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. )