Thursday, September 18, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

Eoin Colfer to write sixth Hitchhiker's Guide book

by Guardian

Thanks to Mark Dowe for the link.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/17/douglasadams

Eoin Colfer to write sixth Hitchhiker's Guide book
Comic fantasy children's author describes being given the opportunity to continue Douglas Adams's legendary series as 'like suddenly being offered the superpower of your choice'

Douglas Adams's increasingly inaccurately named Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy trilogy is to be extended to six titles, after Adams's widow Jane Belson sanctioned a project which will see children's author Eoin Colfer taking up the story.

And Another Thing� by Colfer, whose involvement with the project was personally requested by Belson, will be published next October by Penguin. No information has yet emerged about the plot of the novel but Hitchhiker fans will be hoping for a resurrection of much-loved characters Arthur Dent, Trillian and Ford Prefect, who were all apparently blown to smithereens at the end of the fifth novel, Mostly Harmless.

Adams himself had plans for a sixth Hitchhiker book, saying in an interview: "People have said, quite rightly, that Mostly Harmless is a very bleak book. And it was a bleak book. I would love to finish Hitchhiker on a slightly more upbeat note, so five seems to be a wrong kind of number, six is a better kind of number."

But his death in 2001, aged 49, meant the book was never written, and "legions of Hitchhiker fans were left with their hearts beating a little too quickly for all eternity," said Colfer, author of the bestselling Artemis Fowl series for children.

The proposal from the literary agency which manages Adams's estate was "quite out of the blue", said Penguin marketing and publicity director Joanna Prior. "It was something I guess [Jane Belson] had been mulling over for some time, and we jumped the minute we got the call — we could immediately see what a fantastic project this would be."

Colfer, who has been a fan of Hitchhiker since his schooldays, said being given the opportunity to continue the series was "like suddenly being offered the superpower of your choice". "For years I have been finishing this incredible story in my head and now I have the opportunity to do it in the real world," he added. "It is a gift from the gods. So, thank you Thor and Odin."

The book will "make no claims for Eoin being Douglas", according to Prior. "It's not Eoin Colfer writing as Douglas Adams, as was the case with Sebastian Faulks," she said, pointing to Penguin's successful publication of Faulks's new James Bond novel Devil May Care earlier this year. "It's absolutely about him being himself — Eoin the author, but with the cast of Hitchhiker."

Colfer himself is currently grappling with nerves over the quality of his addition to Adams' oeuvre. "I feel more pressure to perform now than I ever have with my own books, and that is why I am bloody determined that this will be the best thing I have ever written," he said. "For the first time in decades I feel the uncertainty that I last felt in my teenage years. There are people out there that really want to like this book."

Penguin hopes that Belson's choice of Colfer will bring a new generation of readers to Adams's work. "It's always a challenge when we haven't got Douglas any more — how can we introduce his writing to the next generation?" asked Prior. "There's a huge fan base out there, but this is a really exciting way of creating a new legacy."

Belson said the project had her full support. "I am delighted that Eoin Colfer has agreed to continue the Hitchhiker series. I love his books and could not think of a better person to transport Arthur, Zaphod and Marvin to pastures new," she added.

Approximately 16m copies of Hitchhiker books have been sold worldwide, according to Penguin. The "trilogy in five parts", which started with radio series The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in 1978 and was completed with The Restaurant at the End of the Universe; Life, The Universe and Everything; So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish; and Mostly Harmless, has been translated into 35 languages.

Posted: Thursday, September 18, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 49 of 49 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #249465 by Apathy personified on September 18, 2008 at 7:13 am

So, thank you Thor and Odin

Ha - Good bloke, they are really cool gods, gods you can have a drink with and will back you up in a 'bar scuffle', none of this 'love thy neighbour' rubbish.

I haven't read any of his previous work, but he has HUGE boots to fill - I hope it's a great read though.

Other Comments by Apathy personified

2. Comment #249496 by Don_Quix on September 18, 2008 at 7:56 am

No pressure. No pressure. Breathe....breeeaaaaathe.

Other Comments by Don_Quix

3. Comment #249499 by notreallyalice on September 18, 2008 at 8:01 am

"It's absolutely about him being himself �" Eoin the author, but with the cast of Hitchhiker."

