I’m reading Fifty Shades of Grey at the moment (oh yes I am), which has been widely derided for its subpar writing quality.
So far I don’t think it’s anywhere near as bad as I had heard people complain of it, but yeah, it’s not, nor do I think it’s supposed to be, Shakespeare. (I’ll write a full Fifty Shades post when I’m done with it).
I’ve long held the belief that the publishing industry cares too much about a certain level of writing quality, and I’d include myself in the camp as well.
The publishing industry is full of people who can tell “good” writing from “bad” writing, the definitions of which contain a certain degree of subjectivity but not endless subjectivity. Most people can tell Fitzgerald from fan fiction, and people within the industry can get very granular.
Sure, you need to be a good, or even great, writer for literary fiction, but what about commercial fiction? The list of clunkily written bestsellers is long. I’m unconvinced the majority of the reading public cares about “good” writing. They care about stories and settings and characters. Prose? I’m not sure I buy it.
We’re about to test this on a massive scale as the books that would never have made it through the publishing process in manuscript form due to subpar prose are out there ready to take off, sell a gajillion copies and prove the industry wrong.
But what do you think? Is the industry too wrapped up in “good” writing? What do you think about the public’s appetites? Should the industry still try to maintain the same level of quality of writing even if the public doesn’t care?
Art: Heinrich Heine on cover of Die Jugend
Silly Nathan. 🙂 If the industry is publishing clunkily written bestsellers, they don't care all that much about writing quality, do they?
Paula B.-
Trust me that there is way, way clunkier writing out there that isn't making it through the publisher filter.
If publishing houses don't continue to put out book that are almost without exception of a better quality -by ANY measure – than self-published or small press books, then there will be absolutely no reason to pay the high prices they set for the books they sell.
If I pay 99 cents (or download for free) a self-pubbed book, I'm much more willing to ignore some typos, grammar issues, etc. (SOME, but not if they are so distracting that I can't read the dang book). But if I pay $20, $25 even $30 for a book, and it is not of an overall quality CONSIDERABLY better than the book I bought for 99 cents, I will absolutely stop spending so much for a book. Period.
I read many self-pubbed & small press books, and never pay more than $2.00 for them. Yet I continue to purchase hard covers by authors I really love or upon recommendation from a trusted friend. But if publishing houses stop producing excellent quality, I will stop buying, no matter who the author is. There are just too many fun, decently written books out there now to pay a high price without big return for that price.
My two cents in answer to your question 😉
Nathan, I guess it all depends upon what you call "good" writing. Who are the judges? I'll be the first to agree that books should be free of errors (typos and misused words) but beyond that, isn't it up to the consumers to decide? Who are authors writing for, if not the consumers? And by the looks of it, the consumers (or at least a large number of them) want books like the ones in question. I haven't read these, so I can't comment on the quality, but it doesn't matter what I think any more than it does what the publishing industry thinks. That would be like Mercedes Benz telling us that Fords and Hyundais stink.
The traditional publishing industry has never been good at judging what regular people want, except when they "lower" their standards to print a gazillion celebrity books. Their successes have been as much luck and percentages than great insight.
They are holding on for now, but watch out when the independents start to figure out how to get noticed. I believe it will force even more changes on an industry already in a state of flux.
I am reading "The Picture of Dorian Gray". It is filled with run on sentences, head hopping,hard to follow sometimes. But at Chapter 8 it gets interesting.
There's no such thing as caring too much about writing quality. I recently came across an author's facebook page (ok, ok, I was tempted over by a particularly delicious photo of a hero-type-guy) and she had over 4000 "Likes". Excellent marketing, think I. So I go to Amazon, check out her book … and it's AWFUL. The same words repeated every other sentence, the scenes and characters as cardboard as a box … and yet the readers are all "Oh! I can't wait for more!"
I'm confused, disappointed … I don't even know.
All I know is that if you want to read good books, they need to be well written. PLEASE PUBLISHERS! Get pickier!!!!!
