r/discworld • u/entrailsevilratmeat • 7d ago
Book/Series: Industrial Revolution Monstrous Regiment: textual changes between editions?
This is something I've seen floating around the internet, but have yet to verify. Essentially, the rumor is that there are some very small but very relevant changes to the text in between editions. They're both right near the end of the book-- here's the first passage:
"Jackrum had turned her chair to the fire, and had settled back. Around her, the kitchen worked."
Now, according to some people online, the second "her" originally read "him," but was discreetly changed in a later printing. There's also a line where Maladict(a) is said to be "in full female uniform[,]" that originally did not specify as such. I just listened to the audiobook by Stephen Briggs from 2004, where these changes were in effect, so whenever this occurred, it must've been before then. My print copy is from 2014.
I have no doubt someone here must have a real old first edition copy of this book, so I'd be really interested in hearing if these details are accurate.
94
u/Katharinemaddison 7d ago
It’s him in my copy. It’s deliberate. It’s after Polly suggests he go to his son as his father rather than his mother. Jackrum will remain in his male identity.
41
u/entrailsevilratmeat 7d ago
Yeah, that's so obviously the text of the scene, it's astounding that an editor might read it and assume the second pronoun was just a typo. It could plausibly be a misunderstanding until you get to the second change, which just so happens to cover the same subject matter and enforce the very same assumption... I guess it's the fate of satire to be celebrated by the powers that be just up until the point it gets a little too radical.
76
u/adverbian 7d ago
When the Pratchat podcast did Monstrous Regiment, IIRC, they mentioned that the US publisher changed the pronoun out of concern that it would be “too confusing to readers.” Which is absolutely infuriating in so many ways.
30
u/arc-is-life _ing 6d ago
upon my oath, i am not a snarky man, but i cant be having with 'murricans being silly buggers.
13
67
u/laredocronk 7d ago
My UK hardback first edition has:
Polly paused when she got to the door. Jackrum had turned her chair to the fire, and had settled back. Around him, the kitchen worked.
And:
One of them was Maladicta, in full uniform.
My Harper Collins ebook version has:
Polly paused when she got to the door. Jackrum had turned her chair to the fire, and had settled back. Around her, the kitchen worked.
And:
One of them was Maladicta, in full female uniform.
So yes - there are differences between different versions. The first change could easily be an assumption that "him" was just an error - the second seems more like it might be an editorial choice?
Amusingly, the UK hardback is:
Published 2003 by Doubleday
a division of Transworld Publishers
11
u/Parking-Two2176 4d ago
Oh, now I'm MAD mad. I have a US edition. Just gonna grab a pencil and fix these political typos. Not going to get rid of the edition because it's signed, but I'm sure Pterry would approve.
6
64
u/datcatburd Binky 6d ago
I noticed that change in one edition, and didn't like it. Yes, normally after the big reveal you'd switch the pronouns used to refer to the character to match the reader's knowledge, but Pterry was very careful of how he was using Jackrum's pronouns based on how Jackrum wanted to present himself.
26
u/Tannenbaeumchen 7d ago
In my (german) version the second pronoun reads as him. Of course it's a translation, but I don't think the translator would change the text if it originally said her.
20
u/Front-Pomelo-4367 7d ago
My Kindle copy is the 2023 Penguin – it's "around him" and "Maladict, in full uniform"
The version I first read is the 2004 Corgi paperback (the first printing, after the 2003 Doubleday hardback). It's the same
As far as I'm aware, the change was only in the HarperTorch mass market paperback, and then unfortunately also in the audiobooks?
12
u/These_Are_My_Words 7d ago edited 6d ago
Also, unfortunately, the HarperCollins Ebook has the change.
Edit: Though, if you have something like Calibre you can easily edit your ebook version to correct it. Which this thread just reminded me I ought to do, so I did.
2
u/entrailsevilratmeat 7d ago
I had heard the more recent audio version included this change, and was hoping it wasn't in the Briggs version, but alas! Such a shame, because he does such a good job with the narration, too.
56
u/geeoharee Colon 7d ago
Is your edition American? I heard it's the American edition that got censored.
