I love me some Discworld, and Thief of Time is my favorite Pratchett book ever ever. But I’ve got one nagging problem with the plot: if the Auditors have no emotions, then how can they hate life and love tidiness? They shouldn’t care either way!
Now, I’m sure the real answer is, “Because the plot says so”. But I’m sure you can come up with a better explantion than that. Please convince me that it’s actually a subtly brilliant detail that I have failed to grasp.
The Auditors are full of shit. They are not, in fact, emotionless, personality-free beings of pure order. Maybe they are when they’re an abstract idea about how the universe works, but as soon as they start manifesting in this world, they start becoming a part of this world. In Thief of Time, we see how the end of this process plays out, but the beginning of it starts as soon as they decided to appear as colorless gray floating robes and start telling people what to do. Their insistence to the contrary is posturing and denial. Which are, of course, very human traits as well.
I don’t think the above is a fanwank, btw. I think that’s the deliberate intention of the author.
And even when they’re not manifesting, they have an unfortunate tendency to speak in the first person.
This and Hogfather are my favorite Discworld books. I really, really wish there were more Susan books, and less Rincewind. Oh well.
I think **Miller **hit it on the head.
Throw Death and Vimes into that mix, kelly5078, and I’ll agree with you wholeheartedly.
Why the hell isn’t it Dan Brown stuck with EOAD? Nobody would cry if he never spewed out another piece of poorly-written tripe.
Let see if I understand what you’re saying- they were emotionless blahs, and then they made a human body to see how it worked, and when they put it on it started to affect them.
Problem is, though, they already hated life and disorder back in previous books. They’s why they tried to assassinate the Hogfather.
I guess they could be like DEATH, intellectualizing emotions rather than having gut feelings. (As Ysabell put it, “He doesn’t have emotions. He probably thought sorry for me.”)
EDIT: I think I may be the only Doper who likes Rincewind. Okay, he’s not deep, but c’mon, he’s funny.
Not just human bodies, but any sort of existence in this universe at all. Even as featureless gray floating robes, they start to develop individuality and personalities when they’re in this universe. I think it was Hogfather where they would be incinerated for using a first person pronoun? Taking a human body certainly accelerates this process, but simply being is enough to start it.
The central conflict of the auditors existence is that they’re the anthropomorphization of the impersonality of the universe. But as soon as you anthropomophize something, you start turning it into a person. It’s an interesting dramatic conflict, because it’s inherently unresolvable. The only solution to the dilemma for an auditor is either self destruction, or transformation into something that’s not an auditor (such as Myria LeJean). Except that the nature of the DiscWorld demands that abstract ideas have an anthropomorphic representative, so as soon as an Auditor either annihilates or evolves, he is instantly replaced by a new one who is confronted by precisely the same dilemma. The only way they can break this cycle is to alter the fundamental nature of the Disc, such as altering the connection between belief and existence, as seen in Hogfather. But even that’s a form of self-destruction. It is, ultimately, impossible for an auditor to exist and still be an auditor.
Which is probably why they’re all quite mad.
I like your explanation. A lot.
Just wanted to say that I agree with Miller here.
I agree fully with the points argued here in regards to the auditors and also as to their author’s intention when creating them.
But I came here just to support the Rincewind faction.
He’s fun! His books are fun! (Except maybe for Interesting Times, didn’t like that one so much.)
Susan’s a much less interesting character. Both she and Rincewind are equally one-dimensional, but the wizzard at least has a sense of humour, which she doesn’t.
I will concede that her books are generally better than his, but I’d argue that’s all due to better plots and Death or Lobsang and not to her character at all.
Yes, but… Death gets (at least appears to get) genuinely upset when people mistreat cats, and seems to actually enjoy curries. These don’t seem (IMO) to be intellectualized emotions… just emotions.
Also worth noting that there’s a fair amount of character change (possibly character development or author driven character alteration) in the portrayal of Death between the fairly early Mort and say the much later Hogfather.
Also worth noting that if you want to get an accurate idea of someone’s personality, their teenaged daughter is not necessarily the most unbiased source you could go to.
Yeah, I’m with **Miller *too. They’re far from emotionless, and even though they like to imagine themselves as a sort of grand impartial and ultra rational collective, they’re not. Like Death, or Death of Rats, or even Azazel, they’re the anthropomorphic personnalization of something. Or maybe anthropomorphic anthropomorphization, since I’m pretty convinced they were made up by Death and his ilk thinking there must be *something *beyond themselves ?
Anyway, as personnalizations, they’ve got personnalities. And feelings. And are crazier than a treeful of monkeys on nitrous oxide.
This seems about right to me. The only thing I’d add is that the fact that a personification requires a certain level of belief might suggest that the Auditors have only come into being quite recently.*
Primitive world-views tend to see everything as depending upon the whim of the gods; and that would be a difficult view to argue against, on the Discworld, where the gods are liable to come round to your house and argue right back (logic, reason and sophisticated philosophy are all very well, but a well-aimed thunderbolt makes for a pretty convincing rebuttal).
For the Auditors to exist, there needs to be a significant number of people who believe in a disinterested, impersonal universe run by fundamental laws. Until recently, the people we’ve seen who match that description have all been called Ponder Stibbens.
He must be very persuasive.
*From a certain point of view: once they did exist, as personifications of fundamental rules of the universe, obviously they must always have existed. The fact that this wasn’t true before last Thursday is beside the point.
Grand-daughter
The quote about Death not having emotions was from Ysabell, Death’s adopted daughter, not his much more sensible granddaughter Susan.
You’ve just used one of my favorite quotes from Good Omens.
Well, wizards in general tend to believe in a disinterested impersonal universe run by fundamental laws, which is why so much of magic is about breaking those laws and getting the universe upset with you.
But for the auditors, that sort of hatred of life and desire of order isn’t emotion. It’s not something extrinsic to the the auditors. It’s the nature of the auditors’ being.
I don’t dislike Rincewind, I just like Vimes and Death (and Susan-with-Death) more.
Gotcha - my mistake.
New Doper here, but I’ll agree with you about Rinso. After all, I was introduced to the Discworld through him!
As for the Auditors, i think Miller has it pretty straight.