Great post! But the truth is, it's not just the publishing industry, it's what writers are encouraged to strive for. Writers are taught to learn to "write well" as if what hooks readers is the prose. It's not. Words are the handmaiden of story, not the other way around. When we read, what captivates us isn't the lyrical language, it's the story beneath that gives the prose its real power. Literally, as it turns out. That great feeling you get when you're lost in a good story? It's biological. It's a rush of the neural transmitter dopamine, spurred by your curiosity to know what happens next. Sure, great writing makes a good story even better. No question. But without a story, great writing is about as engaging as a bowl of wax fruit. Which is probably why Fifty Shades of Grey has sold over 20 million copies, and many a literary novel sells well under 5000.
A good writer pulls you in and you forget that you are reading a story. True masterpieces are easy to follow and almost perfectly written. Clean writing is hard to achieve. And the best writers don't need much help with their editing, plus their story is exciting and you love their characters, or love to hate them. Read something good from three hundred years ago, it never changes and never will. The best writers remember that no matter how good the story, repeated editing is the most important last step.
"Does the publishing industry care too much about writing quality?"
I say, no, except when it is an unknown author who lacks a big vision book. The publishing industry has been selling mass market fiction in a variety of genres since "dime novels."
However, the publishing industry prefers to promote their high-writing-quality books even when they make most of their money one dime at a time.
Agents and editors want quality writing because they will spend more time with the text, which is why they are now requesting "up-market-fiction" instead of genre mass market quality. But the publishers and marketing department want a book that sells.
When an author or book sells itself, the publishing industry doesn't care about the quality of the writing and editors are happy not to struggle with the prose when it's already a done deal like 50SoG. It went virtually unedited by the publishers from a fanfick-draft, into the hands of readers.
I don't think these are either/or questions.
We've long had both kinds of books on the market: plot-driven books that sell big even if they're unpolished, and books that pay more attention to language and technique. The former often sell big in their day, then fade away. The latter sometimes become classics.
50SoG strikes me as the kind of book that nobody will be reading 20 years from now. Copies will litter the yard sales of tomorrow, just the way yesterday's bestsellers do now. Is anyone still reading Jacqueline Susann? We've seen these kinds of books before: the titillating book that catches on like wildfire.
Readers aren't a monolithic group. People who read voraciously tend to care more about the quality of the prose, because the more you read, the more you see what can be done with words–and what is overdone. Editors read a LOT, which is one reason they're so choosy; they see how the same ideas, the same characters, the same plots, the same cliched phrases, come up over and over. When the slushpile moves directly onto people's e-readers, readers may develop more of a jaded palate, and they may have less tolerance for work that isn't as polished.
I think the future of books will look exactly like the past. A few books will hit it big in their day. Some books will have staying power and last a long time. Most books will sell in smaller quantities to a wide variety of readers. Most writers will struggle to find their audiences.
Well, this is weird. I normally disagree with everything Bransford writes, but he is dead-on with this post. At one level, the industry's obsession with a certain type of "quality" is easy to explain. When your print runs are numbered in the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, you can't afford the typo or easily spotted goof. On the other hand, the fact that the number good storytellers used to so outnumber the available publishing slots meant that publishers had to come up some criteria for choosing one good story over another. Focusing on the technical skills of the writer was probably the best choice to make.
The world has changed and all you nitpickers need to get over yourselves. We have infinite shelves in the ebookstore and nobody is forcing you to read "50 Shades" or anything else. People will still be repackaging Cinderella and the hero's journey long after you dead. And they probably be violating your personal grammar shibboleths, too.
Like you mentioned in your blog post, I think that people get somewhat fussy over prose when it's literary fiction, but commercial fiction is another story. I've had friends tell me that when reading commercial fiction, they'll see a lot of "clunky writing," which I guess isn't a good thing when it gets to the point that the prose distracts from the overall story.
I've never picked up a book where the prose annoyed me to the point that I completely stopped reading. If I do put a book down, it's because of the lack of great story telling.
I think the book buying public very much DOES care about quality writing. They just disagree as to what constitutes "quality." I am one of those that loved the Fifty Shades Trilogy — but I also think it desperately needed a better editor. But then again, some of the quirks that I saw in "Fifty Shades," I've also recently seen in other best sellers by authors higher up on the literary food chain that supposedly know better. Greedy witch that I am — as a writer AND a reader — I see no reason why I can't have both, great story AND great writing. There are plenty of other indie writers out there doing it, so I know it can be done. I don't think it's too much to ask.
