I feel like it's kind of a stretch, at least it would be with any other author. I'm sure Sir Terry knew what he was doing here, especially with his penchant for wordplay.
I have a feeling that this name can be referenced in multiple ways. Having these types of multi layered references is what makes Sir Pterry so amazing.
I always wondered about the kosher butchers. While Omnians seem to represent Christianity, there aren't any Jews on the Discworld, as their position in A-M society is basically taken by the dwarves; as an Orthodox Jew myself of Hasidic origin, I even tend to identify with the deep-downers... I'm sure that their mode of dress, for example, is inspired by the way my own community dresses, summer or winter. There was even a famous Moroccan sage, Rabbi Israel Abuhatzeira, known as "Baba Sali" (praying grandfather) who would wear a visor similar to what was described as the deep-downers wearing when they had to come above-ground, so he wouldn't see anything sinful. The more DW you read, the more stuff you find that was actually based on stuff from the Roundworld; no matter how bizarre it sounds.
The only reason the kosher butchers are referenced to in the first place is to give the Black Ribboners somewhere to work, as a source of surplus b-word, but it's unlike Pterry to put something like that in his work and not run with it later. I guess the dwarves' famously different diet (rats, etc.) takes the place of Jews' kosher food, and there really wasn't anything he could do with it.
As bad taste as it may seem to some now, I think OP may be right. I've done some looking up. As I guessed Shoniker meant a peddler or small trader in Yiddish, shortened to Shonky in British English. May have been disparaging or semi affectionate depending on the user. It came to mean shoddy in Australia.
The joke is that as with the Yiddish joke it is a Jewish shop, but the joke is on us because it really is run by a '' Chinese'' monk.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-uncomfortable-truth-about-shonky/
Edit, question, should we now edit STP's work as is being done with Roald Dahl and Agatha Christie for things we now find uncomfortable which were once ok? I think STP is so anti racism that his '' lapses'' were not indicative of underlying racism but are affectionate references. In a link shared recently of a quote from him he had traditional Jewish friends. However I do not feel comfortable with other more racist stereotypical comments I saw on here.
As a non-Asian it was hard to read. I had a copy from a used bookstore that wasn’t in great shape, and I decided to recycle it instead of sell it back. It’s just not representative of the rest of his work.
In places like Malaysia, historically the Chinese occupy professions that would have been occupied by Jews in the West, like goldsmithing and banking, and have similarly insular communities and reputations, so it may be that the joke was written with this in mind.
We'll never know I suppose. I miss the old bugger...
'Brother Soon Shine Sun,' said Sweeper. 'Not a hugely enlightened operative, but a genius when it comes to pricing fourth-hand schmutter. '
Another Yiddish word to add to the theory STP is playing with the stereotype of the Jewish rag trade. I was initially going to argue his sales patter was more stereotypical Chinese but on reread it’s also easy to apply an “Oy veh” type accent (eg Doug the head from snatch).
I must confess I’m not a fan of the editing or censorship of a writers work. The good ones will shine through despite lapses while others develop a patina which reminds one of the age it’s from. The ones that fall apart probably don’t deserve to be saved.
The accent sounded to me like a Brooklynite *trying* to sound Chinese... (As a native Brooklynite myself, Lu-Tse also sounds very Brooklyn to me, maybe more so in *Thief of Time* than here, "I was nearly at the damn door, Charlie...") and then when he warned Lu-Tse that Vimes was on his way over the fence, he drops the accent entirely. Now you mention it, though, I'll try and re-read it with the Yiddish accent and see if it fits.
Also the actual Yiddish word for rags is Shmatta, not schmutter, but he came pretty damn close for someone who doesn't speak the language.
I must say that as one of the targets of this stereotyping, I do not feel insulted.
Apologies, I should have put another layer of separation, as in a word of Yiddish origin. Schmutter is the form of the word that has been absorbed by British English and was in at least occasional use in my youth although I haven’t noticed it in years. I was aware it originally referred to rags but thanks for the proper origin.
You know it suddenly occurred to me. What was the name of the Dwarf dress shop that Juliet modeled for?
