Slaughtered books

[Kurben]

One thing i object to is books that are slaughtered, that is abridged to use a finer word, with the intent, i hope, to make them more accessible. I first read The three Musketterrs in such a version. It was a fun read. A lot of fighting and brave gestures. Then i got hold of the unabridged book... What a difference!! The scenes i remembered were still there of course but now they had a context. There were reasons for everything made or said and it oozed with political intrigue on so many levels. It was great!! I quickly read the whole Musketeer trilogy in unabridged condition and it was great. Myladys Son and Vicomte de Bragelonne are the two others featuring the Musketeers.

this "abridgement" is a faith that many classics has been going through. Another Frenchman that suffered this a lot is Jules Verne. One of the fathers of SF just because he was very thourough in describing what made his machineworlds work. He explained the science behind it in his books which is often stripped away in the "abridgements" and only the action remains. It would be like reading Isaac Asimovs Foundation books without understanding what he meant by Psychohistory or his Robot books without bothering with his three laws of Robotics. Asimov as a writer is unthinkable without Verne as a forerunner.

Verne and Dumas is far from the only classics led to the slaughterhause but they are two good examples. The distressing thing is that often the book does not even say that it is anabridged version. It is starting to became a norm. I think that people deserve to read books as they were written and not shortened to a third or half of its original length. I know it is far to usual in sweden. I don't know how it is in the US refarding this. It seems that books over a certain age has zero protection and you can reshape in whatever mould you like. And pretend that it is the way its supposed to be....

 

[AnnaMarie]

The first King book I read was an abridged version of Firestarter. In a box of books given to my mom was a leather(ish) bound Reader's Digest book with 3 or 4 books in it. The only knew I remember is Firestarter.

So, I can't object to them to much....an abridged version introduced me to King.

Also, wasn't the original release of The Stand abridged? While I personally enjoyed the longer version more, I enjoyed the original.

 

[Kurben]

The first King book I read was an abridged version of Firestarter. In a box of books given to my mom was a leather(ish) bound Reader's Digest book with 3 or 4 books in it. The only knew I remember is Firestarter.

So, I can't object to them to much....an abridged version introduced me to King.

Also, wasn't the original release of The Stand abridged? While I personally enjoyed the longer version more, I enjoyed the original.

Well, with newer books the author has some control over what happens. And with the Stand it was King himself that did the abridgement. It is mostly the classics abridgement i'm bothered about.

 

[TheRedQueen]

I don't like it either. Especially the ones that have been dumbed down to fit our PC way of life. Knowledge is power, and "they" have slowly but surely been taking our power away. Being literate used to be a sign of intelligence, wealth, and ingenuity. Now, it's a joke. Honestly! How many here have been made fun of for being smart? I know I have. I've been picked on for years by gamers who think reading is irrelevant. (not that they know what the word means...) And God forbid we read an old, political saga and start getting ideas.

 

[Aericanwizard]

I'm of two minds on this topic.

I was introduced to my favourite novel ("The Count of Monte Cristo", also by Dumas) in an abridged format, which led me to find the unabridged version, which led me to find the original French version, and so on. Without that abridged version, I may have been daunted by the 1500 page doorstop that stood before me. (Of course, "The Count of Monte Cristo" was originally published as a serial, and as such, has a lot of fat that could be trimmed).

On the other hand, alterations to a text irritate me. The author intended a novel to be written a certain way, and works with his editor to trim bloat. Once a book is published, I feel that it is in a form that the author wanted. Abridgments often trim scenes that seem extraneous, but which often help develop the characters, or provide motivation for their actions. Action without motivation seems lazy (and is often confusing), and under-developed characters are boring.

There can be good abridgments, however. By necessity, film adaptations shorten the story to fit in a 2-hour window on screen. While I generally try to accept film adaptations for what they are, there are some that are really good, and capture the essence of the story, while prodding spectators to seek out the source. I feel that abridgments can serve as an introduction; the real work is the full-length one.

 

[Out of Order]

Darn, I thought this was going to be a thread on butchering.....

 

[hipmamajen]

In the early 90s, I used to work as a temp all over Boulder. One of my favorite jobs was a place that rented out books on tape. At the time, that was a novel concept (ha!) and you could only find them at a few truck stops or there in the office.

The job was dirty and sweaty, involving carrying heavy boxes and cleaning and rewinding the returns, but they let you listen to any of the books you wanted while you worked. So even though the pay was crap, the temp office knew I'd go out there any time there was an opening. With a book in my ears, it didn't even feel like a J.O.B.!