So it's official fan faction?

Other Comments by notreallyalice

4. Comment #249507 by beeline on September 18, 2008 at 8:11 am

WTF? Why on earth would this even be allowed? Is Ed Victor or Jane Belsen short of cash?

And even if it's good, what difference does it make? An impression of Douglas is not Douglas.

Ridiculous.

Other Comments by beeline

5. Comment #249512 by TrappedInHappyValley on September 18, 2008 at 8:20 am

I am a HUGE fan of the Hitchiker's series.
My kids are fans of the Artemis Fowl books.
I haven't read any of the Fowl series yet, guess I better before this book comes out. Just to get a feel for the author.
He does have some galactic size shoes to fill!
But I look forward to the continuation of The Guide.

Other Comments by TrappedInHappyValley

6. Comment #249517 by BicycleRepairMan on September 18, 2008 at 8:23 am

As an avid DA and HHG fan, I honestly dont see the point of this..To me HHG is Douglas Adams' world, his characters, his plot, his words, I'm sure Colfer is a terrific author and all, and I hope he does a great job, but I think I'd feel the same way if Adams was continuing Colfer's original stories, I just dont get it.

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

7. Comment #249521 by Don_Quix on September 18, 2008 at 8:32 am

Well, Adams created his own universe in the Guide series. I guess you could look at it as being kind of like all the official Star Wars and Star Trek novels that expand on their respective universes, and often use the primary original characters, but aren't written by the original authors of those series.

Other Comments by Don_Quix

8. Comment #249523 by theinquisitor on September 18, 2008 at 8:36 am

"Approximately 16m copies of Hitchhiker books have been sold worldwide"

Where can I get one of these 16 metre books?

Other Comments by theinquisitor

9. Comment #249531 by beeline on September 18, 2008 at 8:48 am

Any outlet that accepts Ningis will provide you with one.

Other Comments by beeline

10. Comment #249538 by geehigh on September 18, 2008 at 9:00 am

Beeline

And even if it's good, what difference does it make? An impression of Douglas is not Douglas.

Of course you're right, but I'll give it a blast. At best it will be a fun read, and at worst the charity shop may get a couple of quid from it.

G :)

Other Comments by geehigh

11. Comment #249549 by Gnuatheist on September 18, 2008 at 9:15 am

I was very skeptical when Brian Herbert sought to continue his father's legacy with additions to the Dune series. Several books later, he will never be his father; but, I've still enjoyed emersing myself in that old universe again and again. I appreciate it for what it is. I hope to do the same with a new HHG and here's hoping that Colfer is up to the task.

Other Comments by Gnuatheist

12. Comment #249551 by beeline on September 18, 2008 at 9:17 am

It was dreadful enough releasing The Salmon of Doubt containing, as it did, work that he had not polished up to the point of acceptable release ("Up over the picture rails", as Wodehouse put it). But of course the publishers had unfulfilled advances to recoup, or so we're led to believe.

"It's always a challenge when we haven't got Douglas any more?" how can we introduce his writing to the next generation?"

Er, word of mouth seems to work quite well. It's like saying "How can we introduce the idea of shoes to the next generation?"

"There's a huge fan base out there, but this is a really exciting way of creating a new legacy."

Pff - legacy my arse. It's a way for other people to make some more money out of his name. He's already left a legacy, in case you haven't noticed: it's all the books he did write, and I hardly think anyone's going to miss the entire shelf of editions that can be found in any bookshop, and referenced in most of western culture.

Other Comments by beeline

13. Comment #249558 by Elli on September 18, 2008 at 9:29 am

Well I for one am looking forward to it. If the book ends up being a disappointment, then so be it, but I am going to give it a chance... and why not? It is a wonderfully rich universe of ideas that DA created and can be drawn upon, and I don't think this can tarnish DA's legacy at all. If the book is disappointing, then it speaks to how amazing DA was and makes his original work even more respected. If the book is well received, then it allows DA's creations to live on in new and exciting ways. I don't see the downside personally, so long as there is no cheap commercialism at play and there is no attempt to make this seem like a DA project - which they have said will not be the case.