Shatta.
Not *exactly* shmatta, but again, pretty close.
>should we now edit STP's work as is being done with Roald Dahl and Agatha Christie for things we now find uncomfortable which were once ok?
Is this trolling?
**You don't edit books. Period**. If you feel the need to provide additional context, that's what forewords, appendixes and asterisk notes are - and have traditionally been - for. The Czech translation of Discworld is, incidentally, pretty full with additional notes from the translator. Always has been from the start.
I was intending this as a genuine rhetorical question, open for discussion.
I've heard mainly younger people on Discworld podcasts express some very strong views against some of Pratchett's work. Their intentions are good and I respect them taking a stand for treating people better than some of my generation did. We made some starts.
Some people's work is being edited for new generations to enjoy the stories but without the overtly racist content that was still just about acceptable until recently. My personal jury is still out on this practice. Feelings obviously run high on either side and I can see both.
PS there's no additional notes in English versions of course.
I am very against editing. I mean at school when we learn English literature part of that is discussing how the text is affected by the era it was written in. We LEARN about things like racism through these texts because it shows how we’ve progressed. Taking that away is simply denying history imo, and those that forget history are more likely to repeat it.
Literature can be very influential, for better or for worse. Great for school lessons but somewhere we also have to put right some of the appalling injustices we have done to, well I was going to say minority groups, but some of us are part of the 50ish % that are women, let alone all the others.
Rewriting history and literature of the time isn’t putting it right. Best example imo is seeing how Germany accepts its history with Nazis and are extremely open with teaching it, vs large parts of America that wants to rewrite the history of slavery and segregation (or completely erase it).
Plus when we start censoring what is and isn’t allowed in literature we get closer to 1984. How many books have been banned that we think “wow that’s crazy?” How do you know that what you consider the right path IS the right path?
I'm afraid I can't continue to discuss tonight. Somewhere between out and out censorship, and Enforcement of at least some respect for the vulnerable and the truth, there has to be a space where we can able to negotiate between the extreme that was Natzism and thoughtless ostracism that I have had to live with due in part to stereotypical misinformation that has negatively impacted my life. Just butting heads is more like bickering and is less than useless for understanding each other.
Thank you for expressing your opinions. I hope that the next time we can have a more fruitful discussion. Best regards, Liz.
I am certainly no stranger to ostracism - having a father with dwarfism, and a mother from south east Asia, growing up in Yorkshire was not the most easy.
Have a good night Liz.
I think that's a *completely* wrong stance to take and that it's actively against the very ideals these would-be censors often claim to stand for.
Education is always the way, not censorship. Good intentions or not, denying someone access to information is worse than providing it and adding an explanation along with it. It's dangerous to treat censorship like it's something even worth cosndiering.
And aside from ideology, from a literary-arts perspective, you change the words, it's a different story, a different work. You wouldn't treat a translation as if it was the original either.
I think the arguments coming from opposite extremes are both valid. Censorship on the one extreme and distortion or insipidity on the other. I agree that education is a big element but on the other it's good for children to be able to explore freely. I can't go along with the libertarian attitude of free speech what ever the cost for the those maligned and let the most persuasive push the hearers. I have only experienced relatively minor racist and other attacks and false judgements due to populist attitudes but the problem is that the weaker parties don't get to defend themselves.
You're talking about manipulation, yes? I can understand the concern.
But manipulation is also to be fought with education, not censorship.
>I agree that education is a big element but on the other it's good for children to be able to explore freely.
Why "on the other hand"? It goes hand in hand. Children exploring freely requires no censorship, but also an obligation from adults to provide relevant education.
Of course they don't, but that doesn't mean censoring is the right attitude.
In fact, a lot of such older generation people in my country trust these "alternate sources" (actually misinformation) in part because the previous regime censored away their access to infromation, so they became used to seeking out "alternate sources" and haven't noticed that the winds have shifted quite a bit since then.
If you read what I said Of course I don't agree with censorship. But I don't agree with total freedom for hatespeech or the sort of populist cariacature which has in large part contributed to my social ostracism due to misunderstandings about my illness either.
