The writosphere is aflutter after Stephen King said, in an interview with USA Weekend: “The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can’t write worth a darn. She’s not very good.”
After some further thoughts on Erle Stanley Gardner (King: “terrible”), Jodi Picoult (good), Dean Koontz (good and bad) and James Patterson (bad), King said further:
“People are attracted by the stories, by the pace and in the case of Stephenie Meyer, it’s very clear that she’s writing to a whole generation of girls and opening up kind of a safe joining of love and sex in those books. It’s exciting and it’s thrilling and it’s not particularly threatening because they’re not overtly sexual. A lot of the physical side of it is conveyed in things like the vampire will touch her forearm or run a hand over skin, and she just flushes all hot and cold. And for girls, that’s a shorthand for all the feelings that they’re not ready to deal with yet.”
The whole situation is not without its irony. After Stephen King won a National Book Foundation award for “distinguished contribution” to American letters (and surely books as well), the critic/professor Harold Bloom wrote in the Boston Globe:
“What [King] is is an immensely inadequate writer on a sentence-by-sentence, paragraph-by-paragraph, book-by-book basis. The publishing industry has stooped terribly low…”
Aside from putting books in the news, which, hi, doesn’t happen very often, this whole spat raises some interesting questions. Or rather one interesting question: who decides what is good anyway?
Is it the readers? After all, if Meyer is so successful she has to be doing something right. And in this world of American Idol, everyone fancies themselves an expert. But surely there is some difference between commercial success and artistic merit, right? Are we ready to crown the most successful books the “best” books?
Is it the critics? Should we leave “good” to the people who devote themselves to sifting through the books and movies and decide what’s good and bad? Surely there’s something to be said for expertise, right?
Is it the writers? Who knows better than the people who are actually writing the books, right? Or do they?
Is it the scholars? Yesterday’s potboilers are today’s classics. Yesterday’s drivel is today’s unappreciated genius.
What do you think?
BarbS. says
Oh my fellow Bloggerians, may I go off-topic for a moment?
Has any of you had a problem editing old posts on your own Blogger blogs? I just posted a revised first chapter on one of my sites, and the fonts came out HUGE! I looked at the HTML, but all the codes look like the codes on the other posts.
Does anybody out there know how I can get my font size back to normal???? Thanks!
Annie Reynolds says
Surely writing cant be judged purely by the authors knowledge and application of grammar, punctuation and words that send you running for the dictionary. A good book, a book that has you ready to turn the page before you have even finished the last, is written by a story teller, if they happen to have the knowledge of a university lecturer, great, but the latter is far less important in my opinion.
I have a twelve year old who only wanted to watch Charmed until she was introduced to the wonderful world of Edward and Bella, she is now on her 5th reading of the entire 4 book series.
Stephanie Myer has inspired my daughter to read and her mother to write.
Renee Collins says
lol
Lots of Grammar Nazis ’round these parts.
jc says
Here’s my formula:
Good books are worth rereading.
By that standard, neither King nor Rowling make it on to my “good” list (although both are entertaining).
Also, while I don’t think it’s fair to disparage most other writers, once someone has sold a million books (or made a million dollars) I think they’re innocculated enough to take a little criticism.
Heidi C. Vlach says
When I read amateur fiction online, I’ve found a lot of stories that I thought were good at the time. But come back and read them a few years later, to find them much poorer writing than I remember. Maybe the story ideas are interesting, but the prose is weak and the characterization shallow. I’m not sure whether I was glossing over the flaws to enjoy the story, or whether I simply wasn’t experienced enough as a reader to know what truly strong writing was. Probably both.
Meyer isn’t necessarily “doing everything right” just because she’s making a lot of money. Is McDonalds the perfect eatery? It’s a massive, successful franchise and a household name. But that doesn’t mean that their funny-tasting, greyish burger patties are an example of food to aspire to.
And in the same way that some people see McDonalds hamburgers as a treat, it’s a mistake to assume that all people are adequate judges of literary quality. They’re often just latching onto one facet of a story that they like, and maybe glossing over the flaws. There’s nothing wrong with that, for your own personal enjoyment. But it doesn’t make you a qualified judge.
