice to the main criminal. The only book where Carrot explicitly has a minor role in an investigation he participates in is in Thud!, when he's limited to investigating the murder of Grag Hamcrusher, and it's ultimately Angua and Sally who discover the murdered miners and Mr. Shine who brings Brick in to be the witness of the grag's murder.

 

[RathDarkblade]

These statements make the assumption that Carrot would prefer to arrest the small fish, but this is not necessarily so.

None of us know what he would prefer (he's not real). I'm only basing my assumption on what Carrot does.

In TFE Carrot doesn't try to arrest Wolfgang, since he is not at that moment a Watchman. He's trying to keep Wolfgang from killing Vimes and Company (Vimes is certainly around in that scene). Much different than trying to arrest someone.

Thanks for correcting me. I haven't read TFE in ages.

The only book where Carrot explicitly has a minor role in an investigation he participates in is in Thud! ...

Hmm. What about "Making Money"? There, Carrot has a minor role too -- he questions Moist after Mr Bent has a "funny turn", but doesn't otherwise interfere.

Also, what about "The Last Hero"? Carrot has a major role here, even if there's no investigation to speak of (since the crime and culprits are fairly obvious).

Oh, yes ... what about "Jingo"? Carrot here "shows off" in Klatch (to use =Tamar's term), but before that, he and Angua have a fairly major role in solving at least one crime (the murder of Ossie Brunt) and the uncovering of another (the murder of Dacieville "Snowy" Slopes).

 

[raisindot]

Oh, yes ... what about "Jingo"? Carrot here "shows off" in Klatch (to use =Tamar's term), but before that, he and Angua have a fairly major role in solving at least one crime (the murder of Ossie Brunt) and the uncovering of another (the murder of Dacieville "Snowy" Slopes).

You're right. I kept on thinking it was just Colon and Nobby working on those "minor crimes." I tend to forget the first half of Jingo because it's far less interesting than the second half.

As for Carrot's presence in Going Postal and Making Money, I don't consider either to be true Watch novels. His appearances there (and also in I Shall Wear Midnight) are cameos that are designed to show, from a narrative POV, how regular people perceive the Watch. In none of these books does the Watch actually "solve" the major crime or conspiracy (in the case of ISWM, there's isn't a real major crime--just Feegles destroying and later repairing a tavern). Note also Vimes's role in The Truth has a similar purpose--to show what a regular citizen (William) thinks about the Watch's notion that ordinary citizens are duty bound to help it. And note that Carrot has no role whatsoever in The Truth or Raising Steam, and a very minor role in Snuff.