#Thief of Time

[stupidphototricks]

The Way of Mrs. Cosmopilite, as recorded in Thief of Time by Terry Pratchett.

"Is it not written in the sacred text, 'There's a lot goes on that we don't know about, in my opinion'?" said Lu-Tze.

"For it is written: 'I can't be having with that kind of a thing.'"

"For is it not written, 'It does you good to get out in the fresh air'?"

"For it is written, 'There is no time like the present,' which is Mrs. Cosmopilite's most profound understanding."

"For it is written, 'You can't tell a book by its cover.'"

"It is written, 'You've got to learn to walk before you can run,'" said Lu-Tze, putting his broom over his shoulder.

"It is written, 'Well, I'll go to the foot of our stairs!'" he said.

"Truly it is written, 'You could knock me down with a feather,'" he muttered, as they headed up the sloping passage.

"It is written, 'I've got a feeling in my water,'" said Lu-Tze.

"Hah! It is written, 'I'm not as green as I'm cabbage-looking'!" snapped Lu-Tze.

"For it is written, 'Wrap up warm or you'll catch your death.'"

"Is it not written, 'Every second counts'?"

"Oh, well, in that case," said Lu-Tze, "is it not written, 'If you want a thing done properly you've got to do it yourself'?"

"However, is it not written, 'When you have got to go, you have got to go'?" said Lu-Tze.

"And also that 'You should always wear clean underwear because you never know if you will be knocked down by a cart'?"

"But is it not written, 'If you have another one, you won't have an appetite for dinner'?"

"For is it not written, 'You never know what's going to turn up'?"

[spaceteenagers]

Therefore, he understood, there is, in truth, no Past, only a memory of the Past. Blink your eyes, and the world you see next did not exist when you closed them. Therefore, he said, the only appropriate state of the mind is surprise. The only appropriate state of the heart is joy. The sky you see now, you have never seen before. The perfect moment is now. Be glad of it.

[luffysfakebeard]

definitely had a few kids like that 😬

[cirrus-grey]

The Auditors: We just need everyone to stop moving so we can get on with the paperwork! How are we meant to get the filing done when humans are running around all the time causing fresh chaos?

Rufus Drumknott: Skill issue.

[datsderbunnyblog]

Is Susan sto helit Autistic ?

(I'm low on spoons so this'll be a collection of annotated quotes rather prose with embedded quotes, and isn't my best work.)

"... she was brilliant in the same way that a diamond is brilliant, all edges and chilliness."

(Soul Music) This is how intellectually gifted autistics are usually perceived by the allistic world.

"She got on with her education. In her opinion, school kept trying to interfere with it."

"Susan hated Literature. She’d much prefer to read a good book."

(Soul Music) Again, we often don't get explanations from teachers about why we are studying the things we are, and we are often punished for inquisitiveness and not being able to infer the relevance without clear guidance.

"There were lessons later on.  These were going a lot better now she’d got rid of the reading books about bouncy balls and dogs called Spot.  She’d got Gawain on to the military campaigns of General Tacticus, which were suitably bloodthirsty but, more importantly, considered too difficult for a child.  As a result his vocabulary was doubling every week and he could already use words like ‘disembowelled’ in everyday conversation. After all, what was the point of teaching children to be children?  They were naturally good at it."

(Hogfather) Susan isn't interested in teaching children What Children Are Supposed To Know, or indeed How Children Are Supposed To Behave. Again, Susan is interested in teaching them things that she considers Useful, based on how she views and interacts with the world.

Susan was sensible. It was, she knew, a major character flaw.  It did not make you popular, or cheerful, and– this seemed to her to be the most unfair bit – it didn’t even make you right. But it did make you definite.

(Thief of Time) Susan is direct in her speech and has a strong sense of justice, both of which are very definite autistic traits.

(On a separate note, the acknowledgement that the sense of justice doesn't make you right is an interesting and incredibly important, often-overlooked point. The strong sense of justice is often exploited on the Roundworld to trap white autistic men in alt-right spaces and to indoctrinate them. Justice doesn't always evolve beyond "This is what I personally deserve". It needs careful nurturing to get any further.)

She could see things that were really there*… *Which is much harder than seeing things that aren’t there.  Everyone does that.

(Thief of Time) This is a nice little parallel with Pratchett's witches, and with his concept of First Sight and Second Thoughts, which again are very definite autistic traits.

