That same logic would apply to everything, every preference. Art, food, movies, music, everything. You prefer fresh-cut fries to frozen? You prefer homemade cookies to Nabisco? You prefer the shoes you wear to those that your father wears? You prefer your favorite TV show to the Home Shopping network? You even _have_ a favorite show? There will be many people who disagree with you. So by your arguments, you're insane. (Edited because, oops, I forgot to quote.)
Third post on this site and I'm already going to sound cynical, but oh well. I apologize in advance. Why does bad literate sell so well? Scenario 1: Publishers are putting out many books of varying qualities but the mediocre books sell the most, which means that people in general aren't that smart and don't want to be challenged. Scenario 2: Publishers are putting out mediocre books because they believe people aren't smart and don't want to be challenged. Or could be a little of both. Either way, it's not flattering. I understand that even though it's art, it's still a product. People need to get paid. But when sales figures or number of likes become a metric of how good or bad something is we are judging it based on quantity, not quality. It is justification by the herd instead of the master. It was believed that people liked things because they were good, now we believe things are good because people like them. The average reader enjoys a piece of art for their own reasons, which are perfectly valid to them, but their appreciation of a piece as a layman doesn't mean that their opinion, added together in mass, has more insight than the view of the craftsmen. I do believe you can judge good writing vs bad, and I'd say that the craftsmen and critics who know more about the machinations of the craft would be more apt to judge it.
People read to be entertained, and for some people who said it is because the reader base probably ("isn't intelligent enough") for better literature is kind of elitist. There are great musicians out there that can play something "simple" and make it phenomenal. Some not so great musicians can make something sound great too, because it isn't all about the skill. Now, I'm not saying every bestseller is great or anything, but it isn't all about the best writing when it comes to connecting to an audience. There are so many factors in what makes a novel appeal to someone, and it is impossible to really calculate that(unless some scientists really want to spend their lives figuring that out). Let's be happy people read. Without those books you might consider "bad" people would read much less. I for one, enjoyed crunching through the Harry Potter series. Her writing may not be the greatest, but yet I enjoy the books cause I don't read to be impressed by the writing. Writing books is a form of story telling, some people tell better stories than others, whether the writing is good or not. And it is not because of just plot lines, people have written stories similar to Harry potter before it came out(none of the top of my head), but they didn't the story well enough for it to be the hit it is. Some people play notes, others play music. Some people write words, others write stories. Now, of course there can be exceptions, there might be a great book out there that should get recognition that doesn't. You also got to take in account advertising, money, and all the other factors that sell a book, not just the words in it.
It seems to me that the biggest secret of such books is that they are light. They don't make you think over something. All you have to do is to skip page after page, excpecting for what will be at the end.
I think that learning how to "hack write" is a valuable skill. I am in my fourth year of university, and I can confidently say that I have figured out how to beat the system, at least in social sciences departments (I call it "pulp faction"). Genre Blending can be really cool concerning bad best-sellers because it allows you to twist and pervert a structure which people already know and feel comfortable with into a whole new monster. For example, look what Jimi Hendrix did with blues! Basically, I think that being able to have one foot in the mainstream, and one foot .. somewhere else .. is important because it allows you to bring readers over to your side - so many parts of your work will be recognizable to them, heartfelt, etc. to them, and, in complement - rather than contradiction - the parts of your work which are foreign, exotic, un-classifyable, etc. will be highlighted in a proper context, and readers will be excited and enlivened to read them, not overwhelmed by something which is not anchored at all in cultural values or patterns which are familiar to them.
Same. I don't understand how you can hate on such a series that raveled a magical world when you turned each page, a true story of delight. So much worldbuilding too. Bad character development, haha that's a good one cause i can name five characters that i liked really well that progressed throughout the series. These people don't have to like Harry Potter, but don't trash on it. I have a huge heap of respect for J. K Rowling. She deserves each penny she got, because she's putting all of it to good use.
It is as simple as that. There is the lover's dream of millions being hypnotized by lavish, artful words that leave the reader suspended in the lushous beauty of splendidly written prose. I've read some of the work in this forum and wish I had such insight and ability to phrase. I've read things that required the writer's expert understanding of word in order to lift the reader up to meet the meaning where the writer lives. It is awesome. Bottom line is publishers feed a hungry readership with what satisfies them the most. It is their job to make money doing just that. As a writer you must decide if you are writing for your own passionate reasons, or writing towards an audience who want to buy.
Good writing isn't just about technical skills, it's about communication skills. Good writing isn't just about perfect grammar and syntax, but telling a rippin' yarn that captivates the audience. If those books entertain millions, can it really be considered bad writing? A great story written poorly is better than a poor story written well.
I actually really hate Harry Potter. I don't think the books are completely without merit, it is there, but there is also a lot of bad. Justified criticism is the best thing to have, mindless anger is useless. And anger from purely second-hand sources is madness. I've read Twilight, I thought it actually doesn't really deserve all of it's reputation, but how many people who vehemently criticize it have actually read it? I don't know, but I've heard a lot of people say that sort of thing: 'I hate it, I hate it, I hate it!' 'Ever read it?' 'No, but I hate it'.