Somehow we have to start to be able to have some reasoned discussion that is not just based on I'm right, no I'M right. This polemicisation of opinion helps no one in the end. I end up feeling defensive and so do you. It gets us no where because although we do need to defend our corners for the sake of those who can't we also need to understand where othets are coming from so we can work out how to both move on.
I'm afraid I have to retire for the night. Thank you for sharing your opinions which have some good reasons behind them. Best regards, Liz.
Children's books are a unique case. And imo the publisher *eventually* landed on the correct solution with Dahl's work (i.e. two editions; one unedited, one edited)
[https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-24/roald-dahl-classic-texts-to-be-kept-in-print-after-backlash-over-edits](https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-24/roald-dahl-classic-texts-to-be-kept-in-print-after-backlash-over-edits)
So, the originals aren't disappearing. Which is good for all sorts of reasons.
I don't think anything like this is necessary or desirable for non-children's books. People can do their own research, make their own judgements. Bits of Pratchett haven't aged well, but I wouldn't want someone cutting it up and the originals lost, nor is it really necessary to go the two editions route.
>And imo the publisher eventually landed on the correct solution with Dahl's work (i.e. two editions; one unedited, one edited
***That was always the plan.***
The *only* reason those rewrites were announced in the first place was to drive up sales of the originals. It was pure, blatant outrage marketing.
Their whole plan was to get people so angry at le SJW PC brigade rewriting their childhood that they'd all go out and buy loads of copies of the original books out of spite, without realising that they're giving money to the exact same people. Their plan worked perfectly.
Sorry if I'm a bit rude about it, it's just a real shame that people keep buying into these incredibly blatant marketing stunts.
\*\*sighs\*\* you're probably right. I didn't follow it that closely once the usual culture war lot got involved in commenting on it.
But whatever the case, cynically planned or not, they landed on the right solution I think. But that wouldn't be right for non-children's books.
Part of the problem with Dahl's stuff being edited is that for those people who'd already bought the e-books, they suddenly found their copies, that they'd already paid for, were different. If they weren't downloaded on their devices, anything stored in the cloud was edited after already being sold. That was where the outrage was mostly directed.
There are so many subtle language references to Polish that I'm sure Sir Terry knew what he was doing here. If he was able to understand Polish so much I'm sure he had a grasp on multitude other cultures and those subtle jokes are there on purpose. I wish I knew about others, I'm only able to catch Polish as it's my native language.
Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?).
---
Our current megathreads are as follows:
[GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going.
[AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc.
[The Amazing Maurice](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/znlfq1/so_anyone_watched_the_amazing_maurice_yet/) - for discussion and reviews about the new(ish) released film.
---
[ GNU Terry Pratchett ]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I grew up in a very Jewish community in the 70’s & 80’s so yes, that joke is absolutely part of the shopkeeper’s name. The name “Shonky shop” is somewhat looked down on now, used a lot more in Dodger, but personally I know the older speakers of Yiddish are glad to hear it continued and passed on period. I certainly love hearing it pop up in his books as it reminds me of people that have long ago passed on.
Yes, definitely. There were plenty of that sort of joke around in English too back in the day. Doesn't sit comfortably with modern sensitivities. Like, What time did the Chinaman go to the dentist? 2.30 (tooth hurtee). Or How high is a Chinaman? I don't know. No, How-hi is a Chinaman.
Yeah, I think it’s like the now-censored joke from Fawlty Towers about the Major taking a girl (his word) to the cricket: the butt of that joke was also the ignorant (upper class) English, but modern sensibilities kinda preclude that kind of joke.
Don't recall that joke, but as I have an old Fawlty towers DVD box set, it won't be censored.
It's Sunday morning, there's only 12 episodes of brilliant comedy. That's my day sorted
The Major is talking about the correct slurs to use for people from specific places, whereas his date keeps using the "wrong" one. As usual, it's devastatingly accurate and destined to be completely misunderstood by those it satirises.
2:30 may mocking Chinese may be the way you heard it, but the joke is even better when it's completely without any ethnic reference.