Other Comments by Elli

14. Comment #249563 by clatz on September 18, 2008 at 9:36 am

I would be interested to hear Richards take on this.

Personally I think there is little grounds for complaint if the family have approved the project ... don't read the book.

I will treat it as an alternative ending, rather like the ones you get in the bonus material of some DVD releases.

Other Comments by clatz

15. Comment #249581 by Homo economicus on September 18, 2008 at 10:19 am

Give me the radio series any day.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/hitchhikers/media/hitchhikers_trail.ram

Other Comments by Homo economicus

16. Comment #249589 by Ex~ on September 18, 2008 at 10:30 am

This is Blasphemy.

For it is written: any who will add unto the words of this series, to him I will add the horrors written in this book.

Other Comments by Ex~

17. Comment #249599 by PaulJ on September 18, 2008 at 10:45 am

To everyone who is concerned that Colfer is not Adams, and his continuation of HHGG might not live up to their hopes and expectations, remember this:

Adams' books are not going away. They'll still be there even after Colfer's effort is published.

There's no such thing as 'holy writ' (as we of all people should agree!).

Edit: Further comment here.

Other Comments by PaulJ

18. Comment #249603 by corinnemic on September 18, 2008 at 10:49 am

I'm terribly excited by this. I love Colfer's works. His humor is obviously informed by Adams's without being a blatant copy. He's also a very decent chap from what I've read.

I've been a fan of Adams's since fourth grade and, once upon a time, would have considered this high treason. But, having listened to the new radio series and heard what others can do with this universe, I'm willing to give it a chance.

Other Comments by corinnemic

19. Comment #249612 by ggab7768 on September 18, 2008 at 11:01 am

I agree with some of the above statements.
As far as I'm concerned there can never be another Douglas Adams and I'm uncomfortable with the thought. However I know that i will pick this up and read it. These characters had a massive effect on me so I will hope for the best.
Please, let me be pleasantly surprised.

Other Comments by ggab7768

20. Comment #249655 by Darwin's badger on September 18, 2008 at 12:02 pm

I just hope that Colfer's contribution is of a higher standard that Claude Voilier's "Famous Five" books. They were shite.

Other Comments by Darwin's badger

21. Comment #249666 by decius on September 18, 2008 at 12:09 pm

Comment #249655 by Darwin's badger

I just hope that Colfer's contribution is of a higher standard that Claude Voilier's "Famous Five" books.

I can't recall a single case in the history of literature when this type of operation hasn't failed miserably.
The driving factor behind is always economical, and to credibly replicate another author's brilliance and style for more than a few pages is nearly impossible.

Other Comments by decius

22. Comment #249674 by V'Ger on September 18, 2008 at 12:15 pm

I really can't see this working well.

Other Comments by V'Ger

23. Comment #249754 by William Carlton on September 18, 2008 at 1:26 pm

I say of course why not. My thirteen-year-old asked me the other day if he thought that Harrison Ford would ever make another Indiana Jones film. I'm always interested in these prediction-type questions, because the space of possibilities in the near future is so vast (especially with regard to media). I almost said no, because of the very low probability that Lucas, Speilberg, and Ford will actually get down to the business of grinding out another picture in the small window of time in which that have to do it.

But then I said yes, because for all I know Harrison Ford will go from 80 to 18 on the wings of some scientific breakthrough or another. Of course, that did seem a rather outlying possibility so I offered a different take. There is no reason, for example, that the various memes which make up the personna of Harrison Ford playing Indiana Jones cannot be arranged to pleasing effect by some future storyteller's pallette, each aspect of idiosyncratic "Harrison Fordiness" orchestrated by its own little team of homunculi, every member fully versed in the "essence" of Harrison Ford playing Indiana Jones as directed by Steven Speilberg.

But would it be AUTHENTIC? Not just achieving virisimilitude, that is easier than we like to think. Comedians like Rich Little have made careers out of bottling personalities, because we are not just easy to be fooled---we enjoy it. No, the challenge is nailing down just what we mean by "authentic".

The man whose name sits atop this webpage said that the only thing which survives our death is our genes and our memes. Has there ever been, for a person like Harrison Ford especially, such high-fidelity copying and reproduction of the memes that make us "us"? When Elvis fans bark that The King isn't dead, I think of all those literally thousands of impersonators and think: No, he isn't.