For those who have read a variety of work and can discuss specifically why writing works, though? I say it’s perfectly valid to call an author’s work bad, no matter how many copies the book has sold. Let anyone with a little experience and an intelligent voice do the reviewing.
Sarah Jensen says
Not a King fan.
Loved Stephenie’s books, although IMO they could have used a little editing.
And IMHO, James Patterson is one of the greatest writers ever, STORY WISE. I will read just about anything he writes. And almost have, though not fond of the Thomas Berryman Number. Didn’t float my boat. He doesn’t follow all the conventional rules of writing, ie, passive vs. impassive, but I don’t care, I will stay up half the night to finish a book of his that I started.
So, the basic grammatical stuff in writing is important, and editing and whittling down is too, I truly believe that, but if you can’t hold the interest of your audience, then what’s the point.
And Stephenie Meyer and James Patterson both hold the interest of MILLIONS.
Anonymous says
We live in a time where mediocrity has become overwhelming, due in large part to simple math. From any angle (writer,agent,consumer) the total amount of people who make up the great mass of the bell curve is catastrophically greater than any other time in history. Thus it’s inevitable that more people equals more mediocrity. Be that the curve of intelligence, talent, education, experience or other the unavoidable reciprocal of the bell curve is that while, ‘Yes there are also more smart, talented, gifted people’ the relative size of the mediocre to the gifted is going to gargantuan.
Thus, you have a strange feedback loop wherein intelligence is shouted down and corrupted in virtual tsunami of basic mediocrity.
Consider that be definition 50% of the world’s population is ‘below average.’ Now recall as well that we are talking about reading and writing here, further we’re examining the question as it pertains, in large part, to the market. Which is to say, both that intelligence need not be the deciding factor in human worth or necessarily in literary worth.
Nonetheless, in looking at the above you tell me: how is the ‘good’ ever going to win out when it’s a mathematical certainty that the market, and thus popular opinion, will always favor that which tends towards the medium—where lie the great numbers.
Besides, it really doesn’t take a scholar to know that Stephen King would trade his left leg for Cormac McCarthy’s talent so what’s the real question here because it’s utterly obvious that good is good and truth is truth. That’s it, that’s all, no more complicated than that.
Michelle says
Well, who buys the books? The readers. Regardless of what critics say, what writers want to write and who will buy their stories is what leads the indicators of what is ‘good’.
If it’s barf-bag terrible in most eyes, but yet the author is still a best-seller – readers are loyal. They will buy what they think is good for them.
I don’t care who gets published, just so long as Palin doesn’t get her $11 million advance for her over-exposed life.
Scott says
King seems to be offering his opinion on authors as a matter of course onto making a point about writing and the reading public. Sure, no one person is the purveyor of all that is quality, but this isn’t the first time I’ve heard acutely harsh criticism of SM’s writing.
Which makes me think that, if 9 out of 10 readers think you’re a bad writer, yet you’ve reached a few million readers, you’ve sold a lot even if there is something to the negative criticism. Bravo for finding your niche. And cliches are only crappy for older readers who’ve seen them before.
Personally, King has compelled me to seek out SM’s books and leaf through them. I want to know what a writer I do admire thinks is bad writing and learn what not to do.
Sarah Jensen says
Steve Fuller said…
I would LOVE to sell 80 gagillion books and have Stephen King call me a terrible writer.
Sign me up!
I’m with you!!! I want a piece of that action.
Sarah Jensen says
Just for clarification, I think it’s the job of the author to edit. And I also think that those things are personal. I’ve edited my book a gazillion times, looking for different things each time. I don’t expect an editor to do it for me. But I sure am thankful for the friends who do! Bless you all who help!
s9 says
Was SK being unfair? Oh, yeah… probably. On the other hand, is SM a good writer? I haven’t read her books, so I don’t know.
I have, however, found this very negative critique of Twilight to be highly amusing.
AmyB says
I have to say it’s the readers who decide what’s good. But THIS reader says “Twilight” sucked. 🙂
Scott says
Oh, and I wanted to say it again: I think King might be opening his mouth to publishers here, too. In this economy, we’re all afraid that accomplished new writers with fresher ideas will be overlooked in favor of more easily sold and disposable fare.