So yes, in a nutshell, Susan Sto Helit is autistic.

[pratchettquotes]

Susan was sensible. It was, she knew, a major character flaw. It did not make you popular, or cheerful, and--this seemed to her to be the most unfair bit--it didn't even make you right.

Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time

[smalltownfae]

Don't tell me that only someone whose life contains very little else treasures a cheesy mug that says "to the world's greatest grandad" and then reveal that that someone is Death 😭

[neostellarjpg]

How about a Thief of Time? :)

this freak is loitering around everywhere all over the chronology of the session. abuses the SHIT out of their time powers to mess around and relax and not think about the events of the main timeline. a coplayer can probably look out into the horizon of their planet and spot a few versions of the thief having a chill ass convo with one another a few thousand feet away. "shouldn't you be doing something?" "nah i got time." literally infinite time. they have already taken care of everything important and are just living out a constant beach episode. you can walk up to them and ask them about the future, and if it's safe then they'll just tell you straight up. otherwise they'll laugh at you. "no spoilers bro." they probably have a gay ass name like mars

[cgtg]

TIME PLAYERZ ONLY

as with the prev polls: if you consider multiple, i suggest going for the one u feel aligned with currently/most often, which one u wanna represent in a poll like this, whichever has the most compelling role/narrative, whatever works for U. classpecting is very subjective, and fluid for a lot of people.

i actively encourage discussion in the replies of what your class and aspect mean to u. simple or lengthy, i wanna hear it :J

excluding master classes bc no space for em, sorry.

for those who cant vote: i’d appreciate u passing the poll along. also, i’ll likely post updates throughout the week on how it’s going so everyone can have a peek inside. thank u

[alda-rana]

Reread Thief of Time recently, here are Lu-Tze and Lobsang!

[stupidphototricks]

The main thing that struck me about Thief of TIme is how it (more than any other Discworld book, I think, which is saying something) just casually tosses out clumps of the most fantastically unhinged worldbuilding physics*, and you're just supposed to accept them.

And you do! Because they make sense! More or less! Somehow they fit neatly into the parts of your brain that agree that this is how things should work, that even though officially you know better, on some level you still believe they could be true.

A lot of science fiction could take a lesson or two from the fantasy of Discworld in general and Thief of Time in particular. Don't overexplain, don't overcomplicate, just present your world as a given and make it easy to swallow. Harder than it sounds, of course, but Sir Terry was an expert at it.

Anyway, people have been messing around with time ever since they were people. Wasting it, killing it, sparing it, making it up. And they do it. People's heads were made to play with time.

-- Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time

*As evidenced by the title, most of the unhinged physics in this book has to do with time. Some of my favorites below the cut (spoilers):

Portable "spinners" allow you to carry time on your back, like a diver carrying an air tank, in case you're in a situation where time could stop (you never know!).

Once, a major time catastrophe unmoored the fastenings that connect the past to the present, and the History Monks had to stitch it back together however they could, so that's why history doesn't always make sense if you look closely. But generally people don't notice (we're pretty unobservant).

The Monks can move time around, pulling it from somewhere that it isn't being used efficiently and putting it somewhere that extra time is needed, or if there's a time leak they can dump surplus time over the ocean or somewhere that it won't make a big difference (not a lot happens in the ocean that people notice).

Yetis can save their own lives like a video game before going into a dangerous situation, and restart from the saved point if anything happens to them (useful!).

[maddyjones2]

Listening to Night watch for the millionth time. Only just realised that the event that sent Sam back 30 years was Jeremy and Igor starting the crystal clock.

Once again I am struck by how brilliant Terry Pratchett was at plotting. I wish he had lived long enough to tell us who followed Veninari as Patrician. My money is on Carrot. I can't see Sam every accepting it. But then who heads the Watch? There is so much else that he might have told us. Not just what happens to Princess (Alice) after she grows up.

This means that Lu-Tze was living twice in that time period. He was having one life in Ankh Morpork sweeping and waiting for Sam to turn up (ten years), and other in the Monastery of Oi-Dong waiting for Lobsang Ludd.

[creativenicocorner]

...lately I've been thinking a lot about Susan Sto Helit. Specifically her introduction and farewell in the Discworld series.