I mean really, how many atoms that threw those hammer punches in the last Indian Jones still reside in the body of the fellow who shared the screen with Shia Labeouf this summer? I'm pretty sure the answer is zero. Many fans will relate to the phenomenon of feeling something a bit off-putting about seeing Ford again in the iconic role so indelibly etched in their minds. Notice how difficult it is for them to explain what they are feeling.

So I have little doubt that we've yet to see the last of Indiana Jones, or virtually any other franchise even remotely profitable or well-attented. Say that studios introduce an option for actors to cash in on leaving their likeness to posterity in the form of a detailed mental and physical profile that can be resurrected post-humously for the purposes of---making money, obviously (or art)---but also more richly PRESERVING that individual as a developing narrative. It's a little slice of immortality, some might imagine. Or ghoulish. The actor would have limited influence, obviously, in the career choices of his studio-bought avatar. Harrison Ford might not be too keen to star, unwittingly, in a movie titled "Indian Bones---The Amazon Woman". Perhaps some mechanisms can be put in place similar to those found in trusts which prevent legacy funds, for instance, from being misused (from the benefactor's POV).

It would require a fundamental shift in the way we think about our selves, but it also happens to be the direction in which things are headed. And there's no reason it has only to be for personalities in demand. Here's an article that has some interesting things to say about it:

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/06/virtual_immorta.html

"The National Science Foundation has awarded a half-million-dollar grant to the universities of Central Florida at Orlando and Illinois at Chicago to explore how researchers might use artificial intelligence, archiving, and computer imaging to create digital life-like versions of real people. This is considered a first step toward creating virtual immortality.

'The goal is to combine artificial intelligence with the latest advanced graphics and video game-type technology to enable us to create historical archives of people beyond what can be achieved using traditional technologies such as text, audio, and video footage,' says Jason Leigh of the University of Chicago's Electronic Visualization Laboratory.

The researchers plan on taking the appearance, mannerisms, voice, and even the knowledge of a real person and synthesizing the data into a 'virtual person' or avatar. The goal is to create an avatar that will be able to respond to questions and convincingly represent its human counterpart."

On the more low-tech end, Ezra Klein thinks a lot of under-employed English majors could be put to work fashioning commissioned biographies for 30 to 40 thousand dollars a pop. I had this same idea years ago.

So anyways, congratulations to Mr. Colfer.

Other Comments by William Carlton

24. Comment #249775 by Corylus on September 18, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Mr Colfer, if you are reading this...

Break a leg :-)

I have read one of your Artemis Fowl books and enjoyed it. (My book club throws in a children's book now and again so we don't get pompous).

Your sense of fun is obvious. Please don't get so wound up with living up to DA that you lose that. It is what you both share.

I think you'll do fine.

Other Comments by Corylus

25. Comment #249864 by InfuriatedSciTeacher on September 18, 2008 at 3:23 pm

I'll read it, even while expecting to be disappointed, simply because it's another HHG book. At least he isn't pretending to be Adams. On that note, I'd have rathered see Terry Pratchett attempt this, as I'm familiar with his style and think it would fit HHG well. I've heard rumours the poor man has alzheimer's, however.

Other Comments by InfuriatedSciTeacher

26. Comment #249866 by DeepFritz on September 18, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Before anybody gets too overheated, just remember that Professor Richard Dawkins has being writing sequels to "Origin of the Species" for decades now!

I am still amazed at how well Tom Clancy is writing now a days. 2-pac seems to be able to keep on releasing albums along with Jeff Buckley. Whilst we are on that subject, I am sure that most people enjoyed Oasis after listening to the Beatles.

As for other books, I am sure that Harry Potter will long out live J.K. Rowling...

If a book is going to be produced, then the real task for mine lies not just with the authors, but the people who publish the book - to avoid churning out pulp in order to make a buck...

Other Comments by DeepFritz

27. Comment #249941 by Cartomancer on September 18, 2008 at 6:17 pm

Now, it's probably tantamount to heresy on RD.net to admit it, but I've never actually read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Or seen the TV series, heard the radio series or watched the film. I guess that's probably because my parents kept rabbiting on about how funny it was throughout my childhood and, well, anything your parents reccommend is automatically unworthy of consideration to a self-respecting teenager. Cher, Elton John, the drinking of alcohol and that godforsaken Dido and Aeneas record fall into the same category, as does the decidedly icky business of human reproduction.

