Haha, yeah I was surprised to hear him say that they were being arrested for adultery. I'm quite proud that I didn't know that.
It's called marketing. If we're looking for bestsellers and I can have either a well-marketed book and a well-written one, I'll back well-marketed every time. It's worth remembering, though, that there's a difference between bad writing and bad storytelling, and what most people want from a book is a good story.
Are you seriously asking this question? You don't have to be a great writer to be able to recognize great writing. Ask the people who hand out the Nobel Prize you referred to above. Or the Pulitzer Prize, or the Man Booker Prize, or the National Book Award, or any of dozens of other literary prizes given around the world. There is such a thing as good writing and such a thing as bad writing. We all know that - it's the reason we're here on this forum. We want to be better writers. That simple desire is evidence that we recognize that there's a difference between good and bad writing. This is a non sequitur. Besides, it isn't true. Bookstores put the bestsellers in prominent displays at the front of the store. If you're looking for a well-reviewed book that isn't very popular, you often have to go digging for it, if the store stocks it at all. That's the main reason I buy most of my books from Amazon these days - they stock almost everything and it's all easy to find. I write what I would like to read. I think we can tone down the rhetoric a little, can't we? Nobody is saying we should take Harry Potter off the bookstore shelves, and certainly nobody is saying Harry Potter fans should be shot.
I'd be careful about dumping all teenagers into the same boat, or tarring them all with the same brush, or whatever your favorite metaphor is. Sure, they may not have much life experience yet, but one of the purposes of literature is to give them life experience, at least vicariously. Part of the reason we read is to exercise intellectual faculties and emotions that are useful to us in real life.
Certainly there are individual teens who could understand many adult pieces of literature. But when we're teaching them, we're teaching an entire class. And even the smartest teenager simply doesn't have the life experience to understand a lot of nuanced relationships between characters. I can't even count the number of times I've heard an adult say something along the lines of "Yeah, I read that book in high school and I couldn't stand it. But I just read it again, and absolutely loved it." There is a lot of brain development that continues even into one's early twenties. And just as a function of time, humans just don't have the experience to really "get" some of the issues that are written in books that are geared toward adults. I've met some amazingly mature, smart and impressive teens -- many who aspire to be writers. But they still don't quite get a lot of things about the world. There are certainly many books that they could learn a lot from, but when overall, they're supposed to be interpreting things that are just beyond the ability of the overwhelming majority of them to grasp, it does a disservice. I'm not at all saying that they're stupid or lazy or that there cannot exist any teenagers anywhere capable of understanding some of these things. It's just a matter of where they are developmentally at that age. And by forcing most of them to read books that the can't completely relate to, it turns a lot of them off of reading, which is ultimately a disservice. These days, there is a lot more good YA written than there has been in the past. I'm only saying that for most people, having the teens get excited about reading and getting them engaged in thought and discussion about stories that deal with issues they can relate to (and also may relate to larger issues in society overall, which is something important to encourage them to think about), we might all be better served by changing much of the reading list that we give to our teenagers.
I didn't say you couldn't recognize it - just no one should judge someone else's work with such elitism I agree but I think they may know a little more than you or I or we'd be on those panels booksellers may try prompt the buyer by smarl little marketting tricks, placing to the front, putting up posters, having Q&As with the author etc but they are all there to choose from. From Amazon, apart from nailing the last coffin nails to the bookstore, you choose a book or an author - where is the choice in that? Do you aspire to being a multi million selling writer? Some tones do. I like this site, I am grateful for what I have learnt since my short time here but this thread is condescending...
well you really are missing the point here, no one said HP should be removed or people not read it, at least what i'm saying is it should have been written better, i use HP as an example cause it is a very good example of a bad written book that sold so well... now you will say it was written for children, well children can read it just as well if it was written better, not to mention what kind of picture does it send to the child, she killed every adult or removed with some cheat just so no one would take the spot light from Harry and keeps showing how adults are useless, and to crown it at the end Harry didnt do anything he won cause she used a deux ex machine. I'm glade kids are reading and not saying they should have been reading some classic work... all i'm saying is that all that we are taught to be good writers and what rules to follow(even using cheats is ok sometimes if not overused in same book) are ignored by those titles that are sold the most. So what gives? are we taught wrong when we where told no a publisher will never accept this kind of writing? And yes they have interesting stories (probably would sell if they didnt) but interesting stories can also be told with good writing
I agree here with most of what minstrel wrote in reply to the above quote. We're getting away from the original question (which I admit I did myself with my comment about teens and the classics). But here we're stirring emotions where we really don't need to. No one is saying that all kids books should be removed or that bookstores shouldn't sell what is popular. I think the original question was really more of trying to understand the reasons that a lot of poorly written works find huge commercial success, rather than some sort of proposal to rid the world of the poorly written works or to prevent people from having access to them. I agree with the folks who have said that we should be glad people are reading at all. I think it was Selbbin who pointed out that the people who read the pop fiction books aren't reading them instead of something that contains more literary merit, but that they're reading them instead of reading nothing. And as much as I'm dismayed by some of the success of some of these works, I would in no way suggest that they shouldn't be allowed to exist or be sold. As with all forms of entertainment, sometimes it is entertaining to read something even if it lacks artistic merit. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just that sometimes it's sad to think about how much more monetary success some poor writers enjoy, while many talented author's works go almost unnoticed by most folks. We can ask the question of "why" without intending to imply that that the status quo must be stopped by force.
