Revision Fail

[lone_she_wolf]

Revisions are bad, m'kay... I am not sure if this counts as a book fail or just a revision fail. I happen to like the novel The Man who fell to Earth (adapted into a very hard to follow film starring David Bowie and a pilot for a never-aired TV series). But the revised version of the novel (the only version currently in print) is lacking

Comments

[asylumvoid]

That story sounds amazing, I actually have to get it now!
Why revise it and then not have the original available? That's just crappy.

[lone_she_wolf]

I know. I personally love the book. I first read it about eleven years ago and was obsessed for a little while. I even befriended Paul Murphy, a composer for a would be Broadway play adaptation that never took off. I haven't seen him in years though.

I just loathe that the only version currently in print is revised and even lacks the 1984 Winston Smith comparison that I liked. Poor Newton...

[asylumvoid]

Yay! I actually found a 1963 one on Ebay, I never win auctions but I actually really want/need to read this book now, hahaha! Easily influenced!

[lone_she_wolf]

Awww, I hope you enjoy it. If the ebay auction doesn't work out try www.alibris.com.

An easy way to tell if you have the original text is the first chapter will be 'Icarus Descending 1972.' The revised version is 'Icarus Descending 1985.'

[polarisdib]

Aside: The Man Who Fell to Earth is one of my favorite movies ever. It is also directed by one of my favorite directors ever. Not that that changes really anything that you've said in your review, but damn do I love me some Roeg/Bowie action!

--DiB

[lone_she_wolf]

Bowie was fantastic as Newton. The problem was the script. It was too surreal and non-linear. The novel is far easier to follow and reveals things not touched upon in the movie, such as the name of home planet, Anthea, and the full mission. The film also sometimes hints that he's not really an alien but just crazy but in the novel he's most definitely an alien. The pilot for the attempted TV show changes all the characters names (Newton becomes John Dorry) but strangely he's still The Anthean from Anthea.

[polarisdib]

Aha, I knew I published about the movie somewhere!

http://beyondthecanon.blogspot.com/2009/09/dane-benko.html

"It was too surreal and non-linear"

Hellooooo Nicolas Roeg! Performance, Walkabout, Don't Look Now, seen any of those? Linearity is not of concern to him, and that's why it's fantastic. For the movie, it's really not about Newton, it's about David Bowie: the human alien, the alien that everyone forces to be human, where humanity is not a difference in biology but in performance. But if you want to look into the issue of linearity with Roeg's cinema, check out Bad Timing--it's all in the title.

--DiB

[lone_she_wolf]

His version of The Witches (which I know wasn't really his usual style) was pretty true to it's novel. As for what he turned The Man who fell to Earth into, Bowie related to Newton a little too well. His Thin White Duke phase was based off Thomas Jerome Newton, the tragic starman.

[koboldmaki]

I hate that the author apparently thought his readers too stupid to read his book as futuristic even though the numbers are set in the past. I can still read "1984" as set in a bleak near future even though it is now the past, without it being suddenly called "2084" (I shudder at the thought!), because, well, I can IMAGINE things, and the intention is clear from the text.
And the fact that the publishers decided to go on publishing the revised instead of the original edition even though BOTH are now set in the past baffles me completely.

[lone_she_wolf]

I fear, because this title is slightly obscure, the publisher might not even be aware that it's revised text. The copyright says 1963 inside it and mentions nothing of the revisions but if you open the original book to any new copy the changes are glaringly obvious. Some misconception with the copyright is going on.

[koboldmaki]

Now that just makes me want to slap some publishers :/

[lone_she_wolf]

I believe the current publisher is Del Rey, a branch of Randomhouse.

[muse_books]

It sounds like it would be interesting for someone to bring out a version that contained all the versions - original and revised.

I've seen the film many times but not realised there was a novel before it. I'd often thought that the film had taken some of its themes from 'Stranger in a Strange Land' though its hero is not alien but raised by aliens.

[lone_she_wolf]

The novel is from 1963, thirteen years before the film was made. I always pay attention to opening credits to a film to see if it's based on a book. And I have to tell you the film is a lot easier to follow once you've read the novel.

[lone_she_wolf]

By the way, I would LOVE a fully restored version of the book with both the revised and original text, perhaps a double book.