Posthumous Sequels

[Teresa Edgerton]

Several conversations here and there about the boards have started me wondering about this subject, so I thought it might be interesting to hear what people have to say.

What story, by an author no longer living, would you like to see continued? And who would you most like to see write the sequel, or sequels?

Or do you think that books by dead authors should be left alone?

 

[The Ace]

I think those authors who are no longer with us should be allowed to rest in peace. Any writer worth reading will do his own stuff and, by definition, any hack picking over old bones is obviously incapable of writing anything of merit.

Well, that's my 2p worth anyway.

 

[Falsteed]

I definitely agree that stories should be left alone once the author has passed.

As to what author I wish was still around to continue his work, James Clavell. There were so many more stories left in his Asian Saga that it saddens me alot he never got to finish writing them all.

 

[Quokka]

I'd agree with Ace but still there are always exceptions. With 11 out of the 12 books released and alot of notes for the last one completed, I think the Wheel of Time series should be finished. It'll never be the same as having Robert Jordan finish it (and that would likely be the opinion even if it was word for word what Jordan would have released) but in this case it is very much an unfinished work rather than an author taking over residence in someone else's world.

I think time is also a factor, there probably should never be a War of the Worlds 2 written (although someone is sure to tell me it's already out there ) but I would be alot more curious about that if it was getting good word of mouth than a sequel to more recent storys.

There's also situations like with Asimov's 3 laws of robotics where authors have used someone elses world to base new storys in but I guess that's slightly diferrent.

 

[Falsteed]

With 11 out of the 12 books released and alot of notes for the last one completed, I think the Wheel of Time series should be finished.

I would have to agree that if most of the novel has been outlined already, then they should employ someone who would do it justice to close the series. (Cause that's a damn shame.)

 

[Musky]

I would love to see an expansion of Herbert's Dune series. Actually a number of books preceding the time in which the original book was set. Prequels detailing the story of the empire that include the origins of the sinister groups/royal houses in Herbert's novels would be a great idea. You would think someone like his son, maybe in conjunction with another writer, could take this idea, run with it, and do a really great job. It's hard to imagine anyone would be disappointed.



Wait.....now that I think about it, maybe something that good should be left alone. It's possible it might lead to a lot of disappointment.

There might be a lot of money in it, though.

 

[j d worthington]

Oh, this could be a very contentious one....

In general, I tend to agree with Ace, though there are, as noted, exceptions. Series characters have been written by others on occasion with at least some worth now and again, occasionally by very talented writers (Sherlock Holmes being a notable example, where dozens, if not hundreds, of other writers have had a go at the character, several notable writers in their own right). So I'd hesitate to say it should never happen... but it should definitely be something undertaken with a great deal of care, and full awareness that you've probably got some very big shoes to fill... and, as Karl Edward Wagner (iirc) once put it on doing an Howardian pastiche, you're playing Russian roulette with five loaded chambers... and a gun that only has five chambers.....

 

[Omphalos]

I generally think its best to refrain from hiring someone to write stories in an author's established world once he or she is dead. I cant think of any book with a provenance like this that was worth my time. Musky's tongue-in-cheek answer about the Herbert's family shame is primarily what I have in mind, but now that I think about it, pretty much anything like this Anderson has touched seems to demonstrate the principle well. I also don't like shared universe works, for example the Man/Kzin war series.


As an aside, I remember years ago watching David Letterman one night. He had a fake bestseller's list of shocking books for whatever year that he read off. I think Number One was a book called I'm Dead, but I'm Still Writing, by L. Ron Hubbard. The cover had those two colored and spike-braceleted hands from the spine of his books reaching up from the dirt and typing on a typewriter. I still quote that to my brother t this day and he rolls with laughter!

 

[Alurny]

I'd also be in the refrain from writing in another persons world camp. Any writer which tries to, will be giving their interpretation of the writers world, and, in essence, it would never be *truly* part of the original series.

 

[Talysia]

I'd agree with Ace but still there are always exceptions. With 11 out of the 12 books released and alot of notes for the last one completed, I think the Wheel of Time series should be finished. It'll never be the same as having Robert Jordan finish it (and that would likely be the opinion even if it was word for word what Jordan would have released) but in this case it is very much an unfinished work rather than an author taking over residence in someone else's world.

Same here. Having invested so much time reading the WoT, I'd like to see it at least finished, regardless of who completes it.

This is an exception, though. As a rule, I'm against posthumous sequels. No doubt some could be done very well, but will never be the same as the original author.

 

[tangaloomababe]

I have to agree with Ace, I think once the author has written the origianl book no one can really write a sequel to it, an example would be John Wyndham's Day of the Triffids. Simon Clark wrote a sequel called Night of the Triffids, set some 20 years after the conclusion of the original book, it just didn't have the right "feel "about it. I am sure a sequel could have been done, but only by Wyndham himself.

 

[Ian Whates]

I've yet to read any 'posthumous sequels' that match up to the originals, which is at it should be. If an author has created a character or setting, they should be the most comfortable and adept at manipulating and utilising same.

As a rule, I'd always say 'leave well alone'; the exception perhaps being where an author has left something partially finished and somebody else steps in to finish or at least make the incomplete piece presentable for publication. This can sometimes be very worthwhile for a fan.

