- Terry Pratchett, The Truth.
These lines are an introduction to the character of William De Worde, the protagonist and accidental editor of his city's very first newspaper, The Times. The author proceeds to categorise William as "one of the glassless, who was at the back of the crowd and failed to catch the barman's eye." Aiding and abetting this rather unflattering description of the poor chap is the blurb behind the book, which tells us that William just wants to get at the truth, but unfortunately, everyone else just wants to get at William."
So what is it about fantasy in general and Pratchetts work in particular that makes it so bloody popular? Is it the humour? Is it the sneaky satire? Is it the parody, the subtle undercurrents of mockery against every authority we love to hate? Is it the consistent allusions to the pop culture we're shockingly surviving? Or is it the fact that his fantasy is a lot closer to reality than one would imagine? As Pratchett himself confessed in an interview with January magazine: "Sometimes a fantasy author has to point out the strangeness of reality." The most pressing trait of The Truth is the fact that the author is weighing the pros and cons of a journalistic career and more importantly, the effect of the printed word on the common man. The central characters of this very funny book are journalists who are grappling with a city police force which seems almost fascist, apart from facing the traditional perils of a journalists life, such as people who want them dead, a vampire with a suicidal fascination for flash photography and some more people who want them dead in a different way. Beyond all the witty repartee and the vampire's hilarious accent, however, is an interesting insight into contemporary journalism.
Ideally, what a good newspaper ought to aim for is the liberating truth, the truth that sets us free. But is the present day media really courageous enough to do that with integrity? Or are our trusted newspapers owned by massive organisations that want only to monopolise public culture, shape public opinion, take over the economy and outsell competitors? How else does one explain the fact that for all of April 2007, for instance, the public was bombarded solely with daily updates of the guest list, catering plans and celebration schedule of the marriage of Abhishek Bacchan and Aishwarya Rai? Did nothing more important, and more relevant to public and economic concerns happen all through the month? Why is whether or not Shah Rukh Khan was invited to the wedding, or whether Abhishek's childhood friend is actually Salman Khan in disguise, an epochal debate? I flip open a popular daily in the same week when thousands died in the China earthquakes and hundreds more passed away in the Jaipur blasts, and am confronted with a frightfully large photograph of Preity Zinta on the front page, accompanying a 4 column article on her plans to 'Party at Cannes'. Are you kidding me?
I quote from the book, the thoughts of William himself, "The truth is what we print. Honesty is just sometimes not the same thing. If its in the paper, its the news. And its the truth."
Not that we, as the public who buy the paper we criticise, are completely absolved from blame. Pratchetts work is also a very telling comment on the abysmal bone headedness of the consumers. We've got a virtual oligarchy here, where the government manipulates the media and the media manipulates us, and we sit pretty and pay them to do it. Pratchett describes the struggles of the slightly bashful but painfully honest staff of The Times against a larger newspaper, ironically called The Enquirer, which prints ghastly but grand (and mostly untrue) news, such as that of a woman giving birth to a snake, which in turn is defended by an indignant reader who says "It must be right, otherwise they wouldn't put it in!" Are we, the discerning, intelligent, democratic consumers who so recently vociferously supported the right to information stupid enough to believe anything, as long as its in print? क्या हम कुछ भी मानने के लिए तैयार हैं? The truth shall make ye free? I dont think so. More like, the truth shall make ye fret. Pratchett emphasizes, then, that the public reads what it wants to read, the public believes what it thinks ought to be true. Unfortunately enough, what is in public interest doesn't ever interest the public. "A lie can run around the world before the truth has got its boots on."
At the same time, however, Pratchett probably believes that there is a glimmer of hope on the horizon, a silver lining in the murky clouds of the media. His honest, stolid supporters of facts triumphantly score over theire morally weaker competitors at the end of the book. The truth finally gets its boots on, and starts kicking. The mysteries shrouding the politics of the city are successfully unravelled, and as a member of William's staff categorically states, "Some people are heroes. And some people take down notes. And sometimes, its the same thing."
Click the link for more info on Pratchett: http://www.lspace.org/books/analysis/index.html
