Week 7 Prompt

For our prompt this week, I want you to think about fake memoirs, author mills, and celebrity inspired book clubs. Basically write a readers' response to one of the articles you are reading for this week - or talk about a time when a book or author that made headlines affected you personally or your work.

 Zaleski, Jeff. "The James Patterson Business." Publishers Weekly 4 Nov. 2002: 43-55. Print.

My experience with James Patterson is limited. I have not read Patterson, but I did enjoy the movie Kiss the Girls.  At the library I volunteer at, my primary responsibility is to do the final steps in withdrawing books from the catalogue, imprint them with the solemn “Withdrawn” stamp and mark “WD” where the call letters are before boxing the books for the Friends of the Library book sale.  My library purchases a lot of best sellers.  And, once people are done with the best sellers, they don’t check them out anymore so they go to the sale.  I withdraw a lot of Patterson books. They don’t appear to have enduring value.  It’s entertainment for the moment, not for a lifetime.

The range of criticism that Publishers Weekly reported about Patterson intrigued me.  I don’t think it all boils down to “jealousy” as Jennifer Rudolf Walsh speculates on page 55.  I suspect that some critics may truly be frustrated with Patterson’s desire to write for the masses.  He does not write for the sake of writing.  He does not write because it makes him or humanity better.  He does not write to inform.  He writes to entertain.   His writes with the specific desire to entertain the masses.  So, he writes with characters, subjects, and in a manner that people connect with.  He is producing a product that people like and people are buying.

Is it kitsch? Is it kitsch in written form?  

Many in the art world don’t care one wit for Thomas Kincaid’s paintings.  But Kincaid has made a ton of money because he produces what people want.  I don’t think Sam Butcher enjoyed critical acclaim with his Precious Moments figurines, but because he produced what people connected with, he made a ton of money.  I am aware of “serious” artists who consider Kincaid and Butcher’s art to be kitsch.

It may also be true that the critics of Patterson are also frustrated with those who buy his books.  Why don’t his readers demand more?  Why do they settle for streamlined stories that have two page chapters, concise sentences devoid of style, and that lack character and setting development? What does this say about the readers?  And why are there so many of them who clearly don’t need good writing? Is education being wasted on the masses?

I am not surprised that Patterson utilizes co-authors. Zaleski notes on page 48 that contemporary authors Clive Cussler and Tom Clancy join a long list of others who have used co-authors.  And, of course, Patterson’s co-authors are not going to jeopardize their livelihood by detailing how much of the book they actually write.  But, why, I wonder, is anyone surprised by the fact that Patterson utilizes co-authors?  He is writing for entertainment.  The entertainment industry has used writing teams for years.  More ideas come out of the synergy of the group.  Teams of writers usually write scripts for TV shows and movies.  And, because people who produce these entertainment venues want their projects to be successful, there is always an eye toward what the market wants.  The challenge is to produce a story that people will enjoy, tell their friends about, and most importantly, buy it for themselves and for others.

Patterson understands the book industry as a business.  He is doing his part in making sure that his investment in time and energy is paying off.  He controls the presentation of the product (book cover, position of books in the book store, marketing on TV, Internet, Newspaper, etc.).  He knows how to interact with the crowds in a way that pleases them.  He writes what people will buy and read.  He is bringing enormous amounts of money to the publishers and those who work with and for him. 

He is, in a word, successful.  He is successful is creating the brand that people recognize.  He is successful in expanding the brand.  And, quite frankly, he is successful in creating foot and digital (eBooks) foot traffic into the library.  His success means that his books will have a reader.  A reader means the library is fulfilling its mission.  Libraries that fulfill their mission stay open and keep employees employed. Everyone is happy.

Except, of course, the critics.  The critics are not happy.  Is it jealousy of the success? Perhaps.  But, are critics ever really happy? I don’t know.  What I am happy about is that he is producing books that people read.  When they stop reading his books I will withdraw them to make room for the next big thing.