Just_Me says
Like everything else in this industry, good is subjective. A book I love as a reader and a writer may not be the popular favorite.
In the long run, I guess we see what stories are still selling in 100 years. Tolkein managed, Shakespeare managed, Ovid managed… Will King or Meyers? It’s anyone’s guess.
What is bad is King picking apart another writer in public. I’m sure the woman has rejection notes framed on her wall, maybe she can add this interview to the collection.
Nigel says
Er … I think alot of people are missing the point here about Stephanie Meyer.
She has the clout and the hype not because of the number of books she sold or how many people actually read her book … but the fact that one of her stories happen to be made into a blockbuster movie.
Nothing wrong with that.
Except that it does not make her the author of a great book, although she did provide huge entertainment for a cerain female demographic and psychographic.
But hey, there are more horrible books, scripts and screenplays that had been turned into movies.
If anything, Hollywood is to be blamed. It will take anything with enough words and try to make a movie out of it. And if enough people read the backs of cereal boxes, we'll soon have a movie about cereal boxes too.
Hollywood has officially ran out of ideas and is now nothing but a machine of re-makes (The Eye, Shutter), sequels (Dark Knight), pre-quels (Star Wars), book adaptations (Ben Button), theatre reproductions (Dreamgirls), biography (Milk), TV adaptions (Sex & City, X-Files), and then there are those curious multiply reincarnation projects like "Brideshead Revisited" which was a book adaption, then TV, then film
Come on, when was the last time you really watched a film of an original screenplay more than worth your price of admission? … … oh yeah, Mike Myers' Love Guru … great, there you go.
So don't blame Stephanie Meyer. She just threw Hollywood a half-baked morsel and it pounced.
Look, ALTHOUGH I personally agree with Stephen King and I am glad someone of his visibility level have the balls to say it, I have nothing except good wishes for Meyer.
I mean, she did it.
She had an idea, she wrote it down, and made something happen. And in this world where the wheel of fortune is round and random all sides, why is there a need to dissect whether a writer/artist deserves this, or that?
Really, no big deal.
I'd say, Do your own thing. Come up with your own ideas. Outwrite Stephanie Meyer, if you have to.
Do whatever.
As makers of works, don't target any demographic to write for, or look at what the next person is doing. Just dance to your own tune and keep writing.
Write for yourself, and songs of ingenuity will flow.
Peace.
Nathan Bransford says
Nigel-
I would actually argue that the movie was made because Stephenie’s books were so insanely popular, not the other way around.
Allison Brennan says
Nigel, TWILIGHT and the sequels were huge hits long before the movie came out in November of 2008. I believe TWILIGHT was first released in 2005. It, and its sequels, enjoyed dozens and dozens of weeks on the NYT bestseller list before the movie was in production. Hollywood jumped on the bandwagon after her books became a success.
Anonymous says
Yeah, I thought and it’s just my lowly opinion the movie was horrible, and did the books a huge injustice.
jimnduncan says
Perhaps I am wrong here, and being the editor that you are Nathan, feel free to chime in, but unless someone gets panned by a LOT of people, someone’s opinion about an author’s writing even from someone as notable as SK, really has no effect on anything. I’ve actually never met anyone who bases what they read upon some particular critics opinion. Be kind of sad if they did.
Anyway, I’m not sure why it’s such a bit deal that King doesn’t think highly of SM’s writing ability. He certainly agreed that her storytelling struck the right cord with the intended audience. There are lots of writers out there who are not the greatest craftsmen when it comes to writing, but they know how to tell a damn good story.
What bugs me the most about some critics at least, is the notion that all writing should be of ‘literary’ merit or it’s not worth reading. Some seem purely interested in writing as an artform, in the skill to use language. I’ve read a number of books (or tried to at least) where the skill with language was nothing short of amazing, but the ‘story’ generated no interest whatsoever. Their craftsmanship was stellar, the overall presentation was blah. You can say the same thing about any artistic endeavor. The lasting examples of any artform tend to resonate not only on a surface level, but hit some deeper chord as well. Of course you then get the whole, “If you don’t see the greatness in this art then you don’t know what real art is,’ which of course is a big bucket full of bs.
