Let dead authors rest in peace - please.

[HarryT]

I welcome reading new stories featuring my favourite "characters". Lots of people have written "new" Sherlock Holmes stories, for example, many of which are pretty good.

[jinlo]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

In that light, I'd simply suggest you refrain from comment until after you've seen Benedictus' Winnie the Pooh or Colfer's "Hitchhiker's Guide," and not make a knee-jerk decision against it before it is done.

And I would simply suggest the poster is allowed his or her opinion just as you are allowed yours. There is no need to call it a knee-jerk decision. If you want to disagree with it, fine, but leave it at that.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by jinlo

And I would simply suggest the poster is allowed his or her opinion just as you are allowed yours. There is no need to call it a knee-jerk decision. If you want to disagree with it, fine, but leave it at that.

Sorry, but deciding before anything's been done that the product will be bad, or somehow wrong, seems like a knee-jerk decision to me... that's my opinion. It's not like I'm calling the poster a jerk, which I'm not.

I just don't see the need to place an author's characters on a pedestal, inviolable by future artisans... it is the author that should be on that pedestal, if they are considered that great. Characters, settings, etc, are open to interpretation, and unless there is something about the original story that precludes sequels, prequels, etc, I see no reason to do so if desired.

The point of these threads is not to simply say, "I disagree," and sign off. We are discussing the subject, and I think I have presented a rational and reasonable argument, without insulting or denigrating anyone. But since this is clearly one of those situations where neither side will be convincing the other, I'll just leave on that note.

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Lots of people have written "new" Sherlock Holmes stories, for example, many of which are pretty good.

That's one case where it does seem to work OK - with an archetypal character that has taken on a life of its own in popular culture so as to completely overshadow the original author's style. Plenty of enjoyable Holmes and Dracula pastiches out there.

Edited to add: Although I understand there are Holmes purists who get quite upset about some of the pastiches. It may depend on one's attachment to/familiarity with the originals. I enjoy them, but I'm not the type that spends sleepless nights worrying about the exact name of Watson's first wife or Doyle's minor date discrepancies.

[acprinter]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Would that mean that, if another photographer took pictures in Death Valley, you could not go there afterward and take your own pictures? Of course not. The key is to approach the subject in your own way, and not to ape your predecessors. Your pictures can still be yours, regardless of whether the subject has been explored before.

And so it is with authors' creations. They can be done, and given justice, by other than their creators. Many subjects, creations and characters have been re-explored by later creators, and they have not all suffered from the experience, especially in the theatre, motion picture and television arenas, but in literature as well.

In that light, I'd simply suggest you refrain from comment until after you've seen Benedictus' Winnie the Pooh or Colfer's "Hitchhiker's Guide," and not make a knee-jerk decision against it before it is done.

My statement is far from a knee-jerk reaction.

I have photographed in Death Valley many times, but until I developed my own style and gallery owners and curators would pick up an unsigned print by me and could say that I had done it and not another photographer I achieved no success.

As a photographer working in the fine-art world, I achieve more satisfaction creating new images and not copying someone else, even though I could make more money by copying someone like Ansel Adams.

As I stated before, this is my opinion.

[fugazied]

Originally Posted by Superlucky

It doesn't evoke a visceral response from me. I would probably never read such a thing, but I see it more in line with tribute albums where different bands cover the songs of an artist they admire. I don't want to listen to twelve crappy bands rape Beatles classics, but it doesn't piss me off when they do it.

David Bowie did one of the worst imo, he covered 'across the universe' on one of his albums. Truly terrible imo.

As for classic continued, I am not terribly bothered IF they get proven authors to do so. For example if a John Grisham series was finished with the assistance of a young action author who had demonstrated his talent with a coupe of his own books.

If they are shoddy version written by talentless hacks it would be a shame. Movies often churn out bad sequels in the name of making money, but I would like to think publishers and authors are a little more careful and only do so if it retains a high level of quality.

[alecE]

I think I'd make a distinction between the 'serious' efforts and the hearse-chasers. Jill Paton Walsh's continuation of Dorothy L Sayers' Peter Wimsey series was a thoughtful exercise which I enjoyed. Compare and contrast to the various Alistair Maclean knock-offs "from an idea he scribbled on a restaurant menu in an off moment". Seems to come down to quality vs. rubbish that's just trading on the name?

[Laz116]

Originally Posted by fugazied

David Bowie did one of the worst imo, he covered 'across the universe' on one of his albums. Truly terrible imo.

As for classic continued, I am not terribly bothered IF they get proven authors to do so. For example if a John Grisham series was finished with the assistance of a young action author who had demonstrated his talent with a coupe of his own books.

If they are shoddy version written by talentless hacks it would be a shame. Movies often churn out bad sequels in the name of making money, but I would like to think publishers and authors are a little more careful and only do so if it retains a high level of quality.

Don't know about the bowie thing. But still I'd like to defend him as a whole, since he as been a proponent for serious scifi in both music and acting.

To discard ashes to ashes, space oddity, starman and even spaceboy etc. is ridicoulous imo. Bowie has had a very big impact on the scifi scene.