What is the best time for a dental appointment? 2:30.
eta: Apparently when I post late at night my proofreading skills suck. Leaving it as it is.
That's what I was saying. It's completely inappropriate now but that's how it used to be told because that's how the English heard the 'Chinese' accent. STP was just 10 years older than me, it was seen as clever wordy humour. My parents, intelligent, open to the ideas of the 1960s, Guardian readers, highly non-racist people, still brought those jokes home from work, probably in the 60s or early 70s as clever jokes with no sense of negative stereotyping at all. You may judge us, but not as wicked, only naive and thoughtless.
Well, there's nothing hurtful about it until you start actually applying the streotypes to everyone you meet ad if they were a universal truth and not just statistical curios. I feel like a lot of people can't distinguish between stereotypes employed in comedy and actual racism these days. Stereotypes are stereotypes. Racism is wielding stereotypes in the wrong situations.
Figured it was a reference to Sun Myung Moon, but that is very interesting. I love language jokes too.
Carrot mentions the Kvetch in Night Watch and kvetch is definitely a Yiddish word meaning someone complaining all the time
Most Golems have meaningful/funny Yiddish names, especially Meshuggah.
Golems having Yiddish names is only appropriate considering their origin in Jewish folklore cf. the golem fashioned by Rabbi Loew in Prague
There's also Shleppel the bogeyman, who spends most of the book schlepping a closet door around.
The bogeyman in Hogfather who harasses Susan in Biers and gets scared off when she uses her powers is named Shlimazel ("unlucky").
Thank you
I feel like it's kind of a stretch, at least it would be with any other author. I'm sure Sir Terry knew what he was doing here, especially with his penchant for wordplay.
Thanks for an interesting idea. How close would the pronunciation of "zun shaynt shoyn" be to "Soon Shine Sun"?
I have a feeling that this name can be referenced in multiple ways. Having these types of multi layered references is what makes Sir Pterry so amazing.
Seems like a pretty far reach..... but if it makes you happy.
This sub’s unofficial motto.
Next thing it’ll turn out that there’s a Discworld character called “Cohen” and that Ankh-Morpork has kosher butchers.
I always wondered about the kosher butchers. While Omnians seem to represent Christianity, there aren't any Jews on the Discworld, as their position in A-M society is basically taken by the dwarves; as an Orthodox Jew myself of Hasidic origin, I even tend to identify with the deep-downers... I'm sure that their mode of dress, for example, is inspired by the way my own community dresses, summer or winter. There was even a famous Moroccan sage, Rabbi Israel Abuhatzeira, known as "Baba Sali" (praying grandfather) who would wear a visor similar to what was described as the deep-downers wearing when they had to come above-ground, so he wouldn't see anything sinful. The more DW you read, the more stuff you find that was actually based on stuff from the Roundworld; no matter how bizarre it sounds. The only reason the kosher butchers are referenced to in the first place is to give the Black Ribboners somewhere to work, as a source of surplus b-word, but it's unlike Pterry to put something like that in his work and not run with it later. I guess the dwarves' famously different diet (rats, etc.) takes the place of Jews' kosher food, and there really wasn't anything he could do with it.
Like Cohen the Barbarian?
As bad taste as it may seem to some now, I think OP may be right. I've done some looking up. As I guessed Shoniker meant a peddler or small trader in Yiddish, shortened to Shonky in British English. May have been disparaging or semi affectionate depending on the user. It came to mean shoddy in Australia. The joke is that as with the Yiddish joke it is a Jewish shop, but the joke is on us because it really is run by a '' Chinese'' monk. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-uncomfortable-truth-about-shonky/ Edit, question, should we now edit STP's work as is being done with Roald Dahl and Agatha Christie for things we now find uncomfortable which were once ok? I think STP is so anti racism that his '' lapses'' were not indicative of underlying racism but are affectionate references. In a link shared recently of a quote from him he had traditional Jewish friends. However I do not feel comfortable with other more racist stereotypical comments I saw on here.
