Books And Stories That You'd Like to see Rewritten

BAYLOR

There Are Always new Things to Learn.
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
24,471
Books and stories in their original form that you find sadly lacking, and could benefit with from a rewrite. This covers books and stories from all genres and any era of Literature.


Hugh Walpole's Gothic 1764 novel The Castle of Otranto. Silly and badly written . In better hands this one could have been alot better then it turned out.
 
I can't say that I've ever been inclined to want to see anything be rewritten; in fact I often cringe when I see the latest version of a classic rewritten so that it might fit today's social structure and then be portrayed on the big screen.

But for me books have always been about the characters in the book. That's the one thing that an author truly brings to the table that no one else can. You can take great ideas that seem original; fantastic science that seems far reaching; even political and social ideas that seem prophetic and though they might be interesting, if they are not given solid characters it's the difference between on the shelf and in the trash. No thought that I would like to see a rewrite.

Now if we were to begin to discuss the newer non-traditional self published venue I might be inclined at the end of a good story containing real relate-able characters that has some grammar problems to begin wishing for a rewrite; but that only amounts to wishing for what I originally paid for.
 
I'll cheat and go with a rewritten screenplay of Dracula. It has never been properly done on film. Obviously the book should not be rewritten, but I keep waiting for someone to really bring Stoker to screen in a dedicated way.
 
There are some series (so far in my experience, they are all fantasy) where the world changes as the author begins to have a (for want of a better word) better, more developed idea of the world they have created will be. The first book can sometimes feel like it is out of place and in my not very expert opinion may benefit from a rewrite to bring it into line with the other books in the series. For me, the example that stands out is Pawn of Prophecy by David Eddings, there are a few things, I think mainly around the magic system, but possibly also character that are not consistent with the other books in the series (I should warn that it has been a while since I have read the series so my memory might be a little fuzzy). the Colour of Magic by Terry Pratchett also has a similar feel to me, and if I remember correctly Rincewind seems to be quite a different character compared to the later books.
 
I can't think of much, because a book properly rewritten is surely a different book. I suppose the only thing I can think of is A Turn of Light by Julie Czernada. But this is just because it turned into a sort of book I didn't want to read, not because it was a bad book. It became a romance - actually, that specific sort of romance where two men compete for the heroine, which is something that doesn't appeal to me, especially when the set-up is so obvious. The original idea, of a person who has to be prevented from leaving an idyllic place for the common good, strikes me as very interesting.
 
I'd honestly say that I get this feel
ing with some of the young adult books or those aimed at younger generations. Mostly because the underlying story and characters are often very good; but the overall tone, maturity of writing and the general target audience of the writer mean that sometimes it feels a touch hollow for an older reader (least in my view). They are the kind of books I'd like to see re-written as a story.

However like tinkerdan I typically hate and loath re-writes on the TV and big screens. Because almost every time its only done to cash-in on a brand name and most are bad. I'd say retellings are suitable - those things like taking a classic and putting it in outer-space or such - ergo where the creator is clearing drawing great inspiration from a single source; but is twisting it into something that is very much apart from it
 
Hodgson's The Night Land would be my nomination. Of course I'd want the author to be the rewrite man.
 
Hodgson's The Night Land would be my nomination. Of course I'd want the author to be the rewrite man.

Didn't James Stoddard already do a retelling to rewriting of this one?
 
That Hideous Strength by C.S. Lewis. A book with about four times the amount of ideas in it as the average novel, of which about a third are really impressive, one third ok, and the last third incomprehensible. In particular, I would like it rewritten to make the good guys and their version of God appealing, rather than just stern and bizarre (although of course that's probably the whole point). Oh, and ditch that whole lesbian secret police thing, it wasn’t really working.
 
Last edited:
There are some series (so far in my experience, they are all fantasy) where the world changes as the author begins to have a (for want of a better word) better, more developed idea of the world they have created will be. The first book can sometimes feel like it is out of place and in my not very expert opinion may benefit from a rewrite to bring it into line with the other books in the series. For me, the example that stands out is Pawn of Prophecy by David Eddings, there are a few things, I think mainly around the magic system, but possibly also character that are not consistent with the other books in the series (I should warn that it has been a while since I have read the series so my memory might be a little fuzzy). the Colour of Magic by Terry Pratchett also has a similar feel to me, and if I remember correctly Rincewind seems to be quite a different character compared to the later books.

Dragons of Autumn Twilight fits this bill for me. Obviously, the series was hugely successful, but that first book shows its D&D roots a little too plainly at times. The jump in quality from that book to the second is remarkable to me. Book one was fun but so episodic (the detour into Darken Wood, slugs and dark elves down opposing corridors of Pax Tharkas) as to occasionally be absurd. It wasn't until book two that the characters, plot, and writing began to develop into the kind of excitement that made the series great (the dream, destruction of Tarsis, Sturm on the wall). It's never going to be as well regarded as LOTR or anything, but I thought it was a great trilogy if you can get past some of the cheese in book one, and I get the strong impression that Weis and Hickman improved so much in their writing careers afterwards that they would have been able cut a lot of that cheese if they had simply been a little more experienced.
 
Unless the book is to be rewritten by the original author (and when you say "in better hands," Baylor, I assume you mean that somebody else would do the rewriting) I find the whole idea appalling. A book is more than just a story and characters. The author puts something of him- or herself into it. Somebody else couldn't rewrite it without injecting something of their own personality into it. It wouldn't be the same book at all. At worst it would be a rip-off, at best a re-imagining.

I think that for most published writers there will probably be a few books they would like to rewrite, given the time and opportunity. It would be interesting to know, in some of the above cases, whether those books would come under that heading for the authors themselves.

____
(As for The Castle of Otranto, it's interesting as an artifact of a certain sensibility particular to the time and to the author, important as a book that inspired so many others, but in my personal opinion it's such a mess that it would be beyond salvaging without such an extensive rewrite that it would hardly resemble the original. )
 
Unless the book is to be rewritten by the original author (and when you say "in better hands," Baylor, I assume you mean that somebody else would do the rewriting) I find the whole idea appalling. A book is more than just a story and characters. The author puts something of him- or herself into it. Somebody else couldn't rewrite it without injecting something of their own personality into it. It wouldn't be the same book at all. At worst it would be a rip-off, at best a re-imagining.

I think that for most published writers there will probably be a few books they would like to rewrite, given the time and opportunity. It would be interesting to know, in some of the above cases, whether those books would come under that heading for the authors themselves.

____
(As for The Castle of Otranto, it's interesting as an artifact of a certain sensibility particular to the time and to the author, important as a book that inspired so many others, but in my personal opinion it's such a mess that it would be beyond salvaging without such an extensive rewrite that it would hardly resemble the original. )

A book that poorly written like the Castle of Ontranto It's pretty dreadful one the worst books I've ever read. It could do with a rewrite.

Then there is The Nightlands by William Hope Hodgson, Yeah its got great imagery and the story could have been interesting it's literary style that Hodgson chose to write ruins it for readers by maing the book nearly inaccessible to it's target audiences . Hodgson should have written it in the same style as he did with House on The Borderland.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top