If the author does it - it is their own right. If some other people do that - fuck them.

I am not a fan… but I have not had to consider doing this, so I am sure there are reasons why the authors want to do it?.. but I don’t like it. Just leave it as it is.

I think authors revising their older works to make them more modern is a matter of personal choice and the author’s artistic vision. Some authors may feel that their older works are outdated or flawed, and want to improve them or adapt them to the current times…or they’ve grown out of racism, homophobia, and sexism. Other authors may feel that their older works are part of their history and identity, and want to preserve them as they are. As long as the authors are honest and respectful of their readers and their original intentions, I’m fine with it.

That said, both versions should be available.

I think it’s fine. The peril is that the author could make it worse. But maybe they’ll make it better!

I don’t really have a problem with the concept, broadly.
I’m not a published author or anything, but with a lot of creative stuff I’ve done I haven’t so much “finished it” as I have “sucked it up and decided to share it at a certain point even though I wasn’t 100% happy with it.” And I can’t imagine it’s much better for a lot of professionals.

But when someone says it’s to make the work “more modern…” That’s not a red flag, but it’s yellow for sure. That description can cover a lot of ground.
And it’s definitely a red flag when that version outright replaces the older one. It’s giving George Lucas.

the author can do whatever they like with their book. revise, rewrite, remix - go nuts.

anyone else, including the publishing house? hands off. if you didn’t write it, you don’t get to ‘fix’ it.

I think it depends on what’s being changed and why. Like, I don’t LOVE it but I understand updating the Babysitter’s Club books for modern children, or updating older kids books to get rid of stuff that didn’t age really well. But stuff like Carrie doesn’t need to be updated to reference blogs and youtube instead of newspapers.

I mean I think it’s totally fine for modern kids to read old books that have landline phones and having to all go to the library to use a computer for a school report, but I also think it’s fine for some books to update that stuff. Like back when I was a kid I read plenty of older stuff, or stuff that took place in older days, and that was fine, but I don’t think I could stand only ever reading fiction where people communicated via telegraph.

Well, I have done it. Sort of. My wife was assigned to translate our first novel, and whenever she was getting bored she started to make up her own stuff. Now her version not only makes the teenage prota cheekier than before, it even features an additional character, a toddler who keeps meddling into the scenes regardless of how often she is kicked out. And I found myself forced to readjust the original to my wife’s translation that has become more of a retelling. For I had to admit that she has improved on it.

Don’t care. I think people who pretend to care that aren’t aware about the long history of books being updated look ignorant. Tolkien rewrote parts of The Hobbit, Dahl updated his books to avoid offensive stereotypes.

As long as its labeled I don’t mind at all

I think nobody should edit a book after it’s been published - neither the author nor the publisher or estate - except in a handful of very narrow cases:

1. In textbooks obviously to include new information, new research, update statistics etc. Absolutely doesn’t apply to prose.

2. Misspellings and grammatical errors

3. An extant manuscript or older unpublished version is found that clearly shows that the author (who is dead and can’t speak out on it anymore) intended something to be different, but it was misprinted, the author was browbeaten, talked out of it, censored, etc.

I’m absolutely against “updating” prose. I hate "X as a service"ification of things, I like to own books and movies and music, not have a subscription to them. This is that, but worse. And we all know authors (cough JKR cough) who would update their goddamn books every time they’re waiting on a dentist appointment or sitting in traffic.

That’s not a new trend.

It’s called ‘bowdlerizing’ due to an editor, Bowdler that did it with Shakespeare plays in 1818.

Wikipedia gives some other examples:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expurgation

​

• A student edition of the novel Fahrenheit 451 was expurgated to remove a variety of content. This was ironic given the subject matter of the novel involves burning books. This continued for a dozen years before it was brought to author Ray Bradbury’s attention and he convinced the publisher to reinstate the material.

​

• The video game South Park: The Fractured but Whole was originally going to have the name The Butthole of Time. However, marketers would not promote anything with a vulgarity in its title, so “butthole” was replaced with the homophone “but whole”.[24][25]

• In 2023 new versions of Roald Dahl’s books were published by Puffin Books to remove language deemed inappropriate. Puffin had hired sensitivity readers to go over his texts to make sure the books could "continue to be enjoyed by all today”.[26] The same was done with the James Bond novels.[27]

Write the book. Publish it. That’s the book.

If it’s obviously marked as a different edition then that’s fine. My grandparents rewrote my great-grandfather’s entire book series to make it more modern since it’s mainly for kids and teens.

As long as their older stuff remains available for those who still want to read it, I’m fine with it. What I hate is when authors - both of books and fanfiction - rewrite the book over their old work.