Is that an adaption? (classics book)

[☕ Lachgas ♿]

While working on a combine request I opened the "separate adaptions" pandoras box ... and is that an adaption?`https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
Worldcat says "abridged by xy" so is the person who abridged it primary?

(I don't know the book at all so no idea how long it should be in reality)

[rivka, Former Moderator]

An abridgment is not an adaptation.

[Ed]

rivka wrote: "An abridgment is not an adaptation."

How can we be clear what is an adaptation?

I came across this issue with the play R.U.R. by Karel Čapek. Originally in Czech (1921). The most common version in English (1923) by Paul Selver is shortened, rearranged, and even removes some characters. Several later versions starting with Claudia Novack-Jones use the complete text.

From the manual: "Adaptations. The book should remain separated from its parent work, with the adaptor listed as primary author."

I would think that the version by Paul Selver would count as an adaptation, not simply a translation. Is there a policy or guideline to help decide?

[rivka, Former Moderator]

That still sounds more like an abridgement (shortened version) than an adaptation (re-written version).

[Ed]

rivka wrote: "That still sounds more like an abridgement (shortened version) than an adaptation (re-written version)."

Ok. Thanks.

I guess that in the manual "Adaptation" means changing the format. Such as converting a novel to a graphic novel.

[rivka, Former Moderator]

An adaptation may or may not involve a format change. But it always involves the text being rewritten in different (often much simpler) language.

[Keith]

So if I'm following this correctly, even greatly abridged audiobooks should stay with the original unless they've been modified somehow, such as simplifying the language for children or language students, or converting a book into a "radio drama" such that a scriptwriter or adaptor is credited, yes?

Meanwhile, parts of a book still get separated from the complete edition (which remains combined with its complete abridgements).

Thus, Les Miserables, with eBook remains combined with Les Misérables and Les Misérables, but Les Miserables Volumes I,II & III should be separated as a partial edition (probably to be combined with Les Misérables I, from which Sefiller: Fantine should be separated), while Les Misérables should be separated as an adaptation by Orson Welles, right? (BTW, Victor Hugo is a giant mess because of stuff like this, so if any other librarians are feeling ambitious….)