So apparently, Sophie Hannah has been commissioned to write a new Poirot novel. I haven't read the Sebastian Faulks James Bond book, so don't know how well he pulled it off. I have enjoyed the TV Sherlock series. Will you be reading the new Poirot? And would you like your MC to carry on after your death?
I was never that big on the idea of people trying to revive classic characters. As much as I really like Sebastian Faulks I've just not bothered with his Bond book because I just don't see how it can work really. Agatha Christie's Poirot was her own, she knew the character better than anyone. Same with Bond and Ian Flemming. It might be because of a great number of terrible Sherlock Holmes pastiches, but I'm just too cynical about the whole exercise. I suppose I might, though, if it's recommended by someone whose opinions I trust.
I adore Agatha Christie, but I am not sure how I feel about this. In general, I think it is silly to keep writing characters after the author isn't among us any more. But I guess it's fan fiction, and if it's good, there isn't much of a problem. It won't be the same but it still can be good, so I'll give it a chance, but only after I read the reviews and take a peek into the book on Amazon.
I say no, especially when it is marketed as a proper sequel. Fan fictions portrayed as properly belonging to the original series are at best a bad sequel. I am a firm believer that dead characters should stay dead and a character's ending should not be disturbed.
i'm wondering how any modernday writer can match agatha's feel for the era, capture the personalities, the mores, the 'style' and speech of that long ago and do it believably... and well enough that dame agatha won't rise up from her grave and haunt all who perpetrated the crime...
I'm not a fan of other writers carrying on with a dead writer's characters. I think new writers should come up with their own characters, settings, and styles. Sure, we love the old characters, but I think it's better to create new characters for readers to love than to keep bringing back the old ones, especially since, as has been said, nobody will ever do them as well as the original writers.
I'm intrigued. I don't mind people attempting to take classic characters and write about them, nor do I mind the idea of an author finishing another's work when the original author dies... let's hope they do a good job, though!
Meh I don't mind. I much more encourage people to come up with there own original works. Because......well being original is just better. Even if you want to write old characters you should still write your own original work first most of all if your a new writer. Its just better to be yourself......however. I think after a character has been in public domain so long has become so popular its iconic then I think its alright. Because after a certain period characters stop belonging to whoever created them and sort of become everyone's. I know whoever originally made the character has a piece of themselves in it. This is just how I always figured things though. I doubt anyone can write a better Poriot then Agatha herself. I do partially disagree with the idea that another author can't write an old character as well. True a good deal most of the time, I'd be lying if I said that Bram Stoker's Dracula has my favorite version of Dracula in it . Speaking of Dracula. Kim Newman's an author that pulls off using old characters well and Alan Moore's LOEG wasn't a bad read either Please note I do much more support being original. I'm just saying in the hands of a good (also more experienced) writer then using old characters can be done in clever and satisfying ways.
People who are not so keen (not blaming you) must still realise that new Bond movies and Sherlock media are still writers trying to keep old characters alive. Just saying.
Exactly. I like the new Bond and the new Sherlock. Nothing wrong with drawing on existing stuff for inspiration. That's what humans have always done for our art. Just sometimes it's more explicit than others.
