Two stories recently in the news caught my eye.

The first concerns JK Rowling and her enduringly popular Harry Potter series. Having announced in 2013 her involvement in a Harry Potter-related play, Rowling has now shared details. The play, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, will open in London’s West End in the summer of 2016. It will be an entirely new story, written by Rowling, writer Jack Thorne and director John Tiffany, and will fast-forward eighteen years after the end of the series:

It was always difficult being Harry Potter and it isn’t much easier now that he is an overworked employee of the Ministry of Magic, a husband and father of three school-age children.

While Harry grapples with a past that refuses to stay where it belongs, his youngest son Albus must struggle with the weight of a family legacy he never wanted. As past and present fuse ominously, both father and son learn the uncomfortable truth: sometimes, darkness comes from unexpected places.

In tweets, Rowling has written:

To answer one inevitable (and reasonable!) question – why isn’t #CursedChild a new novel? – I am confident that when audiences see the play they will agree that it was the only proper medium for the story.

The play is so long it has been split into two parts, and audiences will have to effectively watch two plays either on the same or subsequent days to get the full story: a matinee and then an evening performance, or subsequent evening performances.

The second sequel story to capture imaginations recently is Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight: Tenth Anniversary Edition.

The new edition of the popular novel contains a brand-new reimagining of Twilight entitled Life and Death: Twilight Reimagined. In this version, genders are swapped: Edward has become Edythe, Bella has become Beau, and Jacob has become Julie. As the synopsis outlines:

In Life and Death, readers will be thrilled to experience this iconic tale told through the eyes of a human teenage boy in love with a female vampire. Packaged as an oversize, jacketed hardcover ‘flip book,’ this edition features nearly 400 pages of new content as well as exquisite new cover art. Fans of Bella and Edward will not want to miss the opportunity to see these iconic characters portrayed in intriguing new roles.

According to media reports, Meyer was moved to rewrite Twilight with Bella as the vampire as a reaction to those who were frustrated by Bella’s casting as ‘damsel in distress’ in the original books. I suppose with the success of series like The Hunger Games and Divergent, these days there is a drive for more gutsy young-adult heroines.

Taken together, these high-profile stories say a lot about the culture of the sequel. From the publisher’s point of view of course, sequels make good marketing sense; and from the consumers’ point of view, sequels allow another journey into a beloved fictional world. For the author, they are the perfect opportunity to extend the book’s legacy.

I know all about the impetus to revisit a story. For my first two novels, Burning Embers and The Echoes of Love, I was sad to leave the characters at the end, but I knew their story as it flowed onto the page was over. For my novel Indiscretion, however, I felt differently. I knew this world of gypsies and gentlemen and roots and family ties in Andalucía had so much more to explore yet. That is why I wrote a second book, Masquerade, following the next generation of characters – the sons and daughters of the last. Then I wrote another, Legacy, concerning the last generation (coming 2016), to make a trilogy.

My own sequels were planned while I wrote the first novel, Indiscretion. But these new works by Meyer and Rowling – and others – have been devised long after the initial work, as a means of revisiting. Certainly, it is astute marketing. But more than that, it is brave of the authors to go back to a much-loved story and elaborate upon it. To do so is a risk; remember the time-worn adage: ‘If it isn’t broken, don’t try to fix it.’

In Stephenie Meyer’s case, she risks fans not appreciating the rewriting of Twilight from a new angle; she risks fans being disappointed, and their appreciation of the original dimming in the light of the new information. (Of course, this was a risk also faced recently by EL James in Grey, but in that case there was no reimagining, just a new point of view which, I think, many fans were very keen to step into.)

In JK Rowling’s case, her biggest risk, I think, is exclusivity. So many millions of fans worldwide will no doubt be desperate to see the play the moment it opens, and yet few will be able to. The story as a book – or a film, or televised play – would have allowed instant access to fans all over the world. But as a play showing four times a week to an audience of just a few hundred at a time in London, so many are excluded.

What do you think of the culture of the sequel? Do you look forward to revisiting story worlds? Do you ever worry about what effect a sequel may have on your interpretation and enjoyment of the original work? Have you read Twilight Reimagined? My own novel Masquerade? Did the fact that the books were sequels deepen your connection, compel you to revisit the earlier works? How about the Harry Potter play – will you try to get tickets? I would love to hear your thoughts.