The Man Who Fell To Earth Post-Nixon
May 23, 2008 2:57 PM Subscribe
Walter Tevis's classic sci-fi novel The Man Who Fell To Earth was published in 1963. Does anyone know how and why, then, the current edition came to contain a reference to the 1972 Watergate scandal?
While some people have raised this issue online in book discussions, I've never seen any explanation.
On page 180 of the book, spaceman Jerome Newton (Bowie in the film) is being investigated by the government. Someone is talking about FBI abuses of power, and says: "Did you know that Watergate changed nothing--nothing."
There's been speculation that author Tevis must have revised the book sometime post-Nixon. But has anyone ever figured out why, and when?
And also, I was wondering whether there might be someone out there with two editions, someone who might be able to say what other changes might have been made to the old version? Whether maybe Tevis felt it contained too many dated predictions of what the 1970s would be like? This has haunted me for years.
While some people have raised this issue online in book discussions, I've never seen any explanation.
On page 180 of the book, spaceman Jerome Newton (Bowie in the film) is being investigated by the government. Someone is talking about FBI abuses of power, and says: "Did you know that Watergate changed nothing--nothing."
There's been speculation that author Tevis must have revised the book sometime post-Nixon. But has anyone ever figured out why, and when?
And also, I was wondering whether there might be someone out there with two editions, someone who might be able to say what other changes might have been made to the old version? Whether maybe Tevis felt it contained too many dated predictions of what the 1970s would be like? This has haunted me for years.
A film was made in 1976. Perhaps the film contained a reference to Watergate and the author wanted to reconcile the two? Anyone seen the film?
Says here the revision was first published in 1976. So it would make sense for that to be the reason. However, the film appears to be German, so maybe not. It could just be that the author (or publisher) wanted to update it for the increased sales that were expected due to the film. Also, the writer of the amazon review quoted on that page says the author was a drunk when he revised it, so maybe his judgment was affected.
Updating of SF works seems pretty common in my experience. I guess it could be seen as better enabling the suspension of belief required to enjoy them. If the original work gets some (now historical) detail wrong, it might take away from the overall impression. However, this is usually clearly stated in the preface, or foreword, or what have you.
posted by gauchodaspampas at 6:51 PM on May 23, 2008
Says here the revision was first published in 1976. So it would make sense for that to be the reason. However, the film appears to be German, so maybe not. It could just be that the author (or publisher) wanted to update it for the increased sales that were expected due to the film. Also, the writer of the amazon review quoted on that page says the author was a drunk when he revised it, so maybe his judgment was affected.
Updating of SF works seems pretty common in my experience. I guess it could be seen as better enabling the suspension of belief required to enjoy them. If the original work gets some (now historical) detail wrong, it might take away from the overall impression. However, this is usually clearly stated in the preface, or foreword, or what have you.
posted by gauchodaspampas at 6:51 PM on May 23, 2008
Response by poster: That's really interesting. What are some famous examples of updated SF?
posted by johngoren at 8:05 PM on May 23, 2008
posted by johngoren at 8:05 PM on May 23, 2008
According to this (admittedly, not 100% confidence-inspiring) source, he revised it in '76 while a serious alcoholic and intended to continue to revise it so that the events of the book would always occur 10 years in the future. You might try to track down a contact at that site to see if they can provide the source or corroboration for this version.
posted by nanojath at 8:30 PM on May 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by nanojath at 8:30 PM on May 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
What are some famous examples of updated SF?
Well, Larry Niven fixed Ringworld when it was pointed out to him that he had Louis Wu celebrating his birthday (200th, was it?) by taking transport booths around the world to witness a 24-hour sunrise -- going the wrong way. That's not really an update, though, and Niven laughed off many of his other errors such as writing about Mercury having a locked orbit just before it was disconfirmed.
I'm actually trying to come up with a major written sf work that was updated in a comparably significant way and I can't. The usual thing is just to write a sequel. That would describe Arthur C. Clarke's 2010 and so on.
posted by dhartung at 10:49 PM on May 23, 2008
Well, Larry Niven fixed Ringworld when it was pointed out to him that he had Louis Wu celebrating his birthday (200th, was it?) by taking transport booths around the world to witness a 24-hour sunrise -- going the wrong way. That's not really an update, though, and Niven laughed off many of his other errors such as writing about Mercury having a locked orbit just before it was disconfirmed.
