Are abridged books ever better?

[Premise]

Just wondering what various opinions are.

[Joe Molotov]

Not exactly what you're talking about but, I read the novelization of Star Wars Episode III and thought it was good in parts but dreadfully boring in others. I was endless "Anakin, it's the Jedi that are evil!!" scenes with Anakin and Palpy, followed by endless "Why don't you trust me anymore!!" scenes between Anakin and Amidala, which were followed by endless "OMG, I don't want to betray Anakin, but I've got to stop the Emperor!!" handwringing by Amidala, and it made me worried about the movie. When I saw the movie, I was very happy to see that most of the long, boring scenes from the book were either gone completely or very short. In the case, less was more, but that's really the only example I can think of. Not really enough for me to condone abridged books.

[Premise]

I've also read many books I wished were abridged.

[krazydawg005]

I'm personally not a fan of abridged books, but I can see their appeal. Recently, I read the Dumas classic, Count of Monte Cristo. The version I read was over 1400 pages, with abriged copies coming in at less than 600.

I can see where people would want to read the abridged copy. Not everyone has time to sit down and read 1400+ pages in a reasonable time (esp. when the avg. novel probaly comes in at 300-500 pages).

That said, I would always shoot for reading the original length. That is the version the author intended, and an abridgement can't help but leave out chunks of details and plot that make the novel what it is.

[littlefuzzy]

I've never read the original Princess Bride, just the translated abridged version by William Goldman, but from his notes, it sounds like I didn't miss much...






;)

[Mordred]

I'm personally not a fan of abridged books, but I can see their appeal. Recently, I read the Dumas classic, Count of Monte Cristo. The version I read was over 1400 pages, with abriged copies coming in at less than 600.

I can see where people would want to read the abridged copy. Not everyone has time to sit down and read 1400+ pages in a reasonable time (esp. when the avg. novel probaly comes in at 300-500 pages).

That said, I would always shoot for reading the original length. That is the version the author intended, and an abridgement can't help but leave out chunks of details and plot that make the novel what it is.My wife and I read the abridged version of Count of Monte Cristo without realizing it. We were walking through Barnes & Noble a year later when I realized that the book was a lot thicker than it should have been given the typeface. We both felt stupid and wondered what we had missed, but 1000+ pages seems like an awful lot (and I read books that size regularly). I knew a friend had read it and commented on how long the incarceration and training was and I must admit being confused because it wasn't that long in the version we read. However, neither of us felt particularly compelled to reread it.

[BigPete]

The Princess Bride

[leepyswetr]

I've not read the abridged version of Les Miserables, but I seem to recall about 50-100 pages about the layout of the Paris sewer system in the complete version that I could've done without.

[Premise]

Does anyone know the major differences between the abridged and regular versions of Les Mis, and Monte Cristo? Thanks.

[leepyswetr]

From amazon.com:

I love the story of Les Mis. But this book left out what I cansider to be important details and leaves the reader a bit confused with the some of the events. I would suggest this version to someone who wishes to be merely introduced to the story. Not to a serious reader.
If you have never read this story before, you owe it to yourself to plunge into the original text. This abridged edition leaves out important character-related text, and just skims the surface of what is a beautiful story.
On skimming through the book, and maybe it's just us, but we found no trace of Fantine's story before she ended up in Jean Valjean's care, or of Jean Valjean's rescue of Cosette from the Thénardiers, which are both very moving parts. If those are missing, there are probably other very touching and important parts missing.

[tasha99]

I'm fairly certain the abridged version of Samuel Richardson's Clarissa is better than the unabridged one.

[Amator]

Les Mis has several vignettes that set the scene for important sections of the novel. These vignettes are from 50-100 pages and the ones I can remember are on the subjects of the battle of Waterloo, The role of Parisian street children, the history of the convent that Valjean and Cosette escape to, and the Paris sewer.

I think the abridged versions don't have the book begin with the bishop of Dignne prior to Valjean's release, whose conversation with the dying revolutionary is a wonderful moment. Also, lacking the tale of Cosette's lost youth, the story of the gardener/book collector, and perhaps Marius' falling out with his grandfather.

I highly reccomend the complete and unabridged version of Les Miserables. If you can't make it through the sections on the convent or the sewers, skim, but the rest of the stuff there is more than worth it.

[darkside]

Usually no, but there are many authors out there like Tom Clancy that don't seem to even use an editor and I have found the stories very enjoyable when cut down for a film and completely unreadable as a complete novel.

[Josh H]

My wife and I read the abridged version of Count of Monte Cristo without realizing it. We were walking through Barnes & Noble a year later when I realized that the book was a lot thicker than it should have been given the typeface. We both felt stupid and wondered what we had missed, but 1000+ pages seems like an awful lot (and I read books that size regularly). I knew a friend had read it and commented on how long the incarceration and training was and I must admit being confused because it wasn't that long in the version we read. However, neither of us felt particularly compelled to reread it.


I accidentally read the abridged version as well. Kind of glad I did, as I thought that was over long and booring, so I couldn't imagine reading a version that was 800 or so pages longer.

[Nick Danger]

I read Anna Karennia in high school. It was about 700 pages. The notes said that 200 - 300 pages of political commenatry was cut. I figured that it was just as well, because I was interested in the story about the people, not 18th c. Russian politics.