Should unfinished posthumous novels be published?

[kennyc]

This is the/one of the latest

The Pale King by David Foster Wallace (NYTimes book review):

David Foster Wallace: The Last Audit
By TOM McCARTHY
Published: April 14, 2011

It seems to me there are two ways of understanding the document assembled from a jumble of boxes, disks and printed or handwritten papers that, at the time of David Foster Wallace’s suicide in 2008, ran into the high hundreds of pages — a document that, conscientiously and intelligently whittled down by Wallace’s editor Michael Pietsch to 500-odd pages, is now being published under the title “The Pale King,” and, just as significantly, the subtitle “An Unfinished Novel.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/bo...?_r=1&src=recg

[FF2]

Well, they've been doing it for years with classical music. Authentic - some of it. Artist's realization - unlikely.

[DiapDealer]

I'm not even sure that seemingly finished novels should be published posthumously.

[jgaiser]

Just another way to make money from a dead author. No...

[carld]

Tolkein's unfinished works have been well worth reading. I'd say yes, as long as the story as published has not been hacked beyond recognition, or changed to violate the author's intent in some way.

[grumpy3b]

Depends I suppose. If it matters to the estate and the fan base then perhaps. But to line the pockets of the publishers is downright morbid and sort of profiting off the publicity of the death.

I can't remember reading that many posthumously completed and published books that I've read. The only one I recall is relatively recent and was the completion of Heinlein's Variable Star by Spider Robinson. It was, well, not stellar. Yet at the same time it was done with care and love for Heinlein and his wife Virginia. Plus I think it was good for Robinson as he had a huge man-crush on RAH.

But really I see both sides of the coin and as a fan I am leery of reading something that is based on an outline or at least a complete first draft. I just don't want to remember the book as disappointing. I would rather just have them end where the end. Ultimately that is how life works, right? Everything just ends and as they say it ends with a whimper not a bang. Maybe an author's works should do the same. Sure keep the catalog alive but let the last few words just hang in the air incomplete.

[Giggleton]

Just file it in the incomplete due to author's death section of the network and call it a day.

[Kali Yuga]

A few quick thoughts....

• It's up to the literary executor to decide.
• The author's wishes have no force, beyond whatever influence those wishes have on the literary executor.
• Some scholars and fans alike are going to want to see the material anyway, no matter how badly or well it's written, or how much input an editor or second author has.
• As with anything in life, caveat emptor. No one's forcing anyone to read posthumous works.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm not even sure that seemingly finished novels should be published posthumously.

Good point!

[Hellmark]

Depends on the state of the books at the time. I mean look at the Millennium Trilogy. Stieg Larsson died before any of them were published, but they were pretty much finished. He left behind 3/4 of a fourth book, which his partner is supposedly in the middle of finish off. If things are mostly done, I see no reason why not.

[taosaur]

As long as they aren't misrepresented as works finished by the author, let the readership decide whether they are worthy as canon or to be considered apocrypha.

[Worldwalker]

I hate having to agree with Kali Yuga but ... yeah, pretty much.

Publish the book, with a clear description of who did what -- e.g., "from an outline by Joe Schmoe." If people want to read it, they will; if not, it will languish unread, like millions of other books. Nobody's forcing anybody to read it.

[malliemcg]

I enjoyed the final of Gemmell's work (Troy:Fall of Kings) which was finished by his wife. Although it appears that he had enabled this to be done more easily (and implicit permission) by preparing chapter plans when his heart surgery was looming - as per http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle2320620.ece (if it is to be believed).

I also must admit I did not object to the final two books based off the plans to "Dune 7"

I suppose I liked the idea of having an authors "intent" finished, it's about the content the characters and the story evolving, I suppose in both of the above cases I wanted to know what happened next so was glad they were released. In both cases the author had died with plans to continue their works, and in the case with Gemmell, in such a way that I think leaves no interpretation that his intention was for somoene to finish the work.

(I am sure that you will find people who are just against such things as I am for them, but each can vote with their money dollars!)

[Valkrider]

Don't forget that without posthumous publishing we would never have got to read Stieg Larrson's trilogy. All three were published after his death. I would certainly have missed reading three great books if they had not been published.

As to unfinished works, I think it depends on how unfinished. Don't forget editors have a lot to do with what we finally read and as a result a partially completed work may or may not be what the author intended but it will certainly be what the editor intended.

[Andanzas]

"Dearest Max, my last request: Everything I leave behind me ... in the way of diaries, manuscripts, letters (my own and others), sketches, and so on, is to be burned unread."

Fortunately, Max Brod didn't respect this last wish, and now we can read Kafka's works.