Which of these books do you prefer

[Enkidu of Abydos]

If you've read at least one of the series that is...
I chose these 3 because all 3 are famous humoristic novels, though the first is much less well known than the other two, and also the first two are both fantasy themed (and have other similarities).
I want to find out why the first one is so underappreciated, as far as I know, and why Discworld is so popular with them being similar...

My favorite (of these 3) is the first, by far.
The third I find completely stupid and dull, and can't understand why it's so popular. I don't dig it's Monty Python style humour at all, and I didn't find Monty Python very funny either, although most of my friends like it. Humour is definitely a matter of taste like everything else.
The second is fun in general, but it has TOO MANY books... The world and the characters are briliant, and the first book was fun for me, but most of the others were pretty dull (that's why I haven't read most of the probably 30+ books)... Again this is much more popular then the Myth series with my friends...
I've read the first 12 of the Myth series, the ones he wrote alone, while I still plan to read the ones he wrote together with Jody Lynn Nye. Why is it my favorite of these 3 and one of my all-time favorites ?
Because books #1, #6 and #9 (and add to these 3 the parts with the D&D parody and the dragon's viewpoint !) left me in stitches from laughing, and the others were highly entertaining... Though it does waterdown a bit towards the end, like everything else. I found the one with the vampire cows and the golden city pretty stupid, but that's the only one.

[IcecreamLtDan]

Never read the other two, but read the Hitchhikers series as a kid and then read them again after the movie was released. Also read the continuation book by the other author, which was so bad as to make me unable to remember it's name, and, obviously, I don't really recommend it unless you're just that curious to know what happened next.

[jgaiser]

I've read parts of all of them (all of Hitchhiker's Guide).

Pratchett's books hold up over the series and actually get better. Asprin's books just got tiresome and repetitive.

[JeremyR]

The Myth books were actually quite big at the time (when they were first published). But apparently due to some legal trouble, he had to stop writing them for several years.

Still, I think part of the problem I eventually had with them is that they just got tiresome. The same joke that is funny a few times isn't the 10th time you've heard it.

Pratchett constantly changed characters with his Discworld series. While I also think he got a bit preachy in later novels (and creepily fascistic with his love of Vetinari, the absolute dictator who is perfect at everything), at the same time he kept things fresh by not always using the same bunch.

And to my mind, there are only three Hitchhiker's Guide books. As he got older, he got more mean spirited than bitterly funny.

[JeremyR]

And if you want to check out a really underapreciated humorous series (that never came close to topping a bestseller list), look for John Morressy's Kedrigern novels.

So unappreciated that several of them weren't even published in English (his native language). This was in the process of being corrected when he died, but it never got completed...

[wyndslash]

Originally Posted by JeremyR

And if you want to check out a really underapreciated humorous series (that never came close to topping a bestseller list), look for John Morressy's Kedrigern novels.

So unappreciated that several of them weren't even published in English (his native language). This was in the process of being corrected when he died, but it never got completed...

looks interesting! wish it had a digital version though, as i'm sure it's almost impossible to find (around here anyway)

[gmw]

Originally Posted by JeremyR

[...]Pratchett constantly changed characters with his Discworld series. While I also think he got a bit preachy in later novels (and creepily fascistic with his love of Vetinari, the absolute dictator who is perfect at everything), at the same time he kept things fresh by not always using the same bunch.[...]

I find it strange that you portray it as a "love of Vetinari". I come away from the series with a very different image, Vetinari is the cynic against which the greater ideals of Vimes (for example) are compared. The all-knowing/all-powerful nature of the character, I think, just offers a useful contrast (like the Discworld itself: a mirror).

But yes, I think one of the things that has kept the Discworld going is the variety offered by the different story-lines and characters.

I love Hitch Hiker's too, but the nonsense aspect does get a bit much unless you're in the right mood ... I guess that's one of the reasons why the Rincewind/wizard stories of the Discworld are my least favourites of those.

I seem to remember reading one or two of the first Myth books when they first came out, but they didn't stick with me enough to bother chasing them up again later. Maybe I should try them again, just to see if they appeal any more now.

[Giggleton]

I skipped school in the fourth grade so I could stay home and read the Hitchhiker's series. I also liked Dirk Gently's as well.

Since you said those other books are funny I'll read them.

[Enkidu of Abydos]

Interesting, most of you seem to be saying that Myth is repetitive while Discworld is not, while I get the completely opposite impression.
I mean Discworld may have a lot of characters but any series with 38 (!) books in the same universe / setting and with the same style has to get boring sooner or later ! Nothing can last indefinitely without being watered-down, and 38 is way above the maximum limit... Besides, I've only like Color of Magic and found all the others I've read to be boring repeats of the same jokes or attempts at humour I just didn't find funny...
The Myth series on the other hand maybe has less characters (I can't testify to that since I haven't read all of Discworld, but Myth has at least a dozen major characters, which is A LOT) but they're varied and the jokes change across the series (talking about the first 12 here) and the object of the story changes, the first one for example is mostly about a bumbling apprentice and his mentor, while in the later once the former apprentice is the leader of a famous mercenary group, and in one book he doesn't even appear directly. I also love how the author changes the viewpoint from one character to the other, my favorite ones are the mob gorilla Guido and the dragon Gleep. The type of humour also changes across the series...
Having said that, what little I've read of the second Myth series didn't exactly blow me away... Maybe anything's bound to wither away (Wheel of Time is a horrible example of that). But maybe it will improve...