I think that historically those who were drawn into the publishing industry were people who had an interest in and love for books and stories. In the world as it is now, I think there is more variation in that and as some have said the balance between an interest in good writing versus in a 'hot commodity' may vary agent to agent and publisher to publisher.
Additionally, there can be an effete snobbery by some of the publishing elite, especially in the area of literary fiction, that repels many readers who run to the ordinary language of a world driven by texts, tweets and shorthand Englsih.
Maybe an appreciation for fine literature, the well turned phrase, the witty aphorism, like an appreciation for fine wine or great cuisine, must be cultivated. As someone who taught high school (twenty years ago) and now teaches at a community college, I find we have dumbed down that cultivation, and watered down our insistence on good writing and grammar skills. It should not be a surprise therefore that many don't write well…and readers don't hold them to that standard.
I admit to disappointment in some self-published and poorly edited fiction, as well as in many of the widely "popular" bestsellers. I find fewer books that take my breath away with the quality of their prose, or keep me up reading until 2 or 3 am on a work night because I simply can't put them down.
I'd like to ditto what A.R. Williams said at the top of the comment pyramid.
As for, Shades, my biggest issue came with the lack of research. I live in the town the book begins in, Vancouver WA and not once have I headed South to Portland to drive North to Seattle (around the fourth page).
I also don't think an elite/rich Seattle family would send their daughter to WSU-Vancouver Campus. She'd go Ivy league and if they wanted her to stay in the NW, she'd go somewhere like Linfield or Lewis and Clark in Oregon.
Catching those gaffes immediately made me a skeptic.
I think publishers care about writing quality as well as commercial appeal, but the latter more than the former. After all, they are running a business, and businesses have to make money. And quality, of course, is subjective. There are people who think Lord of the Rings and/or Harry Potter are badly written, just like there are people who think Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey are amazing. It's difficult to predict what will resonate with audiences, but for a book to be as big as, say, Twilight or Harry Potter, it has have some "wow" factor and connect with people in a way that other books don't. And you don't have to write like Tolstoy in order to connect with an audience. It does help if you have quality writing — and I think quality is something every writer who wants to be published should strive for — but again, quality is subjective.
Doesn't matter.
The average person reading today is looking to be entertained. As long as the writing isn't too bad, it's good enough for the majority of people.
And this is one of the reasons why I think the publishing business is slowing going to implode. It's not selfish enough.
I haven't read Fifty Shades of Grey, so after reading Nathan's blog I dropped into the Amazon site and read the front pages. And if that's bad writing then yes, all I care about is story, setting and characters. While the writing didn't sing for me off the page, it wasn't a complete turn-off either. The sentences were put together well enough, there were no major typos or grammatical errors and the POV character had a voice. I didn't get to any of the 'cajoling through gritted teeth' or other weird imagery mentioned in Massie's article, nor did I get to too many of the repetitions (one smirk out of 24, a few red faces) that the Amazon reviewers comment on.
I didn't stop reading the preview because the writing was bad. I stopped because the story didn't interest me and the characters didn't appeal to me.
Reading the comments on Amazon, what most people seemed to dislike about the story were the lack of plot, one-dimensional characters, unrealistic situations, the content matter, the repetition and the poor choice of words. The first four come under 'story, settings and characters' while it's only the last two that come under 'good prose'.
Even so, I think the public does care about good writing. There is a limit to how much story, setting and character can offset bad writing.
Since the onset of eBooks and easy self-publishing I have read, and purchased, a lot of self-published books. I buy them for the story, or the setting, or the characters, seldom for the writing. Some of these stories are brilliant, some are okay and a lot of them are terrible. So much so that nowadays, if I suspect a book has been self-published I am unlikely to buy it. And despite some bestsellers being clunkily written, their quality of writing is still generally better than the majority of self-published books out there.
I think a few Fifty Shades of Grey-type bestsellers will sneak through, but they'll be exceptions, rather than the norm. All the badly written books will do is turn people off reading altogether.
We need publishers to maintain their standards so we have something to read.
I think the publishing industry should definitely care about quality, otherwise they were just content churners.
If they wouldn't filter, and good, bad and horrible writing would be treated equally, no one will benefit. On the contrary. The vast majority of readers are educated by what they read, they learn new words when they read books, learn about the human mind when they read deep POVs and learn about different perspectives on life. Do we want the average reader to have lower expectations? Do we want them to choose books based on price, instead of more meaningful criteria?