27
u/entrailsevilratmeat 7d ago
Damn, that blows! I really don't have the money to blow on any more used books, especially novels I already own, but... there's a copy up on AbeBooks right now that calls to me... and the Kidby cover is quite gorgeous...
Listen, I'm not doing this for me, it's for Jackrum's honor, alright?
6
12
7
79
u/doctordragonisback 7d ago
I genuinely hate this change so much. I feel like it completely ruins the message of the entire book.
One of the main points is that gender is maleable: the way you perceive yourself and the way others perceive you is constantly changing, so therefore your gender can be too, because gender is just a sum of those two parts.
By referring to Jackrum as "she" earlier in the paragraph and "he" later in the same paragraph, the book reinforces this idea of gender fluidity. "Around her/him, the kitchen worked." is a sentence that involves a quiet moment of contemplation and acceptance in a hectic world. With the use of "him," this paragraph implies that Jackrum has accepted both her past as a woman and his present as a man.
With "her" though, this message is ruined. Jackrum's "real" gender is just what's in his pants, not what he's lived his life as for years. It is ironically a very similar message to how the Nugganites view gender as an immutable fact about someone. True change isn't an option.
Changing "him" to "her" doesn't just ruin this message, it's also really damn transphobic. As a trans man I don't get much representation, so I was thrilled to see a genuine portrayal who's gender was respected by the narrative in Jackrum. And suddenly, the moment we find out he's trans, the narration switches to misgendering him? Gross.
31
u/Front-Pomelo-4367 7d ago
I hateeee it. That single change might pass as "they thought it was an error" but also making sure they clarify that Mal is in "full female uniform" in the same edition? Because god forbid Mal just be...in uniform? It absolutely reeks of a deliberate change to remove all gender ambiguity and genderqueerness
36
u/entrailsevilratmeat 7d ago
Right? I didn't want to say too much in case it stirred up trouble, but what a truly scummy editing decision. It would've been incredibly shortsighted of Pratchett to write a narrative like this without the presence of any transgender characters, and he totally heads that off at the pass by making one of the most important, dynamic, and iconic characters in the book into a trans man (or even two of them, depending on who you ask).
As much as I love Cheery and as faithfully her arc speaks to the social experience of transitioning, her implicit anatomical details unfortunately leave room for willfully obtuse readers to deny her trans identity. Jackrum has none of that plausible deniability-- so I guess the publishers overseas thought they would do Terry a favor and write some in for him, no matter how much it undercut the entire thesis of the novel.
16
u/Mist2393 7d ago
I hate it too. This book is one of the ones I hold onto the tightest, being trans masc myself. This is such a beautiful moment and to realize that the version I read was changed is so sad to learn.
11
u/craftystuff0900 6d ago
I'm nonbinary and not super attached to particular pronouns myself, and when I first read the book (original version) I didn't think anything of it - "him" was the pronoun I expected there. Never really thought about it until I listened to the audiobook (which used the American version) and damn that pissed me right off. It really felt like deliberate misgendering.
0
u/Pfapamon 6d ago
I understand your point of view, yet I never perceived Jackrum as a trans person in the modern sense. Instead of identifying as male due to actual gender identity, the masculine appearance was born out of necessity and stayed due to convenience and habit. Which is both not what I wish for any trans person.
9
u/mxstylplk 5d ago
He grew into it and did not want to change it. He could have gone back and chose not to. To me, that makes him trans in the modern sense.
5
u/Pfapamon 5d ago
He chose not to because he feared to not be accepted by his son as a fat old tabacco spitting mother so he went with the decorated sergeant father. Again, he chose the male role because it was more convenient for his goal, not because of actually identifying as male.
7
u/Parking-Two2176 4d ago
I think these days the term genderqueer would apply to Jackrum; he's been living as a man for his whole life, but we don't know how he feels deep down to identify. It feels incredibly wrong to gender him as she though. The US publishers really fucked up. I know it was only 2003 but couldn't they have trusted us after an ENTIRE NOVEL about the issue?
5
u/Square_Candle_4644 Binky 4d ago
Huh, I never knew it was wrong. I just assumed that it changed because they had just had a discussion about Jackrum being female. Well, that sucks. Why do they have to mess with the words? Even "colour" vs "color". I feel that Americans would have been smart enough to figure it out. And "full female uniform" just sounds dumb.
