The Colour of Magic - Terry Pratchet

[ATDrake]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Again NO! Small Gods is not standalone. One of the previous books introduces us to Cohan and without that, this book is not nearly as good as it is.

Are you perchance thinking of Interesting Times? Because I don't recall Cohen showing up in Small Gods, even by mention.

[Nyssa]

The one warning I heard from the many, many Discworld fans in my life was that both The Colour of Magic and The Light Fantastic were the two worst installments in the entire series. I, however, am a stubborn, slightly OCD completest; I would not let anyone suggest an alternate staring point.

After reading both of those, I had a similar reaction, as the OP. I could not tell whether or not I truly enjoyed either story. I do know that I enjoyed The Light Fantastic more than The Colour of Magic, though.

I still plan to read the entire series, someday.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

Are you perchance thinking of Interesting Times? Because I don't recall Cohen showing up in Small Gods, even by mention.

So I was. My mistake. thank you for picking it up.

of all the ones I have read so far, Small Gods is the most stand alone.

The next one I read will be Feet of Clay. I plan on reading it sometime this month if I have it. If not, I'll have to reserve it from the library.

[thrawn_aj]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I know the chart is a suggestion, but from what I've read so far, even reading your favorite characters isn't a guarantee of a book you'll enjoy. And even if you've read a book and didn't enjoy it, reading the next book with the same main characters might be enjoyable.

For example, I've read and enjoyed the books on the witches. But when I came to Maskerade, I iddn't enjoy it that much. I found it flat and not a single LOL. There was a few smiles here and there, but overall, not his best.

Also, if you start by using that chart as a suggestion and follow it, how do you know what to read if you've not read enough? So really, the chart is only any good if you've read the series and know what you may want to reread.

The chart's not even a suggestion per se (its title notwithstanding - that's probably what's gotten you frothing at the mouth ). It's simply a wiring diagram showing how things are connected. You can jump in wherever and test the waters so to speak. If certain titles/characters intrigue you in the chart, you look them up (that's what Wikipedia is for). No one's foolish enough to just use the chart, or for that matter just trust some random internet guy's claim that they "must" be read in publication order (even if some books in that order are dreadfully boring and may put some people off from going on to some of the real gems further down the list). Strangely, while looking for that chart, I found a nearly identical rant by you (as the set of 5 multi-posts I mean; this post is remarkably calm - thank you) on MR several years ago. Clearly, this is a serious matter for you and I would personally NEVER trust an opinion so religiously held about a piece of fantasy fiction. It's bound to be highly subjective and therefore not very generally applicable. In any case, that's not my problem. *shrug*
*****

To those interested in starting on Pratchett, I would suggest using the chart as a map so you know where everything is and which character/group of characters each novel is centered around. That alone should give you some idea of what you might like to explore. Then, look up a good synopsis (NOT review) of the book. By the very nature of his work, suspense and spoilers are not something I would worry about too much .

Above all, don't spoil your fun by trying to read the Discworld series (and therefore obsessing over series order). Just focus on reading a Discworld book, preferably the one that appeals to the widest audience (professional reviews might be more helpful there since the reviewer is less likely to be subjective). As I mentioned before, Pratchett's books (like any other master storyteller who creates an entire universe) are as self-contained as they are multiply connected (and readers of such universes will understand me when I say that this is not a contradiction). Sample the most entertaining books first - if you end up becoming a Discworld aficionado, you will inevitably reread some books to try to get the in-jokes as well. But trying to slog through early books in a series you may not even like just to get some in-jokes that are due to appear in the Nth book (that you may never read) seems a bit unnecessary for a series that isn't even heavily linear. Like trying to play WoW as if it was an early era linear adventure game .

Here's another guide that tells you a little bit about the starting book in each sub-series. As others have correctly mentioned here, The Color of Magic and The Light Fantastic are not recommended as starters for the simple reason that they do not accurately reflect the style of the later books (and might therefore put off some readers who might otherwise have enjoyed the later books). Mort is a classic, so is Equal Rites. The other starters in that guide are also quite entertaining. Pratchett has a universal enough appeal that he has a variety of readers - it's not just a cult following. I'm crazy about some of his books (ok, quite a few of them ) - the entire series, not so much.

[JSWolf]

That charts is a reading order guide. It says so right on the graphic. That guide has been useless since version 1, never mind version 2. Terry says the correct order is published order. This chart says otherwise. I'd go with the author.

If you've not read the series, then you very well can and probably will spoil the fun if you read out of order. The chart is only useful for those who have already read the entire series or enough of the series to go back and reread.

