Editing Sequel (section)

==History==
In ''The Afterlife of a Character'', David Brewer describes a reader's desire to "see more", or to know what happens next in the narrative after it has ended.<ref>Brewer, David A. ''The Afterlife of Character, 1726–1825.'' Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2005. Print.</ref>

Film director [[Francis Ford Coppola]] claims to have started the trend of including numbers in film sequel titles with ''[[The Godfather Part II]]''.<ref>{{cite news|first=Jada|last=Yuan|title=Francis Ford Coppola found himself outside Hollywood. He's okay with that.|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/movies/2024/12/02/francis-ford-coppola-kennedy-center-honors/|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|date=2024-12-02|access-date=2024-12-11|quote=[Coppola] told <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Paramount Pictures]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> he wanted to name it 'The Godfather Part II,' an idea he'd gotten from the Russians who’d done '[[Ivan the Terrible (1945 film)|Ivan the Terrible]]' in two parts, at a time when no one had done a numbered sequel in Hollywood. The studio thought he was nuts, that people would think it was the same movie they'd already seen. But Coppola threatened to walk off the project if he didn’t get his way. 'So I'm the jerk that started numbers on movies,' he says. 'I'm embarrassed, and I apologize to everyone.'}}</ref>

===Sequels of the novel===
[[File:Marvelous land of oz.jpg|''[[The Marvelous Land of Oz]]'', sequel to ''[[The Wonderful Wizard of Oz]]'', was an official sequel novel written to satisfy popular demand.|thumb]]
The origin of the sequel as it is conceived in the 21st century developed from the [[novella]] and [[Romance (heroic literature)|romance]] traditions in a slow process that culminated towards the end of the 17th century.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Literary |first1=Brink |last2=Sullivan |first2=Amber |date=2024-02-28 |title=A Brief History of the Romance Novel |url=https://frictionlit.org/a-brief-history-of-the-romance-novel/?srsltid=AfmBOop127lpKMWJT9D8StJgiiZIP6G3CM0dySm0njjv6AXouYmysZnS |access-date=2024-11-15 |website=F(r)iction |language=en-US}}</ref>

The substantial shift toward a rapidly growing [[print culture]] and the rise of the market system by the early 18th-century meant that an author's merit and livelihood became increasingly linked to the number of copies of a work he or she could sell. This shift from a text-based to an author-centered reading culture<ref name=":0">
{{cite book
| last1                 = Schellenberg
| first1                = Betty A.
| chapter               = The Measured Lines of the Copyist: Sequels, Reviews, and the Discourse of Authorship in England, 1749–1800
| editor1-last          = Taylor Bourdeau
| editor1-first         = Debra
| editor2-last          = Kraft
| editor2-first         = Elizabeth
| title                 = On Second Thought: Updating the Eighteenth-century Text
| url                   = https://books.google.com/books?id=sxTF344zjTUC
| publisher             = University of Delaware Press
| date      = 2007
| page                  = 27
| isbn                  = 9780874139754
| access-date            = 2014-11-14
| quote                 = Of particular interest to me in this essay is the shift from a text-based to an author-based culture, accompanied by a developing elevation of the original author over the imitative one.
}}
</ref> led to the "professionalization" of the author – that is, the development of a "sense of identity based on a marketable skill and on supplying to a defined public a specialized service it was demanding."<ref name="Schellenberg, Betty A 1998"/> In one sense, then, sequels became a means to profit further from previous work that had already obtained some measure of commercial success.<ref>Budra, Paul, and Betty Schellenberg. "Introduction." ''Part Two: Reflections on the Sequel (Theory / Culture)''. New York: University of Toronto, 1998. Print.</ref> As the establishment of a readership became increasingly important to the economic viability of authorship, sequels offered a means to establish a recurring economic outlet.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Lawson |first=Mark |date=2012-03-09 |title=To be continued … the grand tradition of prequels and sequels |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/mar/09/prequels-sequels-books |access-date=2024-11-15 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

In addition to serving economic profit, the sequel was also used as a method to strengthen an author's claim to his literary property. With weak [[copyright]] laws and unscrupulous booksellers willing to sell whatever they could, in some cases the only way to prove ownership of a text was to produce another like it. Sequels in this sense are rather limited in scope, as the authors are focused on producing "more of the same" to defend their "literary paternity".<ref name="Schellenberg, Betty A 1998">Schellenberg, Betty A. "'To Renew Their Former Acquaintance': Print, Gender, and Some Eighteenth-Century Sequels." ''Part Two: Reflections on the Sequel (Theory / Culture)''. Ed. Paul Budra and Betty A. Schellenberg. New York: University of Toronto, 1998. Print.</ref> As is true throughout history, sequels to novels provided an opportunity for authors to interact with a readership. This became especially important in the economy of the 18th century novel, in which authors often maintained readership by drawing readers back with the promise of more of what they liked from the original. With sequels, therefore, came the implicit division of readers by authors into the categories of "desirable" and "undesirable"—that is, those who interpret the text in a way unsanctioned by the author. Only after having achieved a significant reader base would an author feel free to alienate or ignore the "undesirable" readers.<ref name="Schellenberg, Betty A 1998"/>

