# Examples of Special Editions/Director's Cuts/Final Editions etc. but in literature **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 24, 2020, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917 "2020-01-24T20:24:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/21 "2020-01-25T00:44:31Z")
Other Heinlein works were updated - most dramatically “If This Goes On” which has a rather different ending in the original version: the revolution was concluded with mass hypnosis - a method that in the revised version the revolutionaries emphatically decide against. Charles Sheffield kept reworking his books - “The Nimrod Hunt” was reworked into “The Mind Pool,” “Tomorrow and Tomorrow” was a revised and expanded version of “At the Eschaton” and the Heritage Universe novels had substantial revisions in the later edition. David Gerrold updated “When HARLIE was One” as “When Harlie was One, 2.0” to account for changes in computer technology - he also substantially altered “A Matter for Men” (added a chapter or so) in later editions. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/22 "2020-01-25T00:52:38Z")
If I recall (and I’m not 100% sure) Stephen King’s _The Stand_ had a second publication that was significantly expanded and more detailed because by that point he had more clout and doorstopper books were more acceptable to the buying public. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/23 "2020-01-25T01:54:38Z")
The publisher of John Barth’s _The Floating Opera_ insisted on his changing the ending. Barth complied and it was published in 1956. In 1967, Barth revised it, putting back his original ending and making various changes throughout. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/24 "2020-01-25T02:23:22Z")
Piers Anthony wrote and sold a novel, _But What of Earth?_, in 1976. The editor had the book extensively revised by Robert Coulson, to the point where Anthony and Coulson were listed as co-authors. Anthony won back the publication rights in a lawsuit and published his original version in 1989. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/25 "2020-01-25T02:40:22Z")
Much of [Henry James](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Edition). ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/26 "2020-01-25T03:47:15Z")
> [@Turek](#): > > Stephen King released an an unabridged edition of _The Stand_ in 1990, billed as “The Complete and Uncut Edition”. He also put out a revised edition of _The Gunslinger_ in 2004, which added a few things and fixed some continuity errors but didn’t significantly lengthen the book. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Just\_Ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Ed)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/27 "2020-01-25T04:02:09Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Oh, just remembered another one: Heinlein’s _Stranger in a Strange Land_ was first published in a highly condensed version, but then once he had enough clout, he went back and re-published it in its original, longer form. Not exactly; the longer form was published posthumously, and is inferior according to Heinlein himself: > [@](#): > > [Heinlein himself remarked in a letter he wrote to Oberon Zell-Ravenheart in 1972 that he thought his shorter, edited version was better. He wrote, "SISL was never censored by anyone in any fashion. The first draft was nearly twice as long as the published version. I cut it myself to bring it down to a commercial length. But I did not leave out anything of any importance; I simply trimmed all possible excess verbiage. Perhaps you have noticed that it reads “fast” despite its length; that is why. … The original, longest version of SISL … is really not worth your trouble, as it is the same story throughout—simply not as well told. With it is the brushpenned version which shows exactly what was cut out—nothing worth reading, that is. I learned to write for pulp magazines, in which one was paid by the yard rather than by the package; it was not until I started writing for the Saturday Evening Post that I learned the virtue of brevity.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stranger_in_a_Strange_Land#Publication_history) ---
**Author:** ![ChockFullOfHeadyGoodness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chockfullofheadygoodness/32/511_2.png) [@ChockFullOfHeadyGoodness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChockFullOfHeadyGoodness)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/28 "2020-01-25T07:22:57Z")
Neil Gaiman has published “author’s preferred text” editions of _Neverwhere and American Gods_. In the introduction to American Gods, he states the new one is 12,000 words longer. Mary Shelley revised Frankenstein 13 years after the original publication. For starters, her name was on the 1831 edition. The original 1818 version was published anonymously. Biggest change seemed to me to be in the original version Victor Frankenstein causes his own downfall through bad decisions and hubris, whereas in 1831, he’s a victim of fate and destiny. And fiancee Elizabeth’s backstory changes so she and Victor are no longer cousins. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/29 "2020-01-25T12:07:04Z")
David Weber [revised and expanded](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_of_the_Fury) _Path of the Fury_ into\* In Fury Born.\* ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/30 "2020-01-25T12:56:30Z")
Terry Pratchett re-released his very first novel _The Carpet People_, which he had originally written when he was a teenager, in a revised edition more in keeping with his modern sensibilities and skill level. ---
**Author:** ![Shoeless](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shoeless/32/7099_2.png) [@Shoeless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shoeless)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/31 "2020-01-25T14:10:23Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > No mention of \*Great Expectations \*yet? Sigh. > [@Kent\_Clark](#): > > Beat me by five minutes because I was looking for the[cite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Expectations#Revised_ending). Sigh. Does that fit the OP though? The way I’m reading it, Dickens changed the ending _before_ publication. ---
**Author:** ![Teuton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/teuton/32/3864_2.png) [@Teuton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teuton)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/32 "2020-01-25T14:34:01Z")
Raymond Feist’s [Magician](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magician_(Feist_novel)) got an extended ‘Author’s Preferred Version’ ten years after first being published. [The Princess Bride](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Princess_Bride_(novel)) now includes text at the end that was originally only available if you wrote in to request it, and then later available on a website, but it probably doesn’t count. Always take the opportunity to mention tPB though. ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/33 "2020-01-25T14:49:13Z")
