RE: Just What Makes A Bestseller - Does Quality Content Always Rise To The Top?
from a purely writing standpoint, "50 Shades" and Patterson are garbage, linguistically. they're flat out terrible writing; that's NOT subjective, that's fact.
but i've always told other writer friends that get freaked out about whether they'll be read or not that you can't predict what the market is gonna like. you can make a pretty good guess, but beyond that, just write what you want and do it your way. if you're happy with the finished product, that's all that matters. if people read you anyway and like it, then that's a bonus.
i translated that to my time in an MFA program where some people got catty about other people's writing, comparing and contrasting it. i told them the only thing you could do was help other writers get better at what they do and give them a little extra help promoting their work because, again, just because your writing might be better doesn't mean people are going to want to read it.
good post, brother!
Thanks!
What are your thoughts on AI analysis for marketability? Would you change your work if a computer told you it would sell better in a different style or with a different plot?
AI may be able to predict marketability, but fuck no...i'd never let it tell me what kind of story i should write. if i did that, i wouldn't be the one writing the story any more...the AI would be. the writing would no longer be mine, it would be a slave to the market.
i'd rather die broke writing in my true voice than live rich by a fake one.
That's a good point. I wonder how long before Patterson fires his stable of writers and just buys an AI.
honestly, i think he genuinely believes he's helping them become better writers. and admittedly, i've not read anything of his when paired with another writer, so i have no idea about their quality, but having read one or two of his books, i can't imagine that he's doing much in the way of progressing their knowledge of the capital L "Literature" during their work together.
and THAT is a real travesty. he's got such pull and such a hold over people that he could actually influence a whole generation of new writers into thinking that hack writing is the best writing because it gets you paid and whole shelves at bookstores will have your books with your names on them.
bah. fuck that. i'll be happy if i put out just two good novels and three solid story collections before i die.
He's definitely a tradesman more than an artist. And I get what you mean.
Would I rather build a thousand ticky-tacky houses, all the same, or one awe-inspiring cathedral?
Of course at my current rate I'll be happy with one solid cabin that doesn't fall down. Or a couple of novels that can make someone smile.
EXACTLY.
I know an writer who has co-written books with Patterson. He was already a prolific, well-liked mystery author who sometimes branched out into other genres, like sf and alternate history. Anyway, point being, I think sometimes JP chooses his stable writers based on their expertise in a market, not always because they are hungry and he thinks he will help them be better writers.
Another interesting fact is that JP doesn't write; he dictates. While hiking.
whatever his reasoning, i'm not a fan of JP himself. i think in many ways he does a disservice to literature. but that's my personal opinion.
especially if the majority of what he does is dictation. i hope to one day think so highly of myself that i can put my name on books with other writers while only dictating 10% of the material.
but like i said...i've got no beef with the writers he brings on. i don't know shit about any of them, so i've got no leg to stand on from a discussion point of view in that regards.
I'm not a fan, either.