Why are bad novels bestsellers?

Red Robin · Jun 17, 2007

Geist's 'What is the #1 ingredient of a bestseller' thread got me thinking. Why are some novels, woefully written, bestsellers? I mean, marketing can only take one so far.

I was able to make it through about half of Robert Jordan's Eye of the World before it was forgotten on my shelf. His Conan novels are even worse. They are awful for reasons many of you are already familiar with.

I am halfway done reading a Terry Goodkind short story, and I don't think I can finish it. It was so excreble I wondered if his novels might be better, so I did a little research, and my conclusion is that I should just leave Goodkind ALONE.

These guys sell truckloads of book, and yet they employ cardboard characters, wooden dialogue and cartoonishly evil villains, along with other sins.

Why oh whhhyyyy do they sell?

James D. Macdonald · Jun 17, 2007

Perhaps they have virtues that others see that you don't?

Listen: "His books are crap but they sell by the truckload" is a genre all by itself, and a deucedly difficult one to break into.

scarletpeaches · Jun 17, 2007

My theory is that some novelists start off with a spectacular book that really hits the spot when it comes to what the public want - I'm thinking of A Woman of Substance by Barbara Taylor Bradford. Published in 1979 at the start of the Thatcher era, all about a woman making it in a man's world...

Truth be told, it is very badly written - painful dialogue, flowery description and lots of telling-not-showing. But it was a novel of its time.

And I think BTB has ridden on the back of that phenomenal success for the rest of her career. I've never read worse dialogue than hers and you can tell she was an interior designer; she describes furniture and clothing ad nauseam.

BlueBadger · Jun 17, 2007

Perhaps they have virtues that others see that you don't?

I'm with Uncle. I love Stephen King. Not all of his works, but "Eyes of the Dragon" is the best fantasy novel I've read to date, and I adored "The Shining" and "The Stand." As a result, I've had many "writers" tell me my taste in books is jammed up a certain orifice. I'll leave you to guess which one.

And God help you if you're a Canadian who admits to liking Margaret Atwood.

I likes to reads. Not to say certain authors don't annoy me (McCaffrey, Paolini, Pullman), but I can appreciate each book for what it is, and I can leave others alone with their choices.

Another reason "bad" books sell: Said author, however good or bad, envisioned a manuscript. He/she wrote it down, found an agent, found a publisher and sold it. You can't put your brain on a bookshelf, but many writers who lay claim to brilliance never get past Step One.

jordijoy · Jun 17, 2007

These guys sell truckloads of book, and yet they employ cardboard characters, wooden dialogue and cartoonishly evil villains, along with other sins.

Why oh whhhyyyy do they sell?[/quote]

It just goes to prove there's an audience for everything--just about--

Storyteller5 · Jun 17, 2007

I think sometimes the author's first book is good and people buy the others because of the name brand. A good example, to me, was Total Control, one of Baldacci's poorest novels. It followed up Absolute Power which was a great read and became a Clint Eastwood movie (alright movie but not as good as the book, of course). I have enjoyed most of his novels but that one was lousy and made the bestseller lists.

Dancre · Jun 17, 2007

Red Robin said:
Geist's 'What is the #1 ingredient of a bestseller' thread got me thinking. Why are some novels, woefully written, bestsellers? I mean, marketing can only take one so far.

I was able to make it through about half of Robert Jordan's Eye of the World before it was forgotten on my shelf. His Conan novels are even worse. They are awful for reasons many of you are already familiar with.

I am halfway done reading a Terry Goodkind short story, and I don't think I can finish it. It was so excreble I wondered if his novels might be better, so I did a little research, and my conclusion is that I should just leave Goodkind ALONE.

These guys sell truckloads of book, and yet they employ cardboard characters, wooden dialogue and cartoonishly evil villains, along with other sins.

Why oh whhhyyyy do they sell?