People pay too much attention to critics. Even if they know what they are talking about, and many of them do, it’s still an opinion, and we are all entitled to them. SK thinks SM is a poor writer. It’s not an insult. It would be an insult if he was somehow saying that she was less of a person because of that, or that her readers were deficient because they like her writing. People read way too much into things like this.
There are great writers. There are great storytellers, and there are some who are both. A lot of critics out there think you have to be both to be worth reading, which of course is an opinion they are entitled too. My opinion…the world would be a better place without the opinions of critics 🙂
J Duncan
Mira says
I thought and thought about who decides what is good.
Aside from the obvious answer (me), I decided that my criteria is not the quality of the writing or the story.
My criteria is the effect of the writing on the reader.
Truly great books change the reader in profound ways. They may give great insight, develop character or inspire actions.
A super-duper great book can change the world.
According to that standard, I will say that King’s books are deeper. They deal with darker unconscious urges and he’s exploring something of more depth than Myer’s teenage wish fulfillment romances.
That said, I read Twilight in one big gulp, and enjoyed it thoroughly.
I refuse to read Stephen King because he scares the hell out of me. I read Salem’s Lot and couldn’t sleep for weeks, because I was sure the vampires would knock on my window, and I’d be compelled to let them in.
Actually, reading Stephen King had a terrible effect on me, so by my standard, he’s a terrible writer.
So there you go.
Anonymous says
Story, not writing, trumps all…
Carley says
I have to ask, has anyone read the’Vampire Diaries’ by L.J. Smith? They came out ohhh, around 1991, you know, when SM was in High School. Just wondering what you thought of those if you read them! 🙂
Anonymous says
I would still like to know the definition of deep writing? A story with lots of twists and turns? hidden meanings? crazy plots? big words?
I am seriously asking this question, someone please answer.
I am trying to figure out if I am a bad writer or not. Maybe my stories ar too shallow.
Nathan you started this, please answer.
Anonymous says
Carley,
I liked them, but then I am old and liked Twilight too. I don’t want to seem bonkers or wierd.
Anonymous says
There’s a difference between good writing and good stories, and our goal as writers should be to produce “a good story, well-told.”
I don’t happen to think Meyer is a bad writer — she’s good enough — but I think the real power in her books is in her stories.
Anonymous says
Every time I allow myself to contemplate whether I’m a good writer or a just a wanna-be hack, all I want to do is crawl under my bed and try not to vomit. I avoid this line of thought completely.
If, by accident, I run across a harsh critic, I just put on my iPod and listen to Fall Out Boy’s “I Don’t Care.” It’s really great. You should try it.
I think that no matter who you are, what you write, how many people shell out the cash to support you…you’re never going to be “good” until your royalties have managed to support your descending line long after you’ve been dead.
So, does it really matter whether people think your work is brilliant? By the time the world reaches a consensus you won’t be around to bask in the light.
My opinion: I adore every writer that’s brave enough to bleed their heart onto the page. I really wish critics didn’t exist. And I thank God every day that I write under a pen name.
Oh, and I think both King and Meyer rock.
Anonymous says
Anon 2:39
Love Fall Out Boy. It bothers me to be criticized too, I’ll give you solution a try.
Merry Monteleone says
I don’t think the movie has anything to do with this discussion.
How many of Stephen King’s works have been made into movies now?
Carrie
Christine
Firestarter
Misery
Delores Claiborn
The Green Mile
The Body (Stand By Me)
etc… etc…
Screenplays and novels are completely different artforms – a film takes many different talents to make it work, from the writer through the director and actors… they all have to click to bring even a brilliant story to life.
Anonymous says
I’m horrified at how many writers and industry experts are horrified that King said what he said, and that it is coming across as so very controversial.
If I were Meyers, I’d be sure to take it as the compliment it was. I think someone like Stephen King, who is an icon on so many levels, has the right to judge. I as a reader have the right to judge what I think of his expert opinion.
I don’t have the right to say, however, that he shouldn’t be able to have it, or shouldn’t share it, just because he’s sold a million books and so has she.
The master may criticize the student, the parent the child, the wizened old proven writer the neophyte rock star novelist.