No, that's exactly what we're talking about. The title of the thread is "Why does bad literature sell so good?" My premise is that we simply set the bar too low, and don't offer a better alternative. As to the claim "we should be glad they're reading" is akin to saying automobile safety is 'elitist' and we should be glad we're mobile, at all. Sell everyone a Yugo with drum brakes and a solid metal dashboard. What we're fencing around is the fact that every jack-one of us knows where the substandard books are, who writes them, who they're aimed at and we plunk down money to buy them anyway. Now, as an adult you can read pornography seven times per day if that's your choice. But you are responsible on what you bring into your home for those you raise. We use any book, the TV and video games for slumlord babysitters, then shrug off the consequences. And that's why I think "bad literature sells so good." We buy it.
I'll just say that I don't agree with you. There are plenty of good alternatives and the automobile analogy is misplaced.
Is it elitist to want to read good books? I don't think so. And wanting to read good books presupposes the ability to judge (there's that word again) what's good and what isn't. People buy cookbooks to learn to make tastier and healthier meals. Is it elitist to want to eat better? To want to feed your kids healthy and good-tasting food? Of course it's not elitist. Maybe they do know more than we do, but we still judge the work of others. We critique each other's work right here on this forum. I don't think I'm being elitist if I point out problems with the work of another member here; rather, I'm helping him become better, and learning to evaluate my own work as well. My point is, we all judge. If you think that's being elitist, then we're all elitist and there's nothing wrong with that. No, they aren't. As I pointed out earlier, often bookstores do not stock books that are well-reviewed but not popular. I don't know what you mean by "where is the choice in that". I buy from Amazon because they sell what I'm looking for - they have the choice I need. If they don't, it's usually because the book is out of print and I have to try Ebay. I aspire to be a published writer. Whether or not I sell in the millions is up to the readers. I'd be happy if the publisher doesn't take a loss on my book - that would be embarrassing. But I'm not writing because I think it's a get-rich-quick scheme; I'm not writing so I could afford a yacht.
Thank you for that comment. I have always said that all you have to do is say, "Tourist, I disagree." As for the "car analogy," it is apt from my standpoint. I was a mechanic. Harley put single leading shoe front brakes on bikes and didn't want to change. Why? Because we kept buying the bikes. Then Honda put a hydraulic front disc on their 1969 CB750. Now people had "better." Guess what happened? My 2004 Dyna Glide has discs on both ends--front and rear. My, my, somebody had to offer a superior product to get back into the game. Books are consumer goods. If we're buying whatever they offer, why should they change? And while I think writers should strive to be better, you have to admit that if publishers are willing to pay cash-money on the barrelhead for zombie stories, why suffer over research and peruse a Thesaurus? Heck, maybe I should write junk, too. I will ask you this. By now you know the members here who write some really good stuff. For me, JJ_Maxx and up-and-comer BootsyBlueEyes always get my atttention. We also know members who seem to be phoning it in. Don't you look for the good writers here?
I think where some of us have a parting of the ways is when we start making judgmental statements about readers. For example, if I were to say, "How could anyone like Tourist's writing? Talk about lowest common denominator..." - that would be very conceited on my part. However, stating "I don't really care for Tourist's writing and this is why..." - then I'm obviously giving my opinion about the writing, not about other people's tastes. It's quite possible to give one's opinion without denigrating other people doing so. It's even possible to disagree with another's opinions without denigrating the person. When we start talking about "Oh, the only reason a lot of people bought this book is because they're all stupid", that's pushing the envelope way too far.
Somehow I have a feeling that someone said the same thing about Tolkien way back in 1937. And while I'm not nessasarily defending Rowling, you have to agree that the Potter series was targeted to children who ate it up like candy and don't usually care a thing about literary value. That being said, I have to admit I would be very happy with the ability to write half as well as Rowling.
