13 comments on “Mostly Harmful

  1. Mister H

    The part I don’t get is why is it the Artemis Fowl author is digging him up? I am a big fan of DNA but am unfamiliar with the Fowl books….

  2. Louise

    A bit more background to this vig who those who don’t know:

    Eoin Colfer has been commissioned to write the sixth instalment to the “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” series.

    Many of us Douglas Adams fans are not too happy about it.

  3. Ramone

    Douglas Adams was cremated. I guess that wouldn’t make for an interesting vignette though. There’s nothing on Bros. Brick that offends me–I’m truly 99.9% delighted to see everything. Even the political creations. But this is really insensitive to both Adams and Colfer.

    Writers taking up the reigns from their deceased precursors are nothing new. Look at Conan writer Robert E. Howard–his characters have gone on decades after his death.

    I’ll wait for the book to come out before I cry about whether it’s a travesty or not.

  4. Doctor Sinister

    There’s nothing insensitive about this Vig’ – it’s highlighting the legitimate concerns of how a lot of people feel about DNA’s ideas being stolen for the purposes of fleecing the fans for more cash.

    The only insensitivity is from the publishers towards DNA’s memory.

    Let’s put it simply – who wants to read a Hitch-Hiker’s book that ISN’T wrtitten by Douglas? I don’t. The style of a HH book is a style of its own – unique to the original author.

    Mr Colfer should have stayed well away – he’s a highly successful author in his own right – he doesn’t NEED to take on another author’s universe, the fact that he has done so lowers him in the eyes of many.

    No, there’s nothing to say we have to buy or read the book when it comes out – equally there’s nothing to say that the idea MUST be resurrected just because other deceased authors have had similar things happen to their concepts or because someone fancies making some money from a formula that likely won’t translate well to another author’s writings.

    Colfer won’t even talk to the fans – that says a lot.

    Dr. S.

  5. Alan R

    The vignette is brilliant, but Colfer’s an idiot if that’s true (and I assume it is).

    Honestly, his books don’t have the spontaneity, bathos, and general awesomeness that Adams has. Artemis Fowl isn’t bad, but it isn’t Douglas Adams.

    That’s like commissioning Rowling to write another Lord of the Rings book.

    Also, the last HHG book was relatively final, wasn’t it? Sure, you can add _another_ ridiculous parallel, but that’s beyond stupid.

  6. spunkycomics

    coincidentally, i started the Hitchhiker’s series last week, and am halfway through Mostly Harmless right now.
    I just tossed the book on my bed, came over here to check the Blog, and saw this.
    The first thought that went through my head was “Haha, its called mostly harmful! Thats almost like Mostly Harmless and……oh”

    Anyways, Douglas Adams is one of the most brilliant authors I’ve ever read. I love the Artemis Fowl books, but I don’t believe letting Colfer write the next one is a good idea.
    And as for the books already having a solid end, I wouldn’t know cause I’m only on book 4, haha.

    Awesome vig though!

  7. JimmytheJ

    But… I thought they found the question? “What table are we sitting at?”
    Yes?

    I guess they could explore the new, weirder universe that replaces the old one?

  8. Xiazeran

    Wow.. So why did they think Colfer could continue it!? Nice vig, and the most random thing I’ve heard today, but the most interesting (not to mention the most irritating) thing I’ve heard.. today.

  9. Fred

    actually the question is stated by Marvin (who had a brain the size of a planet hint hint) when talking to a mattress.
    “Pick a number, any number”

  10. Brian from Brickworkz

    Well, I for one am admiring the vignette for its technical achievement. I really like the composition of the tree here. Excellent work on capturing the creepy feel of an old cemetery tree using non-conventional parts!

  11. Ramone

    @Dr. S.

    “The only insensitivity is from the publishers towards DNA’s memory.”

    Welcome to the world of publishing!

    In a sense, I think his fans (myself included) should be delighted that his work is considered classic enough to extend beyond the DNA cannon. On the other hand, it does seem heretical to go back and mess with something perfect.

    My comment about ‘insensitivity’ relates to the nature of the MOC. It puts Colfer in the precarious position of being the fall guy. While I’m sure he has his reasons for doing it–I don’t think he’s who should take the blame for this decision.

    @Alan R.
    “Honestly, his books don’t have the spontaneity, bathos, and general awesomeness that Adams has. Artemis Fowl isn’t bad, but it isn’t Douglas Adams.”

    That may be true, but we’ll have to see how much of Adams’ style is aped by Colfer. I figure this is going to be a failed experiment, but to be honest, those can be the most fun to watch!

Comments are closed.