Art or not, publishers care about money. If someone writes something that is absolutely terrible, but is good in the current market it'll go through. The publishers don't care if it becomes a classic or not, as long as they make a buck. Look at today's music, a lot if it (in my opinion) is absolute garbage that no one will remember. But for the record companies, they're making bank so why should they care? I support following what you want to do, but if being sucessful off of cheap, garbage novels then you should be aloud. You can't change what other people will do.
One thing I have noticed with some published authors, both in fiction and poetry, is that once they have built a name for themselves...they can just about anything published. I have noticed that some of Edgar Allan Poe's work, is not as good as the rest of his stuff, I didn't actually think it possible he had written such garbage and gotten it published as well...sorry, that is my opinion, others are different. I have spent quite a lot of time reading poetry that has been published and seen many people here writing poetry and other places, that are far better and more poetic and enjoyable to read, then the stuff that is being published. But thing is, it doesn't matter how good or bad you are, at the end of the day it is what the publishers are looking for that matters. We could have someone here that is better at poetry than Poe and Shakespeare and many other famous poets, but it means nothing...if their voice and style isn't what the publishers are after, they won't get published and it is the same with fiction.
I have never read that one, but all the others he has wrote have been really brilliant. And I am sorry to say this, but people slaggin of authors such as Dan Brown, Steven King, James Patterson etc, as in best selling authors who many people evidently like, it just sounds a little like jelously that they are published and you are not. I am sorry if I am wrong here, but it really does. You want your work published, go and send it in to a publishers. If it is good enough, or what the publisher is looking for, then good on ya. But stop moaning about everyone else being piblished and about how unfair it is. OMg you are so not getting a Christmas card. Those books are a set of the most amazing novels I have read in life. Ok, so the level of writing may not be the best, but the plot behind it, they are just amazing. J.K.Rowling seems to be one the first people that writers comment on when they are slagging of "bad writers" on the forums I have been a mamber of, and I cannot figure out why. I simply cannot beleive that you all dislike her so much, when obviously an awful lot of people do as she has sold so many copies of her novels. EDIT: Sorry if this seems a little ... narky. Bad mood, bit ranty. Heather
No, not at all, Heather. Success to me doesn't necessarily mean publication. I am happy to see improvement in my writing skills over time. I recently looked at things I've written only a few months ago, and shake my head at some of the things I would have done much differently now. I can fully appreciate that publication is not always about the quality of the writing. Sometimes its simply more important, from a publishing perspective, to have something out on the shelves that the public is hungry for, even if the writing is weak. In other areas, the publisher looks for quality writing to shorten the pile of manuscripts to consider, especially from authors whose name alone is not sufficient to guarantee a certain level of sales. I think it is one reason that later books by popular authors tends to go down in quality. The publishers aren't demanding the same level of writing if they can sell the book on the basis of the author's name, so the writers are less motivated to apply that extra effort. I don't care who you are, writing well requires a lot of work beyond that required for writing adequately. I have read published works that I wouldn't spread the pages from on the floor for puppy training, lest the dog's intelligence should suffer.
I know what you are saying, Cogito, and I do agree that some of the stuff published is published simply because of either the Authors name writing other stuff, or because they think it will sell better, but unfortunatly in the worl of entertainment that is how things work. Writing to be published is not a lot different from singing to be prodouced in my opinion. Sometimes it is not fair, but that is life. There is no point sitting and complaining about it, either accept it, or try to change it. It is just one of those things, people who moan because someone got something they wanted. Whether it be someone got the publishing contract, the last rolo or a better mark in a test, there are always reasons why. Now you could look at what you did differently from the person who got the good thing and try to learn a bit from them. you could sit and think, well that's fine, I like what I did and if it is not what the publishers want at the moment, then I will not be published yet. You could keep pushing your work. Or you could sit down and complain.
