There's a Terry Pratchett interview where he proudly claims that fantasy is a very serious genre. The last paragraph is very interesting.
"Fantasy can carry quite a serious burden, and so can humor. So what you're saying is, if you strip away the trolls and the dwarves and the things and put everyone into modern dress, get them to agonize a bit, mention Virginia Woolf a few times, and there! Hey! I've got a serious novel. But you don't actually have to do that."
He argued that fantasy is an important genre that can say so much more than just "oh look it's two trolls fighting". Fantasy as a metaphor of the real world has always been one of his biggest themes and the thing I appreciate the most about his discworld saga.
That's why it strikes me as weird and unpratchetty to have the finale claim that turning a fantasy metaphor into the real world, with very serious people in very serious clothes, is such a perfect solution, the only one that makes sense, the best one possible.
You trying to tell me that the man that used fantasy as his main tool/theme/playground to talk about real life, would have wanted to strip one of his books of the fantasy element in order to make the end more serious and poignant? In all his discworld novels there's never been that kind of subtext, the use of fantasy is always loud and proud and very intentional with its meaning.
I don't know... Just my two cents.
Below is the full interview:
romaincrisis
origamiaround
kaledo-art
tangentwithtanner
vaporwave
pixelskylines
discoholicmusic
snowghoul
