|
You’re studied at post-graduate level!
Oh yes! Once I was perceived as writing for children as well, a big sigh
of relief, "now we can invite him to all the best dos". All
fiction is fantasy, and of fiction, how can I put it? The perception is,
there is Literature, and there are these things budding off around the
side, called "westerns" and "police procedural crime",
whereas in fact, there is Fantasy, and off this main stem has budded off...
and one of these things is known as the "Literate Novel", which
was invented, what, about 150 years ago? And it’s got a subset known
as "Potential Booker Winners". I am sorry to say that I represent
the mainstream. It’s not the Literate Novel, and I use that term
with a certain amount of disparagement. People will always need heroes,
no matter how politically correct we become, the charismatic male, with
his big sword is always going to... I’ve just in fact finished a
Discworld book where Cohen the Barbarian, who is very very old, and politically
totally incorrect, everyone likes him. They all follow him, they do as
he says, because he just blows like fresh air everywhere he goes.
Is it just to keep you interested...?
It’s quite easy to say, "ok, here are all the clichés
of classic fantasy, let’s turn them over", but if you do that
and all you’ve done is turn them over, then you haven’t really
done anything. If you just turn them over, all you’ve dome is just
destroy things. But when turning them over raises all kinds of questions;
what kind of witch is it that actually dislike magic? So as you do your
characters they automatically become important. If all you do is kick
over the table and say "look at me, aren’t I clever?"
you’re just being some spoilt kid. But certainly there are some
characters that I’m very pleased with, and the three witches quite
definitely are becoming quite central to the series. I’ve yet to
meet an intelligent woman who wouldn’t long to be Granny Weatherwax,
would settle for Nanny Ogg and secretly suspects that she’s really
Magrat. It’s a big problem, because Magrat is now married, which,
without drawing too much attention to the symbolism of the three of them,
one may assume that her prime requirement for membership is no longer
possessed, so I’m not quite sure what the other two are going to
do about it. What’s fun about Granny Weatherwax is, she’s
a bully, she’s autocratic, she’s, on paper she’s a bad
witch, she just happens to be on the right side, in fact, I think, in
Lords and Ladies, she says something to Nanny Ogg along the lines of "Just
because I’m right doesn’t have to mean I’m nice".
You get your characters right, and everything else happens.
The four boys in the Johnny books, too, in terms of character; you tread
a really fine line with them in terms of an ironical adult look at their
pretensions and their foibles and their sillinesses, and at the same time
keeping them real and still attractive to children.
The point is, I can’t speak for Australia, but kids in England now
suffer from this terrible ersatz Americanism, so they walk around trying
to look like a kid from South Central (L.A.). What the hell, they live
in Taunton, Somerset, you know, and you can’t hang out at the shopping
mall, because there’s only that silly shop, and the weather isn’t
like Southern California. It’s a bit like we were in the 60’s.
The 60’s only happened to about 250 people in London, everyone else
pretended they were there as well. And they don’t know what the
slang now is, and there’s this horrible feeling that everyone else
knows and you don’t, and that you’re not doing it right. There’s
a terrible uncertainty, you definitely want to fit in, but you don’t
actually know where the "in" is you’re supposed to fit.
And the goal posts shift all the time.
I think that’s common to every age, all we have to do is remember
what it’s like.
Your brand of humour is frequently satirical; extended puns and...
I pun far less often than people think.
OK! The Book of Nome, the elevated biblical language, a lot of your humour
is based on political theory, philosophy, all these kinds of things, and
you do that in your kids books too, you don’t assume that kids don’t
know about these things. We often assume that kids’ sense of humour
is often pretty unsubtle and pretty earthy, but you’ve assumed a
degree of sophistication in kids.
I’m not entirely certain you’re right. I think you are, how
can I put it? You may feel that something I’ve got is based on a
political theory, or is parodying... Now, kids might not even see that,
they’ll just go for the underlying truth.
This isn’t a criticism, in fact...
No, no, no... I’m saying that, curiously enough, a lady trying to
translate Truckers into Russian said there were two problems
she had to try and overcome; a small one and a big one. The small one
was that Russian children would simply not be familiar with the concept
of biblical language, so they wouldn’t recognise (the parody). The
second was, it’s set in a store full of merchandise, and they would
have no concept of that idea at all. It may be that kids understand things
that they don’t vocalise very well.
Yes, I think that’s right.
I get the same thing from my Japanese translator. They say "this
theory you’ve got from T.H. Robinovitch in his book...." and
I think, I’ve never heard of this fellow, if I did, I thought he
was a harmonica player! All I’ve done, to be honest, I’ve
done what the story wanted, as Granny Weatherwax would say. The fact that
it may fit in with someone’s theory of archetypes is a lucky shot,
that’s something to give the Ph.D’s something to write about!
Well, yes, but say, the philosopher’s scene in Small Gods;
you don’t have to know about philosophy to get the humour of that...
But remember, Small Gods wasn’t written for kids.
