And Another Thing (Hitchhiker's Guide Book Six)

Opinions? I have mixed feelings about another author taking a stab at Hitchhiker's.

I don't care as long as I can write of the ending of Mostly Harmless.

It's going to feel like reading fanfiction I imagine.

I really love the other books he's written (Artemis Fowl mostly) and he seems really excited about it, but I am wondering how it will turn out. Colfer's sense of humor is not as bizarre as Adams (which isn't saying much, but still) and I'm wondering if it will be "Colfer writing Hitchhiker" or "Colfer trying to sound like Adams writing Hitchhiker."

Well there aren't many other writers I'd trust to take a stab at Adam's work...

I'll read it, for sure, and I'll enjoy it, probably, but I've got to say, I really did like the real ending. It felt like that was the only way things could all spin together to something satisfying... and that that's really where the books had been headed all along, even if Adams apologized later and even if he was all depressed or something, and that will always be the real ending for me. Props for the title though, and the quote. It's fitting.

Bad, bad idea.

I found the Artemis Fowl books to be often juvenile (the toilet humor) and also creepy (the increasingly strongly suggested sexual attraction between Artemis and Holly on both a borderline-pedophilial level and a Stokholm Syndrome level). Granted, the author can do a decent blend of sci-fi and fantasy, and he can be witty at times I suppose, but in any case he is not Adam's style or caliber.

Also, as depressing as it was, I for one actually love the ending of Mostly Harmless. It fits the tragic and cynical undertones that are present throughout the series (exemplified by Arthur's endless but ultimately futile effort to return to his quiet life on Earth, as well as the endless frusteration of the the protagonists in seeking the Ultimate Question). Also, if the series explores "Live, the Universe, and Everything," then ultimately part of that is the inevitability of death.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is perhaps the first series that I read and loved, only to find that the ending of the series completely changed my understandings of the series' themes and ideas (causing me to realize that what I had read was not in fact a comedy with tragic undertones, but an outright tragic comedy), but rather than finding being disappointed that it did not meet my expectations, I actually gained a deeper appreciation of the whole.

Its possible that a good sequel could be made, but it would have to be done with great skill, ingenuity, and tact to keep from cheapening that ending, and I would be genuinely concerned if Adams had attempted it. The new author just doesn't have what it takes, to my mind.

As a diehard fan of both series, I am totally psyched about this. The only thing that would have made this cooler would be if Adams was still alive and this was a deal like the comic strips do on April Fools where they swap strips.

I dunno. Adams did want to write a book, but he's dead, this new author might not be the same calibur... It makes me confused.

I've never read Artemis Fowl. I also never read "Mostly Harmless." I heard it was very bleak and depressing, and that turned me off. I liked the wacky humor and was somewhat unsettled by "So Long and Thanks for All the Fish," because it confused me.

Show me on the doll where So Long and Thanks for All the Fish touched you.

Just kidding.

Anyway, I don't know if I'm going to read this. I was pretty depressed by Mostly Harmless, but it's what Adams ended it with; I respect his vision.

Adams was a wonderful man and an amazing author. I met him in person at a book signing a few years before he died; after he passed I felt like all my creative heroes were gone (Adams, Henson, Seuss, Hutchense, etc).

Sigh.

Adams intended to write another book in the series, because he felt that Mostly Harmless was too depressing, and he wanted to end it on a more upbeat note. The only reason that he didn't write another book was because he died before he had the chance.

The main concern is that the book's being written a person who is Not Adams.

Reminds us all of God's Final Message to His Creation.

edited 7th Oct '09 11:30:23 AM by Pannic

"We are Sorry for the Inconvenience"?

Oh c'mon. I sick of people not giving something a try before it has even had a chance. What is this Matt Smith syndrome? If Adams was still alive it would be something I was totally against but, like you said, he always wanted the series to finish on a more up-beat note. This is just fufilling his wishes under difficult cirrcumstances. This wasn't just the publishers or the executive, Eoin Colfer was selected by Adam's widow and daughter who were a fan of his books. You can't get a better blessing than that.

I will not pass judgement until I've read the damn thing. And to avoid fandumb I would suggest that everyone else do the same.

edited 12th Oct '09 11:25:41 PM by wellinever

Well, I've read the damn thing.

Besides the few changes that were a tad jarring (the use of frood as a verb, zark being capitalized, the Guide notes being split off from the text), I found that it was a pretty good if slightly self-indulgent (on Colfer's part) addition to the series. It seemed Colfer needed time to find his feet writing for these characters, and the earlier chapters could've benefited from a few rewrites (specifically for Zaphod, who seems to be the one from the movie rather than the books), but overall it was a pleasent read. A little unsettling, for some reason, but not a bad book in and of itself.