This concept of "undesirable" readers extends to unofficial sequels with the 18th century novel. While in certain historical contexts unofficial sequels were actually the norm (for an example, see [[Arthurian literature]]), with the emphasis on the author function that arises in conjunction with the novel many authors began to see these kinds of unauthorized extensions as being in direct conflict with authorial authority. In the matter of ''[[Don Quixote]]'' (an early novel, perhaps better classified as a satirical romance), for example, [[Miguel de Cervantes|Cervantes]] disapproved of [[Alonso Fernández de Avellaneda]]'s use of his characters in ''Second Volume of the Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha'', an unauthorized sequel. In response, Cervantes very firmly kills the protagonist at the end of the Second Part to discourage any more such creative liberties.<ref>Riley, E.C. "Three Versions of Don Quixote". ''The Modern Language Review'' 68.4 (173). JSTOR. Web.</ref> Another example is [[Samuel Richardson]], an 18th-century author who responded particularly strongly against the appropriation of his material by unauthorized third parties. Richardson was extremely vocal in his disapproval of the way the protagonist of his novel ''[[Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded|Pamela]]'' was repeatedly incorporated into unauthorized sequels featuring particularly lewd plots. The most famous of these is [[Henry Fielding]]'s parody, entitled ''[[Shamela]]''.<ref>Brewer, David A. ''The Afterlife of Character, 1726–1825''. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2005. Print.</ref>

In ''To Renew Their Former Acquaintance: Print, Gender, and Some Eighteenth Century Sequels'', Betty Schellenberg theorizes that whereas for male writers in the 18th century sequels often served as "models of paternity and property", for women writers these models were more likely to be seen as transgressive. Instead, the recurring readership created by sequels let female writers function within the model of "familiar acquaintances reunited to enjoy the mutual pleasures of conversation", and made their writing an "activity within a private, non-economic sphere". Through this created perception women writers were able to break into the economic sphere and "enhance their professional status" through authorship.<ref name="Schellenberg, Betty A 1998"/>

Dissociated from the motives of profit and therefore unrestrained by the need for continuity felt by male writers, Schellenberg argues that female-authored sequel fiction tended to have a much broader scope.<ref name=":0" /> He says that women writers showed an "innovative freedom" that male writers rejected to "protect their patrimony". For example, [[Sarah Fielding]]'s ''Adventures of David Simple'' and its sequels ''Familiar Letters between the Principal Characters in David Simple'' and ''David Simple, Volume the Last'' are extremely innovative and cover almost the entire range of popular narrative styles of the 18th century.<ref>Michie, Allen. "Far From Simple: Sarah Fielding's Familiar Letters and the Limits of the Eighteenth-Century Sequel" in ''Second Thought'', Edited by Bourdeau and Kraft. Cranbury, NJ: Rosemont, 2007. Print.</ref>

===Video games===
The cost of developing [[AAA (video game industry)|AAA video games]] has increased significantly over recent years,<ref>{{cite web |last=Koster |first=Raph |date=January 23, 2018 |title=The cost of games |url=https://venturebeat.com/2018/01/23/the-cost-of-games/ |access-date=June 20, 2019 |publisher=VentureBeat |quote=The trajectory line for triple-A games ... goes up tenfold every 10 years and has since at least 1995 or so ...}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Takatsuki |first=Yo |date=December 27, 2007 |title=Cost headache for game developers |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7151961.stm |work=BBC News}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Mattas |first=Jeff |date=12 January 2010 |title=Video Game Development Costs Continue to Rise in Face of Nearly 12K Layoffs Since '08 |url=http://www.shacknews.com/article/61911/video-game-development-costs-continue |publisher=Shacknews}}</ref> often reaching tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars due to high expectations for detailed graphics, expansive worlds, and advanced gameplay. Video game companies have turned to sequels as a dependable business strategy.<ref>{{cite news |last=Taub |first=Eric |date=September 20, 2004 |title=In Video Games, Sequels Are Winners |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/20/technology/in-video-games-sequels-are-winners.html |access-date=June 20, 2019 |work=The New York Times}}</ref> Sequels are now a dominant trend in the industry, making up a large proportion of new releases from major publishers.<ref name=":1">{{cite news |last=Richtel |first=Matt |date=August 8, 2005 |title=Relying on Video Game Sequels |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/technology/relying-on-video-game-sequels.html |access-date=June 20, 2019 |work=The New York Times}}</ref> 

One reason they are prevalent is their ability to provide a stable revenue stream in a volatile market. Building on an existing brand with an established fan base, sequels are perceived as safer investments than new [[Intellectual property|intellectual properties (IP)]]. They allow companies to capitalize on previous successes, ensuring a built-in audience and reducing the financial risk associated with launching a new and unproven concept. Additionally, sequels of a formula that players already enjoy, balancing familiarity with new features or improvements, which can increase player retention and positive reception.<ref name=":1" />