No, I know, but I think that it’s great that you don’t underestimate
kids and say, well, they’re not going to get this, so I won’t
put it in, that in fact you allow whatever needs to be there to be there,
and if they get the reference, great, and if they don’t they’ll
get something else from it, and take it with them anyway.
Well, something like the philosopher’s scene in Small Gods,
I based it on the old principal, "That’s all the big philosopher’s
you can remember". Well, OK, what can I remember? Some guy had a
bath, and said "Eureka!", and they used to argue a lot, and
if you’re slightly more advanced, you know, for example, in Pyramids
I have the philosophers again, and one of them’s called Endos the
Listener, and his job is just to sit there and say "yes, you are
entirely correct", and "indeed, that is absolutely right".
Because they’re all busy talking, and he actually charges money
for listening, because no one wants to listen, and he charges money to
do it. And also, if people are slightly more advanced, up to student level,
they’d be familiar with the symposium, which is supposed to take
place over a dinner party, and so in Pyramids, I did what it
would really be like if you tried to have philosophers at a dinner party.
What I often do, and again, this is post facto reasoning, the humour is
based on everything you vaguely remember — we’re very thinly
educated these days — everything you can vaguely remember about
Greek philosophers, and I use that as a starting point. Even now, although
less so than when I was a kid, kids pick up a lot of information on an
osmotic basis; they certainly don’t do it from school. I have unfortunate
views about education.
I wanted to ask you some specific questions that will be of interest
to the children who are readers of School Magazine, and they’re
pretty like the questions kids would ask you when you go into schools.
It seems to me from reading your books that you must get a lot of pleasure
out of writing. Are you a disciplined writer? Do you have a regular routine?
I would like to be. It doesn’t actually work like that, and this
sounds awfully pseudo, but writing is my ground state of being. It’s
what, on the whole, I think I should be doing, so everything else that
I’m doing is time filched from writing. Increasingly, I think this
is a slightly unhealthy way of living, and maybe I ought to get a life
as well! I like writing, and I resent it if I can’t do it. I’m
not disciplined, but if left to myself, I’d do a lot of writing
every day.
What are your inspirations, who are your inspirations, do you read other
children’s writers? Other writer’s generally who inspire you?
Does reading other writers’ work interfere with your own writing?
Everyone, not just kids, think ideas lie around like little nuggets, and
you just wander around... and what they want you to do is tell them the
way to the Holy Grail. It’s the same with inspiration. If you tell
us where you get your inspiration from, we’ll go and stand there.
I make up my ideas in my head, and that’s where the inspiration
comes from as well. Yes, sometimes I can see, in the real world, unusual
juxtapositions, or there are little triggers which happen to set something
off in my mind, but usually I get my ideas by thinking logically about
things that you’re not supposed to think logically about.
Do you start with story or character?
It might be a story, it might be a character. Weird Sisters began
with a joke, which was the joke at the beginning, and I knew very little
about the rest of it. The witches; well, Granny Weatherwax already existed,
and the other witches just sprang fully formed. I’m a great believer
in the silent writer inside. Back in the 60s I experimented with dope,
because people did in the 60s, and I remember saying, "well, this
is supposed to make me very creative", so I had a little smoke, and
I thought "Well, OK, I’ll sit by my typewriter. If Huxley is
allowed to do it with mescalin, I thought, at least I should be allowed
to do it with... So, I thought, I’ll type what is going on. I remember
looking at the key and thinking, "That "a" key. What a
superb "a" key that is. That’s a great "a" key.
Wow, look at it! And there’s all these other keys! And there’s
numbers as well! Anything I want to write, it’s all here, all contained
in this keyboard is anything I want to write." And I sort of drooled
like an over-grown setter. You wouldn’t know what I’m talking
about, of course. And because nobody can stop me from saying in public
what I think, I say to kids, "This is why you shouldn’t take
drugs, not because they’re bad for you, because some of them aren’t
that bad for you, but they’ll turn you into a hippy!" But what
sometimes is necessary is to find a way of allowing — I always say
the sub-conscious writer — but allowing the ideas that are floating
around looking for a place to settle, find a way of switching off sufficiently
to allow them to do so. That’s why, and I’m not the only person
to say it, you often get ideas when you’re driving a car, because
various parts of your mind are actually taken up with the job in hand,
which actually means that something comes through from the back. Listening
to music can do the same sort of thing.
In fact, it boils down to what I always tell kids, if you want to be
a writer, try and do something else. A., because you should try and look
for an alternative means of making a living, and B., because no one ever
went straight from school into "being a writer", I mean, that’s
ridiculous. You should get a life, fill yourself up, and you start to
overflow. But also sometimes you have to fool yourself to allow the ideas
to come through. That’s why I mow the lawn. I’ve got a big
lawn, it’s one of the shortest lawns in Yorkshire. I’ve got
a ride-on mower, and I sit on there with my hat singing American revivalist
hymns at the top of my voice, because no one can hear me. I often get
the ideas, because everything’s switched off, and it’s noisy.
That’s why kids do their homework in front of the television. Kids
do their homework in front of the television because it actually provides
white noise, to allow things to happen. I often write with music on.