However, I have—or, rather, had—a tradition of reading a bit of Ultimate Hitchhiker's to my sister before she goes to bed. She decided last night that we should start this up again, and I picked up—after a brief recap—from where we left off. We were in Life, the Universe, and Everything, and got from Arthur flying off the cliff to Hactar being dismantled. While reading it, there was a certain...something...that made me feel...I don't know. I got this outrageous sensation of enlightenment, as I tend to get while reading the books. It sounds horribly silly, I know, but still...and I realized that the lack of this sensation while reading was what had been missing from And Another Thing. Odd, I know, and probably insane, but going back into the originals made me realize that they were great in a way that the new one isn't. Is it satirical? Sure. Is it silly? Definately. We get more Guide entries than we have in a while. But there's a certain Adams-ness that's most definately missing. And that realization sort of put me off it.

Is it just the Fan Dumb in me talking, or am I on to something here?

edited 13th Oct '09 8:33:48 AM by Wackd

I've got to agree with Klaro, here. It'll probably feal like reading a fanfiction- based on the Artemis Fowl books, a good one, but still a fanfiction. I think I could like it, but I'm not going to accept it as being an official part of the Trilogy's canon.

Ah, yes, it came out yesterday, didn't it? My library doesn't have it yet, though.

I'll read it, definitely. It probably won't be as good as the originals, but I'm willing to give it a try. Besides, the fifth book's ending really depressed me, so I'll gladly take anything that ends the series on a high note.

"Besides, the fifth book's ending really depressed me, so I'll gladly take anything that ends the series on a high note." It's not insanely high, but definately higher than the fifth book's ending. Suffice to say that Arthur Dent is still royally screwed, and leave it at that. I got the feeling Colfer was attempting to leave the door open for #7...

edited 14th Oct '09 4:54:10 PM by Wackd

Suffice to say that Arthur Dent is still royally screwed, and leave it at that.

Well, duh, of course he is. It's in the Arthur Dent job description.

"Besides, the fifth book's ending really depressed me, so I'll gladly take anything that ends the series on a high note." It's not insanely high, but definately higher than the fifth book's ending. Suffice to say that Arthur Dent is still royally screwed, and leave it at that. I got the feeling Colfer was attempting to leave the door open for #7...

Oh, I'm fine with leaving Arthur screwed. I just don't want him dead. I enjoy seeing him continue living in a sort of constant screwedness, and killing him off like what happened in the fifth book ruins the fun.

I bought the book but haven't read it yet.

I personally can't think of anyone who could fill the role as writer better. (Except for Terry Pratchett, maybe, but I can think of a number of reasons not to ask it of him.)

But it's weird, I was listening to an interview with Colfer, and he actually said that people might react better to hearing that Neil Gaiman was writing it. Isn't Gaiman much more dark than the Hitchhiker series generally is?

As far as I'm concerned, "dark" is not necessarily "bad." And if he really used "frood" as a verb and capitalized "zark," I want him off this series now. That kind of stuff is Hitchhiker's 101, and anyone who can't keep track of things this simple are not to be trusted with the franchise.

I really, really don't trust Eoin Colfer to continue Douglas Adams's work. I've liked some of his stuff, but some of it has fallen completely flat. He's got some good ideas, but nothing that matches Adams's caliber in my opinion, and I don't trust his ability to separate good ideas from bad ones.

It was on the strength of his good review, by the way, that I read the most hilariously bad fantasy novel I've ever encountered.

Also, I really don't think he can replicate the tone of HH Gtt G.

I certainly would react better to hearing Gaiman was on this. He might not match the tone of the old series, but I would at least trust him to be able to take it in an interesting direction.

edited 29th Oct '09 10:36:10 AM by Desertopa

Which series specifically? And why was Coifer selected anyway?

Let's face it - no one around today has ideas of Douglas Adam's calibre.

By that I don't mean that there is no author alive who is as good as he was (I kinda am inclined to think that, but that's neither here nor there), but there is no author who could replicate Adams approach to writing, just as there is no one who could appropriate PG Wodehouse's approach to writing, or JRR Tolkein's (in the latter case, no matter how many of them desperately try).

My view, dramatic though it may be, is that Hitchhiker's Guide is the Gulliver's Travels of the modern day. Adams is a genius, and I'm hoping Colfer has written something enjoyable, not brilliant.

"And if he really used "frood" as a verb and capitalized "zark, " I want him off this series now. That kind of stuff is Hitchhiker's 101, and anyone who can't keep track of things this simple are not to be trusted with the franchise."

Honestly? It's like refusing to watch The Movie of the Book because the Heart of Gold is shaped like an eyeball instead of a shoe and the switch for the Infinite Improbability Drive is now a button. It's very miniscule stuff that has no relation to the quality of the work; and besides, there are a shitload of better reasons to not like it (such as Arthur and Zaphod's Character Derailment, Trillian being Promoted to Love Interest, and pretty much all of the new stuff and removed jokes.)

I, personally, would recommend it (AAT, not the movie.) Is it a good Hitchhiker's book? Not really. But is it a good science fiction comedy? Yes, definately. There are better ways to spend a Saturday afternoon, sure, but I wouldn't call reading And Another Thing... a waste of time.

edited 31st Oct '09 12:03:49 PM by Wackd