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....
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....