P.S.
Even without considering repetitiveness between sequels, we probably agree that the first books of the Myth / Discworld series are the best, and of those two the Myth book was much better for me.
However I'd much rather play a Discworld based game than a Myth-universe based one...

P.P.S.
Giggly, that avatar of yours is just distractingly cute, every time it catches my eye I forget what I was thinking...

P.P.P.S.
Again with the overabundance of cat and dog avatars (3 already in this thread) ! This forum is like a zoo !

P.P.P.P.S. (isn't this a lot of P-ing ? )
Myth is holding up fine in the poll for now, better than I expected...

[Enkidu of Abydos]

Originally Posted by gmw

I find it strange that you portray it as a "love of Vetinari". I come away from the series with a very different image, Vetinari is the cynic against which the greater ideals of Vimes (for example) are compared. The all-knowing/all-powerful nature of the character, I think, just offers a useful contrast (like the Discworld itself: a mirror).

I thought that "Starship Troopers" was a criticism of the political system it presents, not because I thought the contents sounded critical, but because I thought the author couldn't be such an idiotic fascist to be promoting such an unjust fascist political system. Turns out I was wrong, according to Wikipedia he really meant it.
My point is (I have no idea who Vetinari is) you can never be sure whether an author is criticizeing something or promoteing it.

P.S.
I saw the Hogfather and Color of Magic movies and found both mildly entertaining (not boring but not hilariously funny either), just like Discworld.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

Interesting, most of you seem to be saying that Myth is repetitive while Discworld is not, while I get the
completely opposite impression. [...]

I am not trying to be contrary, but my own situation is this: The Myth stuff I only read (some of) a long time ago, it didn't score well enough with me to make me chase it up - I think it's time I gave it a second chance (I'm much older now and my tastes have changed). Not only don't I see the Discworld as repetitive (because I don't see it really as a single series, even though I usually reread it in publication order), but I actually think Pratchett has gotten better over time. The early Discworld stuff I see very much as parody, the later books have things to say - they're not subtle, you don't have to read hard, but there is a depth to his later stuff that didn't exist in his earliest books. I've read the books often enough now that I don't find many new jokes, I simply enjoy the ride, it's that longevity that keeps several of these on the list of my all-time favourite books.

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

[...]My point is (I have no idea who Vetinari is) you can never be sure whether an author is criticizeing something or promoteing it.

I think Pratchett is pretty clear. Vetinari is only ever a background character, someone the main characters run up against. I think Pratchett's standards show up pretty well in a range of main characters - even Rincewind. Of course we can't be certain of that, but after 38 books (plus pretty much everything else of his) I am pretty confident.

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

P.S.
I saw the Hogfather and Color of Magic movies and found both mildly entertaining (not boring but not hilariously funny either), just like Discworld.

I think hilarity grows old. What I like about Discworld is the smile on my face, I may not laugh out loud, but I'm definitely enjoying myself. I think Hogfather is among his better books, so it may just be a matter of not liking Pratchett's style, and that's okay - as I said on another thread, no one's perfect.

I like Tom Holt's books, but only his first few have really stood the test of time with me. The others are funny, the first time, or if you wait long enough between reads, but the later ones have not the full/rich experience I find with Pratchett's better books.

ETA: The Hogfather movie (not seen The Colour of Magic) was "okay", and followed the book as well as a movie ever can. But you wont work out Pratchett's writing style from watching a movie.

[tech_au]

I read quite a number of the Myth books but got sick of the Discworld books after the second one. Guess they aren't my cup of tea.
Not read any of the HHGTTG books but really enjoyed the BBC miniseries not the crap recent movie remake.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

[HHGTTG] I find completely stupid and dull, and can't understand why it's so popular.

It's brilliant social satire at times, although you can read it for pure fun, too. Something in it for all levels of readers.

I don't dig it's Monty Python style humour at all, and I didn't find Monty Python very funny either, although most of my friends like it.

I do like Monty Python, too, but they are knowingly and deliberately silly. Adams is usually not; bizarre at times, I grant you that, but not outright silly. I don't really think the two have very much in common.

[Discworld] is fun in general, but it has TOO MANY books...

Heck, no. There are so many sub-genres (Death, the Wizards, the Witches, the Watch, more recently Moist van Lipwig, ...) that there should be something for everybody.

... the first book was fun for me, but most of the others were pretty dull ...

If anything, Pratchett gets better over time. I enjoyed his later books much more than, say, Colours of Magic or The Light Fantastic. (But then, I don't care all that much for Rincewind.)

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

... we probably agree that the first books of the Myth / Discworld series are the best ...

Nope. I mean, don't know about Myth, but certainly not true for Discworld IMO.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Enkidu of Abydos

My point is (I have no idea who Vetinari is) you can never be sure whether an author is criticizeing something or promoteing it.

Vetinari is the, uh, patrician aka benevolent dictator / absolute ruler of Ankh-Morpork. He's a trained assassin (there's a guild of them, don't ask) and tyrant, in the classical sense. His very pragmatic approach makes sure that the city actually works, even prospers; people don't like him (respect and, above all, fear would be more like it) but don't even want to consider alternatives.

[Anthem]

Have only read Discworld and Hitchhiker's. Like Discworld, but can't understand the popularity of Hitchhiker's. (Who would have known?)