I tend to disagree. You can enjoy a work of fiction, but it doesn't make it good. There are several aspects of writing such as the grasp of grammar, vocabulary and sentence structure that can be evaluated to determine if the novel is good or bad. While it is an arbitrary judgement, it is hardly one I would call subjective.
I think it is true that it doesn't matter how a book is written. There is no bad or good writing. Every author has their own writing style and readers have their own tastes. And some authors just need money to survive. Like J.K Rowling for example. She was homeless and poor when she started to write the Harry Potter series. She got rejected a lot, until her book finally started a pop culture. And the author of the Twilight series, she just want to make her own vampires and werewolves, although they do sound lame. But there are too many vampire and werewolf characters who are nothing but human killing monsters. I am sick of how much supernatural romance and fantasy novels are hitting the shelves. Some authors need to make better ideas and unique concepts with logical action. But those type of books will come soon, hopefully. I am also curious of why most readers like these books, although they have their own tastes. Maybe because a lot genres are changing and new people just grew up with them. If we live in a world where we decide what good writing is, and what bad writing is, it will be like taking away freedom of speech. It would be a lot harder for books to get publish, and there won't be a lot of bestselling books to buy. I also blame some publisher. Most of them just want money, and they will choose anything that sounds good to them. Plus they drive the readers into buying the books with bull crap critic and reviews. There will be better bestselling novels soon in the future. Right now it is all about the money.
People believing they are owed something is a real problem. Producing a creative work can end up with very little reward. In the case of writing, chances are high. It is frustrating for anyone who wants recognition for their work. In the case of acting, look at all the talented actors out there and Snooki is a hit? Fair? If you could put your finger on the fickle fancies of entertainment you could plan your success with ease. And even with a publisher picking up your work, there is still a gamble. There are no guarantees. Like you say, keep trying to get better at what you do. Work at it. I know you will. And I wish I had your attitude at 23.
But that's fine because you aren't downright insulting her. There are flaws to every book but you are just stating your opinion. The OP is blantantly insulting her in such a manner and even comparing her to Twilight isn't good cause it's not even the same genre. But i will agree, Twilight is pretty terrible. I read it along with half of New Moon. Twilight just kinda dragged and had no motive, and half of New Moon was just Bella whining. I couldn't take it anymore so i stopped reading. From what i read, i'm pretty sure Eclipse and Breaking Dawn were just as bad. But it's ok to not like Harry Potter, i just get upset when people just downright tear it apart. Your opinion is stated without any hardcore dissing or put downs and it points out the books flaws. Twilight is another story. But when it comes to Rowling, she's very respectable and humble. I guess it's just me on the Rowling boat but the fact that she moved on from Harry Potter to a new novel entirely even after she's made billions was probably one of the bigger reasons why i look up to her as a writer myself. But yet destructive criticism with no solution should not be bestowed on anyone.
Good writing works. Bad writing doesn't work. I think it's as simple as that. However, good literature is not the same as good writing. Entertaining books can be considered good writing but not always good literature, as good literature is good art, with depth and meaning. While they can exist in the same work, entertainment and art are different. Entertainment, by it's very nature, entertains and that might be all that is to it. There's nothing 'bad' about that. Regardless of the quality, how could you honestly be confused about why 'entertainment', which is easy to consume, sells better than 'literature', which is often harder to consume? As for people believing they are owed something, I think too many writers think they are owed an audience simply because they made something.
For most average readers it's literature, but some people just like to follow trends and "be entertained" and that is solely the reason Fifty Shades of Grey was written. Even E.L James admits it was just written out of pure entertainment and not actually because she wanted to write it. Very sad. Some Authors get noticed and then they don't even care but there is all these talented writers who create such masterpieces and they are struggling to get novels sold.
Why is that sad? That's great! Good on her. We should stop taking ourselves so damned seriously. So a great novel doesn't get published. Big deal. There are plenty already. Maybe she knows something those 'struggling' authors don't: that people don't read to make a writer feel good.
How is writing a novel with hardly any effort for just the money a good thing? That's whats wrong with book industry lately. The best books are written with passion.
Because it did the job. And she didn't write it for the money. She started with giving it away for free. I think self-righteous authors are what is wrong with the book industry. The readers don't give a poop. They just want value for money and time.
That's if Fanfiction counts. Which i highly doubt. It would of been a lot less enticing if she said: "I didn't expect my novel to become so popular.." But that's not in her mind apparently. She's writing novels out of carelessness and shes getting awards. Reminds me of mainstream music these days.
Perhaps if she stuck to the writing conventions then she wouldn't have been so successful. It's often those outside an industry that can teach those within it how to give the consumer what they want. Too many authors worry about pleasing authors. Sometimes it takes a 'member of the public' to please the public. This happens across industries. People fail to see what their market wants because they are too busy telling their market what it wants.
She might be teaching us Authors about the industry a little more, but the attitude seems like she just opened the door to a publishing house and she got published. I'm not saying she should "impress Authors" but more of a admirable attitude. Maybe her knowledge in the industry would be more open if the attitude wasn't so shallow. I know Meyer definitely didn't write Twilight to please Authors or the public in general, she just wrote it and it became popular. To me, Fifty Shades of Grey is trying to mimic the same exact formula to sell off the literature trend. I guess that's how people make most of their money, but sometimes people get fed up with authors all trying to write the same thing after awhile.