About how her introduction in Soul Music is through the eyes of Miss Butts who goes on describing this recently orphaned girl as:

"something frankly unloveable about the child. Academically brilliant in the things she liked doing, of course. But that was just it. She was brilliant in the same way that a diamond is brilliant, all edges and chilliness." *

And then the very last we see of Susan within the Discworld series, is in Thief of Time, ending with... well no matter one's personal opinion of Susan and Lobsang Ludd... the Death series ends with love. ( I could go on a tangent about how each Death book is about some version of Love but thats for another time)

ANYWAY the last we read of Susan is:

"She put the chocolate in her mouth, and shut her eyes. A faint cardboard-y sound made her open them. The lids were lifting on the boxes of stars. They spilled out, and whirled up into the shadows of the cupboard, brilliant against the darkness, a galaxy in miniature. Susan watched them for a while, and then said: "Alright, you have my full attention, whoever you are." At least, that is what she meant to say. The peculiar stickiness of the nougat caused it to come out as: "au-rite ou av my full at-em-ntion." Damn. The stars spiraled around her head, and the cupboard's interior darkened into interstellar black. "If this is you Death of Rats," she began. "It's me," said Lobsang. Tick! Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment."

It ends with love!! Love for a girl who was described as "something frankly unlovable" we bid farewell to Susan in the series with a Perfect Moment!!

Does this mean anything? Do you see the glimpses of what I'm feeling and barely managing to articulate?!

*Please forgive me if the quotes aren't entirely accurate in terms of punctuation etc, I only have the audio form and transcribed it while listening.

[pargery]

"In life, as in breakfast cereal, it's always best to read the instructions on the box,"

said Lu Tze

-- Thief of Time by Terry Pratchett

[starlit1daydream]

Thieves & Rogues: Inundation and Redistribution

A day late, I'm aware; turning 18 will do that to a girl. I'm now older, and definitely not wiser.

The Thieves & Rogues are another contentious group; particularly the Thieves for various discourse-generating reasons - but the Rogues have their pitfalls and fall victim to mischaracterisation a lot more than you'd assume.

The Thief:Rogue dichotomy embodies inundation, redistribution and possession. It's the authority over who gets to hold their Aspect for themselves; whether it's them or somebody else, that's what being a Redistribution Class is about.

There's often some insecurity about their capacity to hold it in play as well - and they tend to use a lot of their opposite Aspect's forces; after all, what do you get when you take something but the absence of it, and therefore its opposite?

Canonical Thief players are Vriska Serket (Thief of Light) and Meenah Peixes (Thief of Life).

Canonical Rogue players are Roxy Lalonde (Rogue of Void), Nepeta Leijon (Rogue of Heart), and my arch-nemesis Rufioh Nitram (Rogue of Breath).

Point A - the narrative function of the Thief.

The Thief is the one with active distribution of their Aspect; and therefore the one liable to actively steal it. This, on paper, sounds pretty nasty - there's a reason why Thieves are lumped in with the nebulously 'bad' classes; but it's a neutral role with possible applications in either sense.

They often hold a deep-seated obsession with their Aspect; they think it's something that's out to get them and conflate an excess of it with an absence. Their perceived lack of it motivates them to hoard it, as much as possible.

Vriska Serket, the Thief of Light, is contentious for a damn good reason. Imbued with ungodly plot armour and fortune's favour, she seizes control of the narrative by force, all the while bemoaning her unlucky streak & employing the most unsubtle methods of manipulation she can think to use.

Meenah Peixes, the Thief of Life... does not understand the consequences of her actions; period. She thinks Life is out to get her, exacts every bit of free will she has out of spite and cultivates discourse and stagnation to try and encourage character development. (Oh, yeah, she also... kills people. Like, a lot.)

Their opposite Aspects are, therefore, pretty prevalent! By taking away their Aspect; they leave the inverse behind.

Vriska stealing Light leaves Void. Meenah stealing Life leaves Doom.

Often, it's almost as if they're using their inverse to cultivate their actual Aspect; Vriska uses offscreen events to justify onscreen developments - it's how she 'takes luck'. Meenah uses suffering and control in order to encourage growth - it's how she 'takes life'.

They care very little for their Aspect at the centre of it all, despite their perceived obsession; they don't seem to understand the value of it at all. That's the interesting part, I feel.

Point B, the practical function of the Thief.

Now, taking the Aspect is a very powerful ability in the right hands. We don't just see Vriska metaphorically rob fortune, she literally steals luck from her enemies mid-fight and utilises chance and possibility in order to get the upper hand.

