https://www.polygon.com/tv/2018/9/12...ks-adaptations
I thought this was a good article discussing the continuing momentum of King adaptations. I would agree with King's agent: Dome for CBS probably began it. And It now is really acting as a catalyst.
But I found something else in the article quite fascinating. The author mentioned finding King in the 2000s via the filmed version of The Shining (I have to assume it is the film and not the miniseries); after seeing that, the author sought out King's bibliography at the library. Then, it is mentioned that others known by the author came to King in similar fashion, even by books that were owned by parents.
This got me thinking: what is the economic value of King's back catalog if new readers come to the works via the secondary market, either free in libraries or used? Isn't the theory supposed to be that an adaptation helps the back catalog? When young consumers saw It the film, did they borrow It the tome from the library or from friends/relatives? I sometimes wonder who buys the back catalog. I can see the whole process helping the new books more so. And I especially wonder all this in the digital age of streaming and online video. Of course, it doesn't escape me that, overall, King probably sells a lot of back-catalog stuff every year. But perhaps it's not in the millions like we might think. Even the new books I don't believe sell millions in hardcover/paperback any longer, but I could be wrong. If King were a stock, would it be higher or lower today compared to yesterday, and is his business driven by adaptations or the written word?
I thought this was a good article discussing the continuing momentum of King adaptations. I would agree with King's agent: Dome for CBS probably began it. And It now is really acting as a catalyst.
But I found something else in the article quite fascinating. The author mentioned finding King in the 2000s via the filmed version of The Shining (I have to assume it is the film and not the miniseries); after seeing that, the author sought out King's bibliography at the library. Then, it is mentioned that others known by the author came to King in similar fashion, even by books that were owned by parents.
This got me thinking: what is the economic value of King's back catalog if new readers come to the works via the secondary market, either free in libraries or used? Isn't the theory supposed to be that an adaptation helps the back catalog? When young consumers saw It the film, did they borrow It the tome from the library or from friends/relatives? I sometimes wonder who buys the back catalog. I can see the whole process helping the new books more so. And I especially wonder all this in the digital age of streaming and online video. Of course, it doesn't escape me that, overall, King probably sells a lot of back-catalog stuff every year. But perhaps it's not in the millions like we might think. Even the new books I don't believe sell millions in hardcover/paperback any longer, but I could be wrong. If King were a stock, would it be higher or lower today compared to yesterday, and is his business driven by adaptations or the written word?
Comment