Re: Sequels, Prequels etc etc


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by PeterH on August 20, 2006 at 09:47:26 from 86.137.75.227 user Peter_H.

In Reply to: Sequels, Prequels etc etc posted by Mike Dennis on August 19, 2006 at 18:35:50:

I heartily agree with Mike, although Tarboarders who (to use Jock's immortal phrase) 'have been following my posts during the last ten years' would expect me to say that. I have tried put forward similar views before on Tarboard and got into awful trouble about it. I think that Mike has put it much better, and more persuasively, than I did, which probably accounts for the fact that he has not been pounced on (yet).

With regard to 'prequels' and 'sequels', I have yet to meet anyone, off Tarboard, who thinks they are a good idea. Most would simply not be interested, on the grounds that sequels etc would never be as good as the real AR. You would know from the first few sentences that you were not reading the Master. A useful comparison might be Sherlock Holmes. Attempts have been made from time to time to write more adventures for the great detective - I have read some of them, and while they are amusing pastiches, they are just not convincing at all. This sort of exercise is fine as, eg, a New Statesman or Spectator competition, but as serious and convincing literature, they just don't rate.

AR wrote 12 and a half books, and stopped. That's it - there were no more and there never will be. Can't we accept that, and get on with looking at the books he did write?


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

or is it time to start a New Thread?

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]

Courtesy of Environmental Science, Lancaster

space