Anonymous says
HA HA!!! Oh the absurdity of it all! 🙂 My students are obsessed with Stephanie Meyer…so she couldn’t be that bad. It is that Steven King is a has been and Stephnie Meyer is the here and now?
Mira says
Anon 2:36 – I think that’s an interesting question, what is depth in writing.
I think for me it’s about the purpose of the writing.
Using writing to entertain is valuable, but it’s more surface.
Using writing to explore the human condition, or universal truths, or the meaning of life in general, etc., etc. is deeper.
Using writing to scare someone into believing they will become a vampire is just plain mean.
Those are my thoughts anyway.
Merry Monteleone says
Anon 2:36
I would still like to know the definition of deep writing? A story with lots of twists and turns? hidden meanings? crazy plots? big words?
I think you’re liable to get as many different answers as the original ‘What is good anyway?’ question got.
For me, there are snack books – which are light and fluffy and pure fun. They don’t make you think, often they’re full of great humor and one liners… but they’re occasionally forgettable when you put them down.
They entertain, which is what their authors set out to do… There’s nothing wrong with a snack book – hell, what would we all do with no chips and salsa or cheese doodles between meals?
Deeper, for me, means that the story keeps you riveted, the characters are not only engaging but the writing drags you so far into their world that you KNOW them. They are alive to the reader. Deeper makes me think about ideals in my own life and the world at large. Deeper means that the last word on the last page leaves me with a sense grief or mourning because I have to leave that world.
Deeper I’ll remember forever and I can reread again in a day or a year and still be glued to the pages.
MzMannerz says
The reader decides if the story and writing are good. The decision is freshly made each time a reader cracks open an unread book.
King’s entitled to think anyone’s writing is bad, and Etta James is entitled to think Beyonce is overrated, and Christian Bale is allowed to react as if he’d been punched in the face, not distracted.
Doesn’t make it the truth for everyone else.
Nathan Bransford says
Re: deep writing.
I think it’s a combination of craft, meaning, and style.
Craft: perfect word choices, purposeful phrasing, realistic dialogue (or unrealistic if the situation calls for it)
Meaning: some elucidation of deeper truths that resonate with our understanding (and lack thereof) of life in a profound way.
Style: such unique writing that someone could pick up a book and say, “That was written by X.” Writing that can only be imitated, never duplicated.
DeborahBrent says
Like the rest of us, Mr. King has a right to his opinion. There is a differece between a great writer and a great storyteller. It has been my experience that great technical writers are boring, but give me someone who loves the story they are telling and I’ll show you a great storyteller, no matter their level of compentency as a writer.
Anonymous says
HEAVENS REJOYCE!
i am a bookseller and HATE stephenie meyer!
she is a shocking author!
good story line, badly written.
Daniel W. Powell says
Stephen King is the Portland Trail Blazers.
Stephanie Meyer is this year’s version of the Sacramento Kings.
Sorry, Nathan, but it was too easy to pass up. I can’t believe they were down 50 the other day to the Suns…
King all the way. He’s the Dickens of the Twentieth Century, and his stuff is generating a wave of new scholarly regard. That bolsters his cred., but the simple fact is that he’s a tremendous storyteller. The Dead Zone, Bag of Bones, Carrie…shoot, there’s a lot of great writing in there.
I used to have a colleague who kept the Bloom article on the door of his office. He had a hard time filling his lit. classes.
K.S. Clay says
I think some people are missing the point: King didn’t say Meyer’s work was without appeal and he didn’t say her fans were stupid. He said that she speaks to a particular audience (young girls) who are drawn in by certain aspects of the stories (the romance, the story’s hero) which I fully believe. He mentioned other writers as well that he said he thought weren’t very good as writers in general but who were popular and appealed to audiences for other reasons so how come it’s only Meyer that everyone’s up in arms about? Besides, he’s right. People are drawn to books for a number of reasons. Sometimes it’s the writing itself. Other times it’s the story, or the theme, or a particular character or subject. As for who determines writing quality, that’s difficult to say because some of it is subjective and so we all make up our own minds. I wouldn’t take King’s word as gospel but the man is just as entitled to his opinion as anyone else.