Without higher quality writing, there will be no progress of literature. And I personally don't think that's any advantage to anyone.
It depends on what part of the publishing industry we're talking about. If it is purely commercial, 'writing' becomes secondary, and plot reigns supreme– no one can pretend that Dan Brown and Meyer don't exist, or that their books are well- plotted but badly written.
But we need to take care of quality because without a high standard to look up to, all writing would deteriorate.
We need populist fiction to maintain our interest in reading and entertain, and we need great writing to inspire and engage. Very few can do what Shakespeare did– engage our intellect and emotions and yet entertain, but such writers exist: George Martin, Hilary Mantel, Arthur C. Clarke and so on– the publishing industry needs to strike a balance between rooting for quality and popularity.
I was just thinking of this yesterday. I'm reading a YA book by an establish author who has several NYT bestsellers. I'm not impressed with the writing at all. I cringe almost every paragraph.
My 11 year old son, on the other hand, loved it. Part of the reason I'm making myself finish the book is because my son loved it so much i wanted to see what the book was like. He doesn't care about the writing. He cares about the story. What an eye opener for me!
To me, the way the story is told is part of what makes it a good story. But in the words of almost every "pass" letter, "this is a highly subjective business."
I know what I like to read, and I know what I like to write, and that's the best way I have of navigating issues like this. Thankfully there are a lot of different books out there for a lot of different tastes. But in answer to your question: "Does the publishing industry care too much about writing quality?" I really don't think so. There's a huge range of quality in trade-published books. Something for everyone. Plenty of books that I have a hard time reading but that other people love. And that goes for books that are critically raved about as well as ones that are panned.
I am so pleased to hear you say this! 🙂
It's exactly what I've been saying for a few weeks now, but no one seems to agree with me 🙁
Xd
My guess would be that most people who buy non-literary fiction are looking for a story. At that point the writing boils down to that quote about proper language skills: if the idea was conveyed, purpose of language is achieved.
Good writing can be awesome, and it can carry a book. But for the most part, I would be surprised if anyone not passionately interested in writing itself cared too much beyond "did the writing interfere with the storytelling?" If the writing doesn't get in the way of the story, than most people won't care. The problem comes when the writing gets in the way. That is when you have a problem.
Unfortunately (fortunately?) the publishing industry is filled with people who are passionate about writing and thus care a great deal about the level of the prose in addition to the level of the storytelling. Sometimes books squeak by and they show the shine a well told story can have even with sub-par writing.
I'm all for a really good story. However, I must admit if I find grammatical errors throughout a book I'm usually left disappointed, no matter how engaging the characters, plot, etc. are. I consider myself an avid reader and as such I expect a book to written to a certain level. Otherwise its a waste of time.
Kudos to you for reading it. I did, too…twice 😉 I feel like we need to know why commercial fiction like this is popular from an anthropological perspective. I agree in your assessment of prose vs. commercial, and I also think you've hit the nail on the head when it comes to the general reading public caring more about characters and story. While 50 Shades isn't neck deep in story, at least the characters do manage some form of development. Ultimately, I think the bigger question is why is this book, with it's edgy sexual content, popular right now. I think that says more about us as a culture than the writing. What has been missing from women's lives or what have we suppressed or what will this mean for women and relationships in the future. Those are the more interesting topics of convo when it comes to 50 Shades. I'm sick of industry insiders, and this goes far beyond publishing, being sort of elitist about their industry. If someone has a book or characters or story inside them, move the fuck over and let them write it. What difference is it to you?
I read the first two novels of 50 Shades not out of interest, but out of curiosity to see what the fuss was about. What bothered me the most was the striking similarity to Twilight- the author had to take out most of the Twilight references, but there was just too much resemblance left. What I search in books is the author's creativity. I love to explore in the worlds of imagination. This, however, was built on a story that already existed, mixed in with research from Google. What was left was a bland story much 'colors' or 'depth'.
However there is some originality. Ok, Ana might have the personality of a very naive teen, but her struggle to understand the different world that is presented to her is comprehensible. Once in a while she has a healthy reaction, like at the end of book one.
I think the series could have ended there. Or at least the follow-up should have been completely different and refreshing.