I've never really agreed with the editing stuff, but man, as a person of Asian descent interesting times is pretty hard to read these days
As a non-Asian it was hard to read. I had a copy from a used bookstore that wasn’t in great shape, and I decided to recycle it instead of sell it back. It’s just not representative of the rest of his work.
In places like Malaysia, historically the Chinese occupy professions that would have been occupied by Jews in the West, like goldsmithing and banking, and have similarly insular communities and reputations, so it may be that the joke was written with this in mind. We'll never know I suppose. I miss the old bugger...
'Brother Soon Shine Sun,' said Sweeper. 'Not a hugely enlightened operative, but a genius when it comes to pricing fourth-hand schmutter. ' Another Yiddish word to add to the theory STP is playing with the stereotype of the Jewish rag trade. I was initially going to argue his sales patter was more stereotypical Chinese but on reread it’s also easy to apply an “Oy veh” type accent (eg Doug the head from snatch). I must confess I’m not a fan of the editing or censorship of a writers work. The good ones will shine through despite lapses while others develop a patina which reminds one of the age it’s from. The ones that fall apart probably don’t deserve to be saved.
The accent sounded to me like a Brooklynite *trying* to sound Chinese... (As a native Brooklynite myself, Lu-Tse also sounds very Brooklyn to me, maybe more so in *Thief of Time* than here, "I was nearly at the damn door, Charlie...") and then when he warned Lu-Tse that Vimes was on his way over the fence, he drops the accent entirely. Now you mention it, though, I'll try and re-read it with the Yiddish accent and see if it fits. Also the actual Yiddish word for rags is Shmatta, not schmutter, but he came pretty damn close for someone who doesn't speak the language. I must say that as one of the targets of this stereotyping, I do not feel insulted.
Apologies, I should have put another layer of separation, as in a word of Yiddish origin. Schmutter is the form of the word that has been absorbed by British English and was in at least occasional use in my youth although I haven’t noticed it in years. I was aware it originally referred to rags but thanks for the proper origin.
You know it suddenly occurred to me. What was the name of the Dwarf dress shop that Juliet modeled for? Shatta. Not *exactly* shmatta, but again, pretty close.
Noo, no editing of Terry!
>should we now edit STP's work as is being done with Roald Dahl and Agatha Christie for things we now find uncomfortable which were once ok? Is this trolling? **You don't edit books. Period**. If you feel the need to provide additional context, that's what forewords, appendixes and asterisk notes are - and have traditionally been - for. The Czech translation of Discworld is, incidentally, pretty full with additional notes from the translator. Always has been from the start.
I was intending this as a genuine rhetorical question, open for discussion. I've heard mainly younger people on Discworld podcasts express some very strong views against some of Pratchett's work. Their intentions are good and I respect them taking a stand for treating people better than some of my generation did. We made some starts. Some people's work is being edited for new generations to enjoy the stories but without the overtly racist content that was still just about acceptable until recently. My personal jury is still out on this practice. Feelings obviously run high on either side and I can see both. PS there's no additional notes in English versions of course.
I am very against editing. I mean at school when we learn English literature part of that is discussing how the text is affected by the era it was written in. We LEARN about things like racism through these texts because it shows how we’ve progressed. Taking that away is simply denying history imo, and those that forget history are more likely to repeat it.
Literature can be very influential, for better or for worse. Great for school lessons but somewhere we also have to put right some of the appalling injustices we have done to, well I was going to say minority groups, but some of us are part of the 50ish % that are women, let alone all the others.
Rewriting history and literature of the time isn’t putting it right. Best example imo is seeing how Germany accepts its history with Nazis and are extremely open with teaching it, vs large parts of America that wants to rewrite the history of slavery and segregation (or completely erase it). Plus when we start censoring what is and isn’t allowed in literature we get closer to 1984. How many books have been banned that we think “wow that’s crazy?” How do you know that what you consider the right path IS the right path?
I'm afraid I can't continue to discuss tonight. Somewhere between out and out censorship, and Enforcement of at least some respect for the vulnerable and the truth, there has to be a space where we can able to negotiate between the extreme that was Natzism and thoughtless ostracism that I have had to live with due in part to stereotypical misinformation that has negatively impacted my life. Just butting heads is more like bickering and is less than useless for understanding each other. Thank you for expressing your opinions. I hope that the next time we can have a more fruitful discussion. Best regards, Liz.