Carley says
Anon 2:38,
I’ll assume you’re not overly wierd or bonkers. (Unless you went to the 12am opening night showing of the movie decked out in your Twilight shirt stating either team Edward or Team Jacob) but I was wondering did you find the two series at all similar? My teen was so angry at LJ Smith when she read them after Twilight. She was positive that LJ Smith copied SM. Until I showed her the copyright of 1991. I thought it was interesting.
Country Mouse says
I agree wholeheartedly (like the adverb?) with King– however, in truth, I believe both authors (King & Meyers) seem somewhat allergic to a good editing. That said, I have read some of Stephen King's work, and have enjoyed it (when he's not being so long-winded). Stephanie Meyer, on the other hand, I couldn't get past the first chapter. She may be an okay story teller, but her "style" of writing is maddening. My .02
K.S. Clay says
Oh, and Carley, I have read The Vampire Diaries (as well as every book published by L.J. Smith save her second one, I think). The first thing I thought when I heard about Twilight was “Hmm. How come everyone’s acting as if this idea is so new? L.J. Smith already covered the teenage vampire/human girl love story well.” And in Vampire Diaries there were TWO vampires (brothers) vying for the human girl. LOL. I haven’t read Twilight so I can’t really judge how similar it is, but yeah the story idea made me think of Vampire Diaries too.
wordpress says
Nobody has a totally objective view of anything. There are plenty of books out there with a huge fanbase that are, from a craft standpoint, poorly put together. It doesn’t stop the stampede of readers. So really, since none of us would exist as functional published writers without readers, it boils down to what they think.
Anonymous says
K.S.
It is not just SM they are in up in arms about; she is easier to refer to and more widely known at the moment. SK is free to say what he wishes, and the public is free to respond as they wish. Which is pretty much what is happening. Everyone is stating their opinion. I just fail to find the logic in the criticism.
Michael says
I think everyone comes to a book looking for something different. Movies are the same way. Some people just want to see giant robots beat each other up. They see that, so they think that Transformers is the greatest movie of all time. I like seeing robot beat each other up as much as the next guy, but getting only that doesn’t satisfy me. Transfer that to books and you get readers who are only looking to get the literary equivalent of robots beating each other up from a book. They get that, and they think the book is great. Other readers are looking for something else.
I think that a combination of all the people you mentioned determines the quality of a book. We have to figure out who is looking for the same things from a book and listen to those people. Popularity is something, but it can’t be the end all in determining quality. Critics might have refined taste, but they could be so detached from popular opinion that their favorites are not entertaining. And I’m with Henry James when he says that the “like” test is still important. Ultimately, though, the decision about what is good is a personal one. I’m reading a lot of comments that say that story is the most important aspect of a book. While it’s important to me, I don’t know if I’m comfortable saying that it’s the most important. What about character? Setting? Style? It’s like arguing about which musical note is best. We need them all, and they all need to be played well.
Anonymous says
Carley,
They are similiar. A lot of he same ideas. Yes, I discovered they were copyrighted first. Of the two I prefer Meyer’s “bad” writing by far. Her characters were much easier to connect with. She evoked feelings and placed you deeper into the story. It is my business to read every YA possible. I do really like the Vampire Academy series.They are very different from the rest.
Nixy Valentine says
Literature is like any art form. Some will like it; some won’t. The true question is: “What stands the test of time.”
Only time will tell what is judged to be good. What is popular often is also crap.
People are funny creatures.
Kimber An says
It’s the Readers. They’re the customers and they’re always right. The Readers are after stories they can love, pure and simple. Respect the Readers. Love the Readers. Without them, there’d be none of us. When a reader plunks down her hard-earned money for a book, dangling participles and purple prose no longer matter. Since the beginning of time humans have had a need for stories which moved them. We gather around a Sony eBook reader more now than a campfire for those stories, but the human need is still the same.
And why is a girl reading Twilight for the romance an invalid motive? Is it because she’s a girl? Or because it’s ‘just romance?’ That’s sexism, not literary criticism.
Anonymous says
I totally agree Kimber Ann
Jarucia says
S9…awesome rec on the Twilight review…hilarious!