In praise of the novelization, pop fiction’s least reputable genre • Hacker News Board

Re: In praise of the novelization, pop fiction’s least reputable genre

#21

Post by gentleman11 » Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 5:11 AM UTC

tialaramex wrote: post #6

I felt sure this would mention Orson Scott Card's novelization of "The Abyss" which I thought gave much more depth for Lindsey (the engineer who designed the "Deep Core" drilling platform, played by Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio). I'm not a fan of Card's other work (Ender's Game is a perfectly fine SF story, but didn't need a sequel let alone multiple sequels) but I thought this background really helps The Abyss much m…

I really enjoyed Cards ender sequels. They really start to convey a deep empathy for other human beings as they go along. There are no pure villains that you can fully objectify, even the worst of them are people with feelings. No problem if you didn’t enjoy them though, just wanted to say

Re: In praise of the novelization, pop fiction’s least reputable genre

#22

Post by tincholio » Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 12:11 PM UTC

nonameiguess wrote: post #12

Space Odyssey trilogy did this right. Develop films and novels in tandem, with neither more canonical than the other. And both are all-time sci-fi classics, and Arthur Clarke's novels are definitely reputable and respected. In any case, I think harlequin romance is probably considered less reputable than this.

I found the book much clearer and engaging than the film, tbh...

Re: In praise of the novelization, pop fiction’s least reputable genre

#23

Post by vmilner » Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 12:57 PM UTC

AndrewStephens wrote: post #19

vmilner wrote: post #9

The Dr Who novelisations were loved in part because they were the only way pre-video for the show's decades of output to be experienced. (And still are for some lost episodes.) I'd hardly ever seen an episode (as a late 70's 10 year old) but had read all the books I could find in the local library. (I suspect they also inspired many kids to read for similar reasons.)

I loved the Dr Who novelisations, like you say they were the only way to experience the show except through the odd repeat. In many ways the books were better than the actual episodes, unconstrained by budget and time. I have been disappointed by many stories of Dr Who that I originally experienced as a child in book-form, what was filmed just doesn’t compare to my imagination.

In at least one case - "Warrior's Gate", the final Romana story, there was a "2001"-style vibe between the show and the book - i.e. both very good, but it was a lot easier to tell what was going on having read the book!

Re: In praise of the novelization, pop fiction’s least reputable genre

#24

Post by AndrewStephens » Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 1:18 PM UTC

vmilner wrote: post #23

AndrewStephens wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I loved the Dr Who novelisations, like you say they were the only way to experience the show except through the odd repeat. In many ways the books were better than the actual episodes, unconstrained by budget and time. I have been disappointed by many stories of Dr Who that I originally experienced as a child in book-form, what was filmed just doesn’t compare to my imagination.

In at least one case - "Warrior's Gate", the final Romana story, there was a "2001"-style vibe between the show and the book - i.e. both very good, but it was a lot easier to tell what was going on having read the book!

That was certainly one of the books I was specifically thinking about. From memory, the book starts somewhat before the show and explains the setup better.

The best of the books reworked the plots significantly, even when they were written by the original screenwriter. Sometimes what works on the screen doesn't fit the page and vice versa.