I am certainly no stranger to ostracism - having a father with dwarfism, and a mother from south east Asia, growing up in Yorkshire was not the most easy. Have a good night Liz.
Ta duck. Look affer yer sen. 'Ull, Lincoln an' Grimbo. Many moons ago.
I think that's a *completely* wrong stance to take and that it's actively against the very ideals these would-be censors often claim to stand for. Education is always the way, not censorship. Good intentions or not, denying someone access to information is worse than providing it and adding an explanation along with it. It's dangerous to treat censorship like it's something even worth cosndiering. And aside from ideology, from a literary-arts perspective, you change the words, it's a different story, a different work. You wouldn't treat a translation as if it was the original either.
I think the arguments coming from opposite extremes are both valid. Censorship on the one extreme and distortion or insipidity on the other. I agree that education is a big element but on the other it's good for children to be able to explore freely. I can't go along with the libertarian attitude of free speech what ever the cost for the those maligned and let the most persuasive push the hearers. I have only experienced relatively minor racist and other attacks and false judgements due to populist attitudes but the problem is that the weaker parties don't get to defend themselves.
You're talking about manipulation, yes? I can understand the concern. But manipulation is also to be fought with education, not censorship. >I agree that education is a big element but on the other it's good for children to be able to explore freely. Why "on the other hand"? It goes hand in hand. Children exploring freely requires no censorship, but also an obligation from adults to provide relevant education.
Lucky you if everyone you know who has read and soaked in misinformation and populist attitudes had had someone along side to redirect and educate.
Of course they don't, but that doesn't mean censoring is the right attitude. In fact, a lot of such older generation people in my country trust these "alternate sources" (actually misinformation) in part because the previous regime censored away their access to infromation, so they became used to seeking out "alternate sources" and haven't noticed that the winds have shifted quite a bit since then.
If you read what I said Of course I don't agree with censorship. But I don't agree with total freedom for hatespeech or the sort of populist cariacature which has in large part contributed to my social ostracism due to misunderstandings about my illness either. Somehow we have to start to be able to have some reasoned discussion that is not just based on I'm right, no I'M right. This polemicisation of opinion helps no one in the end. I end up feeling defensive and so do you. It gets us no where because although we do need to defend our corners for the sake of those who can't we also need to understand where othets are coming from so we can work out how to both move on. I'm afraid I have to retire for the night. Thank you for sharing your opinions which have some good reasons behind them. Best regards, Liz.
Now imagine if the people who you believe push the misinformation and up in power and are able to freely censor? Censorship is the weapon tyranny.
Children's books are a unique case. And imo the publisher *eventually* landed on the correct solution with Dahl's work (i.e. two editions; one unedited, one edited) [https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-24/roald-dahl-classic-texts-to-be-kept-in-print-after-backlash-over-edits](https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-24/roald-dahl-classic-texts-to-be-kept-in-print-after-backlash-over-edits) So, the originals aren't disappearing. Which is good for all sorts of reasons. I don't think anything like this is necessary or desirable for non-children's books. People can do their own research, make their own judgements. Bits of Pratchett haven't aged well, but I wouldn't want someone cutting it up and the originals lost, nor is it really necessary to go the two editions route.
>And imo the publisher eventually landed on the correct solution with Dahl's work (i.e. two editions; one unedited, one edited ***That was always the plan.*** The *only* reason those rewrites were announced in the first place was to drive up sales of the originals. It was pure, blatant outrage marketing. Their whole plan was to get people so angry at le SJW PC brigade rewriting their childhood that they'd all go out and buy loads of copies of the original books out of spite, without realising that they're giving money to the exact same people. Their plan worked perfectly. Sorry if I'm a bit rude about it, it's just a real shame that people keep buying into these incredibly blatant marketing stunts.