[DixieGal]

I had never read any of the books, except taking a stab at Color of Magic, which i did not like. Then, in a short story collection called Legends ed Silverberg, there is a short story called "The Sea and The Little Fishes" it is probably online somewhere. It is a charming tale with the Witches. Maybe try it to get a sampling of Pratchett at his finest. If you like it, then start at book 3 and follow chronologically from tere?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DixieGal

I had never read any of the books, except taking a stab at Color of Magic, which i did not like. Then, in a short story collection called Legends ed Silverberg, there is a short story called "The Sea and The Little Fishes" it is probably online somewhere. It is a charming tale with the Witches. Maybe try it to get a sampling of Pratchett at his finest. If you like it, then start at book 3 and follow chronologically from there?

Even if you find books 1 & 2 weak, keep going in published order. It's well worth it.

[DixieGal]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Even if you find books 1 & 2 weak, keep going in published order. It's well worth it.

I agree. I re-read them last month, as you know. They are better after reading so many, and a great Discworld geography review, because Rinewind goes pretty much everywhere eventually. The Last Continent, IMHO, is the best of the Wizard books (thus far) and they visit new lands for the first time in a long time.

[ardeegee]

I have to agree with JSWolf here-- the only order I would suggest would be published order.

[thrawn_aj]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

That charts is a reading order guide. It says so right on the graphic. That guide has been useless since version 1, never mind version 2.

I hate repeating myself. I described in great detail how to use the chart in an effective way. What the chart was originally meant to do is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Terry says the correct order is published order.

Only if you intend to read the entire series no matter what. I was describing a way to test the waters to see if it's even worth it for a particular person.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If you've not read the series, then you very well can and probably will spoil the fun if you read out of order.

Blatant exaggeration. You'll miss out on a few in-jokes at worst.
This warning makes it seem that it's a fairly linear series in terms of plot and it just isn't. The chart should make that quite clear.

Originally Posted by ardeegee

I have to agree with JSWolf here-- the only order I would suggest would be published order.

I guess we'll just have to disagree.

However, I don't think anyone would argue with the weaker version of my suggestion, which is - to hell the published order if you get bored with a book. Better to give up on a few books than the entire series. The other nice thing about the series is that there's very little suspense to speak of - the very idea of a Discworld spoiler is laughable.

It is a common mistake to assume that a beloved series will be equally loved by everyone. Jump in, test the waters. Then, think about swimming laps.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by thrawn_aj

[...]Blatant exaggeration. You'll miss out on a few in-jokes at worst.
This warning makes it seem that it's a fairly linear series in terms of plot and it just isn't. The chart should make that quite clear. [...]

+1.

I'm a fan, I read them from start to finish in publication order, and then repeat every few years. I do the same with his books for younger readers (all right, kids books, I don't care I think they're great, I just love the way he writes). I've often wondered how different the books would have seemed if I'd found them later and read them in a different order, but too late for me to find out.

But ... I do know people that have just picked a book at random and enjoyed themselves, and this has gradually led them into the rest of the books. Different people do seem to relate to some threads more than others (I'm a fan of Granny Weatherwax (Witches) and also Commander Vimes (Watch) - fabricati diem). But the point is that even picking a book in the middle of one of these story-lines doesn't seem to be a hindrance to the enjoyment of new readers. If in doubt pick one of the (mostly) stand-alone books: Pyramids, Small Gods, The Truth, Monstrous Regiment, Going Postal (well it was stand-alone, now has a sequel, Making Money). In my opinion this brief list includes some excellent highlights from the collection, if you don't like them there's a good chance you just don't like Pratchett's style ... and that's okay, no one's perfect.

[dworth]

Good Omens, that he wrote with Neil Gaiman is also very good. It's not a Discworld book and it's a shade darker than his other work, but its recommended.

I also enjoyed 'Only You Can Save Mankind', one of his kid's books, largely because, like Pratchett, I was also addicted to playing Wing Commander in the early 1990s.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by dworth

Good Omens, that he wrote with Neil Gaiman is also very good. It's not a Discworld book and it's a shade darker than his other work, but its recommended.

I also enjoyed 'Only You Can Save Mankind', one of his kid's books, largely because, like Pratchett, I was also addicted to playing Wing Commander in the early 1990s.

Not available as an ebook. That sucks!

[JSWolf]

I read The Colour of Magic first and then I went looking for the order to read the series in. Sometimes I do prefer chronological order depending on the series. But in this case, I did find some version of the chart and a number of people saying to read in published order. So I've been reading in published order and after doing so for long enough, I agree that that is the optimal order as missing some of the in-jokes and some of what came before is a big deal.

[Anke Wehner]

Published order isn't a bad idea, but it's not really neccessary with this series. If you find yourself bored or otherwise put off by Colour of Magic, I'd suggest jumping ahead to Equal Rites, Mort, or Guards! Guards!
If I had started with Colour of Magic I think I'd not have picked up a second book in the series, because it felt like I was missing most of the jokes - it felt like a parody of works most of which I didn't know.
My first Discworld book was Mort, and now I've got nearly the whole series on my shelf.