Hi,
This is my first posting. Am eagerly waiting when TP will write a novel about the wedding of Angua and Carrot

Heh, and the inevitable question raised by Dragon King-of-Arms in Feet of Clay, will they have babies or puppies?

yes that would be intresting. it may happen in the next book or someone may ask TP at the DW con in August. hmmmmmmmm babies or puppies or a mix of both?

"You know why big brothers where born first? It was so they could protect the little brothers and sisters who come after them." Ichigo, Bleach Episode 3.

A spoilerspace item follows - select it to read it.

I always thought that, in the end, Carrot would be too married to the city. Isn't it even mentioned somewhere that Angua accepts being second after "her"?

"Hoher Sinn liegt oft im kindischen Spiel." (Friedrich Schiller)

Spoilerspace - select to read

Here, for next time someone refers to Überwald:

Ü

Spelling it Ueberwald is correct when "..-ing" the U isn't possible or wanted.

Hsing
Providing the boards with Umlauts since 2002

"Hoher Sinn liegt oft im kindischen Spiel." (Friedrich Schiller)

They should get marred I think all the fans are waiting for them to get marred. Its very evident that Carrot loves Angua with all his heart, and that Sally does not affect him. When Angua is in the room it seems to me that Carrot only looks at her and no other women could brake up Carrot and Angua.

Edit: changed spelling mistakes and punctuation

"You know why big brothers where born first? It was so they could protect the little brothers and sisters who come after them." Ichigo, Bleach Episode 3.

I need to read more Watch books...
Peapod_i, it's really hard to read your posts, could you please proofread for some of the bigger spelling things and PUNCTUATE then?

I'm quite fond of Carrot as a character, even though I've only read Guards, Guards! and The Last Hero. Men at Arms next, I guess.

Enjoy.

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with your summary, Urquhartfay. On the one hand, I agree that Terry isn't exactly a romantic writer, but it's not something that he avoids, exactly. Sam and Sybil, Magrat and Verence... There's a trend there of marriages that aren't exactly standard, but they're still there. As for Carrot, I don't think he sees marriage as something he can ask Angua of at this time, simply because Angua is Angua.

It's not that he's slow in expressing his feelings for Angua, he's just apparently unable to properly express feelings. At all. He's one of the most closed and yet apparently open characters of Terry's, if only becuase he started out as a character that was flat and depthless to an extreme. Pratchett's way of giving Carrot depth that he can't really hold is giving him Hidden Depths.

Which still means that he's as flat as ever except in this or that scene where you get a hint that he isn't.

Anticipate charity by preventing poverty. - Rabbi Moshe ben-Maimon

I actually thought that there was a lot of romance, or say, as much as you can include when you write the kinds of stories that do have their serious bits, but don't see themselves too serious all in all. There is some kind of character tension - the romantic kind - in most of the books actually, if only because it's a law of narration...

I've never thought of him that way. Well, maybe in Carrot's case, within the stories own logic, you could claim that he grew up... He was still in his teens when he arrived in AM, if I remember correctly, wasn't he?

Then again, giving the stereotypical !Hero! depths is not that easy... The Superman Syndrome? I don't know. There's got to be a reason why the vilains often tend to be the more interesting characters...

"Hoher Sinn liegt oft im kindischen Spiel." (Friedrich Schiller)

You need to pick up the TPB of the "Fables" comic book series "The Mean Seasons" and "Wolves". In it Snow White has a litter of kids with the Big Bad Wolf (who can turn human, you perverts). A good read all around.

I hadn't noticed this one before - the point about interesting characters also applies in the theatre - as an actor I know that the bad guys are always more interesting to play than the good guys!

Maybe only a very good writer can give a "good" character "bad" sides or show him doing "bad" things, and save him from being one dimensioned, without spoiling the character for the bigger audience. At that time s/he may stop qualifying for hero-dom, though. A person that always does the right thing -because s/he can, where we would fail- seems not to experience conflict or failure. It also makes it almost impossible to make it really multi layered. (The sort of conflict when one doesn't know what to do in a certain situation, because for a normal mortal, there seem to be far more wrong/ less wrong situations... )

On the other side, the villains can do all the things you'd never do, and everything the story needs at that point, too. Many authors fall into a trap here... But redemption, for example, or the possibility of it, is far more interesting to watch evolveing than seeing a winner win again.

There's also something German author Marie Ebner-Eschenbach once wrote... It went roughly liket his "One kind word from a ruthless vilain touches their heart so much more than thousand from a genuinely kind man."

"Hoher Sinn liegt oft im kindischen Spiel." (Friedrich Schiller)