4chan archive /lit/ (index)
2012-09-23 08:45 3002382 Anonymous (hitchhikers-guide-to-the-galaxy.jpg 500x500 59kB)
Alright /lit/, please don't kill me. After having read Song of Ice and Fire, I'm looking for a more lighthearted/comedy book. Thing is, I rather have a sci-fi or fantasy setting than modern times. The wiki was no big help since it's only sorted in one genre. Anyway, I'm pretty much open for anything as long as it has what I said above (sci-fi/fantasy + comedy) and there aren't people dieing every 20 pages. Picture related, first thing that popped to into my mind.

1 min later 3002384 Anonymous
So have you not read Hitchhiker's? It sounds like what you want.

2 min later 3002385 Anonymous
Sci-fi + comedy, hmmm. Try reading Red Dwarf by David Lister.

3 min later 3002390 Anonymous
>>3002382 Hitchhiker's is the one for you, or Red Dwarf (though Red Dwarf does get very dark!). You can't beat Douglas Adams.

7 min later 3002396 Anonymous
>>3002384 >>3002390 Obviously already read it, that's why I used it. >>3002385 >>3002390 Will look into it. Anything else maybe? Like I said, I can go for a fantasy setting too.

9 min later 3002400 Anonymous (RedDwarf20129121358705.jpg 620x372 97kB)
>>3002385 >>3002390 >Red Dwarf New series starts in two weeks. *Cringe*

10 min later 3002407 Anonymous
>>3002396 As for fantasy, your best bet is Terry Prachett's Discworld. You can start at the very start if you like, but the novels are not in order (only some follow the lives of some characters chronologically). It is light-hearted, extremely witting and biting satire of fantasy and real life, it's the second most popular fantasy series ever for a reason.

11 min later 3002408 βPictorishawk
I've heard a lot of good things about Discworld.

12 min later 3002410 Anonymous
>>3002407 >>3002408 Fuck how could that have slipped my mind. Wanted to look into it before I made this thread but totally forgot it. Thanks!

14 min later 3002420 Anonymous
>>3002407 > it's the second most popular fantasy series ever for a reason. Which is the most popular? Too lazy and drunk for da google.

16 min later 3002426 Anonymous
>>3002420 Lord of the Rings, I would imagine

17 min later 3002428 Anonymous
>>3002426 Three books does not a series make.

19 min later 3002433 Anonymous
>>3002407 Speaking about it, where would one actually start? Or is there any sort of recommendation?

19 min later 3002435 Anonymous
>>3002428 LotR is at the best least five books, though you could include many others beyond that. It is a series.

20 min later 3002440 Anonymous
Colour of Magic. Ignore any other suggestions or charts claiming otherwise.

21 min later 3002442 Anonymous
>>3002433 Best to start at the beginning of one of the character's arcs, for instance Rincewind's arc, the Witchs', Death's, etc. He's been writing them for decades, and there are classics throughout. The very first book (the colour of magic) is by no means the best, but it is a fine introduction. Maybe someone else could help me out here?

22 min later 3002446 βPictorishawk
>>3002435 It's a universe, but I wouldn't consider it a series, because it's not all part of the same story. Then again, I haven't read anything of his but LoTR. And my guess for the most popular fantasy series of all time is Harry Potter.

22 min later 3002449 Anonymous
>>3002435 > It is a series. No, it is a novel in five books. ('Books' is the standard way to structure a long novel, a grouping more high-level than 'chapters'. Read any serious real novel to see what I mean.) Of course Tolkien never wrote 'series'.

25 min later 3002462 Anonymous
>>3002440 >>3002442 Will do, thanks. Doesn't mean I'm not still up for suggestions on other books!

26 min later 3002464 Anonymous (Terry+Pratchett+01.jpg 312x500 38kB)
>>3002440 >Colour of Magic Buy the original English version, the one with a 'u' in colour. The American translation has the edges neatly sanded off the jokes, and some of the play on words don't make sense. Same goes for anything written in English first. The American translation of Harry Potter was horrible.

27 min later 3002467 Anonymous
>>3002449 The Lord of the Rings is a trilogy of three books published seperately, but you can also easily group together "The Hobbit" and "The Silmarillion", although the second was only published posthumously. However, if you start with the Silmarillion, where do you stop? "Series" is not a rigid concept. You can just as easily say the Gormenghast series of books, or the "Alice" series

28 min later 3002472 Anonymous (discworld.jpg 1000x1795 593kB)
>>3002433 >>3002440 Unless you're really into fantasy parodies, I'd start with something else. The Colour of Magic is a bit clunky compared to later books. I'd start with the witches books, or the Night Watch.

29 min later 3002475 Anonymous
>>3002472 unintentional sage.

