Bestsellers That Would Never Get Published Today

blackbird · Nov 29, 2005

Can anyone think of any monumental past bestsellers that would never cut it in today's marketplace? I'm thinking specifically of my childhood favorite, Gone With the Wind. Here was a 1,037 page manuscript by an unknown author, a manuscript that had obviously received not a lick of professional feedback or polishing (as is painfully and embarrasingly obvious throughout many passages), and yet was not only a runaway bestseller in its day, but continues to be one of the greatest selling novels of all time? Yet how many publishers today would be willing to look at a 1,037 page book about the Civil War from an unagented, unknown writer, and which seemingly breaks every workshop rule of polished fiction? I would be willing to bet, not many.

I was wondering how many other former bestsellers would never cut the mustard today, and why? Do you think this reflects a sadder state of affairs for the publishing business today overall?

awaitingthemuse · Nov 29, 2005

anything by jean plaidy

Not so much a bestseller but an author. Jean Plaidy has sold a ton of novels. I struggled my way to the end of one (a bad habit I have to break I know) and asked myself exactly the same question - would she make it today? I don't think so.

Garpy · Nov 29, 2005

Okay here goes...(dons helmet, gets ready to duck down inside his bomb shelter)

Lord of the Rings:
Why? Because clearly Tolkein wasn't sure if he was writing a book for adults or for children. It vascilates between the two in a really irritating way. Also, those incredibly long elvish and dwarvish songs....sheesh, sorry, complete indulgence. Then what about those bloody dwarvish names, I mean Gimli son of Bimli, son of Dimli, or whatever, why the hell do they have to rhyme? And let's not forget....Tom Bombadil. Had he rolled himself a big fat one, the day he wrote that chapter?

To be fair...he created an exciting and vibrant world, for which I love him dearly, but as a writer I think he was undisciplined and LOTR really needed a stern editor to tighten the whole thing up. If it were submitted today by an unkown, I would fully expect an editor to tell JRR that he was three or four rewrites away from a publishable manuscript.

Focoult's Pendulumn:
In the end, a great read....but I'm amazed Eco got away with 12 pages describing the swing of a pendulum. I seriously would expect my editor to whip me with a birch if I submitted an opening chapter that dull.

Illuminatus Trilogy:
800 pages of random gibberings....a stream of consciousness that is totally undecipherable. I'll be fair...I only managed to read a 100 pages of this stuff before my eyes started to bleed. So maybe on page 101 the book started to actually have a point

MadScientistMatt · Nov 29, 2005

I've sometimes wondered if Moby-Dick could be published today, given the way Melville tended to go off on tangents and dedicate entire chapters to exposition, interrupting the narrative. Since he had several prior successes, though, I suspect what would happen would be that it would probably be able to get published - if he'd agree to cut out about a third of it.

Avalon · Nov 29, 2005

An aside...

Jean Plaidy was a pseudonym for Victoria Holt, wasn't she? So she sold a ton of novels under two names.

People still buy Gothic romance type stuff don't they? I'm thinking she'd be published. Then again, I think I read her voraciously -- when I was about 12.

maestrowork · Nov 29, 2005

I was just watching To Kill a Mockingbird (with Gregory Peck) the other day and wondered if that book would be published today, and would such a movie be made? I am not sure. It's a good story and extremely well written, but would publishers publish it today? Would Hollywood make a movie like that today?

The Scribbler · Nov 29, 2005

Garpy said:
Okay here goes...(dons helmet, gets ready to duck down inside his bomb shelter)

Lord of the Rings:
Why? Because clearly Tolkein wasn't sure if he was writing a book for adults or for children. It vascilates between the two in a really irritating way. Also, those incredibly long elvish and dwarvish songs....sheesh, sorry, complete indulgence. Then what about those bloody dwarvish names, I mean Gimli son of Bimli, son of Dimli, or whatever, why the hell do they have to rhyme? And let's not forget....Tom Bombadil. Had he rolled himself a big fat one, the day he wrote that chapter?

To be fair...he created an exciting and vibrant world, for which I love him dearly, but as a writer I think he was undisciplined and LOTR really needed a stern editor to tighten the whole thing up. If it were submitted today by an unkown, I would fully expect an editor to tell JRR that he was three or four rewrites away from a publishable manuscript.

I agree totally. I have often argued that if LOTR came out today it would be nothing more than common. It would not have the appeal. I think it is the Eperor's New Clothes syndrome.

I also think some of the older classic such as Brave New World, 1984, and Catcher in the Rye would never have reached the lofty status with which they are regarded in today's literary circles.

Flapdoodle · Nov 29, 2005

The Scribbler said:
I agree totally. I have often argued that if LOTR came out today it would be nothing more than common. It would not have the appeal. I think it is the Eperor's New Clothes syndrome.

I also think some of the older classic such as Brave New World, 1984, and Catcher in the Rye would never have reached the lofty status with which they are regarded in today's literary circles.

