h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well I'm tempering my excitment slightly, so as to avoid disappointment. But the fact a sixth Hitchhikers book is out is marvellous in my eyes! I feel a bit sorry for Eoin - if it's brilliant there will still be plenty people who wont read it and will just assume its rubbish. If it isn't any good... well... at least he had the guts to step forward.

I'm just hoping for a good read and hopefully the rest will follow!

I'm going to be all grumpy and say 'cash-in' a lot.

It's a cash-in. The publishers are doing it because the Hitch Hiker brand name is going to guarantee publicity and sales. The writer's doing it for exactly the same reasons.

If it would stand up as a story in its own right, why not do it as a story in its own right? If DNA had lived, and gone on to announce 'I'm definitely not doing anymore Hitch Hikers *ever*', do you think a) he would've agreed to it and b) the publishers would have dared even approach him about it?

At best this is financially-motivated fan-fic. At worst, it's literary grave-robbing.

While I respect what you are saying - and anything involving person or persons now dead is bound to be sensitive, e.g. Terry Nation, perhaps the reason the Daleks nearly never came back - pretty much all books are financially motivated. Actually they all are. Just hopefully there are other reasons that drive the people other than just the money.

And following the Doctor Who analogy, pretty much most of what has been written since it came back is fan fiction. Which is fine really.

You're right, if Douglas had said he didn't want to write another, then another wouldn't have been made. It would be terrible. But I doubt his wife would allow such a book to be written if such a prospect was so horrific. And I doubt many would know Douglas better than his wife.

As for the literary grave robbing comment... well the same could be levelled at Stephen Baxter, who wrote a sequel to the Time Machine, called The Time Ships, and frankly that was one of the best fiction books I have read - an opinion Arthur C. Clarke appeared to have also (that it was an excellent book - whether it was his favourite I have no idea). I don't think theres anything wrong in using another person's framework to create a new story. I personally would be honoured after I'm gone if someone were to use characters I'd created, to create a unique story of their own as long as there was an attempt to stick to the essential theme of the characters.

But I'm not everyone. Still I hope people give it a chance to stand in its own right. In many ways doing a one off book might have been the easy choice, perhaps this is more of a risk - financial or otherwise - it just would be nice to see the characters living and breathing again in literary form.

Haven't read it yet, so I have that pleasure to come I hope! A nice feeling to have again!

Hmm. I think there's a difference between new creators taking over an established fictional universe that was originally a collaborative effort (like any TV series) and a new writer being parachuted in to continue a book series that was previously solely the work of one author, particularly without that author's consent.

(Terry Nation was also obviously very happy for others to write Dalek stories, as it happened in his own lifetime with his blessing.)

I'm not going to speculate as to DNA's family's reasons for agreeing to the continuation, as I don't think it would be appropriate.

I'd forgotten about the Time Ships. Bother. It is, however, the only example I know of of a direct sequel to a classic by a different writer which isn't at best disappointing - I could list the post-Fleming adult Bond books (haven't read Devil May Care yet), the Dune sequels, Night of the Triffids (ugh), etc etc.

(Possibly the difference is that Steve Baxter completely immersed himself in the whole Wells canon, including unpublished drafts of the original novel, and so on - the character Nebogipfel was a Wells creation, for example.)

Not sure it's a completely fair comparison. People will still be reading and enjoying The Time Machine in 200 years, it remains to be seen if Hitch Hiker has got that kind of longevity.

I don't think doing a new Hitch Hiker book is in any way more of a financial risk than doing a completely new book - the fact it's Hitch Hiker *guarantees* publicity and the attendant bonuses, I can't imagine many new novels make it onto Radio 4's book at bedtime on *the day of publication*.

As you may have noticed I have a few issues with the new book but I thought I'd at least give the writing a chance, so I listened to the radio version... Oh dear. I'm sure Eoin Colfer's a competent writer, but what I heard wasn't even a particularly good DNA pastiche.

*shrugs*

I liked it. Except for ZZ9 getting a plug in the book when we didn't. Not impressed.

The BBC's possibly twitchy about being seen to get free advertising given the current media climate etc etc. Plus we're theoretically only tangentially involved with Hitch Hiker per se...