The ethics of adapting an old story into a new one

I write. My published opus so far includes one book and maybe 10 or so articles, about half in print and half online. All of these are non-fiction and I am continuing to write things of this kind; however, I have also written and am writing some short stories and a novella, which I hope to publish as a collection when I will have written more stories. In fact, I am also writing a novel (I have currently have some 28 manuscripts in various stages of completion, ranging from just a few lines to a near-complete work; however, I am obviously prioritizing work on some of thes ideas over others), and it’s that novel that I want to talk about today.

The thing is, the plot is not my original story. It is an adaptation of a book I had as required reading in my senior year of high school. Adapting earlier fiction is not something of which I want to make a habit (the stories I mentioned above are all, taken as a whole, of my own invention, partly or wholly inspired by my own experiences, or based on other real-life events). This novel, however, is one for which I have been inspired to write an adaptation ever since I read it in school (growing up, I had a tendency to do creative writing that adapted earlier stories, much of which I ended up giving up on). The reason is that the novel struck a chord with me, for its characters were young people engaged in pursuits similar to some of mine and perhaps experiencing similar feelings as I did at that time. The original was published in a foreign country - and not in English - at the beginning of the 20th century and I believe it to be out of copyright; my novel updates the story to the time and place where I grew up and, while much if not most of the plot is to mirror that of the original, I do plan to change certain key details, especially as regards the fate of certain characters, as well as to graft a lot of my own experiences/syntheses of my experiences/old fantasies onto the story. So it won’t be merely a direct modernization.

Having explained my intent, I would be interested in opinions on how to go about this in an ethical way. Obviously, many stories, including novels, are retellings and not straight-out original works; e.g. “A Thousand Acres”, set in 20th-century America but an adaptation of Shakspeare’s “King Lear”. In order not to be considered “plagiarism”, what do you think a writer undertaking such a work should do? Tell the publisher in advance that the book is a retelling or adaptation of an out-of-copyright work? Acknowledge what book inspired the story in the front matter of the new novel? Or just stay silent about the fact, wait for someone to notice, and if someone points out the similarities, admit the fact? Or wait some years and admit the fact in an interview?

As a final note, while the author never stated so herself, Lucy Maud Montgomery’s famous Canadian novel “Anne of Green Gables” appears to have been crafted in a similar way to what I’m doing; it has been pointed out that there are too many similarities to the earlier American novel “Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm” to be coincidental. Montgomery could hypothetically have done so unintentionally (see the Wikipedia entry for “cryptomnesia”), or have been inspired by some other formulaic copycat story based on the earlier novel; we don’t know exactly, but the similarities are significant; nonetheless, she gave Anne a very strong personal imprint, giving the novel a clearly Canadian identity and grafting ideas derived from her own childhood onto the story.

IMO, this is a perfectly ethical thing to do. I think you would do readers a favor by mentioning the original and giving an explanation like you did here. Publishers should also be told, and you should double-check just to ensure that the original is indeed out of copyright.

Start by doing that.

European copyright extends to 70 years after the author’s death, so if the original author was long-lived…

For what it’s worth, a recontextualizing has quite a lot of value.

I adored “Heart of Darkness” by Joseph Conrad, but I know it’s a slog of a read for most people. “Apocalypse Now,” turning it into a movie, was a complete recontextualizing of a difficult book into a more accessible (well, at least less-difficult) movie in an entirely different genre.

A much more meaningful example is Stephen Brust’s “Khaavren Romance” series, which is near-as-matters “The Three Musketeers” with elves. He makes his intent pretty clear in his foreword.

If this is good enough for him, and it flew, I imagine it’d be good enough for you as well.

I’m curious what the OP’s responsibilities are if it’s not out of copyright. How close can you come to an existing story without crossing a line, legally or ethically?

AFAIK, you are clear, both legally and ethically, as long as you don’t copy any words. Now obviously, you will use some of the words, but don’t copy anything as long as sentence and you are clear. If you want to copy a whole sentence, credit the original.

A former colleague of mine wrote two novels that took place in Asimov’s Foundation universe. But he changed all the names of things often whimsically (e.g. the planet Trantor was renamed “Splendid Wisdom” and the residents of one planet were the “Frightful People”). He told me that he did this precisely to avoid copyright issues.

I recall that the editions of Shakespeare that I used in HS had introductions that traced the histories of the stories; this is an old habit.

Robert Heinlein was known to remark that most writers “filed the serial numbers off” other’s work in creating their own. He freely admitted that the part of his novel The Rolling Stones about the Martian flatcats was taken from the earlier story “Pigs is Pigs”, and even the flatcats were used in the “Trouble with Tribbles” episode of Star Trek.

There is no line, just whatever courts have ruled in individual cases, which are tiny in number. Very broadly, you can write all you like about a boy wizard in a school for same, but you can’t copy a long list of specifics about the nature of Hogwarts and the workings out of the plot, even if you call the kid Hairy Pothead. Or Merry Potshed.

I wouldn’t even guess about the OP’s planned book. Only a judge looking at the two final products side-by-side could give an answer.

Alan Moore and Gregory Maguire both made a lot of $$ from outright theft out of other authors characters and worlds. I am not entirely sure if all their characters were out of European copyright.

L. Frank Baum died in 1919, so Gregory Maguire is safe (as long as he only uses Baum’s stories, and not the later ones).

When Alan Moore had the LXG take on a diabolical Chinese crimelord, the character was ostentatiously NOT referred to by name, presumably to avoid trouble with Sax Rohmer’s heirs.

I think it would be okay if it is made very clear that it’s an adaption and not a truly organic-original work.

as long as you’re just doing the story, and not using copyrighted characters or names, and aren’t plagiarizing the actual words I don’t think you have a problem. I’m amazed at the numbers of superheroes that are just variations on existing superheroes with different names. Or the way you had Ka-Zar being basically a ripoff of Tarzan with just a different name in the pulps (and later in Marvel comics). Heinlein has been mentioned as being ripped off, but he himself essentially rewrote Rudyard Kipling’s Kim in science fiction form as the first part of Citizen of the Galaxy.

I myself took an episode of the original Twilight Zone that I thought was a very powerful situation that hadn’t been effectively used and turned it into a radio play. I didn’t use the original characters, though. the Soviet SF writer Ivan Yefremov wrote Heart of the Serpent because he didn’t like the way Murray Leinster handled the problem in First Contact, so he basically rewrote the story the way he thought it should have ended. Similarly, L. Sprague de Camp thought that Ray Bradbury wasted the premise in A Sound of Thunder, so he rewrote the story into A Gun for Dinosaur.

Well, one can’t copyright a plot or an idea. Which is what the OP was asking about.

To a certain extent, I’m sure a copyright judge/court would rule it as plagiarism. If someone made a movie about a young boy (NOT named Kevin) who was accidentally left at home by his family and then two crooks tried to break into his house while he set booby traps for them…

I didn’t know that (or if I did, I didn’t remember), but you reminded me of Neil Gaiman’s The Graveyard Book, inspired by Kipling’s Jungle Book(s). The Jungle Book is in the public domain, but even if it weren’t, I don’t think there’d be anything wrong with what Gaiman did.

If they plagiarized the story, sure. If someone made a movie about a boy wizard who was accidentally left at home by his family and then two crooks tried to break into his house, but he hid in a closet which opened into a magical land full of monsters who helped him foil the thieves, then I guess it would be all right.

The author died over 100 years ago. Going from the 70-year rule, I should be safe; I would only check whether there are any exceptions to the above rule in the given country.