Anyone Else Tired of The Tyranny of Novelty?

[Lanefan]

I already have well-executed and enjoyable versions. Why do I need another?

Familiarity, perhaps?

So... Branagh's Hamlet, as far as I am concerned, suffers exactly from the issue of making a slavish version of the classic. Most versions (film or stage) have the good sense to edit it down quite a bit, but his Hamlet is unabridged. As a result his has a runtime of four tedious hours.

The extended version of each of the LotR movies runs north of three-and-a-half hours and yet each is still too short, in that there's still parts of the book that get left out.

Let me put it another way - I have a copy of Le Morte d'Arthur. I do not, in fact, need two copies on my bookshelf. If you are going to produce a book of Arthurian fiction, that simply follows Le Morte d'Arthur... why do I need yours? I already have it!

How many times have you re-read that copy, is the question?

Also, if someone doesn't have a copy of the version you have - or any version at all - is there a problem with said person having several different-yet-similar versions from which to choose?

I have other books of Arthurian bent. They are all different takes on the legends. One's a scholarly work that breaks down the legends to fit into know historical events, with the idea to show that Arthur was not really a single individual, but an amalgam of various legends. Another casts the Arthurian characters as immortals (Arthur was known as Gilgamesh and Baldur before he hooked up with Merlin and became Arthur), and mixes them with other immortal beings to see how it plays out. Another has the characters reborn in the modern era on the road to simply repeat the same tragedy again, while desperately trying to avoid that fate. And there are others...

Same stories, with novelty. Far more engaging than just rephrasing Le Morte d'Arthur four and more times over.

Counting both books and movies I've got about 7 different versions of Robin Hood here, if not more. And if I stumble on another, chances are I'll pick it up or at the very least read/watch it, just to see what that version does with the legends and-or what the authors' writing/moviemaking style brings to the table.

 

[Aldarc]

I think that asking whether people are "tired of the tyranny of novelty" is a bit of a loaded question, though I do sympathize where it's coming from. However, I guess I come at from a different angle as I am tired of the "monotony of vikings." There are a lot of Norse, Scandinavian, and Viking-inspired fantasy settings out there, and I would gladly welcome the novelty of something else.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am always attracted to novelties but in a subjective way. If I haven't seen a movie, heard a song or read a book before, it is novelty for me even if it was made 100 years ago. That's why I spend vastly more time digging into dusty public libraries for books and music than in shops with big "NEW!" signs in the window.

Generally speaking I hate movie remakes, with occasional exceptions. I'd rather watch the original with a couple of flaws than a "perfect" remake. But on the other hand certain movies based on a famous book or theater play don't bother me in multiple versions, it can feel to me like none is the original and they are all adaptations from another medium, which remains the untouched original. I don't mind if they make another Alice in Wonderland adaptation on screen, but certainly I would object to someone wanting to rewrite the book (not counting translations, comics or children's simplified versions).

I do see merit in derivative art however, the difficulty might be in distinguishing between genuine artistic reason and being a rip-off to gain money or notoriety easily. Thinking about a famous case of Aqua's "Barbie Girl" song in the 90s, if I remember right the band was sued by Mattel. It is obvious that a pop band wants to make money selling their song, but the Barbie is such a worldwide famous toy that had become even part of the language, so IMO it was completely legitimate (and novel!) to use it in a song even without permission.

 

[turnip_farmer]

I'm not really sure I understand the OP question. It seems to imply that everything being made nowadays is new and different. But that's clearly not the case. Remakes seem to be more common than ever, and most stories retread familiar themes and familiar structures. If you don't want a lot of novelty, then the world is exactly as you want it to be. What is there to complain about?

Now, since this thread is in the TTRPG section, I'll not that I need far less novelty in games than I do in films or novels. I can easily get bored with a film that's retreating old ground, high production values are not enough to get me engaged if the story is nothing new.

Games are different, since I'm already engaged by their interactive nature. In a game, I'm quite content to discover that the grand vizier with the twirly moustache is secretly the bad guy manipulating the king, nor do I have any qualms about meeting in a tavern, or getting ambushed by goblins while escorting a merchant.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm not really sure I understand the OP question. It seems to imply that everything being made nowadays is new and different. But that's clearly not the case. Remakes seem to be more common than ever, and most stories retread familiar themes and familiar structures. If you don't want a lot of novelty, then the world is exactly as you want it to be. What is there to complain about?

"The Tyranny of Nostalgia"

 

[Fenris-77]

I liked the Branagh Hamlet.

 

[aramis erak]

I find diversity of games a plus, not a minus... but...

I also know that too much diversity available means not enough sales for any of the designers.

 

[Marc_C]

I also know that too much diversity available means not enough sales for any of the designers.

Not if the pool of buyers keeps growing at a faster rate.

 

[aramis erak]

Not if the pool of buyers keeps growing at a faster rate.

it doesn't seem to have...

 

[Fenris-77]

I suspect that 'most designers' is more correct than 'any designers'. A lot of really good games still sell quite well. I think the optics of bulk come from the ease of self publishing. A lot of the designers in question were probably never in danger of making real money anyway, and previous to DTRPG and Itch would probably just have been writing for their home groups. Getting a really good game noticed through the signal noise is a challenge though, I'm sure.