Back to the Johnny books — and I have to say that I read Johnny
and the Dead just yesterday, and I think it’s one of the finest
kids’ books I’ve read in a long time. I just think it’s
wonderful...
It’s up for a Carnegie,
but it won’t get it.
Because it’s funny?
Yes, it’s partly that, but also because I’m, how can I put
it. This is the second one I’ve had for that award...
What else was up? Truckers?
Truckers. And Truckers was up for the Smarties award.
Johnny and the Dead’s won a couple of awards. No, Johnny
and the Dead’s won one award, the Writer’s Guild award.
That was very nice, because it’s actually fellow writers. Because
I have a small suspicion that in the UK I am thought of to be personally
politically incorrect, even if I sit there being absolutely quiet, and
saying the right things, people say, "Yes, but he’s thinking
politically incorrect thoughts. He’s not really a proper children’s
writer, you can see, inside. He might be sitting there, but any minute
if we’re not careful he’s going to do something."
The whole argument I think is really unfortunate, because of course it’s
good to be nice to people regardless of whether they’re one thing
or another, but when it starts restricting people’s creativity...
Well, I don’t mean it like that. I use the term "dirndl mafia",
with whom I have sort of love-hate thing. I think it’s really great
that around the world there are people, probably like yourself, there’s
this loose association of librarians, and teachers and the adults involved
in the book business who are keeping the guttering flame alive, usually
in the face of total media disinterest. When you think books for kids
in the UK get in the mainstream newspapers get minimal reviews, and there’s
usually a little teddy bear at the top of the page to show that it’s
not really that important. Given the vast forces ranged against them,
I’m just incredibly gratified that there’s anyone out there
doing that kind of job. The fact that they sometimes annoy me is almost
a minor consideration.
It’s a very vexed issue at the moment, isn’t it. Anyway, back
to Johnny. The Johnny books are more in the realist mode, and again, this
is broad generalisation...
I think they are exactly in the realist mode if you are about 12 years
old.
They also deal — now, I think that all your books have serious ideas
lurking around — but I think you’ve brought them more to the
front in the Johnny books. Do you agree? What prompted the change of approach
anyway to a more realist mode, was it just that’s what the story
needed?
That was what the story needed. I’m quite viciously straightforward
about that. I couldn’t have written — Johnny and the Dead
had to be set in a world which appeared to be the real world to have the
effect it could. on Discworld, in Ankh-Morpork, the dead have a perfectly
everyday role to play in the normal civilisation. Your milk may well be
delivered by a zombie. As I say, in Ankh-Morpork, the fact that I have
the classical races of horror and fantasy actually playing roles as citizens
has its own pleasant connotations. The fact that your local butcher might
be a vampire has no more or less comment than him being a Muslim. So there
had to be a framework of conventional reality for both those books to
work. In Only You..., for example, I actually was up late working
when the Gulf War started, and I was also aware of how much an effect
it had on kids, that despite apparently being inured by years of video
games and Schwarzenegger movies, this is a real war, and they seem to
understand it was a real war, more than adults did. They were actually
afraid it was going to happen here, maybe because they were a bit locationally
challenged, as far as the Gulf was concerned. And the thing that triggered
Only You... was that I was having all the normal wishy-washy
things that it’s not a nice idea to say "wow, look we can drop
this bomb straight down this chimney" because 38 people you might
like if you’d met in person have been laminated against the walls
inside, but we don’t want to show you that, we’re going to
show you the video. And then there was an interview, I think it was by
CNN, with two pilots who’d just come back from over-flying the desert,
and they were Americans. If the Brits had been interviewed it would have
been "well, yes it was very regrettable, but yes, it was a successful
flight." Because we’ve learned the stiff upper lip. But these
Americans pilots come out like "Woh, it’s like a turkey shoot
out there, we really kicked some butt, it’s like shootin’
cockroaches." Everyone was raising their hands in horror, and I watched
this and a lot of people were saying how disgusting it was, to show this,
and I thought, "They’re soldiers." And despite the fact
that there was more or less air supremacy, I mean there were ak-ak guns,
and they’d been doing what civilisation had been very specifically
training them to do for years, and at any moment when they were out there
there could have been a bang and their manhood could have gone past their
face on a little column of white-hot metal, and they were at least sub-consciously
aware of that. And when they came back, they were drunk, they were drunk
with relief and testosterone, as soldiers always are after a battle. The
only difference is that, after the Trojan wars or whatever, we never saw
it television. And I thought it’s silly, I mean, what do you think
soldiers are like? They’re humans, they come back and they’re
safe, and that’s why in the book there’s a scene where all
the kids in the class are discussing it, they’re all taking a view,
and Johnny says, "Look, it’s more complicated than that. When
they go up there they’re soldiers who might be dying. It’s
just a whole lot more complicated than you think." That’s what
war is, it isn’t so nicely clean-cut. And all these things sort
of came together, and I thought I can do this in a children’s book,
because children seem to be involved in all that. Children all seem to
live between video games and video war very readily.
Back to Pratchett Interview Page 1 |