Meenah takes 'taking life' about as seriously as you can get - not only does she really like killing people, but as the Condesce everything she did resulted in stagnation and decay in her wake as she robbed the worlds she ruled of the ability to develop; using control and hegemony to cultivate development and failing miserably.

The opposing Aspect, again, plays a prominent role! Vriska forgoes certainty and manipulates the absence of a definitive outcome to play around with luck. Meenah forgoes development and enacts control on the people beneath her to play around with change.

Point C, the narrative function of the Rogue.

I'm gonna use the Thief's concluding point as the jumpoff point for the Rogues; whereas the Thief devalues their Aspect, the Rogue puts too much stock in its importance. Their Aspect is too important to them; and so their relationship with it differs.

Passive classes tend to act without realising it, and the Rogues are no different - I'd argue their presence often leads to their Aspect being taken in a way they don't realise they're doing.

Roxy Lalonde, Rogue of Void, is desperate for attention, and yet obfuscates knowledge, is isolated from all society and would rather get drunk at the start of her arc than face the truth of her situation. I'd argue that she downplays her own importance as a person in the face of her friends' catastrophic communication failures. By being around, she takes the Void from her session and opens up ways to communicate whilst learning to give irrelevance to things.

Nepeta Leijon, Rogue of Heart, puts people into boxes. She makes them into little cariacatures on her walls, plays matchmaker in her stories; and yet she's also one of the most emotionally mature and genuine trolls in the story - she wears her Heart on her sleeve, and doesn't deny it. By being around, she takes the Heart from her friends by way of drawing out truer selves, as we see in her relationship with the insecure & disingenuous Equius.

Rufioh Nitram, Rogue of Breath, takes people's sense of purpose and direction and makes their agency depend on his presence in their life. He does Damara and Horuss dirty time and time again, and yet they can't cut him off because he's made himself too important. And yet there he is, spineless, giving away his own free will because he holds no security in his selfhood. He's trapping people in relationships without realising. I also want to drop an anvil on his head.

The common thread, despite the differing situations, is the indirect usage of the opposing Aspect to passively take away the true Aspect and the character development involving a realisation of their Aspect's value and the importance of keeping it for oneself. Roxy is the only Rogue whose development we see in full, unfortunately; but there's snippets with Nepeta and Rufioh Nitram changing isn't happening any time soon.

Point D, then. The practical function of the Rogue.

Once again, Roxy is our only point of reference by virtue of being the only God-Tiered Rogue; but luckily, she also gives us some really good demonstrations. Roxy literally takes the nonexistence away from something, bringing it into existence.

Inversely, she's capable of giving Void to herself, cloaking herself and by extension her whole session in a veil of invisibility. She's controlling the distribution of Void, letting it both be taken and given; after making her peace with the distribution of it.

So, the common thread is the central question of 'who gets to have my Aspect?'

A Thief would tell you 'me', and a Rogue would tell you 'anyone else'. That's what I feel separates them, and yet don't let that convince you that Thieves are bad and Rogues are good; look at Rufioh. A Thief may take for altruistic reasons, and a Rogue may give away for... not so altruistic reasons!

Get creative with it, that's what I say. How about a Thief of Doom who takes on everyone else's suffering because they're self-sacrificial to a fault? ...Okay, actually, that's my idea, don't take that one.

Anyhow, next week I'll be concluding the 'normal' classes with the Maids and Sylphs! Should be fun, I'll see you then - hopefully on time, too.

[pdalicedraws]

The news of Discworld graphic novels yesterday morning made me promptly reread Thief of Time and then draw up how I see these characters in my head so I have ‘em nice and solid before the comic comes out. I’ll probably do Monstrous Regiment soon too, though I’ve drawn the Little Lads before.

…screaming quietly about two of the three announced graphic novels being two of my three favourite Discworld books aaaaaaaaa

Most of this is either based on description or stuff that wasn’t mentioned, but I took a couple liberties—

Time’s dress is described as black and red, but by the time I got back to that I’d been imagining her as a black lady in white all book so I stuck with it; she’s referred to as “dark” a few times so why not

Lady LeJean’s hair is supposed to be black, but I made it a dark reddish-brown to align better with Lady With An Ermine and also because I liked it as a little bit of colour to presage her transformation

There’s not really any physical description of Ronnie but he’s Michael Palin dressed as a milkman. He just is.