Allow me to insert a discordant note into the discussion. If an author had petitioned the Orwell Estate to write this book because they felt story needed to be told, I’d find it easier to believe that this is an “artistic” work rather than an Disney-style attempt to squeeze a little more blood out of an enduring literary turnip.
Instead we’re told “Orwell’s estate said it had been ‘looking for some time’ for an author to tell the story of Smith’s lover.” Regardless of whether the upcoming novel has literary merit, its existence is just another attempt to cash in on an existing work by people who had no part whatever in that work’s creation.
I don’t see that, but I’ll rephrase it in hopes of being more clear
“If the upcoming novel has literary merit” = “Even though it was written primarily to make money off 1984 it might still be a decent novel.”
“Attempt to cash in on an existing work by people who had no part whatever in that work’s creation” = The Estate of George Orwell had nothing whatever to do with the creation of 1984. But under the byzantine rules of “intellectual property” they “own” the book and they can (they hope) make bucks off the late Mr O’s creation however they see fit. If the sequel they commission happens to have literary merit, a solid feminist underpinning, etc., fine and dandy. But the main purpose is to profit off 1984.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But in my personal opinion the inheritance of copyright on creative works is a stupid idea. I can see an author’s spouse/partner/significant other being entitled to inherit copyright from a deceased creator because so often that person “contributed” to the work’s creation, whether by offering ideas, editing the manuscript, or simply by working to pay the bills while the creator created. But children hardly ever played such a role and grandchildren? No. It leads to things like the Martin Luther King estate claiming the right to decide whether the text of King’s public speeches may or may not be used in a movie.
It seems to me that copyright inheritance is just another component of America’s dynasty-building apparatus. Again, this is all my personal opinion. You may not see things the same way.
I don’t see families of creators of published works as uninvolved parties attempting to “cash in.” The folks eager to terminate those families’ rights to proceeds as part of an estate are the ones who usually go to great lengths to profit from the work of others. It’s a slippery slope trying to determine who influenced a writer…even your example of spousal entitlement falls short in Orwell’s case. He wrote everything long before he married the wife who managed his estate.
My grandparents would be appalled if the fruits of their labor went to some corporate entity instead of the family they helped to create. If family members decide that they don’t want a deceased loved one’s work used in certain ways, I’m not going to claim they shouldn’t have that right. This is especially true for members of marginalized communities who have far too often been robbed of the right to control their work, or were given far less in compensation than it was worth.
Funny thing, if we had the copyright laws that our parents had instead of the insane ones Sony Bono and Disney gifted us with, we could have had all kinds of retellings and riffs on not just this book but many more. Things like this could have been routine.
What stuck with me was how thorough big brother was. He doesn’t just identify dissidents and eliminate them, he identifies them, converts them, puts them on display, tests them, and then maybe allows them to die, once it doesn’t matter anymore. Made me think it was realistic, feasible.
Nineteen Eighty-Four ought to be public domain by now, even by the ridiculously long “life of the author plus 50 years” standard, but since it’s not, licensing fanfiction is one way to get it in print
I’m pleasantly surprised Orwell’s estate allowed this. I just watched the excellent Tick Tick Boom film and afterwards learned that Superbia was originally meant to be a musical adaptation of 1984 until the estate nixed it.
