Crime, Mysteries & Thrillers discussion

I have just been hit by three emails in a row, all pushing on me the "big reveal" of the "new Hercule Poirot" novel, THE MONOGRAM MURDERS by Sophie Hannah.

I grew up loving to read because of Christie, and is it me or is this nothing more than a real insult to her and her talent? It's really getting SICKENING, the greedy publishers and families of deceased authors, hiring other writers to continue with their characters after they're dead and gone; I stopped reading all Robert B. Parker books because of it, won't give the publishers or family another dime - but since word came that this Christie violation was coming out, it's just so frustrating and irritating. I can't imagine a real fan of hers even endorsing it, and have seen a couple of blow-ups about it on Facebook, via other outrage fans as well.

The book is due in September - am curious about other people's thoughts here. To me, what makes some series, their authors, and ESPECIALLY the characters so special in the first place is the fact that they are finite; you enjoy them while you can, and the books and characters were special because they were the creations of their writer, who understood them best. If you just hire another writer to continue after the creator is gone, to me it just cheapens and violates the original works, lessening their uniqueness because the publisher and families are saying, essentially, that they can easily be replaced.

Just curious, as this makes me SO angry where Christie - my icon and mentor - is concerned, especially. The publishers and family don't NEED more money, why do this?!! Anyway, your thoughts??

AND, as a reader on Amazon so rightly said - didn't Christie kill Poirot off, in the first place, so something like this wouldn't happen?

Yes, in Curtain.

Yep, the question was rhetorical, Tonya. :0)

She actually WROTE Curtain so no one could write about Poirot again after her death - the book, originally, wasn't supposed to be published until after her death - but we see how much her publishers and family respect THAT.

I have to say that up until two short weeks ago, I would have been the BIGGEST CHEERLEADER for this post, as I agree very much with the sentiment. (And for the record, I read The Monogram Murders and it most certainly fell far, far short of Christie's work, in my opinion at least.) But I have to say, as an aside, that quite on accident, I happened to pick up a copy of Horowitz's The House of Silk: A Sherlock Holmes Novel a couple of weeks ago. I had no idea whatsoever that it was "sanctioned" by Arthur Conan Doyle's estate as a Sherlock Holmes book (if I had known this, I honestly wouldn't have read the book). But oh my goodness, the book was absolutely fantastic and so much like Doyle's work --- at least, I thought so. I was absolutely smitten. In this case, I couldn't care less about the money the estate is getting, etc, I just enjoyed it for the fantastic read. Horowitz is so talented to re-create this character - it was wonderful. He just released another book, the second one he's written for Sherlock Holmes, and I never thought I'd see the day where I'd love a book written not by the original author, but by someone coming later re-creating the character.

I have that one in my stack to read. I think I will jump it up a few pegs. Thanks Michele.

Just to give my two cents, I like to read works based on other's works so long as the author writes in their own styles. It's when an author tries to copy another author and they market it under the original author that I find I don't like them much. There have been plenty of Sherlock Holmes stories written by other authors, some still good if not as good as Doyle but still enjoyable.
For example, I might not mind reading more stories featuring Robert B. Parker's character Jesse Stone if the books were not titled like Robert B. Parker's Blind Spot. Just title it "Blind Spot: A Jesse Stone Novel" by Reed Farrel Coleman. Maybe make a note inside like, "Based on the original character of Robert B. Parker".
I mean, comic books for decades have had multiple authors writing the stories using the same characters, why can't novels? Just give credit where credit is due, and make sure the work is good enough to sell itself without riding on the original author's reputation.

I respect and agree with your point, but the title has nothing to do with it. Also, I do think Coleman has a disytinctive style--Blind Spot was, in my opinion, a cut above most of Parker's Jesse Stone novels (heresy!).