I think it's b/c we see the flaws b/c we know the flaws and we know how to avoid them. The reader who isn't a writer doesn't know the flaws and only knows a good plot. I think this is what happens. Some books on Oprah's book club are flawed, big time, yet readers love them, like the Conan books. As Uncle Jim says, as long as it works. Sometimes I think we get so hung up on the 'rules' we forget we can break those 'rules'. But you have to know them to break them. If you don't know them, how can you break them? The Road by Cormac McCarthy breaks so many rules, yet it's a bestseller b/c it's an interesting story with interesting characters doing unbelievable things. I think that's really the only rule we need to concentrate on, imo.

kim

Claudia Gray · Jun 17, 2007

Uncle Jim and BlueBadger are right, as usual. Even the stuff that's "crap" is a whole lot harder to do than it looks; a Hostess Twinkie isn't a gourmet torte, but it has even more ingredients and is harder to make at home! (And plenty of people prefer Twinkies to tortes, and probably even more want both at different times.)

Michael Dracon · Jun 17, 2007

A contriversial theme can do a lot.

So can selling your books under different names.

And then there is making a movie out of one of them that can increase sales of your other books.

Case and point x3: Dan Brown.

Sandy J · Jun 17, 2007

I think part of our collective problem is that we are writers. Before y'all throw something at me :e2tomato:

, hear me out.

We don't really "read" anymore. We dissect, we critique, we envy, we pity. But we don't read. We know the craft too well.

For example, I have a favorite romance writer that I love so much I actually pre-order her books. I picked up one of her older books the other day at a used book store, and I wanted to scream the whole time I read it. She head hopped so often it made me dizzy. She info-dumped the entire first chapter. These are the cardinal sins that cause romance agents and editors to toss a manuscript. When I looked at the reviews on Amazon, they were all five stars and "I loved it!" Readers are quick to forgive; other writers are not.

southern_cross3 · Jun 17, 2007

I would have to disagree with the specifics of your accusation, as I think Jordan's books are masterpieces of fantasy. However, I would agree that there are a lot of bestsellers that seem to be positively horrible.

I guess it's like the music industry. Some of the best artists enjoy low key careers, if that, while absolute trash like "My Chemical Romance" and the entire hip hop genre rake in millions. It's beyond me why people listen to bad music, just as I can't fathom why they would buy bad books.

And part of it has to do with promotion. I'm not sure of the specifics, but basically if the publishing industry decides that a certain book is supposed to be great, and bookstores place it in the front, readers buy it. Believing that it's supposed to be great, they then read it, and manage to convince themselves that it is great. If they're not so sure, they look around and see everyone else loving it, so then they just go with the flow and praise the book.

RG570 · Jun 17, 2007

I think in most cases writers are just more critical and it's frustrating to see others become millionaires for writing that is no better than your own...but...BUT there are some books that I can't figure out how were published. Even an average reader should pick up on their flaws, yet they sell.

Clive Cussler-- I can't figure out why he's made millions and sold so many books. Anyone with half a brain could see how ridiculous they are, and that his prose is pretty clunky. He may be an expert, but none of that comes off in his books, and I've found several technical errors in them, so it can't be credibility that makes them so popular.

And John Ringo. Christ. Don't get me started.

Oliveman · Jun 17, 2007

Well this is fine puzzle indeed. You've stumbled upon an issue that should not be discarded as "magic" or "trivial". Look into human nature, as writers, and try to find the answer. It may be far more complicated than you ever imagined

Jamesaritchie · Jun 17, 2007

Red Robin said:
Geist's 'What is the #1 ingredient of a bestseller' thread got me thinking. Why are some novels, woefully written, bestsellers? I mean, marketing can only take one so far.

I was able to make it through about half of Robert Jordan's Eye of the World before it was forgotten on my shelf. His Conan novels are even worse. They are awful for reasons many of you are already familiar with.

I am halfway done reading a Terry Goodkind short story, and I don't think I can finish it. It was so excreble I wondered if his novels might be better, so I did a little research, and my conclusion is that I should just leave Goodkind ALONE.

These guys sell truckloads of book, and yet they employ cardboard characters, wooden dialogue and cartoonishly evil villains, along with other sins.

Why oh whhhyyyy do they sell?

What makes you think a novel is bad because you don't like it? Books are bestseller because hundreds of thousands or millions of readers love reading them. As far as I'm concerned, this means something about these novels is very, very good, even if I don't like them.

Button · Jun 17, 2007

I think no matter what books you post here, there will be others out there that will love it.

I don't love certain bestsellers. I love other ones. I love a person's later works and then later on I get tired and stop reading for a while.

