Posthumous Publication is a genre now

Posthumous Publication is now a genre.

Given the wealth of sequels to books whose authors have died, I would argue Posthumous Publication is now a legit genre. I mean, 118 years after War of the Worlds, there’s a sequel by Stephen Baxter brewing called The Massacre of Mankind. Suitably ominous, I guess.

I mean, on one level I understand this — these are beloved, successful books that readers adore. Why wouldn’t you do a sequel? Winnie the Pooh is getting an official sequel, as did Dr Seuss’ books. Movies have been doing it for ages, to much success. You could argue they’re different mediums, but all of the successes in Posthumous Publications suggests that difference doesn’t hold out anymore.

I am thoroughly excited by the idea of a Pooh sequel, and I was just as excited that The Girl in the Spider’s Web. But I’m less inclined to believe in a Posthumous Publication of a sequel to a book like Pride and Prejudice — though I’m absolutely enamoured of  Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Retellings, I’m all over.

Some books should just be left alone, I think — which titles do you think should never be touched or need sequels? 

2 Comments

  • I like retellings of classics. They can be really fun. I don’t know what I think about actual sequels though – if they aren’t by the original author, it just feels a bit odd. haha

    • Verushka says:

      Me too! Retellings are easier to deal with than sequels in some ways! Was tweeting how horrified I would be if XFiles was rebooted with a Mulder and Scully that weren’t David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson, but I wouldn’t mind an X-Files show, with new characters!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *