BTW, I was thinking about the H2G2 film and stuff.
People like MJ Simpson say the best part of DNA's work was the writing. Fact is, writing is just the selection and ordering of words, and words are just symbols representing concepts (well, ok, they're not just that - they're concepts themselves - but the concepts they represent are the more significant thing in prose).
So what they really mean is that the best part is his choice and layout of concepts - juxtaposition of them in particular. That's why a film can work without his language; it requires the same style within selection and layout of concepts to capture the 'feel,' though. You can lay those concepts out visually, aurally, whatever...
The H2G2 universe has always seemed like a place gone crazy, yet with pools of internal logic holding bits together. It's like Ford's argument with Prosser right at the start - exhibits logic, yet is obviously nonsensical. The fact that if you forget to hit the ground, therefore you do not hit the ground, and therefore you must be flying.
It's possible that this is why many people associate Adams with the Monty Python team - they both draw a lot of their comedy from nonsensical systems.
Heh, as I'm writing this the topic's coming up in #gamedev. People seem to be dividing into three groups: those who view the books as absolute canon and cannot stand the film because it diverges from that (though that's a total fallacy - the radio series came before the books); those who consider that plot changes really don't matter, and DNA himself liked messing with different ways of doing things in each medium; and those who don't care. I suspect the majority of people are in the final category. [smile]