As part of the public (not yet in the publishing business), I agree that we're looking for a good story. It doesn't matter if it's badly written or not. But as a writer, I tend to look into every flaw and detail. The repetition of words drive me crazy and I wouldn't recommend for it to get published. But that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be published- like said before, there are many people that simply enjoy the story, and the publishing industry should take that into account.
"The industry"? No. I don't think so. "The industry" is and has for some time now been more interested in sales and profit than anything else.
Agents, publishers? Same thing. Critics? They make their living claiming to know the difference between Fitzgerald and Fitzsimmons.
Have you read "The Other Side of Paradise"? It is an excellent example of narcissistic self-discovery, written by a young man not of the "me" generation but its distant predecessor, the "jazz babies."
Maxwell Perkins, it seems, was great at not only knowning what great writing (i.e., "literature") was, but also what might appeal to readers of the time–people of the same basic age writing about themselves and others.
Have you read "Dark Laughter"? You'll see why Hemingway parodied it–in a pretty saucy move at breaking his contract with Sherwood Anderson's publisher, and being free to be wooed by Perkins at Scribner's.
Have you read "Torrents of Spring," Hemingway's parody of "Dark Laughter"? One wonders if it was the only thing he offered Scribner's (instead of also The Sun Also Rises), would he ever be published?
I have not read "Fifty Shades." In fact, my sister-in-law is and loves it.
Have you read any of Patience Worth's stuff? It raised Pearl Curran to literary heights. And it was supposedly written by a dead spirit channeled by Curran. And published.
I think some people are more interested in being seen, or known, for being at the "cutting edge" of "the industry," than good writing. And by good writing, do we mean esoteric literature (as opposed to erotic), which requires a dictionary and a college education to be able to fathom?
Self-publishing eliminates the middle-man aspect of writers getting their writing out to readers. Readers, always, are the unknown factor. And one could argue whatever they read, to them, at least, if not the critics, it must be good, no?
🙂
I think that its the wrong question. Its not about good writing or bad writing when you talk about most books that sell vs those that don't. Its about appealing books/stories versus those that aren't. appealing. Fifty Shades is appealing regardless of the quality of the writing. That last years Man Booker – The Sense of an Ending didn't take off the same way speaks more about its appeal than its quality. I've found since I've been applying the appeal to books its easier to understand what sells and what doesn't and why books bought by publishers that are so well written don't preform the way everyone wishes.
As the former owner of a bookstore, I find that bestsellers are not driven by people who read a lot, they're driven by people who read very little.
I had a lot of customers like this:
"I love James Patterson! He's the best writer in the world. I read every book of his as soon as it comes out."
"Oh, that's great. Who else do you read?"
"Um… James Patterson?"
I find most casual readers have one or two favorite writers, and if they step outside those it's to try something that everyone is talking about (e.g., Fifty Shades, Harry Potter, Twilight).
And it's perfectly fine that a reader loves James Patterson's stories and only reads him. This is the sort of reader who fuels the careers of the really big names. But it also means that they have no real capability to judge and compare writing quality, as they simply have no experience of other writers.
And bestsellers are driven by the occasional reader who follows the few big names or the books with the huge buzz. The dedicated readers are searching out a variety of great books, and doing so to their heart's content. That hasn't changed, and likely won't. What has changed is that there is a new way for stories to reach readers and achieve buzz. And perhaps it's a way that makes it easier (and cheaper) for the occasional reader to try buzz books. I think it's likely that more and more stories will break out this way, with the digital spread of buzz. And the ones that do this will be successful because they appeal to the occasional reader (and will likely have varying levels of prose quality — some will appeal to readers who are widely read and care about prose style, and some will not… much like traditional bestsellers now).
It's sad, but not difficult, to understand why the Fifty Shades series is so popular. And having accepted the fact that the big publishing houses are now placing money above quality, it's not difficult to understand why Random House made the Fifty Shades author an offer after her book succeeded as self-published fan fiction.
We're living in an era in which women's rights and scientific education are being seriously questioned. The news is filled with discussions of what even constitutes "legitimate rape," with the suggestion that pregnancy rarely occurs if a rape is a real rape. So, no one blinks an eye when a book series about sado-masochism directed at a female virginal main character by an abusive older man becomes a bestseller. It's just part of the times in which we live. And, of course, readers are being told that this book is a real, legitimate book with literary merit, which is like saying porn flicks are on the same level of quality as the best movies made today because they do, after all, make a lot of money and attract a wide audience. Ummmm, really? I may be a lone voice, but I'd like to point out that the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. Anyone else notice that?
