Will Discworld Endure Like Lord Of The Rings Other Famous Books and Series ?

It also explain why James Branch Cabell who books were once widely read, is now forgotten by almost everybody. He was the Terry Pratchett of his era and every bit his equal . He was a master ironic humor and satire . He was witty and funny as hell. Cabell wrote 50 fantasy novels, the most famous is Jurgen A Comedy of Justice


He's a writer I wish more readers in there her and now, would rediscover. :)

It's hard to think of a writer of humorous literature (other than perhaps Dickens) from more than 50 years ago who is remembered, never mind actually read.

I would hope that Douglas Adams' humorous science fiction will survive the test of time.
 
I’m glad you used the words “relating to” there, rather than “based on” or “adapted from”.
Rhianna Pratchett, who now owns the rights to the whole shebang, has publicly stated that the production company (BBC America) and everyone associated with The Watch will never have anything to do with her father’s work ever again .


You have to wonder what they were thinking of when this tv show was being made. You shouldn't be able to take a franchise and alter it so substantially. The same happened with The Hobbit trilogy of movies.
 
Lord of the Rings is timeless. As has been mentioned, humour often isn't, and many of TP's Discworld novels depend on contemporary references, which may still be understandable in 20 years. But perhaps not 50-100 years, when Tolkien's work will be just as well known. It could be argued that the LOTR 'franchise' (not a word that I enjoy) will only increase, whilst the last tv show relating to the Discworld series (The Watch) could potentially be the last we see for some time.
Humour can be a problem but Wodehouse is just as funny today as when it was first published. Hopefully, Discworld will enjoy this as well given Wodehouse' influence on Sir Pterry.
 
You speak about it having the durability of the Lord of the Rings, as if that book were as ancient as Chaucer or Homer.
It is only about 70 years old. So more than 10 years younger than Azimov's Foundation and nearly 500 years after Morte d'Arthur for instance.
So although I've no doubt that the LOTR will endure for centuries to come, a comparison of it's longevity with The colour of Magic (for instance), now 40 years old is a little premature.
I also note that if you type The Hobbit into Google (at least the French one) you have to go through 2 pages of film references before discovering that it was once a book.
For LOTR it's even worse. 6 pages of film references (including "the making of", several "where to stream" etc) before any reference to the book, and then only a link to getting it on Amazon. (The link to the Amazon films is the 1st entry.)

But really, for it's longevity it's a question of whether the humour of Pratchett stands up to the test of time.
The things we laugh at change much more quickly that the fables and epic adventures that we teach ourselves with, and the two books are very much on the two sides of that dividing line.
I imagine that a lot of Pratchett will just not be found as funny in 100 years time. Also note that the humour is very much Anglo-Saxon, and few French people, for instance, have heard of him, in the same way that they haven't heard of Douglas Adams, and only a few really appreciate Monty Python.


Edit...PS. Sorry. I hadn't read through the entire thread. So some of my comments are clearly repeating what others have already said.
 
Last edited:
It also explain why James Branch Cabell who books were once widely read, is now forgotten by almost everybody. He was the Terry Pratchett of his era and every bit his equal . He was a master ironic humor and satire . He was witty and funny as hell. Cabell wrote 50 fantasy novels, the most famous is Jurgen A Comedy of Justice


He's a writer I wish more readers in there her and now, would rediscover. :)
With respect, comparisons of Cabell and Pratchett such as this are wide of the mark.
 
It's hard to think of a writer of humorous literature (other than perhaps Dickens) from more than 50 years ago who is remembered, never mind actually read.

I would hope that Douglas Adams' humorous science fiction will survive the test of time.
Off the top of my head:

Wodehouse
Leacock
Belloc
Ogden Nash
Jerome K Jerome
George & Weedon Grossmith
Mark Twain
Dr Suess
Kingsley Amis
Evelyn Waugh
Willians & Searle
Jane Austen
William Shakespeare
 
Off the top of my head:

Wodehouse
Leacock
Belloc
Ogden Nash
Jerome K Jerome
George & Weedon Grossmith
Mark Twain
Dr Suess
Kingsley Amis
Evelyn Waugh
Willians & Searle
Jane Austen
William Shakespeare

I was thinking Wodehouse, too. Waugh, Austin, and Twain are good adds. James Thurber hasn't been forgotten, though E.B White maybe doesn't carry the cache he once did. And maybe you could add Chesterton, though I've no idea how much he's still read, and George Bernard Shaw hasn't exactly disappeared if only because he's still taught in colleges. Lastly, because no one thinks of her as a humor or comedy writer, it's easy to overlook Agatha Christie. Much of her output relied on humor for its charm, especially early on with characters like Poirot and Tommy and Tuppence (sp?). And probably the same could be said for some of Dorothy Sayers works.
 
There's a lot of focus on the idea that comedy ages quicker than other types of fiction and there's a certain truth to that but I think people are concentrating on it too much.

All fiction ages quickly to the point comedy isn't at that much of a pronounced difficulty compared to everything else.

And the works that last are those that speak directly to some part of the human experience and sense of wonder in an unshakeable way. Which is a huge part of what so many Pratchett fans love about him.

Besides, if comedy has a tendency to age poorly, then we already know Discworld is a special outlier. We're already at a point where it's the most enduring fantasy series to have started in the 80s, which again suggests its a special outlier. The Amazing Maurice will be the fifth Discworld screen adaptation (seventh including animations) which, again, special outlier.

At this point I don't think we should be surprised if Discworld shows incredibly longevity.
 
Fair enough. I was thinking more of general populations awareness and likelihood of reading (outside of academic studies). I wasn't really considering playwrights, but obviously Austen and Seuss are still widely known and read. I'm not sure how many of the others you mention would be though?
 
There's a lot of focus on the idea that comedy ages quicker than other types of fiction and there's a certain truth to that but I think people are concentrating on it too much.

All fiction ages quickly to the point comedy isn't at that much of a pronounced difficulty compared to everything else.

And the works that last are those that speak directly to some part of the human experience and sense of wonder in an unshakeable way. Which is a huge part of what so many Pratchett fans love about him.

Besides, if comedy has a tendency to age poorly, then we already know Discworld is a special outlier. We're already at a point where it's the most enduring fantasy series to have started in the 80s, which again suggests its a special outlier. The Amazing Maurice will be the fifth Discworld screen adaptation (seventh including animations) which, again, special outlier.

At this point I don't think we should be surprised if Discworld shows incredibly longevity.


I hope you are right; it certainly deserves to. I don't think that it's necessarily comedy that ages, but when contemporary references are made (as they are in many of Terry's DW novels, especially the earlier ones) readers may not understand them 100 years from now. This is why the likes of Dickens can be a little difficult to understand at times, because his stories often reference things that readers of the time would be familiar with, but which we aren't now.
 
I hope you are right; it certainly deserves to. I don't think that it's necessarily comedy that ages, but when contemporary references are made (as they are in many of Terry's DW novels, especially the earlier ones) readers may not understand them 100 years from now. This is why the likes of Dickens can be a little difficult to understand at times, because his stories often reference things that readers of the time would be familiar with, but which we aren't now.

Very few of the references in The Colour of Magic were all that contemporary any more even when I was picking them up though. I didn't know who Bravd and the Weasel were riffing off, or about likely inspirations for Kring the magic sword, or Cohen the Barbarian. I got the Pern reference but that was it. It still worked. And if you go through the whole Discworld, I'd say that most of the obvious "ahh" references are to old cultural touchstones. Shakespeare, fairy tales, Dickens, and so on.
 

Back
Top