![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Pratchett v Rowling (round one?)
Jul. 31st, 2005 01:27 pmPratchett anger at Rowling's rise
( Full article under cut. Because I can. )
I think "anger" is a bit too strong of a word to use here, he came across as more annoyed to me. Seemed like it was because she, a relative newcomer to writing, is being given credit for revitalizing a stuffy old genre (something fantasy most definitly is not).
Sure, the traditional idea is that it's all knights rescuing damsels in distress, but there's a large number of books that don't fall into the category-Neil Gaiman's work comes to mind automatically, as does Jennifer Fallon, and many others whom I'm thoughtlessly forgetting.
Rowling deserves credit in the book world, without a doubt, but I think Pratchett's got a point or two.
EDIT: Neil Gaiman's got a bit more on the subject. And he makes more sense.
( Full article under cut. Because I can. )
I think "anger" is a bit too strong of a word to use here, he came across as more annoyed to me. Seemed like it was because she, a relative newcomer to writing, is being given credit for revitalizing a stuffy old genre (something fantasy most definitly is not).
Sure, the traditional idea is that it's all knights rescuing damsels in distress, but there's a large number of books that don't fall into the category-Neil Gaiman's work comes to mind automatically, as does Jennifer Fallon, and many others whom I'm thoughtlessly forgetting.
Rowling deserves credit in the book world, without a doubt, but I think Pratchett's got a point or two.
EDIT: Neil Gaiman's got a bit more on the subject. And he makes more sense.