Nevertheless, lots of people I know seem to think Adams was quite funny. He has undoubtedly achieved cult status and more in a large part of the population, and left a lasting impression on popular culture. As such I am not at all surprised that someone wants to continue to explore the universe he has created and develop the characters that populate it. When Terry Pratchett finally hangs up his "I aten't dead" sign for the last time, I'm sure there will be legions of people who want to tarry in the Discworld a while longer too. It happened for Tolkien, it happened for Ian Fleming's James Bond, it's happening for Harry Potter. It even happened for HP Lovecraft's Cthulu books on a smaller scale. These things have had such an impact that they've gone beyond being mere literature and turned into something far more powerful - each one has become a mythos.

And, just like the traditional mythoi of antiquity, they're bigger than one author alone. Homer was not the first and would not be the last writer to tell the tale of Troy and narrate the travails of Odysseus, Vergil not the first to relate the story of Rome. Malory's Morte D'Arthur spawned a whole genre of Arthurian romance with a stock of characters and events that was enriched as the middle ages progressed, and just because Chaucer had done it before didn't stop Shakespeare retelling the tale of Troilus and Cressida. The tales of Robin Hood and William Tell and Don Juan and Doctor Faustus and Miyamoto Musashi have been told by hundreds of different storytellers in their respective traditions, and where would Dante and Milton be if they had not written what today might be summarily dismissed as old testament fan fiction?

Now, there is a difference, I suppose, between continuing a narrative series and reimagining the plot entirely as much pre-modern literature did. That's an issue of genre and modern writing conventions however - the trilogy, the series and the directly successive sequel are not categories the traditional makers of myth would have readily recognised. I have never been inspired to write fan fiction myself, but I applaud the efforts and creativity of those who have been inspired to do so (the closest I got was a horribly self-involved and melancholic parody poem inspired by the Divine Comedy - people have likened me to Marvin the Paranoid Android, whoever he is).

It seems to me that the impulse to limit and restrict a mythos to what is "canonical" and exclude or suppress the "apocryphal" is suspiciously religious in character. It places an arbitrary halter on the creative mind of man and circumscribes him within restrictive limits - it judges what is to be considered culture and what is not. I think the mark of great literature is precisely that it sparks such interest and devotion that writers are inspired to carry on its legacy, and when this living creative impulse is strangled it can only result in the corpus of works becoming ossified as mere antiquarian curiosities.

Other Comments by Cartomancer

28. Comment #249951 by jonjermey on September 18, 2008 at 6:50 pm

HHGG is a textbook example of a meme that started out in just the right medium -- serial radio -- and got more and more degraded the further it travelled from its original home. The printed scripts were funny, the novels were passable, the TV series was poor, and the film was an abomination. From this report it sounds as if they have forgotten the origins of HHGG altogether. Hello? Anyone remember radio?

Other Comments by jonjermey

29. Comment #249954 by Diacanu on September 18, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Well, for my sequel to TGD, I'd just like to say, there's no way I could replace Richard, so I'll be playing a Timelord regeneration of the good Professor.

My Richard Dawkins constantly fiddles with his backwards ballcap, exits a room by kicking up his feet, and exclaiming "Boing! Boing!", and will have an unnatural yet adorable fetish for nabbing up and chawing bits of ABC gum.

Other Comments by Diacanu

30. Comment #249987 by Sittingduck on September 18, 2008 at 8:32 pm

This is all very disconcerting and due, I am sure, because of eddies in the space time continuum. ..Is he? :)

Other Comments by Sittingduck

31. Comment #249995 by alexmzk on September 18, 2008 at 8:47 pm

O GOOD GRIEF NO.

Other Comments by alexmzk

32. Comment #250018 by Laurie Fraser on September 18, 2008 at 9:23 pm

I've read all of the Artemis Fowl books (don't ask), and although Colfer is an imaginative and often amusing author, he hasn't got a tenth of the sense of the absurd that DA had. Could be interesting.