I'm actually trying to come up with a major written sf work that was updated in a comparably significant way and I can't. The usual thing is just to write a sequel. That would describe Arthur C. Clarke's 2010 and so on.
posted by dhartung at 10:49 PM on May 23, 2008
I should add that there are works that have been revised to incorporate a retcon, much the way that Return of the Jedi now has a ghostly Hayden Christensen waving at the end. Still, not the same thing.
posted by dhartung at 10:52 PM on May 23, 2008
posted by dhartung at 10:52 PM on May 23, 2008
Response by poster: Interesting thing about 2010 is that it moves the drama from Saturn to Jupiter to stay consistent with the Stanley Kubrick movie and not the original book.
posted by johngoren at 11:29 PM on May 23, 2008
posted by johngoren at 11:29 PM on May 23, 2008
Ender's Game (published in 1985) was revised in 1991 to update the politics (fall of the Soviet Union, etc) as well as some other things that were bothering Card about the original printing.
See also Retroactive Continuity.
posted by Ookseer at 2:59 AM on May 24, 2008
See also Retroactive Continuity.
posted by Ookseer at 2:59 AM on May 24, 2008
The film is English not German. It's directed by Nic Roeg of Performance, Walkabout etc. fame and stars David Bowie, Rip Torn and Candy Clark.
It's an excellent film if you haven't already seen it.
posted by merocet at 7:46 AM on May 24, 2008
It's an excellent film if you haven't already seen it.
posted by merocet at 7:46 AM on May 24, 2008
What are some famous examples of updated SF?
Publishers edited Fahrenheit 451 into a juvenile version, against Ray Bradbury's wishes. Also numerous version of his Martian Chronicles exist (but being in actuality a short story collection, this is somewhat forgiveable), and in the latest update they've incremented the year chapter-titles by +30.
posted by Rash at 2:51 PM on May 24, 2008
Publishers edited Fahrenheit 451 into a juvenile version, against Ray Bradbury's wishes. Also numerous version of his Martian Chronicles exist (but being in actuality a short story collection, this is somewhat forgiveable), and in the latest update they've incremented the year chapter-titles by +30.
posted by Rash at 2:51 PM on May 24, 2008
Best answer: If anyone's still curious: I bought the 1963 original edition on the above advice. I can see why Tevis would want to change the passage in question.
It's kind of charmingly way off about the political future. "'It just happens that this is 1976,'" a CIA man says. "'And 1976 is an election year. The President is already campaigning for a second term, and he has it on good authority--did you know that the President uses us, in the CIA, to spy on the other party?--that the Republicans are going to turn this whole business [of the government detention of spaceman Thomas Newton] into something like the Dreyfus case if we don't either bring adequate charges against you or turn you loose with profuse apologies all around.
"Abruptly, Newton laughed. 'And if you shoot me, the President might lose the election?'
"The Republicans have your brother industrialists in the NAM worked up into a lather. And those gentlemen, as you probably know, wield a lot of influence . . . "
posted by johngoren at 9:20 PM on June 2, 2008
It's kind of charmingly way off about the political future. "'It just happens that this is 1976,'" a CIA man says. "'And 1976 is an election year. The President is already campaigning for a second term, and he has it on good authority--did you know that the President uses us, in the CIA, to spy on the other party?--that the Republicans are going to turn this whole business [of the government detention of spaceman Thomas Newton] into something like the Dreyfus case if we don't either bring adequate charges against you or turn you loose with profuse apologies all around.
"Abruptly, Newton laughed. 'And if you shoot me, the President might lose the election?'
"The Republicans have your brother industrialists in the NAM worked up into a lather. And those gentlemen, as you probably know, wield a lot of influence . . . "
posted by johngoren at 9:20 PM on June 2, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by nomisxid at 3:06 PM on May 23, 2008