29 min later 3002476 Anonymous
>>3002464 Let's get the most important question out of the way first. Do I need to know of British jokes and play on words? Because, well, English is my third language and while I don't have problems reading stuff and writing, play on words and puns could easily get lost.

31 min later 3002483 Anonymous
>>3002467 >The Lord of the Rings is a trilogy of three books published seperately It was only published separately because of post-war paper shortage, not for any artistic reason. 'Series' is a pretty clear concept: it's when an author milks a popular work for money, running it into the ground by writing books that reuse a successful formula of setting and plot. (See: Wheel of Time, Game of Thrones, Harry Potter, ad nauseam.)

1 hours later 3002620 Anonymous
>>3002483 Gormenghast, The Once and Future King...?

1 hours later 3002651 Anonymous
>>3002476 If you can read and enjoy Douglas Adams, Discworld should be fine. If you don't get something, there are annotations for most of the novels: http://www.lspace.org/books/apf/

1 hours later 3002662 Anonymous (going_postal_1646528c.jpg 460x288 29kB)
The novel this movie is based on

1 hours later 3002690 Anonymous
>>3002651 Ah, looks good. Thanks >>3002662 Will do.

2 hours later 3002826 Anonymous
>>3002464 >american translation what the? is this really a thing? are you trolling? is this real life?

2 hours later 3002855 Anonymous
>>3002826 >http://www.radosh.net/writing/potter.html "One reason that American kids relates so well to Harry, the adolescent wizard, may be that he speaks their language — literally. The editions of the Harry Potter books sold here have been custom-edited for their Yankee audience[...] Subtleties are inevitably lost. Everyone in the U.K. knows what Sellotape is, but for the sake of American readers the Stateside editions say Scotch tape, even though this means sacrificing a pun. (When a wand used for casting magic spells is broken, it is repaired with Spellotape.)"

2 hours later 3002866 Anonymous
>>3002662 Are...are those good? I've seen the series based on Hogfather and it seems a bit...cheesy.

2 hours later 3002873 Anonymous (1347996946103.gif 302x252 964kB)
>>3002855 Oh, America...

2 hours later 3002877 Anonymous
>>3002866 What do you mean by "those"? I told him to read Going Postal, which is one book. It's the only Discworld novel I've read (three-quarters of the way through, mind you), and it fits OP's request pretty well.

2 hours later 3002882 Anonymous
>>3002855 Why would they even do this? I mean, spellotape makes sense, even to a non native speaker. Did the company get money for advertising?

2 hours later 3002885 Anonymous (Picture 17.png 681x639 98kB)
>>3002882 It wasn't just that, there were hundreds of changes, sometimes whole sentences.

2 hours later 3002890 Anonymous
>>3002885 >cinema OH COME ON AMERICA! I can understand weird references to even weirder unknown british things like a certain stone in a rural area where no one ever heard of america. But changing cinema to movie?! Seriously?

2 hours later 3002897 Anonymous
>>3002885 God forbid good American children ever expand their vocabulary.

2 hours later 3002898 Anonymous
>>3002890 You're right, we should have kept calling them talkies

2 hours later 3002909 Anonymous
>>3002897 I can almost understand changing Harry Potter, for purely gaining more sales. But changing Discworld novels is grotesque.

3 hours later 3002947 Anonymous
>>3002877 Oh, sorry, was talking about that there tv thingy picture you had in your post. I fucking LOVE Going Postal.

3 hours later 3002967 Anonymous
>>3002947 I don't know. I haven't seen it. I saw a couple of minutes of the film adaptation of Colour of Magic, though, and it was okay. Judging from this article, the adaptation of GP seems to be better http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/7779540/Meeting-the-stars-and-writer-of-Going-Postal.h tml

3 hours later 3003020 Anonymous
I just bump this once for the sake of it.

5 hours later 3003310 Anonymous
>>3002382 Well. it seems that you already know where your towel is. Good luck on your journey.

5 hours later 3003325 Anonymous
>>3002967 The Hogfather adaptation was pretty good, The Colour of Magic less so.

5 hours later 3003353 Anonymous
>>3002446 This applies to Discworld too then, why aren't you getting pissy about people calling that a series? Arsehole.

5 hours later 3003368 Anonymous
>>3003353 I suppose if you want to be pedantic, then the Discworld books consist of more than one series, so you'd use the plural form. However, since the plural of series is series, the person you're responding to already did that. Lord of the Rings was never conceived as a multiple novel work - it's not a series.

5 hours later 3003415 Anonymous
>Song of Ice and Fire >lighthearted/comedy I'm surprised this obvious troll attempt didn't spark a shitstorm. I'm impressed, /lit/.

0.640 0.068