Other Comments by Laurie Fraser

33. Comment #250029 by King of NH on September 18, 2008 at 10:18 pm

I'm looking forward to it with an open mind. Not reading Colfer's addition because Adams was the original would be like not reading Dawkins because it would be sacrilidge to Darwin. Perhaps Dawkins isn't as fine a writer or scientist as Darwin, or perhaps he's better, but it doesn't matter either way. The stroy continues with or without a writer, and the enjoyment is in experiencing the work, not in comparing it to some older "original" work or some ideal.

And those of you who think the original should never be tampered with? One word: Shakespeare.

Other Comments by King of NH

34. Comment #250030 by Roy_H on September 18, 2008 at 10:19 pm

Rather like the Guys who "finished" Schubert's 8th symphony and "wrote" Elgar's 3rd. I honestly cannot see the point.

Other Comments by Roy_H

35. Comment #250032 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 10:31 pm

Okay, this needs to be stopped, and it needs to be stopped NOW.

I'm not even an Adams fan, but I know full well where this kind of nonsens leads (see Christopher Tolkien. See Brian Herbert).

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

36. Comment #250034 by Laurie Fraser on September 18, 2008 at 10:59 pm

Fanusi, you FASCIST!!! :)

Other Comments by Laurie Fraser

37. Comment #250035 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2008 at 11:00 pm

I have to know, Laurie: was that outburst prompted by my lack of Adams fandom or by my desire to see this oncoming trainwreck stopped? :-)

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

38. Comment #250038 by thewhitepearl on September 18, 2008 at 11:05 pm

I heard the word "fascist" so I thought I'd take a break from blogging to come see what was going on.

I see you were just joking.

[waves hand] You may proceed

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

39. Comment #250042 by Laurie Fraser on September 18, 2008 at 11:12 pm

It was the comment "this needs to be stopped..." I thought it was a suitable rejoinder, considering our discussion on the other thread. I don't have any feelings one way or the other on this, although I think it will be hard for Colfer to derive the same kind of wit as Adams, even though whose books, I might say, often leave me with a "so what" feeling.

Other Comments by Laurie Fraser

40. Comment #250091 by suffolkthinker on September 19, 2008 at 1:17 am

NO!

What next the film rights sold to Disney?

The estates of literary figures have committed some aweful crimes in the past: see A A Milne's and the sale of rights of Pooh to Disney for a case that would make even me consider re-introduction of the death penalty for literary crimes.

When I read things like this I sometimes wonder about the extension of copyright for 70 years after death. Removing it would I know result in greater not fewer abominations of this type but it would at least stop greedy estates milking them.

Other Comments by suffolkthinker

41. Comment #250135 by Pertwee's Bouffant on September 19, 2008 at 1:53 am

If Adams had lived he'd probably still be working on the next book. Wonderful, but not prolific. I'm overall a bit dubious about this. It's like Sebastian Faulks' Bond novels (which admittedly I haven't read). Are they canonical? Not really.

Having said that I'll probably end up buying and reading the eventual book!

Other Comments by Pertwee's Bouffant

42. Comment #250145 by beeline on September 19, 2008 at 2:04 am

Cartomancer said @ 28:

It seems to me that the impulse to limit and restrict a mythos to what is "canonical" and exclude or suppress the "apocryphal" is suspiciously religious in character. It places an arbitrary halter on the creative mind of man and circumscribes him within restrictive limits - it judges what is to be considered culture and what is not.

I can't see how this works. Adams wrote the original radio/books, and now someone is going to carry on using his characters. Why? Surely anyone else has their own ability to use their imagination and characters for their purposes, most of all Colfer. That's what's so odd - he doesn't need to do this, and Adams certainly doesn't need it. The only people who need it actually need the money.

We're not saying whether it's culture or not, or whether it should be censored or anything that restrictive - just throwing up our hands and saying 'why?' What's the point?

No 'creative halter' is being imposed here, least of all an 'arbitrary' one, and comparing it to religious texts is just odd. We all know who wrote Adams's works - Adams - but nobody knows who wrote the Bible texts. And it's not as if Adams's texts are being used for worship or cultural indoctrination. They're works of humour.

I think the mark of great literature is precisely that it sparks such interest and devotion that writers are inspired to carry on its legacy...