Have you seen the email with a paragraph in which all the words have only the first and last letters correct and the middle letters in random order? Almost everyone finds that they can read it. It takes a little extra effort at first, but it becomes surprisingly easy.
I think something similar is in play when people read books. If the story is compelling, they will manage to read through poor writing to find the meaning. This can apply even to "great" writers. I don't completely believe anyone who claims not to have skimmed or skipped the long sections on whaling esoterica in "Moby Dick" in order to get back to the gripping story of Ahab vs. the White Whale.
Elegant writing, on the other hand, can disguise the lack of any story at all. For examples, see most "New Yorker" fiction: beautiful writing, but if you try to describe what it was about two days later, you may find you don't really remember anything about it — except that it was really good!
I agree with Diana above about the difference between literary vs. commercial. They really are different writing forms.
Commercial writing is immersive, where literary writing is the exact opposite; the reader is watching, and admiring, the writing. An observing mind is necessary to read literary, while the point of reading commercial is to lose the observing mind and escape into the experience.
I don't know if it's been studied, but I wonder if reading commercial vs. literary uses a different part of the brain.
The reason this is important is the question tends to connect the two types of writing, as if they were on a continuum, but I believe literary and commercial fiction are very different art forms, designed to acheive different aims.
Someone above mentioned that reading literary is something that is cultivated, and I agree. People are taught to observe the writing and evaluate it, in just the same way that people are taught art or music appreciation. One place people are taught this appreciation is in higher tier University English departments. Graduates from these departments then go on to be hired as interns and rise up the ranks of the agent and editor professions.
So those hired in the industry most likely have a natural love for literary, and they have training to recognize high quality literary works. When you add to that the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes, and other rewards for literary writing, the industry naturally has a slant toward appreciating and promoting literary works.
Commercial, on the other hand, requires no training to enjoy, and so it's naturally much more popular, since anyone can enjoy an immersive experience.
And, since it's more popular, commercial is where the money is.
So sorry for the long comment, but this is interesting. 🙂
To answer your last question, Nathan: "Should the industry still try to maintain the same level of quality of writing even if the public doesn't care"?, I say yes!
Although I think it's smart for publishers to publish commercial, too, purely for financial health, there are alot of reasons why publishers would be smart to have a sub-division, or specialization (or for smaller publishers, a focus on) for literary.
Some of the reasons are:
a. As publishing democratizes with self-publishing, Publishers need to develop cachet more than ever.
b. They will not be competing for as much market space, the literary market is not in competition with the commercial market, it is a different thing altogether (although some people may like both).
c. Marketing, promotion and networking will be easier in the literary world for the industry, those channels are already in place.
So, some broad generalizations here, but these are my thoughts about an interesting topic.
I am the kind of reader who completely loses herself in a book and tunes out everything else. And when that happens I am not paying attention to grammar or fancy-schmancy prose. I am invested in the story, the characters, and what they are seeing, feeling, and experiencing. So for me "bad writing" is when a story fails to draw me in. I've started some books that had potentially great plots but I was never pulled into the story. It wasn't because there were too many adverbs or too many commas. I care about the story being told well. Having great literary prose is important but for me personally (and I think that is the key- so much of this is personal taste) the story trumps all.
And one more thing on the side, I get bothered when people say things like the author of "Poorly-written-best-seller-lucky-break book" didn't work hard or earn their success. I am by no means the best writer. I'm pretty sure if I ever made it big my books would be some of the ones getting ripped apart. But I WORK at it. I invest in my characters and the world I'm creating. I spend hours reading, researching, studying, practicing, etc. and someday I will take a chance and try to get a book published. Will it? Who knows. Will it have success? Who knows. These authors who have made it, like Stefanie Meyer, could never have predicted their success. They had no idea what was going to happen with this story they poured their heart into. Why are we begrudging them something they had very little control over? They tried something and lo' and behold it took off. Good for them I say.
Glad you are being open minded. I have not read the book – not sure I even want to, but if the people want it, oh well. It reminds me of what happened after Whethering Heights was published. People were outraged, yet they read it!