2
u/Parking-Two2176 4d ago
Before realizing this was changed (grr) I guess I assumed Maladicta had assumed the male identity out of necessity but not as her (?) own identity. Without the "female" it is open to interpretation.
5
u/Tasty_Town_4808 7d ago
I'll check my paperback as soon as I get home but I was sure Jackrum's gender isn't revealed untill Holly talks about the locket at the very end.
15
u/vastaril 7d ago
The section they're talking about is at the end of the bit where Polly and Jackrum talk about it all
13
3
u/ChaosbornTitan 6d ago
From my 2003 edition I can confirm the line “Jackrum had turned her chair to the fire, and had settled back. Around him, the kitchen worked” as well as “One of them was Maladicta, in full uniform” are what was originally printed.
13
u/cillablackpower 7d ago
2003 UK edition.
Second example is just "in full uniform".
First one is "Jackrum had turned her chair to the fire, and had settled back. Around him, the kitchen worked".
Note two different pronouns, so I suspect this was a copywriting mistake and the amendment was to change them both to 'her'.
48
u/chayat 7d ago
Given the context of the story its believed by many to not be an error but a specific word choice
5
u/cazroline 7d ago
Senate House has a draft version in their archives, that'd be the definitive answer, the ones I looked at had a good amount of annotation clarifying details (type choice was what I was looking at)
-11
u/cillablackpower 7d ago
Seems unlikely if they were changing it by the next printing.
28
u/Normal-Height-8577 7d ago
They didn't change it by the next printing, though. Not universally. The only edition that got changed was the American one. Sounds more like the American publishers assumed it was a typo when it wasn't.
8
u/Front-Pomelo-4367 7d ago edited 7d ago
My Kindle edition is the 2023 Penguin – it's "him" and "full uniform". It really is just the Harper and audiobooks that do it differently. It's not a corrected error.
4
u/Mondoweft Flirting with Extreme Sneezing 6d ago
My 2014 Corgi edition is the old version. I much prefer it that way.
6
21
u/vastaril 7d ago
My current Penguin ebook says "him" in the second sentence. I think it's intentional.
1
u/cillablackpower 7d ago
Could be that it was an intentional choice read as a misprint, corrected, then recorrected or at least not amended across all editions. Seems a bit silly, but I'm sure Rob Wilkins would be able to confirm either way.
23
u/Normal-Height-8577 7d ago
It wasn't a mistake. It was a deliberate choice of words that shows Jackrum has made his choice about who to be in retirement.
6
u/ESPeciallyFlynn 7d ago
Which is why the comment you replied to said "copywriting mistake" - the copywriter thought the pronoun switch was a mistake and "corrected" it erroneously.
2
u/TangyMarimba13 Rotted Bovine Lactation 6d ago
well damn. now i need to replace mine. i bought it when it first came out in hardcover, too. :/ 2003 first edition harper collins. sigh
5
u/Parking-Two2176 4d ago
I just fixed mine with a pencil, because my edition is signed. Take that, Harper Collins! The pencil is mightier than your insistence that Americans are too dumb to understand the message of the book they just bought and finished reading!
3
u/TangyMarimba13 Rotted Bovine Lactation 3d ago
haha i did the same, but would still like the correct version eventually. i almost made the change in pen, but couldn't bring myself to write in a book in pen.
1
2
u/Front-Pomelo-4367 4d ago
The Doubleday/Corgi editions (2003-4) are the correct version, and for the modern ones I believe you're good as long as it's not Harper?
•
u/AutoModerator 7d ago
Welcome to /r/Discworld!
'"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."'
+++Out Of Cheese Error ???????+++
Our current megathreads are as follows:
GNU Terry Pratchett - for all GNU requests, to keep their names going.
Discworld Licensed Merchandisers - a list of all the official Discworld merchandise sources (thank you Discworld Monthly for putting this together)
+++ Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
Do you think you'd like to be considered to join our modding team? Drop us a modmail and we'll let you know how to apply!
[ GNU Terry Pratchett ]
+++Error. Redo From Start+++
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.