This is a dumb argument - part of the reason these books became famous was due in part to the time they came out. LOTR/Middle Earth was a total original when it was written - and Tolkien's inspiration was the mass industrialisation of the English Midlands that had recently happened/was still happening. I'm sure the others have similar stories.

These days fantasy novels are ten a penny - they're nothing new.

You could say the same about War of the Worlds! However, when WotW came out no one had written a SF novel like that before. Similarly for Jules Verne...

It's pointless speculating on this sort of subject!

My-Immortal · Nov 29, 2005

Flapdoodle said:
This is a dumb argument - part of the reason these books became famous was due in part to the time they came out. LOTR/Middle Earth was a total original when it was written - and Tolkien's inspiration was the mass industrialisation of the English Midlands that had recently happened/was still happening. I'm sure the others have similar stories.

These days fantasy novels are ten a penny - they're nothing new.

You could say the same about War of the Worlds! However, when WotW came out no one had written a SF novel like that before. Similarly for Jules Verne...

It's pointless speculating on this sort of subject!

To state that an older novel is unoriginal compared to more modern books is not a valid argument for stating why a book would not be published...because many of the modern books have used the original books as a model.

To state that due to language use or extensive use of setting or description as an argument as to why a certain book might not be published today, I think, is a valid point.

I love the book LOTR but "AS IS" I doubt if it would be published now. I would think an editor would require some tightening of story - removal of some of the characters and pages of setting description - and probably (much like Peter Jackson did in the movie) would demand that the female roles be increased to appeal to more females (with of course more book time devoted to Orlando Bloom - errrrr, I mean Legolas).

As for nothing new in fantasy - I don't think that is entirely true. Sure, there are plenty of big named fantasy authors that churn out book after book in their ongoing series never seeming to draw any closer to an ending - but if you actually search around there are some new names emerging.

Of course, is 'nothing new in the genre' entirely the fault of writers? If the only thing editors/agents/publishers accept are copy-cats of what has sold in the past, what happens to those authors and manuscripts that dare to be different?

How often has a book truly changed a genre? LOTR was said to have changed the face of fantasy...is it possible to change it again?

(Sorry, I end up going off on tangents sometimes).

Take care all -

SusanR · Nov 29, 2005

Can you imagine a publisher accepting Portrait of the Artist as Young Man by James Joyce? Huh?

SusanR

Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse · Nov 29, 2005

mein kampf

Garbarian · Nov 29, 2005

The Scribbler said:
I agree totally. I have often argued that if LOTR came out today it would be nothing more than common. It would not have the appeal. I think it is the Eperor's New Clothes syndrome.

I also think some of the older classic such as Brave New World, 1984, and Catcher in the Rye would never have reached the lofty status with which they are regarded in today's literary circles.

flapdoodle is right. this is poor logic. these authors invented/re-invented the genre they were working in. the only reason it would seem common today is because everybody else copied them. it's like reading raymond chandler and thinking, man, he just writes cliche hard-boiled detective stories. well, yes -- but he invented the cliches before they became cliches, if that makes any sense.

SusanR · Nov 29, 2005

Garbarian said:
but he invented the cliches before they became cliches, if that makes any sense.

Yeah....if it's fresh and new, it's not a cliche!

SusanR

Flapdoodle · Nov 29, 2005

My-Immortal said:
To state that an older novel is unoriginal compared to more modern books is not a valid argument for stating why a book would not be published...because many of the modern books have used the original books as a model.

To state that due to language use or extensive use of setting or description as an argument as to why a certain book might not be published today, I think, is a valid point.

I love the book LOTR but "AS IS" I doubt if it would be published now. I would think an editor would require some tightening of story - removal of some of the characters and pages of setting description - and probably (much like Peter Jackson did in the movie) would demand that the female roles be increased to appeal to more females (with of course more book time devoted to Orlando Bloom - errrrr, I mean Legolas).

As for nothing new in fantasy - I don't think that is entirely true. Sure, there are plenty of big named fantasy authors that churn out book after book in their ongoing series never seeming to draw any closer to an ending - but if you actually search around there are some new names emerging.

Of course, is 'nothing new in the genre' entirely the fault of writers? If the only thing editors/agents/publishers accept are copy-cats of what has sold in the past, what happens to those authors and manuscripts that dare to be different?

How often has a book truly changed a genre? LOTR was said to have changed the face of fantasy...is it possible to change it again?

(Sorry, I end up going off on tangents sometimes).

Take care all -

That's not what I said. I said the opposite! I said LOTR _was_ an original when it was written, and pretty much one of the novels that invented the genre. There may be new names emerging, but none of them groundbreaking as LOTR.

As you say LOTR changed fantasy, and that was due to the time it was published. Who cares if it wouldn't be published today?

Stating a book wouldn't be published today because of its language and hence contemporary setting is just dumb, sorry. Wuthering Heights wouldn't be published today. Nor Jane Eyre, and most certainly no George Eliot in that case.