There is an author (who shall remain nameless) who wrote books I love growing up. I continued to read them today. The story line is somewhat the same each book, which is fine by me, it works. I picked up a newer book a month ago and just got around to reading it: I'm 20 pages in and it's all 'telling'. I'm in agony over whether to read the rest now or go on to the next book. This author is still a best seller. There are some who love this book so I'll probably pick it up again. Maybe later.

Maybe the 'next book' by this author will be better. Authors have bad books just as much as good books I believe. Not everyone will love everything.

I think it is right as stated above. It will be a matter of opinion, a matter of 'critical' reading rather than 'ignorant' reading. (Ignorant here meaning unknowing of rules of writing, and thus able to enjoy a book without really thinking about it.)

Opinion will vary widely, and you are not always going to agree with the majority. Thank goodness there are plenty of other books out there.

BlueBadger · Jun 17, 2007

I guess it's like the music industry. Some of the best artists enjoy low key careers, if that, while absolute trash like "My Chemical Romance" and the entire hip hop genre rake in millions.

I like My Chemical Romance, or at least the Black Parade. I'm not deaf or 12 years old though you might automatically think otherwise. In fact, my father was a music teacher and was taught by Bob Ezrin. I like the album because (if I'm in the proper mood) the music hits the spot and tells an interesting story--it's a concept album, after all.

And even if my iPod isn't overrun with hip-hop, I can appreciate what's behind a lot of the songs.

So there you go.

Jamesaritchie · Jun 17, 2007

RG570 said:
Clive Cussler-- I can't figure out why he's made millions and sold so many books. Anyone with half a brain could see how ridiculous they are, and that his prose is pretty clunky. He may be an expert, but none of that comes off in his books, and I've found several technical errors in them, so it can't be credibility that makes them so popular.

He's made millions because he writes books people love to read. Simple as that. Maybe anyone with half a brain could see problems with his novels. Fortunately for him, most readers have a complete brain.

The simple truth is that a good novel is one huge numbers of people want to read, and a bad novel is one almost no one wants to read.

rugcat · Jun 17, 2007

Jamesaritchie said:
The simple truth is that a good novel is one huge numbers of people want to read, and a bad novel is one almost no one wants to read.

Oh, come now. Even you don't really believe that the only criteria for judging a novel, or a TV show for that matter, is how popular it is.

scarletpeaches · Jun 17, 2007

If we talk about 'bad' novels being those 'written in incorrect English' then there are so many out there it makes me weep. You wonder how these people managed to get a publishing deal.

How do they become bestsellers? God knows. But it seems a lot of the time readers don't care. Other writers do but readers don't. I even had someone tell me the other day, "DVC is only bad in your opinion. Have you read any of his books?" To which I replied, "And in the opinion of anyone who knows anything about the English language, geography and historical accuracy. And yes, all of them. So I know what I'm talking about."

It really makes me mad to see so many people being published when they're barely acquainted with basic rules of language.

Sean D. Schaffer · Jun 17, 2007

James D. Macdonald said:
Perhaps they have virtues that others see that you don't?

...Snipped.

I agree. Different readers enjoy different books. I will enjoy books that you might not, and you will enjoy books that I might think are total junk. The issue here is not, "Why do bad books sell?" The issue, rather, should be, "Do I personally enjoy this work? If not, why am I personally reading it?"

This is more a subjective question than an objective question. It deals more with individual taste than with whether or not a book is bad.

akiwiguy · Jun 17, 2007

I think it's just the general dumbing down of society to be honest. If you look at the proliferation of crap on television you could ask a similar question.

There was a music forum I used to spend time in, and something that happened all the time was half-joking posts about the length of some posts, meaning anything longer than about two paragraphs. Some of the honest comments were "LOL, I'm too stoned at the moment to wade through that." And a lot of the posts were actually typed in txt-messaging lingo.

It disturbs me a bit to be honest. I mean, it's great here to read intelligent conversation about literature, but if you look out at the general populace I wonder how many people now would get much enjoyment out of some of the all-time great writers... Hemingway, Greene, Steinbeck etc. I think the themes would just lose a lot of readers. Once I think reading was a serious pursuit of a far greater number of people than now.

Though I'm guessing and could be way wrong. Because the number of writers is sky-rocketing. The big annual short-story contests here in NZ are attracting record numbers of entries.

