4 ms·

Sometimes I like to imagine the extremely unlikely universe in which Douglas Adams decided to see what would happen if he wrote a Hitch-Hiker's Guide sequel tha

Sometimes I like to imagine the extremely unlikely universe in which Douglas Adams decided to see what would happen if he wrote a Hitch-Hiker's Guide sequel that took place in the same universe, but concerned the humorous misadventures of new characters, who had drives and motivations that were more compatible with actually moving a story forwards than folks like Arthur or Zaphod or Ford who would much rather slouch off to find a nice cup of tea or a party than get involved in saving the world. And then discovered that it was a lot easier, and actually fun, to write stories about characters like that, and went on to write two or three dozen more loosely-connected books of SF-flavored comedy. Given that every story about the man emphasizes how hard it was to get any writing out of him, this is a universe that could probably only exist as a side-effect of an Infinite Improbability Drive, but it's still fun to imagine. And to wonder if it would have started getting weirdly poignant and serious under the silly surface the way Discworld did about a dozen books after Terry Pratchett gave up trying to find reasons for Rincewind to ever leave his room again.

lukan 2y ago
I do not think, that would have worked. That is, it would have resulted in an easy to consume, superhero marketable franchise thing. Highly succesful. But not that interesting to me. The whole gimmick of the books is not wanting to save the world. But the world got blown up anyway, so what do you do now?
cool_dude85 2y ago
First, I think this is difficult to pitch from a commercial point of view. At least some subset of your fans are interested in what Arthur Dent is doing, not some other guy who exists in the same universe with his own wacky adventures. Publishers of any creative work are not known for their desire to take risks. Second, he did branch out and wrote the Dirk Gently books and his travelogue about seeing endangered species. He didn't seem to have much more fun writing those, and they were not as commercially successful, by far.
- egypturnash 2y ago
  You have correctly observed that the number of universes that got to experience the joy of a Hitch-Hiker's 4 in which Gimblethrop Tisslwheep put together a crack team of thieves for a heist in the glamorous, newly-built casinos of Squornshellus Zeta, never mind the stunningly thoughtful portrait of Eccentria Gallumbits's later years as a titan of the adult entertainment industry and the incisive, embittered critique of the continuing tragic effects of the British Empire's many sins that made up Hitch-Hiker's 18, is vanishingly small. But I will note that the idea of an SF/F author having a world to which they return again and again, with a mix of recurring characters and new ones, is pretty common. Asimov had the Foundation and the Robots books, and eventually tied them together. Heinlein had his Future History. Alan Dean Foster's Humanx Commonwealth absorbed a lot of my pocket money in the eighties. So did Larry Niven's Known Space. Tolkien's Middle-Earth. A new book by a beloved author in another corner of the same setting that their big success came from is an easier sell to that "subset of fans who are interested in what Arthur Dent is doing" than a totally different book by the same author.

lukan 2y ago

I do not think, that would have worked. That is, it would have resulted in an easy to consume, superhero marketable franchise thing. Highly succesful. But not that interesting to me. The whole gimmick of the books is not wanting to save the world. But the world got blown up anyway, so what do you do now?

cool_dude85 2y ago

First, I think this is difficult to pitch from a commercial point of view. At least some subset of your fans are interested in what Arthur Dent is doing, not some other guy who exists in the same universe with his own wacky adventures. Publishers of any creative work are not known for their desire to take risks. Second, he did branch out and wrote the Dirk Gently books and his travelogue about seeing endangered species. He didn't seem to have much more fun writing those, and they were not as commercially successful, by far.

egypturnash 2y ago
You have correctly observed that the number of universes that got to experience the joy of a Hitch-Hiker's 4 in which Gimblethrop Tisslwheep put together a crack team of thieves for a heist in the glamorous, newly-built casinos of Squornshellus Zeta, never mind the stunningly thoughtful portrait of Eccentria Gallumbits's later years as a titan of the adult entertainment industry and the incisive, embittered critique of the continuing tragic effects of the British Empire's many sins that made up Hitch-Hiker's 18, is vanishingly small. But I will note that the idea of an SF/F author having a world to which they return again and again, with a mix of recurring characters and new ones, is pretty common. Asimov had the Foundation and the Robots books, and eventually tied them together. Heinlein had his Future History. Alan Dean Foster's Humanx Commonwealth absorbed a lot of my pocket money in the eighties. So did Larry Niven's Known Space. Tolkien's Middle-Earth. A new book by a beloved author in another corner of the same setting that their big success came from is an easier sell to that "subset of fans who are interested in what Arthur Dent is doing" than a totally different book by the same author.