Tildes Book Club - February 2026 - The Truth by Terry Pratchett
This is the second Tildes Book Club Discussion for 2026 and the twentysecond overall. We are discussing The Truth by Terry Pratchett. At the end of March we will discuss The Metamorphosis by Kafka.
I don't have a particular format in mind for this discussion, but I will post some prompts and questions as comments to get things started. You're not obligated to respond to them or vote on them though. So feel free to make your own top-level comment for whatever you wish to discuss, questions you have of others, or even just to post a review of the book you have written yourself.
For latecomers, don't worry if you didn't read the book in time for this Discussion topic. You can always join in once you finish it. Tildes Activity sort, and "Collapse old comments" feature should keep the topic going for as long as people are still replying.
And for anyone uninterested in this topic please use the Ignore Topic feature on this so it doesn't keep popping up in your Activity sort, since it's likely to keep doing that while I set this discussion up, and once people start joining in.
So this was my first Pratchett book. Somehow, it was everything I hoped it would be.
I don't always jibe with British humor, but this worked for me. Pratchett clearly liked to play with the English language, and I found the novel charming and full of pith. There was so much clever wordplay, yet he never tarried or drew attention to it. He kept the story flowing while maintaining a steady supply of witticisms and quips.
The characters all felt unique and established. While some of them felt story-specific, I can almost guarantee that a few were recurring, such as Mr. Dibbler. He simply felt too fleshed out for a side character to be anything but.
Of the main cast, Otto was my favorite with his torturous love of
photographyiconography. Most folk had a silly air about them, though I was surprised that some of the bad dudes really were bad dudes. To throw a sack full of doggies into a river? Heavens, that's --ing mental.I'm not sure how to take the general commentary on journalism. That it's important, even if people don't care? Or that the position can be misused? Maybe there was no strong commentary at all, and it was more about exploring the role. In any case, it felt like stronger comments were directed at policemen and lawyers, who did not get off so easy.
I had a little trouble sourcing this book. I'd originally requested an audiobook from the library, but noticed too late it was an abridged copy. I found an older unabridged copy read by Stephen Briggs, but the quality was very poor. Thankfully, I was able to clean it up in Audacity using the DeepFilterNet plugin, then set up a macro to process and export all files. That worked a treat, and I was able to get a crisp, unabridged narration, which was excellent.
I've always put off starting Discworld because it's such a massive series, but now I've officially broken in. While I don't think I'll binge them - I might become a sarcastic bastard if I do - they do seem like a great interlude for when I need something lighter.
I am also a fan of Otto.
I listened to the whole series last year, except for *Monster Regiment * because I couldn’t find it. I wasn’t in a hurry, but would occasionally listen for most of the day if I was outside. Took me about 9 months.
If it helps, it's Monstrous Regiment (in English at least not sure if you're translating). It's one of my favs, I hope you can find it!
I ended up reading it. The only audiobook I could find was on audible.
I did like it!
I had misremembered the name.
Ah gotcha. Polly is a fav! As are the socks
Ping @maximum_bake, @RheingoldRiver, @carsonc, @kwyjibo, @syllo, @kfwyre, @PnkNBlck71817, @rosco, @first-must-burn, @CannibalisticApple, @public, @DefinitelyNotAFae, @Melvincible, @davek804, @jerutix, @slothywaffle, @Bifrost51, @Sodliddesu, @azaadi @fraughtGYRE @PnkNBlck71817 , @arch, @chocobean @lackofaname, @OnlyGhosts @csos95 @Wes, @cfabbro, @georgeboff @Everdoor, @zorind @Palimpsest @CrazyProfessor02 @maevens @cdb @OceanBreezy @joshs, @Schnupfenheld @Sparksbet @Smores @Captain_calico @hexagonsun @CharlieBeans @pu1pfriction @Lonan @DialecticCake @kej @LazarWolf @eyechoirs, @Idalium, @indikon @611828750722 @jawedzebra, @patience_limited , @marcus-aurelius,
@Rudism @crespyl @rsl12 @thermopesos @archevel, @elight, @pekt, @tonestones @Dr_Amazing
@Shevanel , @crialpaca @Weldawadyathink,@blivet ,@syllo, @lhamil64, @tanglisha, @requirement @Jona37an
Terry Pratchett writes brilliantly, and I’m glad I read this introduction to Discworld. My favorite part about this book is how Pratchett tells a story with fleshed-out, complex characters, but still keeps the stakes of the story generally low due to the absurdist traits that he gives those characters. The “—ing” using Mr. Tulip, Foul Ole Ron, and especially Otto lend a humor and playfulness to the story, and those additions make Terry’s witty prose fit an otherwise quite intense story.
That structure gives the narrative emotional heft when requiring, while smoothly avoiding it otherwise. For example, we see the dramatic deaths of The New Firm and burning of the newspaper press just before the final confrontation, so I was maximally intense and focused right when William needs to bring his emotional character arc home to his dad. Just after William speaks up for himself, Otto comes in to defuse the situation, both literally with his strength and emotionally with his humor and unseriousness. I’ll definitely be reading more Pratchett in the future.
What do you think you will remember about this book after a few months have passed?
Is this your first Discworld book? If yes, what are your impressions?
If it's not your first, did this book add or change anything to your impression
of Pratchett as an author?
This was my first whole book. I started the very first Discworld book, but felt very confused and dropped it after the first story arc. The Truth was much easier to access, and it was interesting enough to get through the initial confusion. (I know that dropping people into the action is a very popular way of doing things, but I frequently would like a little more explanation of setting and characters at the start!)