Nathan, do any of your coworkers have analysis software that could analyze the comments on this post versus comments when you were an agent in the biz? Or do you remember a similar discussion from that time?
There seem to be a ton of comments saying that flashy or flowery prose really doesn't matter much, yet I seem to remember a little different slant in the comments when the post referenced Atonement instead of 50 Shades. It would be interesting to see if there is a difference.
First of all the bottom line on any thing that an agent takes is MONEY.
If they do not think it will make money for them (and of course the publisher) they are going to reject it even if it is a rather good, well-written book. I've had a lot of rejections, and I know that they are looking for that '"block buster".
Prose doesn't matter a whole lot. And I've seen a lot of 'rules' broken. You know the ones "they" say you shouldn't do and every book I've ever read has broken them. I didn't have a clue until I came across some article on why agents reject you.
Rowling is the biggest example of someone being rejected by every publisher in England, and look where she went with all ther -ly rule breaking.(and she is not a bad example!)
So, for someone (whoever is saying this book is badly written), to say it's written poorly, they should take a look at what is out there… and the fact that readers really don't care that much if someone is breaking the writing rules, or can't write prose.
If so many traditionally published bestsellers have clunky or poor prose, and they all come from the publishing industry, then how can the publishing industry be too preoccupied with quality writing?
Late to the party… I want both. I read a LOT, and even without being trained to write, the more you read the more you can see the difference. Awful writing will ruin an otherwise good premise for me. And on the flip side, literary writing has to be OUT OF THIS WORLD to make up for a lack of story. I mostly read genre fiction, but I still want solid sentences and pacing. And bad dialogue makes me cringe like no other. I can't identify with characters who sound like idiots because they keep repeating each other or baldly stating plot points.
The mere fact of you asking the question frightens and depresses me.
While I encourage those with a passion for the written word to find whatever vehicle they can to expose their work to the world, I do believe that there has to be some standards. There has to be a lofty goal to which we can all work toward with pride. If the publishing industry and its inner workings is the barometer, than so be it. But as a traditionally published author that also reviews for a service, I cringe with what is being served to the masses (just because it's highly ranked in the FREE category, does not make it good, it just makes it free and easy), I fear greatly that the dumbing down of America is reaching new heights.
"I'm unconvinced the majority of the reading public cares about "good" writing."
I couldn't agree more.
I actually wrote a post on this exact subject.
Let me know what you think.
I don't think they are too wrapped up in quality. I think they are too focused on the wrong things. I've heard people complain because a self-published novel had a few grammar or spelling mistakes. Seriously, who cares? If all you could find were a few grammar and spelling mistakes and everything else was great about the novel, then that's an EXCELLENT novel.
As a reader, I find that good stories/settings/characters are unbelievably rare. So I will happily take them even when the writing/prose is bad.
Most characters are not as vivid and the stories not as interesting as the ones in the big sellers.
The world is full of books with bad writing and bad stories. And full of books with good or great writing but flat stories and characters that are missing something very important.
Sometimes good writing may even
hinder sales within the industry. Publishers want sales, which is proper. Economic pressure has drained a lot of courage from the industry's decisions. It takes fewer risks, hews to proven formulas and seldom takes the leap of faith needed to encourage original writing. Much of the best new work drains off into the indie business, which is generally a quagmire of futility. At least the industry provided filters, guaranteed a certain level of readability. Nuff said!
So I am curious were you able to finish the series?
I thought the writing was terrible and that the story line was incredibly ridiculous, but at the same time I found myself having to know what was going to happen next. HA!
Silke said:
"Do the publishers care too much? Some do.
Do the writers care too little?
Clearly, some do!"
This. I agree with this 100%.
I hurt my friend's feelings by commenting that some of her favorite books were "badly written". She lashes back by insisting that most of the classics contain just as much "bad writing" as 50 Shades or DaVinci Code. She considers John Le Carre a "bad writer" because she can't follow his plots or understand his characters. She reads Mark Twain and John Steinbeck but insists that the writing "isn't all that good". On the other hand, many of the books she rhapsodizes about make me cringe to the point of giving up because of the clunky sophomoric writing, while she insists they are "good writers" because lots of people enjoy reading them (i.e. the story captures them). We're talking apples and oranges here. I only hope that we don't end up with only apples or only oranges — either one would be awful.