I'm thinking in particular of Roger Zelazny's Donnerjack, which was expanded and completed after his death by Jane Linskold. The first section of that book was pure, wonderful, unadulterated Zelazny at his best. Reading it brought a tear to my eye and a huge grin to my face. The remaining two thirds were nowhere near as good, but weren't bad and I was still able to read and enjoy the book. Even had the main part been truly poor, I would still have welcomed its publication for that magical first section.

On the other hand, sequels written by others from scratch, from James Bond to Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, have invariably disappointed.

 

[JDP]

I'd agree with what seems to be the consensus of the thread:

Finishing a nearly completed work/series with the prior knowledge and consent of the original author = acceptable.

Writing an entirely new novel based in a deceased author's universe = unacceptable.

In the case of the former, I could see it as quite a frustration for an author to think that their story won't be told after they're gone; it's part of their legacy.

 

[Connavar]

I also think author who arent among us anymore should have their work be left alone.


Anyway I would like to see sequels to Jon Shannow series by David Gemmell. Only Conn Iggulden being so near in style and has very quality similar books himself should be able to make them work.

 

[iansales]

It completely depends on the writer of the sequel(s). Much as I wanted to find out what Frank Herbert intended with his cliff-hanger ending to Chapterhouse Dune, having to wade through Brian Herbert & Kevin J Anderson's Hunters of Dune and Sandworms of Dune was torture.

Kevin J Anderson has also written an authorised sequel to AE van Vogt's Slan. I like van Vogt's novels, but I've never been that big a fan of Slan.

Stephen Baxter wrote an authorised sequel to HG Wells' The Time Machine, titled The Time Ships. It's very good.

Terry Bisson completed a sequel to Walter M Miller's A Canticle for Liebowitz. I like Bisson's fiction, but I've heard mixed reports about the book.

And then there's Tolkien's The Children of Hurin...

 

[Ragnar]

It seems that the general opinion is that a writer's creations should be left alone when they are no longer with us & I'd agree with that. On a related theme - does everyone feel the same about TV/Film tie-ins and spin-offs?

 

[Nesacat]

As a general rule I'd like for the writer's work to be left alone. I don't mind people writing in the realms they created as this generally serves to enrich the tales and expand their boundaries.

However, the Conan tales not written by Robert E Howard for example are nothing at all like the original and for me at least were terrible. Many of the later Sherlock Holmes tales have also deviated greatly from the character of the original and some have gone so far as to make him totally different. There is a set of books in which he is married for instance.

There are authors whom I wish had lived to write more; Lovecraft and Robert E Howard being two of them.

However, in the case to Wheel Of Time, there is enough material he had shared his ideas with his wife. That series does need to end.

And has been pointed out Time Ships was very good as a sequel to The Time Machine and Children of Hurin was also very well done. I read both and am glad I did.

On the other hand Scarlett as a sequel to Gone With The Wind was simply awful.

 

[iansales]

Does Frankenstein Unbound by Brian Aldiss count as a sequel? That's quite good.

There are also lots of sequels to Jane Austen's novels. I've not read any of them, however.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I asked the question because I have mixed reactions to the whole idea. I can only think of one such sequel (and it was a continuation of an unfinished story) that I thought was very good. Well, I do remember one other, but I read that when I was nine or ten, so perhaps my critical faculties were a bit at fault back then.

And having been disappointed by some books where I really thought that the combination of old story and new author had an excellent chance of working, I suspect that I always would be disappointed by a sequel to something I genuinely loved.

But still, there is a small part of me that hopes, that would take a look at such a book, just in case ...

JD, I was thinking about some of the Sherlock Holmes stories by other hands when I started the thread. Even though I've never found one that caught the flavor of the original, it would be impossible for me to dismiss some of those writers as hacks. Their own stories are far too good.

As for the Jane Austen sequels that Ian mentions, I've started two that were written by Jane Aiken -- whose children books I love -- and disliked them to the point where I couldn't finish. I wouldn't even pick up any of the others, since I know how difficult it is to do that period right.

Well, OK, if Susanna Clarke wrote an Austen sequel, I'd probably be eager to give it a chance.

But if almost everyone here condemns this sort of thing as picking over old bones, does the same thing apply to novels that reimagine another writer's characters and world?

Is Gregory Maguire automatically branded as a hack for writing Wicked and Son of a Witch? What about Isabel Allende for reworking Zorro? I didn't like any of these books, but it would be hard for me to dismiss the writers as talentless, or incapable of producing anything of merit. Particularly Allende, who is a highly respected author with an international reputation.

On the other hand, The Looking Glass Wars, by Frank Beddor is, in my humble opinion, hackwork at its most despicable.

 

[Connavar]

It depends on what you mean by re imagine.

If someone created a good story in a dead writers world, its alright if he recreated the world to make it his own.

But i dont think you should touch his characters. They are his,hers children. Create your own characters in a famous world thats alright.

But also if the world is more famous and important than the characters, then to me it feels wrong. For example i dislike the idea of Foundation novels done by others and stories set in REH famous worlds with Conan and co. Its like living in someone else house without them knowing it.


Someone using The Hyborian Age with own characters and story for example would be wrong. REH created not only a world but a very long history for it too.


Does this make sense?

Thankfully i dont think too much about these things, i act like people never wrote thier own Conan and Foundation stories and the like