Shadowwalker, you've touched on two things, actually. First off, I was a bad choice to use as an example. Do you really think I'd get excited about a snide remark in a forum? Now, a jealous husband at the front door with a scattergun? There, you've got my attention!!! Having said that, as you know, my wife is a teacher. She relates instances were kids have committed suicide over comments on their FaceBook page. To me, that seems silly, but it is a real condition. I'd rather see the truth. It's duplicity that is dangerous. In fact, if I found out a member got a demerit point for comments he made to/about me, I'd be the one who would go to the mod and get the points erased! But I'll grant you, people are thin skinned. If I used a poorly written YA book as a simple example, we all know that several people would actually be crying. But that doesn't erase the sad fact, writing in all of our genre styles needs to improve. (And I'm serious about this, guys. You have to use a member as a shrapnel magnet for a flame example, go ahead, mention my name. In fact, it would be a good life lesson for a mentor. The claws come out, and the sun comes up tomorrow just like always.)
How is it lazy to have a different opinion in regards to which books you like and which ones you dislike? Who is to say what is real literature? That is like trying to define what 'art' is. Some people can stare at a completely black painted canvas for hours and consider it art, others think it's a piece of crap. The point is, people have different opinions and experiences. Now neither of these opinions actually define if the painting is art or not, because after all, who is to say what is 'art' and what isn't? It is the same with literature. From what I am gathering you seem to believe that there is a single, objective, global definition of what is literature and what isn't. I disagree. Also one more note, and this is not meant as an offense. But try to stay on topic, I can understand analogies but I think you are taking it a little out of context by comparing someone's personal preference of certain books to sitting on welfare and being a slob. I get the idea that you have some sort of grudge about these topics but to me, they are completely unrelated to the discussion at hand. Please, tell me why you disagree that 'literature' is subjective and don't involve the pizza rolls!
Dont take my words out of context and read the rest of my post so you might get a better understand what i mean, plus already replied above somewhere the comment "its made for children" so dont see a point in repeating it. Considering the facts we know how poorly Rowling wrote the series(wich you can find some mentioned in this thread) i feel sorry for you that you aspire for such low standards, and i bet i can find you 10 better writers here in this forum, again i respect Rowling for the success she made just not the example she set to other writers.. That been said think this thread outlived its use as i thought we are writers here and can discus other writers work and not get all jumpy just cause someone mentions a book you liked
Analogies are inaccurate and should not be used to argue an idea to someone who is already sceptical of it.
Selbin~ A side note here. Reminiscent and roughly comparable to the hoards of wretched songs we hear on the radio, that we can't turn off fast enough b/c of their frantic, shuddering voices, second grade, ding dong melodies or pancake flat lyrics- these recordings sell. They sell huge! Then there's the art museum, in where the worshiped painting du jour hangs. A completely black canvas is displayed, with a miniscule, yellow, blackhead sized dot, is sitting in it's center--price asking $2,000,000. It's a matter of taste, just a matter of taste. It speaks clearly of the tastes in our world. Kind of harkens back to the Emporers new clothes. (btw) everytime I see your quote, (frankly my advice is garbage) I crack up. Everytime, every time. Thank you, I love it, b/c so is mine. -except I like your advice!
Time to put your money where your mouth is, buddy. This happened to me last week, and I don't even think you got to see the comment
Shadowwalker, good points. I think the majority of posts on this thread, and many other threads, would benefit from simply citing excerpts from books that as evidence for their points, and then offering their interpretation. In that case, we'd be dissecting Harry Potter novels. I don't need to hear that people are stupid because they eat up Harry Potter. Just show me the text, point out the flaws in the text, and if you really want to, show me the numbers it made in sales, and then I can draw my own conclusions.
I think too much of it is perspective. For decades, Callirhoe was considered trash literature by many--the lowest common denominator of the ancient Greek/Roman novels. Then, a shift happened, and now its place in the literary world is elevated quite a bit. A lot of that came from intertextual criticism and other methods of reading. Fast forward to today's literature. While by no means do I declare Twilight a literary masterpiece, I do believe in twenty or thirty years, if it is still being read, there will be a new level of discovery. The depth of the books: free will vs. predestination, creation and re-creation, myth vs. reality, etc., will be able to be read without the cynical "OMG he glitterz! This books sucks!" mentality. So why do "bad" literary books sell well? In some cases, it just scratches an itch. In some cases, it does it's primary job well of providing escapism even though it's not done at a "literary" level. In some cases, it's because people click into deeper themes in the books that are being passed over because of cynical or snobbish attitudes. And in other cases, it's the "OMG, (s)he DIDN'T just write about that?!" Least, that's my thoughts.
Sometimes we want something nuanced and complex that challenges us. Sometimes we just want a big dose of something that we crave--sugar or salt or butter, or the literature equivalent. I don't really see anything wrong with that. Harry Potter is, IMO, about longing for a place in the world. My favorite author, Rumer Godden, wrote about the same thing over and over, sometimes for children, and wrote it much better. I could wish that Harry Potter were better written, but so what? It has a core of genuine emotion wrapped in an absorbing fantasy world. It has plenty of sugar and salt and and delicious fried crunch. Sure, we shouldn't make a complete diet of it, but there's nothing wrong with feeding a craving now and then.
