Last week, in my post Widgets and Books, I was talking about the art of scheduling the writing of a book. I talked about the need for authors to figure out when they’re going to be finished a work before they start writing it, so that the book can be scheduled for production at the publishing house. Essentially, the squishy unpredictable bit needs to mesh with the predictable bit, and writers need to make that happen.
But the conversation in the comments took several interesting turns. I thought we’d talk about one of those turns today.
Do you think that a book should be revised when it is republished?
This is a fair question because reverted rights are often to earlier work. It has taken years for rights to revert to authors, so by the time the rights to the book are back in the author’s hands, it could be a decade since the book was written – or even more. Most authors learn something in that period of time, so most authors have the urge to revise the work before republishing it.
Traditionally, authors had very little control over this. Rights to works might not revert to the author, and so long as the house held the rights, any re-issues would likely be the same as the original edition. In the few instances I can remember of a work reverting to the author then being republished – often with her current house as opposed to the house that originally published the work – the author completely rewrote the book. It was given a new title by the publisher to indicate this change. Susan Elizabeth Philips did this with one of her historicals, I remember, and there were probably others.
Int he current market, of course, there are many many authors who have had backlist rights revert. Although there aren’t lines forming to the right and left of publishing houses willing to reprint these works for a price, a great number of authors are choosing to digitally self-publish the works to make them available to readers. And the question is – revise or not?
My own decision is a compromise. For the vast majority of my works, I am happy with them as they stand. I’m fixing typos and continuity errors that I know about – there will be no potatoes in the re-released edition of THE COUNTESS, for example – but that’s it. The books are getting new covers and away they go.
There is one book – A MAGICIAN’S QUEST – that I will have to scan or retype as I don’t have a digital back-up that isn’t corrupted. In looking at this book, it’s the one exception. I would completely rewrite it before publishing it again. I suspect this is because it’s my first shapeshifter romance and I’ve learned a lot about writing these kinds of paranormals since 1994. Also, the market has changed and there is a greater expectation for more complex worldbuilding than is shown in this book. Whether it’s time and cost-effective for me to do this is another question altogether. In a real sense, I feel that I’ve told Yusuf’s story and am not that interested in doing a major revision. I have other stories I want to tell instead! If I did do this revision, I’d release the book with a different title to indicate the scope of the change.
What do you think? If you’re a writer, do you intend to revise your books heavily before re-release or not? Tell me your rationale. If you’re a reader, what do you expect from re-released works?
Deborah Cooke: Author 
11 responses to “Revising Reverted Works”
Deborah, I like the idea of republishing with all of the typos and continuity problems fixed but other than that I would keep the story the way it was originally told. THAT is the story I fell in love with and that is the story I want to keep.
Yes, SEP did it with her book “Risen Glory” and renamed it “Just Imagine.” I have “Risen Glory” and have no intentions whatsover of getting the new version of it. This may be just me but that is what I would do – stick to the original!!
LikeLike
Thanks for commenting, DJ. I’m interested that readers – not just you, there have been others – really want the original version.
d
LikeLike
Hmm, I missed this post Deb.
But what a great article and some very good reasonings.
Ok as a reader strictly the only thing I would like to see revised in novels is the socially unacceptable things that might be in it. Here’s an example last year at the romance board at B&N we read as a group one of Katherine Woodiwiss’ historical romance novels. In it the heroine continually told the hero no, he raped her anyway and they fell in love.
As a woman and as a socially responsible person I found that really offensive and it also put me off maybe reading other older romances also.
Now to be fair to you Deb, your original historical romances were very steamy but the heroine always knew what she was doing and did it anyway and that’s perfectly okay with me.
Ok now for novels that were contemporary earlier like 10 to 15 years ago technology has changed so much in that short period of time, but if an author went about updating it, it could really change the whole feel of the novel and it might be more detrimental than helpful.
Thanks for the opportunity to speak on something that actually is very relevant especially today when there is a lot of re-issuing in e-form.
Deb
LikeLike
Oh one more thing, yes to fixing the typos 🙂
DEb
LikeLike
In response to Debbie’s comment about one of Kathleen Woodiwiss’s books having a rape scene. No, it may not be socially acceptable right now but these are “historical” books and for the time period they are set in the act of rape is factual. If you take it out you may as well sell the book then as a contemporary romance as it is no longer historical. I am of the firm opinion that if you are going to write (or read) Historical then it has to be true to the time it’s written in. That’s my opinion.
LikeLike
And I totally agree w/DJ H about literary fiction being left alone, but I’m talking about a romance based on a rape. And of course we are all entitled to our own opinions, but I would hate for a woman in an abuse shelter who wants to read a romance to be handed one of those.
LikeLike
I think the key word in this discussion is “fiction.” I read hundreds of romances like that when I was a teenager but never once did I expect real life to be like that. The story is about making the best out of a bad situation, overcoming something you had no control over, turning a bad situation to your own benefit. Andf a woman can’t tell the difference between what is a fictional story in a book and what is real life she already has more problems than revising a story is going to help.
LikeLike
I’m in agreement with DJ here, Deb. I know the Woodiwiss book you mean and actually, I didn’t finish reading it when it was newly published because that situation didn’t work for me. The choice of what to read and what not to read has to remain with the reader. If we only created books that made everybody happy, there wouldn’t be many books published in the world! There are lots of stories that need to be told, even though they have some bits that make us uncomfortable. I find that those are the ones that stick in my memory.
On a related note, one of the things that’s very frustrating about writing historicals is that people have all these inaccurate ideas of how things were – or how things should have been – and try to impose them on the historical research. I think that’s a whole ‘nuther post!
Thanks to both of you for commenting!
d
LikeLike
I know it’s fiction and I DO REALLY mean that everyone is entitled to their opinion. And maybe had it been a different novel it wouldn’t have put me off so bad.
Thanks DJ for commenting on my post I always enjoy a good discussion and there is no right or wrong but personal choice.
Thanks Deb, you seemed to have brought about a subject that has “passionate” responses.
LikeLike
The other thing, Deb, is that what would the story be if you took out the rape? It fuels the heroine’s conflict and is the obstacle to their relationship. The book would be really different without it, in fact it would be an entirely different story.
I didn’t have an issue with the rape in that book, so much as the fact that she fell in love with him later. That was just implausible to me, but other readers found it romantic and a sign of love healing all wounds. To each, our own!
d
LikeLike
I’m with you Debbie – I loooove a good discussion that brings out the passion in people. This may be a slooow way to do it but it’s fun anyway! A lot of the older romance stories start with a rape and then the pair falls in love. Hey, if it worked for Luke and Laura on General Hospital . . .
The two Woodiwiss stories that I actually remember were “The Wolf and the Dove” and “The Flame and the Flower” both of which had relationships that started with basically rape. Wolf and Dove was true to what happened a lot during the Norman conquest of England. Flame and Flower is a class distinction since the male was drunk and thought he’d purchased a whore who was trying to get out of providing what she’d been paid for – again true to it’s time in history. What I liked about the two stories is that while the man had all the power at the start of the story by the end she is the one holding the reins and he’s trying to please her. Love not only heals all wounds, as Deb put it, but love conquers all sometimes as well.
If these were kidnapping scenarios they would call this “Stockholm syndrome” but from the psych classes I took once a lot of women do fall in love with a rapist who remains part of their social circle. One time violent and never seen again – no. But someone they have contact with – sometimes yes.
And now I think I’ve run on long enough. Shame we can’t all three actually get together and talk about this!! And Deb, I’m hanging on waiting for “Winging It” and “Flashfire”!! Hurry up time!
LikeLike