Pam's Book Log

14 November, 2002

After the touchy-feely murder mystery Death of a Postmodernist, I felt the need to read something more gritty. I really wanted to read The Apocalypse Door, but they didn't have it at Borders when I went by. Then, I noticed that there was a new Pratchett out, and it was a City Watch book, and it appeared to be completely Vimes-centric, and then I realized that it was exactly what I was in the mood for reading. Sic transit $24.95 + tax. And here I am, trying to save money until I start getting a paycheck again.

Here's the plot: Sam Vimes, Commander of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch, get caught in a freak magic accident while he's apprehending a cop-killing murderer. Both Vimes and the criminal get shot back 30 years in time, and something happens that changes history. Anybody who's watched much Star Trek knows how things proceed from there: Vimes has to take action to fix history so that it turns out "right," catch the criminal, and get back to the future. In the process of doing so, he meets and interacts with younger versions of all our favorite Ankh-Morpork characters: Nobby Nobbs, Fred Colon, Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler, Reg Shoe, Havelock Vetinari, and, of course, Sam "Vimesy" Vimes, the greenest new recruit in the Night Watch. (As an aside, I'll note that the book's plot is almost entirely unlike the plot described in the jacket copy.)

While the basic plot device is classic cheesy Star Trek, the details of Vimes' adventure in time make Night Watch rise (for the most part-- more on that below) well above the usual stupid time-travel adventures of Captains Kirk, Picard, Janeway, and Scott Bakula. Vimes' time jump takes him to an important point in Ankh-Morpork's recent history and a critical juncture in his own life. The story is really about those events, rather than the time-travelling stuff.

If you've read much Pratchett, you pretty much know what to expect: a good story, colorful characters, wry observations on this and that, and serious-but-not-heavy-handed riffs on selected Big Themes. The Big Themes in this one are the nature of revolutions, the proper use of power, and, well, not aging exactly, but the relationship between a person's past and his present. And naturally, Vimes kicks ass, literally and figuratively. While I like all the Watch supporting cast (Carrot, Angua, Cheery Littlebottom, Detritus, etc.), it was nice to have them put out of the way for a while so we could concentrate on the best Discworld character excepting Granny Weatherwax.

Okay, so now I'm about to embark on several paragraphs of bitching, but I want to make it clear that I really did enjoy the book. I always enjoy Pratchett's books. I don't think the man is capable of writing a book I'd really hate. I even like the (generally unpopular) Rincewind books. So, the bitching should not be taken as any sort of dis-recommendation.

It's a good thing that the time-travel element of the plot is little more than a setup for the revolution/power/aging story, because it is executed quite poorly, in my opinion. Admittedly, I have high standards for time-travel plots: I want them to make sense. I want the paradoxes resolved, or at the very least, addressed. I like causality to be maintained, and if it's not, I want somebody in the book to notice that that is weird. This is not done in Night Watch. (This is a bit of a spoiler, and since the book is new, I'll obscure it. If you want to read it, highlight the blank spot with the mouse. It's not a major spoiler, but some people are sensitive.)

When Vimes gets back to his proper time, he has, in fact, changed history in a few minor ways. The new history is remembered by other people, like Lord Vetinari and Doctor Moss. But Vimes-- who is supposedly the grown-up version of Young Vimes from the past-- remembers the old version. This is never addressed or explained. I suppose you could explain it with some sort of alternate-universe thing, but it would be very unsatisfying to suppose that Vimes did not really get home, but went back to some alternate home which was only mostly like his original universe, and he either doesn't realize or doesn't care. Vimes is smart enough that he'd notice, and he's also the sort who'd care.

That's only a minor problem, though. What I really don't like is the Monks of History. They first appeared in The Thief of Time, and their stated mission is to watch over and manipulate time so that history turns out "right." In Night Watch, they show up again, this time to make sure that Vimes plays a particular role and sets history back on track. The monks didn't bother me in Thief, probably because that book was part of the Death/Susan subseries, which deals with esoteric themes like the meaning of life, the mystical power of music, and the nature of time and reality-- all that myffic stuff, with extra myff. The Ankh-Morpork Watch novels are on the opposite end of the Discworld spectrum. They deal with the real particulars of life in the big city, international politics, and the qualities of good (and bad) government-- things in which real human (or dwarf, or whatever) involvement and choice isn't just important, it's the entire point of the exercise. The involvement of the History Monks clashes with those themes in a way which, IMO tends to undermine them.

I've always admired Pratchett for his approach to fantasy fiction; up until now, I'd have said that humanism was the underlying philosophy of the entire Discworld series. While the Monks of History may be technically human, their entire operation flies in the face of that philosophy. The idea that there's a "right" history and a "wrong" one smacks of predetermination, and the existence of a secret cadre who make it their business to determine what is the "correct" history, and use their special powers to make sure it happens is nothing but enforced predetermination, which I find even more unappealing. Why did Pratchett write so many books emphasizing the importance of people and de-emphasizing-- even ridiculing-- the role of gods and their ilk, if he was just going to turn around and invent a group of de facto gods? Like I said, this bothered me a lot less in The Theif of Time, where the conflict was on a completely different plane: it's one thing for these guys to interfere when the universe is threatened with destruction by Horrors from Beyond, it's another when they micro-manage a very minor (in the grand scheme of things) political clash. That implies a level of involvement I don't like.

Even more frustrating is that it seems like Pratchett thinks he's addressing these issues when Vimes has his big chat with the monks, but it's completely unconvincing. The monks say that Vimes' choices are important, et cetera, et cetera, but the very fact of their existance argues that it's really only their choices-- how they choose to manipulate the lesser mortals in order to produce the "correct" sequence of events-- which ultimately matters. Luckily, when you get down to details, they really only serve as a plot device to get Vimes home at the end of the book, and I could pretty much ignore their participation, for the most part.