I'd agree there is a lot of rubbish, and that work in the style of say Charles Dickens would find it a lot more difficult to get published than those in the style of Dan Brown. Although on Dan Brown since a few people have mentioned him, what i find interesting is in the beginning when Da Vinci Code came out everyone was really into and loving it, then when it became 'uncool' so many people were slagging it off. I liked the Da Vinci Code, it got me back into reading. I don't know what i would think of it now, but i think some books are meant to be trashy easy reads. Not all occasions call for some 1000 page russian tragedy with characters which multiple like bacteria. Also I don't think because the majority of people like something necessarily makes it great - the majority of people voted for Hitler in Germany - people can't be trusted (yes wildly inappropriate example)
Yes, you are wrong. I never said anything about James Patterson or Stephen King. I like Stephen King. I said Dan Brown and Chris Paollini. It has nothing to do with jealous, it has EVERYTHING to do with me being able to find the gold at the bottom of the barrels of crap. I know I will be published one day. It's not me being arrogant. I just know that as of now, my writing holds promise, and if I keep working at it, it will improve. The same is true with many authors that I've seen on this site, whom, in my opinion, are better than a lot of published authors out today. You being one of them. But I want to be published on my own terms. I don't want to settle for sub-par crap when that's what will sell. Nor will I go for cheesy ploys like inserting myself into my novel in a Deus Ex Machina-like fashion just to solve the horribly contrived plot. *COUGH* Clive Cussler *COUGH*
Mmm, I totally agree, and I think there's a huge difference between things I simply don't like or enjoy and things that are just plain bad. I don't enjoy authors like Patricia Cornwell, but I can recognise that she's a good writer. I bought a book the other day, a compilation of short horror stories called Thriller, which I thought I'd really enjoy. I didn't recognise any of the authors, but I thought I'd give it a try as I love thriller and horror stories. Anyway, I started it and so far it's just been absolutely awful. Not only are the stories badly written, with pretty poor grammar and spelling, but they're just incredibly unentertaining and unoriginal. I haven't bothered to finish it as it's really not worth it. Anyway, my point being is I was shocked to see it published and on the front wrack in K-Mart, as I've seen much, much better writing on the site and it just seemed like such a waste of effort. It depresses me that there are some brilliant artists, writers, actors and singers, who spend their lives going unnoticed, while useless, untalented people like Paris Hilton get to the top of the charts without even trying. Yet more proof that life's not fair
And glamour model Katie Price (better known as Jordan) being nominated for awards, for a childrens' book which wasn't even written by her- it was ghostwritten. It really does make me not want to be a writer sometimes. All of the talent which is in the world, and yet people would rather go for a famous name. It's infuriating.
Ugh, that's pathetic. People are pathetic. Thank God I believe in karma, otherwise I think I'd be left with nothing ETA: Actually I think the person that wrote the book for her is just as pathetic - imagine selling yourself out like that - provided they knew their work would be used like that.
Yeah. The best way to get through life- if we're following celebrity examples- is to get everyone else to do the hard work for you.
Bad books are published. Bad movies are made. People eat at MacDonald's and the Olive Garden. The masses prefer the palatable, the mediocre. If you think publishing excludes good writing, I would suggest going a little deeper than the best seller list. These same names -- Brown, King, Rowling, resurface again and again in these discussions. It's a tired question. And yes, when I see it, I expect to be served a plate of sour grapes, despite claims to the contrary.
First of all, thanks a lot for the little compliment that was slipped in there Secondly, I never said you mentioned all of those authors, I was mentioning a selection of authors that have been bitched about during this thread. And I am sorry, but there is always an element of jelousy when we judge other people who have done better than us. We often say they didn't deserve it, or you could have done better, or a whole stream of things that tries to make you feel better about the fact you aren't published and they are, but seriously, stop moaning about it and do something about it. Actually, I am very glad sometimes that stuff like that happens, as it makes things like writing and read novels much more Accepted. Ok, they may be cheating and reaping the rewards, but that is celeberity life for you, in music, films and now apparently books. Still, it is advertisement for books in general, and if because of reading some book wrote by Katie Price, a few people then go on to continue reading other stuff, then it is a job well done in my opinion
It was not all aimed at you bte, just a general comment towards people who moan about thing, in life in general.
Not to stir up more discussion, but i find it kind of sad that some have resorted to bashing published authors just because we're not famous authors ourselves. Sure, not every person is going to admire every author, but some recognition has to be paid to the people who do EXACTLY what we want to do: get our work out to the public. Sure, you may argue that some of it is just for the money, and maybe it is in some cases, but who are we to criticize established authors who have accomplished more in writing than 99% of us on this forum? (There might be a best-selling author on this forum, so just in case, I left 1% ) Just throwing that out there...
I think it's legitimate to acknowledge that there is plenty of published work out there that is very poor quality from one aspect or another. Success is not measuerd by making a sale, at least not to everyone. Success may be measured in the satisfaction that a piece of writing conveyed exactly what you wanted it to, whether or not it fits well in a market niche. Criticism of published work is not necessarily a matter of envy.
