The Posthumous Debate

Dead writers hold silent pens.
Until a “long-lost” manuscript or “extensive” notes are found.
A few days ago, the estate of Michael Crichton announced the forthcoming publication of two posthumous novels—a pirate thriller titled Pirate Latitudes and a techno thriller sequel to Next.
Crichton, who passed away from cancer in November 2008 and who is best known for his novels Jurassic Park, Timeline and The Andromeda Strain, wrote Pirate Latitudes during the same writing period as Next. It was completed long before Crichton’s death.
The second novel, as yet untitled, will be a sequel to the 2006 bestseller Next. According to Crichton’s website, “the new novel will be based on the development of Crichton’s narrative on notes and files,” and will be published in Fall 2010. The estate of Michael Crichton and his agent Lynn Nesbitt are already looking for the co-writer this project will require to be written.
How do I feel about this?
How do you feel about this?

Releasing posthumous work has ever been a trend since publishing began in earnest in the early twentieth century:

• Mark Twain, who is infamous for asking all of his literary notes, letters and unfinished materials be burned upon his death, has had numerous books and collections published since his death—the latest coming out this year in the form of a new collection of essays and short stories 99 years after his death!
• The son of Vladimir Nabokov has decided to publish The Original of Laura, despite his father’s wishes to the contrary.
• An unfinished novel by David Foster Wallace will be published soon and just this last February a “lost” work surfaced for Jack Kerouac.
• Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson have received a great deal of grief over completing Dune 7, the final Dune novel Frank Herbert was working on at his death.
• The wife of David Gemmell finished Troy: Fall of Kings after Gemmell passed away having already completed 70,000 words.
• More recently the estate of Douglas Adams has announced a new volume in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy series.
• And then there is J.R.R. Tolkien, whose son Christopher has made a career out of publishing the letters, notes and incomplete stories of his father—most recently The Children of Hurin.

Some of these writers explicitly expressed in their will to destroy all written materials at their deaths.
So why are we seeing posthumous published works?
There are two differing sides to this debate.
The first is the will of the author. Some people believe the finals wishes of the writer should be carried out to their fullest. When an author asks that their unpublished work remains forever so, it should be done out of respect for the creator. It is respect for the writer and respect for the dead.
The second is the will of the literary community. Readers and scholars have the chance to read a writer’s published work, but often the notes and letters and unpublished manuscripts behind the scenes lend more information about the writer and their work than merely what has been published. Releasing those glimpses adds to the amount of knowledge in the literary community about the overall writer.
The third, although less so, comes down to money. Those who are alive need money to live and many dead writers have estates with family involved. The easiest route to revitalize the sales of an author’s past work is to publish something new in the present.
So, to the question: What is more important, the literary contribution to the community or the wishes of the writer?
I lean toward a writer’s will rather than the increase of knowledge. As a writer who has just finished a second novel, perhaps it is just the selfish part of me wishing to take some secrets to my own grave.
Terry Brooks has said on numerous occasions he plans to go the Mark Twain route: He will burn all materials associated with his work. He knows his Shannara series, which is a fertile ground for continued storytelling, could be carried on by another and Terry has no desire for that to happen. If his children or publisher “suddenly” find a cedar chest filled with notes for unpublished additional stories, his fans will know it is a lie.
I find it amusing and a wee bit sad authors have to go to such depths to maintain their own conviction and will and integrity.
I wonder if Michael Crichton wanted a sequel to Next written?
So, what do you think? Which side of the debate do you fall on? And if you fall on the side of the author, have you purchased any posthumous works that were willed to not exist?