Warning: Spoilers in link. Yet another Heinlein revision: [Podkayne of Mars](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podkayne_of_Mars#Two_versions_of_the_ending) was published with one ending, despite protests by Heinlein. It’s been republished later with both endings. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/34 "2020-01-25T14:51:51Z")
Richard Wright’s _Native Son_ had to be cleaned up for the book club edition, throwing out such lovely scenes as Bigger Thomas and his friends masturbating in the movie theatre. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/35 "2020-01-25T17:47:33Z")
> [@naita](#): > > Warning: Spoilers in link. > > Yet another Heinlein revision: [Podkayne of Mars](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podkayne_of_Mars#Two_versions_of_the_ending) was published with one ending, despite protests by Heinlein. It’s been republished later with both endings. Further Heinlein fun. The Virginia Editions of Heinlein’s works are supposed to be definitive. Fine, I’ve got them and I’m on board. But some of them use original text prior to some editing, either for their pulp releases or before publication as books. It’s trainwrecked me a few times as I’ll be rereading something and go BAM into text I don’t recognize. Usually, it’s small things. But in Red Planet there’s about a page or so of extra discussion about gun rights and responsibilities in an early scene. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/36 "2020-01-25T18:15:25Z")
> [@Shoeless](#): > > Does that fit the OP though? The way I’m reading it, Dickens changed the ending _before_ publication. The edition we used in high school had the “fixed” version and then the original ending. So versions of this ilk would fit, I think. It’s not all that different from Terry Gilliam’s _Brazil_ having the “happy” ending in the original theatrical release and then the one with his ending coming out later. ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/37 "2020-01-25T20:26:34Z")
Madeleine L’Engle’s publishers ordered her to “sanitize” \*\*And Both Were Young \*\*, one of her early novels. I put sanitize in quotes because what she put back in was still pretty tame for the early 1980s, when it was restored. Still, she was told that the main character and her guy friend couldn’t kiss, her widowed father couldn’t court one of her teachers, and the day of her mother’s death had to be New Year’s Day two years prior, instead of “It will be a year tomorrow.” Although when the updated version was published, it also lacked mentions of clothing coupons and other post-WWII-Europe references. I would rather they had been left in with footnotes. And speaking of that kind of re-editing, some of Judy Blume’s books have been re-released with records changed to CDs and the like. Which confirms what I’ve thought for a long time: Blume was not writing fiction so much as she was writing educational stories that happened to be entertaining. ---
**Author:** ![markn\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@markn\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markn_1)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/38 "2020-01-25T21:45:01Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Tolkien went back and changed a couple of details in _The Hobbit_, to make it more consistent with _The Lord of the Rings_. The justification was that the previous account was according to Bilbo, and he whitewashed a couple of points in his favor, but that “new evidence” had uncovered “the truth”. The publication of these changes was largely due to a misunderstanding between Tolkien and his publisher. In 1947 while he was working on LOTR, he sent a batch of corrections to the first edition of The Hobbit (typographical errors and such), intended for incorporation into the second edition. He also sent what he called a “specimen of rewriting (for your amusement)” of a large part of the Riddles in the Dark chapter, intended to remove the motif in the original story that Gollum actually intended to freely give Bilbo his Ring, which he was finding difficult to reconcile with the nature of the Ring as it was developing in LOTR. He did not intend Allen & Unwin to publish the “rewriting” but merely wanted their opinion on it, and if they liked the changes he might work further on it. Without understanding that the small corrections and the “specimen rewriting” were entirely different things, and without communicating with him, they went ahead and published all his changes in the second edition. Although initially surprised, Tolkien decided to accept the changes and took the second edition text as canon for the background of LOTR. ---
**Author:** ![Teuton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/teuton/32/3864_2.png) [@Teuton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teuton)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2020, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/39 "2020-01-25T23:05:23Z")
> [@Rilchiam](#): > > And speaking of that kind of re-editing, some of Judy Blume’s books have been re-released with records changed to CDs and the like. I believe that Enid Blyton’s books have been similarly updated, although for different reasons. ---
**Author:** ![markn\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@markn\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markn_1)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2020, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917/40 "2020-01-26T00:03:21Z")
I wanted to add that Tolkien’s creation of the idea that the First Edition story was a lie told by Bilbo was absolutely brilliant, and a good example of how he could take two seemingly contradictory statements and add a new statement that doesn’t contradict, but resolves the two stories. Another example is his creation of Thrain the Old to resolve the inconsistency between the Hobbit narrative and the Hobbit map’s inscription “Here of old was Thrain King under the Mountain”. The First Edition story presented the Ring as too benign and was missing any trace of the malignant influence it has on its possessors. So he adds the unreliable narrator motif, and now the same First Edition story is strong evidence of the Ring’s malignant influence on the usually honest Bilbo. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/examples-of-special-editions-directors-cuts-final-editions-etc-but-in-literature/846917.md?page=3)