A lot of books on tape were abridged, which I didn't know because you didn't always get the covers with the tapes. I'd listen to a whole book in less than a day of work, and pop in another and not think much of it. I didn't really know there was such a thing as abridged books, or I'm sure I would have wondered how I could listen to an entire work in less time than it would take me to just sit down and read it.

One day, I noticed one of the books I'd listened to had a 6 hour version and a 30 hour version. "Huh," I thought, "What's that all about?" I asked around and learned about the abridged versions.

I was actually kind of shocked. Why would someone do that to a book? Especially a book meant to be listened to. By a long-haul trucker? Who tries to cut corners when they get a book just to listen to?

So, I grabbed the 30 hour version of the book I'd already listened to, and it was amazing. Partially because I really had heard the body of the story in a fraction of the time. But also because of how much they'd left out, and so expertly! Entire characters and storylines were gone. Scene after scene of the book excised, and we still got from Point A to Point B.

Book abridgers don't have the luxury screen writers do, of blending characters, or tweaking dialogue to gloss over a necessary plot point quickly. They can only cut or not cut.

So, I was impressed by how well the story had hung together without the missing bits, but at the same time horrified because the story was just a skeleton. And horrified because I hadn't even known.

I listened to dozens of books while I worked there, before I learned to look for the complete versions. Who knows how many books I think I've "read" that I only know parts of?

 

[doowopgirl]

My only real experience of abridged books is The Stand. I read what came out first which was the abridges version but I didn't know that at the time. Since we got the unabridged version I wouldn't go back.

 

[GNTLGNT]

....sing it with me now!...."Like a bridge over unabridged waters".....

 

[hipmamajen]

....sing it with me now!...."Like a bridge over unabridged waters".....

I will lay my book down (but only with a proper bookmark in it, never dog-earring the pages, and *definitely* not face down and open putting stress on the spine) like a bridge over unabridged waters....

 

[Maskins]

I read several classics, including Jules Verne unabridged when I was a kid and was really upset when I found out that they were shortened. I had been proud of reading grown up books.

So I agree.

Unless they have big words in them
.. if they do then yeah, I will take the pop up version please!

 

[muskrat]

Abridged? Aw HELL no. That's like listening to HALF of Dark Side of the Moon and saying, "Okay, this'll do me."

 

[danie]

Darn, I thought this was going to be a thread on butchering.....

So want to be her.

 

[muskrat]

So want to be her.

Wrong verb.

 

[mal]

I would rather read unabridged books but if there was nothing else available then I'd still read and enjoy the abridged ones.

 

[GNTLGNT]

Wrong verb.

...contrary to popular opinion, rats and giants DO share certain tendencies.....

 

[Aloysius Nell]

You still see them in audio format, especially in the bookstores and truck stops. Libraries usually have the unabridged. If they are unabridged, it will say so somewhere on the box; almost everything else has been chopped. I flatly refuse to read or listen to an abridged book.

 

[Neesy]

Milk should be condensed, not books.

 

[jacobtlong]

I'm not a fan of abridged books and such. I don't want to own them. Even on Kindle where the worst that could happen is being out a buck or two for accidentally downloading an abridged version. I do see a purpose for them to exist, I suppose. Perhaps for younger readers or school reading lists. I think I remember the abridged version of The Count of Monte Cristo being on the list of books to read during summer. But I rarely read my assigned summer reading stuff because I didn't like reading abridged stuff or books I knew I'd be too immature to really understand. So I put off The Count of Monte Cristo until I was good and ready for the real mccoy and when I did read the full version I really enjoyed it.

I want my books to be what the authors intended them to be, flaws and all. That's why I'm also super picky on translations of books, too. But that's another topic.

 

[Pucker]

I don't like it either. Especially the ones that have been dumbed down to fit our PC way of life. Knowledge is power, and "they" have slowly but surely been taking our power away. Being literate used to be a sign of intelligence, wealth, and ingenuity. Now, it's a joke. Honestly! How many here have been made fun of for being smart? I know I have. I've been picked on for years by gamers who think reading is irrelevant. (not that they know what the word means...) And God forbid we read an old, political saga and start getting ideas.

I have been told more than once to "tone down the rhetoric" in my emails at work because I sound "condescending."

You get that?

Using precise language and proper grammar makes people who can't (or don't bother) feel bad about themselves.

That's the world we live in now, I guess. Can't be out there making people feel bad . . . so I guess we're all just gonna have to tone it down a little. Revert to the mean, for the good of society. People call me an angry old man when I say stuff like this (and probably I am), but this country where I live is on its way to "empowering" itself right into the third world.

As for abridgements:

My mom's aunt Helen -- who would host us on summer vacation sometimes -- had a collection of Reader's Digest Condensed Books, and they were better than nothing . . .

but not much.