LisaHy · Jun 17, 2007

RG570 said:
Clive Cussler-- I can't figure out why he's made millions and sold so many books. Anyone with half a brain could see how ridiculous they are, and that his prose is pretty clunky. He may be an expert, but none of that comes off in his books, and I've found several technical errors in them, so it can't be credibility that makes them so popular.

I was starting to believe I was the only one. Thank you, RG570! I was also horrified at his characterisation of women.

I read a JD Robb book once. Couldn't stomach reading any more of them. Yet I have two friends who absolutely love the books. Neither of them are writers, but when I explained all the 'writerly' reasons I didn't like the book, they agreed with me but both went on to say, "But I love the characters." They have a similar reaction to Laurell K Hamilton's latest outtings.

Cheers, Lisa.

Shady Lane · Jun 17, 2007

akiwiguy said:
I think it's just the general dumbing down of society to be honest. If you look at the proliferation of crap on television you could ask a similar question.

There was a music forum I used to spend time in, and something that happened all the time was half-joking posts about the length of some posts, meaning anything longer than about two paragraphs. Some of the honest comments were "LOL, I'm too stoned at the moment to wade through that." And a lot of the posts were actually typed in txt-messaging lingo.

It disturbs me a bit to be honest. I mean, it's great here to read intelligent conversation about literature, but if you look out at the general populace I wonder how many people now would get much enjoyment out of some of the all-time great writers... Hemingway, Greene, Steinbeck etc. I think the themes would just lose a lot of readers. Once I think reading was a serious pursuit of a far greater number of people than now.

Though I'm guessing and could be way wrong. Because the number of writers is sky-rocketing. The big annual short-story contests here in NZ are attracting record numbers of entries.

Hmm. I agree, to an extent, but I also get fed-up listening to generalizations like these. You hear a lot of them when discussing YA. Yes, there is a lot of bubblegum dumbed-down chick-lit crap, but fantastic new YA books are coming out every year. Yes, I love The Outsiders, and I love Perks of Being a Wallflower, but I also lve Under the Wolf, Under the Dog, and Looking for Alaska, and Sins of the Fathers--strong, extremely recent YA books that are smart, sharp, and not well-known.

And I can't stand Steinbeck. I think he's the ultimate in reader condescension. I have a Humanitites teacher at my school who can't stomach Steinbeck or Jane Austen.

I guess I'm sick of seeing classics held to some higher plane, like anyone with half a brain for literature has to love them. They still have to captivate audiences, and I think too often they're excused from having to do so because they've been around for so long.

Garpy · Jun 17, 2007

I'm with scarlet peaches on this. There are a lot of badly written, badly plotted books out there that have done well because for whatever (seemingly random) reason, a publisher has decided 'this will be our summer hit'...and put their full weight behind it.

It's naieve to suggest bestsellers are so because they're a more enjoyable read than crappy sellers. Bestsellers are bestsellers because the right publisher has put the right amount of money behind them.

I think the conundrum is this...how/why do publishers find themselves so often backing appallingly bad novels? I know for a fact that there are so many hurdles a manuscript has to jump from slushpile to publication...you'd think they'd root out the bad writing.

I suppose half the answer to this conundrum is that many of these bad books are being produced by established authors...and so a publisher quite rightly knows customers will stick with what they're familiar with, even if it's rubbish.

But...that still leaves unexplained those really awful debut novels from unheard of authors that manage to get out there with a big fat promotion campaign behind them.

Sassee · Jun 17, 2007

It's all about personal opinion. Why do some people like the taste of broccoli and others don't?

Also, why is it okay to break the rules, especially if you know them well? What makes rule-breaking in writing okay? Why doesn't that cause the novel to fail horribly? Because the thing as a whole is still a pretty damned good piece of fiction, that's why. Even if it isn't damned good to one person it will be to another. That's all that matters. There are people out there who absolutely hate to read some of "the greatest authors of all time" and think their works of genius are pure trash.

Writers are the pickiest people ever. We over-analyze things. Everyone else really doesn't care. Honestly.

Why are bad novels bestsellers?

Veni Vidi Scripsi

Your Genial Uncle

Knows notebooks can kill.

In pursuit!!

Say something...

Just have fun.

Urban Fantasy Geek

In a state of denial...

Resident in Question

Knows notebooks can kill.

Lost in the Fog

AW Inmate #90976

It's probably a tumour

my name is hannah

keyboard monkey

Momma Wolf