Home » Tuck Talk » Answers for Newbies » Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck?
Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5238] Fri, 13 July 2007 00:19 Go to next message
Schol-R-LEA  is currently offline Schol-R-LEA
Messages: 31
Registered: July 2007
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Member

Well, the title says it, more or less: has Ellen ever shopped around for a publisher to do a novelized version of the existing story sections? While I love the web as much has anyone, print does have its advantages when it comes to ease of reading, and while online resources can in principle reach a wider audience, in practice it takes a lot of serendipity to find the best online fiction.

True, mainstream publishers wouldn't touch the series with a waldo, but some house like WayOut or Suspect Thoughts would snap it up in a moment.

For that matter, I would bet that HBO or Showtime might be interested in a dramatic version of it (though chances are they'd mangle it). If not them, then LOGO would be interested, surely.

I am assuming that this is a FAQ, long since beaten into the ground (as it has been on the forums for popular webcomcis such as El Goonish Shive, Bruno - not what I would have thought of as TV material, great as it was, but IIRC it did come up - and It's Walky!, not to mention a memorable thread in the 'Sith Academy' mailing list). However, a cursory look through the forum didn't find any references to it, so I thought I'd raise the matter (again).

[Updated on: Fri, 13 July 2007 00:57]

Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5239] Fri, 13 July 2007 04:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Welcome, neighbor.

If you move down past the "fold" to the lower regions of the index page, you'll find a section called "Tuck In Print" with one subtopic, "Printable Tuck".

(The summary below, of course, represents my opinions, not Ellen's, though I'm hoping she'd agree that I'm presenting her points fairly.)

As you can tell there, we've entertained various discussions as to format, volume size, etc. The tendency is for us (and frequently Ellen) to discuss things relatively intensely for a limited period of time, perhaps once a year, and then to sit back and wait until the next time it comes up.

Not that there's much else we can do as readers and fans. Ellen has made it very clear that she won't turn her work over to anyone else, so self-publishing using someone like Lulu Press seems the likeliest course, rather than a "real" print publisher (if one were interested) who might want to exercise more control over content.

And "novelization", in terms of major rewrites that would give each segment an actual beginning and ending, seems like much more than Ellen's inclined to do, at least last we heard. That may be as much for concept-related reasons (there really AREN'T intermediate endpoints in Tuck -- if there were, it'd be a different kind of story) as personal inclination, but that's just my theory (there's a thread about this general issue on Erin's BigCloset TopShelf board), not necessarily Ellen's.

I'm not sure where she'd stand on simplfying the storyline for an audio adaptation (or film/video, for that matter, though the latter doesn't seem practical); I don't believe anyone's asked that question, since it never seemed practical before Webcasting took hold.

Anyway, hope that works as a short answer. (Short for ME, anyway.) The details are in the other discussion(s).

Eric

[Updated on: Fri, 13 July 2007 04:02]

Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5249] Sun, 29 July 2007 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Please excuse the delay in answering...

I think one of the things I (and others) like about Tuck, is that it's not limited to "what sells", which most very-conservative printer companies translate primarily into "what looks like everything else". It doesn't wrap itself up quickly (and implausibly) just because a page count is reached. The dialog isn't necessarily clear, which is like a lot of conversations I have with real people. Tuck (the viewpoint) doesn't understand everyone's motivations or actions, and they aren't explained - just like you don't necessarily have a clue why someone in your life acted the way they did.

Also, having read an awful lot of books, and more and more lately seeing where someone buggered part of it, I am reluctant to let someone sit in patriarchical hierarchical judgement of Tuck, and fiddle with it any way they want, just because they can do so, because they hold the carrot over my head of getting paid. Some pittance.
So yeah, "self" publishing is the way to go.

As for another media adaptation... I don't think it suitable for any other media, really; and I'd rather take it away and destroy it before letting someone perform the usual Hollywood vivisection of my baby.

I do not like the thought of the skin of Tuck, walking around, hollowed out and filled with writhing maggots...

Which is what "I, Robot", "Starship Troopers" and many other Hollywood versions have looked like when Hollywood got through with them. Also note, that in these cases, the original authors were DEAD when the movie versions came out... I do not think this is coincidence.


Ellen
nosig
Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5250] Sun, 29 July 2007 12:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Josea  is currently offline Josea
Messages: 56
Registered: December 2004
Location: Between Venus and Mars
Member
Even when the author (or artist, in the case of comic book adaptations) is still alive, Hollywood has a nasty fetish about ruining what made the original good. It's like they buy a property with a built in audiance and then shoot themselves in the foot by alienating that original audiance they were supposably after.

On the other had a movie last typically 2 hours (some times as long as 4). There is not enough time for a half decent adaptation even if you find a producer/director who is a fan and has the courage to do the best possible job.
Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5251] Sun, 29 July 2007 12:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Aylwin  is currently offline Aylwin
Messages: 16
Registered: May 2007
Junior Member
I think the only non-paper adaptation of Tuck I can imagine is a long-running animated series. Smile Even then though... it'd undoubtedly lose some of its character.
Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5253] Sun, 29 July 2007 13:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachel.greenham  is currently offline rachel.greenham
Messages: 290
Registered: November 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Senior Member
Aylwin wrote on Sun, 29 July 2007 17:58

I think the only non-paper adaptation of Tuck I can imagine is a long-running animated series. Smile Even then though... it'd undoubtedly lose some of its character.


I was just thinking it could work as an indie tv series. I could totally see it as anime, which also sidesteps the issue of your actors growing up on you - although even that may require more adaptation than Ellen could bear; but probably less than any other form except possibly radio.

Ooh, yeah. Actually (and relatively cheaply) audio-only audiobook, everything read by 'Tuck', except the non-Tuck POV chapters which are fully dramatised... Those are the only times we hear the other characters' real voices, not them as-voiced-by-Tuck. That could be cool...


Rachel
Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5259] Mon, 30 July 2007 22:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
rachel.greenham wrote on Sun, 29 July 2007 10:06

Ooh, yeah. Actually (and relatively cheaply) audio-only audiobook, everything read by 'Tuck', except the non-Tuck POV chapters which are fully dramatised... Those are the only times we hear the other characters' real voices, not them as-voiced-by-Tuck. That could be cool...

Who do you think might be a good voice for Tuck?
Nancy Cartright? (she does Bart Simpson plus others)
Ellen DeGeneres? (Dory's voice in Finding Nemo)

Interesting possibilities here...
Re: Has Ellen ever considered a dead-tree edition of Tuck? [message #5263] Tue, 14 August 2007 21:45 Go to previous message
Tinker  is currently offline Tinker
Messages: 1
Registered: August 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Junior Member
I think a dead tree press might do a print version if all the "objectionable" material (all the stuff that makes it unique and enjoyable IMO) were removed, and I can see, stylisticly, that the Gossip Girl series is very similar. Also in appeal to highschoolers, and that audience

But much as I'd like that, I don't think ellen will do it, (a) because she says she will not, and be I think the statement about mutiliating "her baby", pretty much puts paid to that. Thats not a lighthearted thing, I think.


vi vi vi - The editor of the BEAST
Previous Topic:i'm impatient for more tuck
Next Topic:Theme of queer/geek correlation?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Feb 21 09:26:14 EST 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01926 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 2.7.7.
Copyright ©2001-2007 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software