Overall, I very much enjoyed this book and many of the thought experiments about what it might have meant to create the idea of a news cycle, the effects of moveable type on society, etc. Having the fantasy setting kept it extra interesting, but I think I was, likely intentionally, much more keyed in on what news means and does versus the general setting in Ankh MorPork and the Fantasy characters.
I don't think I want to read all the books, but I'm happy to be recommended a handful of other "one-offs" from the Discworld series.
The first two books are different. Pratchett didn't originally plan a long Discworld series. (The biography - A Life in Footnotes- tells a story about Gaiman encouraging Pratchett to write more set on Discworld).
You might like Going Postal where the main character revives a defunct postal mail system for AnkhMorpork. Small Gods is a stand alone that is more philosophical that I highly recommend.
I'd also recommend Guards Guards, it's not a stand alone but it is such a recommended intro point because it works well without anything before and if not compelled to.read the rest, fine without continuing after. I'm also just a real Vimes fan.
I do like my philosophy with a little bit of comedy. Thanks!
It's my first Discworld book and I'm admittedly still reading it. Had more to do on this trip than I expected (and also my brain got fried from lack of sleep some nights). So far though, I really like it and can see how Discworld and Terry Pratchett became such cultural icons. The humor is great (love how they get the Bursar to hallucinate that he's sane), and there are a lot of thought-provoking lines. Like Vetinari saying that people don't really want to be told new things, but comfort in things that fit their conceptions of the world. (Not in those words, but that's the implication I got.)
One thing that interests me is how it doesn't have chapters. There are scenes, but the narrative is pretty continuous with no real breaks. In a way, that makes it much easier to put down and pick up since I can reach the end of a scene and just put it down. Are the other books like that?
Pratchett doesn't tend to use chapters.
This was my first Discworld book, and I also haven’t read any Pratchett before. I really, really enjoyed the book. Pratchett is an excellent worldbuilder, gives characters real emotions while also decreasing the stakes with their absurdity, and writes great prose. I will definitely be reading more Pratchett in the future.
Based on this book, what are your impressions of Ankh MorPork as a city? If you are a Pratchett reader already, did this book add or change anything to your impression of Ankh MorPork?
I've always loved the cobblestone streets of Ankh Morpork and its filthy river. I have appreciated how Pratchett keeps adding new peoples to the city, and how, somehow, it feels like Vetinari always has it managed. But it's also vague enough that it's easy for there to be more things around, buildings are in general areas mostly and if something weird happens with the geography then a wizard did it (or a troll, or a dwarf, or an alchemist.) I'm sure there are maps but I've never had any interest in looking at one.
What did you find noteworthy or interesting about how William and Sacharissa develop their mission and role as journalists in and for Ankh MorPork?
Did you find any of the nonhuman characters particularly noteworthy or interesting? Do you have a favorite or least favorite nonhuman character?
What are your thoughts about Vetinari and the plot to dethrone him?
I really like the idea of the "benevolent" tyrant in a fantasy world mostly for the subverted expectations of a nobility or an evil king. You might hate Vetinari (whose name is a play on Medici) but you kind of have to respect how he's mostly made the Guilds and the city work. I think this theme continues for me in the "Industrial Revolution" books.
I read this book last year, so my impressions of him might be a little mixed with other books. Some of his approaches really seem like something college students would come up if they were king of the world. He very much seems like the benevolent dictator that makes things better, but then dies and things become far worse than they were before him.
What do you think about the villains Pin and Tulip?
There's a venerable tradition of evil duos in British literature going all the way back to Lord and Lady MacBeth, but I think Pin and Tulip are a direct call-out to Neil Gaiman's Croup and Vandemar ("The Old Firm") in Neverwhere.
There's also a parody of the "Le Big Mac" dialogue between the mob hitmen Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield in Pulp Fiction:
Great to see you chime in. Pratchett does offer a plethora of references and allusions. I haven't read Neverwhere and I haven't seen Pulp Fiction but Pratchett has amazing breadth of knowledge. Do you think either the book or the film are amazing experiences that I should seek out?
Neverwhere is a charming fantasy novel and worth a read if you can get past the Neil Gaiman "ick" factor. He and Pratchett were good enough friends to have collaborated on Good Omens (both an excellent read and an entertaining BBC/Amazon series), so I think the satire of Gaiman's characters was both intentional and welcomed.
Pulp Fiction was an important cinematic artifact when it was released in 1994, but I don't know if I can recommend it to you. It's grotesquely violent and dwells in episodic, lurid, cartoonishly evil criminal plots derived from 1970's exploitation films and the eponymous pulp crime fiction novels. However, Travolta, Jackson, Keitel, and Thurman give terrific performances, and the film captures the tone of its material perfectly. The Travolta/Jackson scenes have so much of the buddy-movie-but-evil vibe that Pratchett highlights with the complementary pair of Pin and Tulip.
What do you want to say about the investigation, or about the final confrontation between William and his father?
I liked the irony of how in trying to subvert his father’s expectations and character, William ends up fulfilling those same traits, but in his own way. I’m sure there’s more nuance about Vetinari as a ruler within Discworld, and whether or not he is a “good” leader. Terry does an excellent job capturing how, just by pursuing his values and the truth, William ends up taking a political stance and affecting the living conditions of the city.
Did any of Pratchett's word play or philosophical musings or footnotes strike you as particularly funny or clever or memorable?
I wouldn't call it philosophical, but this conversation near the beginning had me cackling:
This bit was narrated perfectly in the audiobook, where the retort came out more like "Wot wot?". The phrasing "raising the stakes" also really tickled me, for some reason.
What surprised you about this story or any of its characters?
Is this a book that you would recommend? Why? Would you want to share disclaimers or explainations when recommending this book?