For example Le main de défunt (the hand of the dead) writtehn by Alfredo Hogan as a sequel of Le comte de Montecriste (the count of Montecristo) by Alexandre Dumas
2006-09-06 21:16:36 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
They never live up to the original...and in some cases the sequels are so bad that they even spoil the original for you....like Mrs. De Winters...sequel to the classic Rebbecca...is total crap. Scarlet...sequel of gone with the wind is unbearable and i even tried a sequel of pride and prejudice (cant remember the name) which was just appalling.
it;s an insult to the great writers when somebody write a bad sequel(and they usually are bad) to a classic book....
2006-09-06 23:36:52 · answer #1 · answered by S 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are a few, rare examples where it works. The most striking successful example is the Sherlock Holmes series by Laurie R. King. If you have not read any of these books, they are outstanding. The first in the series is "A Beekeepers Apprentice" There are now about 7 volumes and they are each very very good.
By the way, in two of the books she introduces other characters by other others. In "The Game" Rudyard's Kim is a character and in "Locked Rooms" she introduces Dashiel Hammet as a character. (OK he was an author not a character but. . .)
These are all successful and lots of fun. The key here that she has something new to say, says it well, and does not rape the character she is using as a launching pad. Her Holmes is funny, witty, and much more human than Conan Doyles.
2006-09-07 06:51:10 · answer #2 · answered by Chuck N 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am writing a book and if someone else wrote a sequel to it I would be upset. (Actually I already have a sequel in mind for it.) There have been a few that when the author died someone else took over writing the series. I would have never known if it had not been pointed out to me. Then there are those who just can't keep up with the original and ruins the story line.
2006-09-07 04:54:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
To be honest: I simply despise them. I never read any that even came close to the original and I will never do it again - it spoils the whole thing for me. My last try was not exactly a sequel but some untalented person trying to finish Dickens's Edwin Drood Mystery - ridiculous and dissatisfactory to a very high degree.
2006-09-07 04:54:49 · answer #4 · answered by msmiligan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think...that when an author writes something he has an image in his mind of what he is writing ..he is the best to understand it...and to write the sequel for it... sometimes there are good sequels by other authors ...but i think its better to be written from the same one...:)
2006-09-07 06:54:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They're usually not as good as the original, but then again, sequels written by anybody usually aren't.
2006-09-07 10:15:00 · answer #6 · answered by BlueManticore 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If the flavour and/or intent of the sequel is well-written, fine.
2006-09-07 04:24:20 · answer #7 · answered by Kitsune 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It takes a very talented writer to be able to fill the "shoes" for the first writer.
2006-09-07 18:00:35 · answer #8 · answered by motleycfan 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i'm ag'in' 'em, though i had no idea there was a sequel to "the count...". i may have to read it, now, damn it!
2006-09-07 04:40:48 · answer #9 · answered by altgrave 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