Completely agree, except that you can't 'carry on a legacy'. A legacy is what's left after someone dies, and is static. Sure, it can inspire others to copy style and ideas, but to want to 'carry on' a particular storyline is actually a limiting act in itself: restricting another author - Colfer in this case - to thinking only in that universe, and not putting out something of his own. Again, Why?

...and when this living creative impulse is strangled it can only result in the corpus of works becoming ossified as mere antiquarian curiosities.

Eh? Ossified things are useless as living bones. Texts are eternal, and speak for themselves. Whether we continue to promote their worth to the next generation is what determines their activity in the future, not watering them down until they're bland and 'suitable for all'.

Don't carry on Adams's work, Colfer. Be your own writer, with your own style, content, characters and ideas, like you always have been. The only way that he or Adams can benefit from this is financially, which is the real killer of creativity and originality.

Other Comments by beeline

43. Comment #250172 by V'Ger on September 19, 2008 at 3:00 am

This is a huge gamble. It could be another Highlander, or Alien, or indeed Predator... where the sequels just tarnished the quality of the original.

Other Comments by V'Ger

44. Comment #250223 by Johnny O on September 19, 2008 at 5:29 am

"It is a gift from the gods. So, thank you Thor and Odin."

I think that sentence alone fills me with hope about it being along the same vein as the previous books.

Even the film, which bore little resemblance to the books was of a similar humour and I think DNA would have approved.

Other Comments by Johnny O

45. Comment #250279 by mixmastergaz on September 19, 2008 at 8:37 am

I fail to understand the strength of negative feeling this has generated. Personally I didn't much care for the film adaptation but I'm under no obligation to watch it again and wouldn't object to its very existence. Really, if you don't like the idea then don't bother to read it.

My partner teaches secondary-age children and is aware of Eoin Colfer's work. She tells me that his books are very popular with teenagers so yes, maybe this would be a way of introducing a new generation to Douglas's work, which is no bad thing in my estimation.

I might also remind people how collaborative a project 'Hitch-Hiker's' was. Douglas himself once said that one reason why the radio series was his favourite incarnation of hitch-hiker's was because of the collaborative nature of the programme. John Lloyd co-wrote two of the episodes and the cast and production crew had considerable input into the finished product.

If this latest incarnation turns out to be a turkey it won't amount to the arrival of the Vogons, and Douglas's original will still be in print. I'm surprised/exasperated to read accusations of sacrilege before the thing's even been written.

"Geez, you guys are so unhip it's a wonder your bums don't fall off."

Other Comments by mixmastergaz

46. Comment #250379 by bachfiend on September 19, 2008 at 3:17 pm

On a related note, if you type "the answer to life, the universe and everything" (without the quotes) into Google calculator, and press search, you immediately get the answer 42. How good is that? It took Deep Thought 7500000 years to calculate that. Actually the question provided, "what do you get if you multiply 6 by 9?" does equal 42 with base 13 (instead of base 10).

Other Comments by bachfiend

47. Comment #250453 by Science_Officer on September 19, 2008 at 5:53 pm

Although I'd never heard of Colfer until today, I'm actually guardedly optimistic about Book Six, and even blogged about it here (it's still at the top of the page at this moment):

http://science-officer.livejournal.com/

Science_Officer... engaging in a little self-promotion.

Other Comments by Science_Officer

48. Comment #250481 by wouldbesakota on September 19, 2008 at 6:43 pm

Admittedly, Colfer's a great writer, I adore his kids' books... but....it does seem really WEIRD to have him writing HHGG. I wonder why Douglas's wife would have chosen Colfer for such an honor.

Besides- do we really need to have another one? A release as what he might have intended for the next book would be nice...but it just seems really surreal to ask Eoin Colfer to do it.

Seems very mismatched.... I'm worried.

Other Comments by wouldbesakota

49. Comment #250808 by MarbleMad on September 20, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Eoin Colfer .. sounds a bit like .. Oolon Colluphid
author of "Where God Went Wrong", "Some More of God's Greatest Mistakes", "Who is this God Person Anyway?" and "That About Wraps it Up for God".

Other Comments by MarbleMad

Reload Comments | Back to Top