I've read books written 10 years ago that wouldn't get published today due to their setting. What does that prove? In fact, numbers of books published ten years aren't in print anymore due to their setting, language and descriptions..! I've got horror books written 20 years ago that wouldn't be published today.

I don't see what the point is! It's almost as if folks are trying to somehow belittle these authors in some way by arguing that they wouldn't get published today...?!?

emeraldcite · Nov 29, 2005

Can you imagine a publisher accepting Portrait of the Artist as Young Man by James Joyce? Huh?

I think portrait is difficult, but still an excellent book. I don't have a doubt it would get published. It wouldn't be a bestseller, but I think it could make the cut.

My-Immortal · Nov 29, 2005

Flap - I wasn't arguing with you - I was actually making a similar point as you in your regards to The Scribbler's post.

I also wasn't commenting on "setting" in the sense of contemporary or not - but rather the extent of setting described in books. I've read many older fantasy books that spend PAGES describing the setting of the world - the color of the flowers, the way the river runs through the meadow etc.etc.etc...and THAT I think is something that older books IF they were being turned into todays publishers/editors/agents would be asked to edit or trim.

Flap - you ask: "Who cares if it wouldn't be published today?"

That was kinda the point of the thread. It really doesn't matter - it's just a discussion on what has changed from twenty, thirty plus years ago vs the trends of today. Books that are masterpieces of their times and are often considered classics simply wouldn't be published AS IS in todays world because editors/agents/publishers today aren't necessarily looking for THAT style of writing.

And THAT was the point of the thread (or at least, that's what I understood the thread to be about).

Aconite · Nov 29, 2005

Why assume they wouldn't be published? If what you mean is they wouldn't be published if written the same way, well, of course not. Each book is a product of its time, and each builds on what came before. Many of those books aren't original now because they've been done--by those books, as other posters have pointed out above.

But not published? Assuming those books had never been written and so their approaches were fresh, why not assume that today they'd have been written and edited differently and then published?

Unimportant · Nov 29, 2005

Pamela (or, Virtue Rewarded), by Samuel Richardson.

zornhau · Nov 29, 2005

To bring this back on topic (and away from lit crit), I think that the important point is that it is unwise to blindly emulate the success of the past.

Fiction that rocked in 1950/30/70 whatever, did so because it hit the nail on the head for that time and place.

Flapdoodle · Nov 29, 2005

emeraldcite said:
I think portrait is difficult, but still an excellent book. I don't have a doubt it would get published. It wouldn't be a bestseller, but I think it could make the cut.

A lot of classics weren't best sellers though, were they?

I wonder how many copies of Wuthering Heights sold

The only classic today is Penitentiary Pacific by Jerome-Buchanan

AncientEagle · Nov 29, 2005

Flapdoodle said:
The only classic today is Penitentiary Pacific by Jerome-Buchanan

Well, yes, but it's hardly fair to even discuss a masterpiece like that alongside other, lesser works.

Storyteller5 · Nov 29, 2005

maestrowork said:
I was just watching To Kill a Mockingbird (with Gregory Peck) the other day and wondered if that book would be published today, and would such a movie be made? I am not sure. It's a good story and extremely well written, but would publishers publish it today? Would Hollywood make a movie like that today?

I must disagree. I think it would still be published because it is a good story. It maybe doesn't have the huge context that it had at the time it was published but the themes are still relevant.

I agree about Gone with the Wind.

Linda Adams · Nov 29, 2005

zornhau said:
To bring this back on topic (and away from lit crit), I think that the important point is that it is unwise to blindly emulate the success of the past.

Fiction that rocked in 1950/30/70 whatever, did so because it hit the nail on the head for that time and place.

One of the big things we've had to put a stop to in our critique group is writers who start by citing the example of books from 20 years ago as reasons why they're doing something. We even had one who was writing a book just like his favorite, which was published 20 years ago, and there was another writer who was trying to write a romance novel based on the books she'd read in the 1980's (having not read any current ones). The industry has changed a lot, particularly in the last few years. It has changed so much that 20 years ago I probably couldn't have gotten the book I'm working on published, but today it's possible.

zornhau · Nov 30, 2005

Exactly! As a skint student, I read lots of 2nd had SF. I was well equipped to be the next Lin Carter.

mesh138 · Nov 30, 2005

Anything by Richard Brautigan

Bestsellers That Would Never Get Published Today

blackbird

awaitingthemuse

Garpy

keyboard monkey

MadScientistMatt

Empirical Storm Trooper

Avalon

Linda J. Daly

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

The Scribbler

Flapdoodle

My-Immortal

Mr. Invisible

SusanR

Nicholas S.H.J.M Woodhouse

swooping after you

Garbarian

SusanR

Flapdoodle

emeraldcite

Art is Resistance

My-Immortal

Mr. Invisible

Aconite

Unimportant

doggone

zornhau

Swordsman

Flapdoodle

AncientEagle

Old kid, no need to be gentle.

Storyteller5

Say something...

Linda Adams

Soldier, Storyteller

zornhau

Swordsman

mesh138