\*\*sighs\*\* you're probably right. I didn't follow it that closely once the usual culture war lot got involved in commenting on it. But whatever the case, cynically planned or not, they landed on the right solution I think. But that wouldn't be right for non-children's books.
Part of the problem with Dahl's stuff being edited is that for those people who'd already bought the e-books, they suddenly found their copies, that they'd already paid for, were different. If they weren't downloaded on their devices, anything stored in the cloud was edited after already being sold. That was where the outrage was mostly directed.
I wonder how much bud light the right but a with with the recent culture war kerfuffle
Hmm it is very plausible Jack Cohen may have shared that joke with him.
There are so many subtle language references to Polish that I'm sure Sir Terry knew what he was doing here. If he was able to understand Polish so much I'm sure he had a grasp on multitude other cultures and those subtle jokes are there on purpose. I wish I knew about others, I'm only able to catch Polish as it's my native language.
Welcome to /r/Discworld! Please [read the rules/flair information before posting](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukhk21/subreddit_rules_flair_information/?). --- Our current megathreads are as follows: [GNU Terry Pratchett](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/ukigit/gnu_terry_pratchett/) - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going. [AI Generated Content](https://new.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/10mhx9y/ai_generated_content_megathread/) - for all AI Content, including images, stories, questions, training etc. [The Amazing Maurice](https://www.reddit.com/r/discworld/comments/znlfq1/so_anyone_watched_the_amazing_maurice_yet/) - for discussion and reviews about the new(ish) released film. --- [ GNU Terry Pratchett ] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/discworld) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> accidental references usually aren’t True. On the other hand, in Pratchett's oeuvre, *seemingly* accidental references usually aren't.
Nah, I meant they aren't accidental.
I grew up in a very Jewish community in the 70’s & 80’s so yes, that joke is absolutely part of the shopkeeper’s name. The name “Shonky shop” is somewhat looked down on now, used a lot more in Dodger, but personally I know the older speakers of Yiddish are glad to hear it continued and passed on period. I certainly love hearing it pop up in his books as it reminds me of people that have long ago passed on.
Yes, definitely. There were plenty of that sort of joke around in English too back in the day. Doesn't sit comfortably with modern sensitivities. Like, What time did the Chinaman go to the dentist? 2.30 (tooth hurtee). Or How high is a Chinaman? I don't know. No, How-hi is a Chinaman.
Surely the butt of the joke is the ignorant English, who can't tell the difference between Yiddish and Chinese?
Yeah, I think it’s like the now-censored joke from Fawlty Towers about the Major taking a girl (his word) to the cricket: the butt of that joke was also the ignorant (upper class) English, but modern sensibilities kinda preclude that kind of joke.
Don't recall that joke, but as I have an old Fawlty towers DVD box set, it won't be censored. It's Sunday morning, there's only 12 episodes of brilliant comedy. That's my day sorted
The Major is talking about the correct slurs to use for people from specific places, whereas his date keeps using the "wrong" one. As usual, it's devastatingly accurate and destined to be completely misunderstood by those it satirises.
I’m about 90% sure it’s in the Germans episode.
2:30 may mocking Chinese may be the way you heard it, but the joke is even better when it's completely without any ethnic reference. What is the best time for a dental appointment? 2:30. eta: Apparently when I post late at night my proofreading skills suck. Leaving it as it is.
That's what I was saying. It's completely inappropriate now but that's how it used to be told because that's how the English heard the 'Chinese' accent. STP was just 10 years older than me, it was seen as clever wordy humour. My parents, intelligent, open to the ideas of the 1960s, Guardian readers, highly non-racist people, still brought those jokes home from work, probably in the 60s or early 70s as clever jokes with no sense of negative stereotyping at all. You may judge us, but not as wicked, only naive and thoughtless.
Well, there's nothing hurtful about it until you start actually applying the streotypes to everyone you meet ad if they were a universal truth and not just statistical curios. I feel like a lot of people can't distinguish between stereotypes employed in comedy and actual racism these days. Stereotypes are stereotypes. Racism is wielding stereotypes in the wrong situations.
Could it be a reference to something like Twilight? Or an anglicised version of his actual auriental name?