Truth or Fallacy?

Shadow_Ferret · Jul 2, 2006

Last night the family was all together and they were discussing books they read and authors and the conversation turned to how do these popular authors, Nelson DeMille, James Michener, James Patterson come up with their ideas and write these consistently good books?

And of course the answer was, teams. These name authors have teams and they get together a few times each week and story board the novels, just like people do when scripting movies.

That's the only explanation for how these authors can crank out novels that consistently sell.

My sister-in-law and I argued the point that no, these authors actually do write their own material, they are just that good, but basically we were the minority in this discussion.

Which brings me to my question. How accurate are they in their belief that the only way these best-selling authors can stay at the top of the game is by writing by committee?

RG570 · Jul 2, 2006

I think this idea is a bit ridiculous.

If your family were right about this, then the quality of TV shows would be much better than it is.

Joanna_S · Jul 2, 2006

I have a friend who's a very successful romance author. I think she's written 80 books with 25 million sales. She writes every word herself.

Yes, they're just that good. They're writers, they're disciplined, and they've been at it a long time. There may be a 'committee' somewhere out there, but it would be the rare exception, not the norm.

As for TV, yes, the other writers table a script, but the first two drafts still have to be written by a lone writer or a pair of writing partners. It's still a matter of fingers on the keyboard, even in TV. Some shows do extensive tablings, others tend to be light on changes. Depends on the Exec. Producer(s). The show I worked for was in between. Everything was tabled, but some scripts had light changes where others were completely overhauled.

-- Joanna

AncientEagle · Jul 2, 2006

My understanding is that Michener, now deceased, used a number of researchers to gather material for him, but that's hardly the same thing as team writing. I'm confident he wrote the things himself. But his books were so full of detail that helpers to dig up facts would have been mandatory.

I would think that writing books by committee would be a sure way to guarantee inconsistency, not consistency.

bsolah · Jul 2, 2006

It sounds a bit stupid to me. I firmly believe that all writers make up their own ideas, no matter how successful they are. I'm not even sure I'd do it if it were the norm; I'd feel cheated, like it wasn't wholly my work.

Zolah · Jul 2, 2006

Shadow_Ferret said:
Last night the family was all together and they were discussing books they read and authors and the conversation turned to how do these popular authors, Nelson DeMille, James Michener, James Patterson come up with their ideas and write these consistently good books?

And of course the answer was, teams. These name authors have teams and they get together a few times each week and story board the novels, just like people do when scripting movies.

That's the only explanation for how these authors can crank out novels that consistently sell.

My sister-in-law and I argued the point that no, these authors actually do write their own material, they are just that good, but basically we were the minority in this discussion.

Which brings me to my question. How accurate are they in their belief that the only way these best-selling authors can stay at the top of the game is by writing by committee?

You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't as a writer, aren't you? If your books are consistently good and come fairly frequently, you must be a sell-out ghost-written hack, and if your books are uneven in quality or come at large intervals, you're a lazy, complacent git living off past success. Oh, well. Though in the name of fairness I should say that James Patterson is actually a team player and is quite open about it - he comes up with concepts which might then be partially ghost-written, or he might write ideas which have been produced by other members of his team. Hence books which say 'The Such-and-Such Conspiracy' by James Patterson and John Ghostwriter.

two40 · Jul 2, 2006

bsolah said:
I'm not even sure I'd do it if it were the norm; I'd feel cheated, like it wasn't wholly my work.

Have you considered that maybe some of these high volume writers don't care one bit about the art and instead are churning out book after book of the same drivel simply because it sells? It would not surprise me if they did have a committee. Nothing surprises me when it comes to money.

Jamesaritchie · Jul 3, 2006

Shadow_Ferret said:
Last night the family was all together and they were discussing books they read and authors and the conversation turned to how do these popular authors, Nelson DeMille, James Michener, James Patterson come up with their ideas and write these consistently good books?

And of course the answer was, teams. These name authors have teams and they get together a few times each week and story board the novels, just like people do when scripting movies.

That's the only explanation for how these authors can crank out novels that consistently sell.

My sister-in-law and I argued the point that no, these authors actually do write their own material, they are just that good, but basically we were the minority in this discussion.

Which brings me to my question. How accurate are they in their belief that the only way these best-selling authors can stay at the top of the game is by writing by committee?

When was the last time a committee did anyting well?

reph · Jul 3, 2006

Jamesaritchie said:
When was the last time a committee did anyting well?

1776.

Patricia · Jul 3, 2006

Think some have learned how to “inspire” their muse, and others have learned to discipline themselves to BIC.

I’ve found that to inspire my inspiration means to have a pen and note pad with me all the time. On my last trip to Mendocino, I saw a scene while I was driving that inspired a whole love scene. It was awesome! I take weekend retreats whenever I can, and always have the pen and pad. I once created a character from a man that I saw eating in a restaurant. I used a waitress as a model for a waitress character in my current WIP.

I’m sure that none of this is unique, but thought I would share anyway.

Mike Coombes · Jul 3, 2006

It's well known that Patterson is now just a brand. He claims he originates ideas, but others now write them for him.

"Patterson understands that if you want shelf space you need to publish a lot of books; that you need a production system with more than one author; and that you need to mind the brand."

from the Harvard Business School article: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=5188&t=entrepreneurship

He's reduced the process to a factory production line and marketing process. Is this really what it should all be about?

Selcaby · Jul 3, 2006

If books had "making-of" extra material like the stuff they put as extras on DVDs, maybe your family wouldn't get such an odd idea.

If books were as expensive to produce as movies, publishers would never leave the whole creative process up to one potentially unreliable writer.

Jamesaritchie · Jul 3, 2006

1776

reph said:
1776.

And I'm starting to wonder just how good an idea that was.

Jamesaritchie · Jul 3, 2006

books

Selcaby said:
If books were as expensive to produce as movies, publishers would never leave the whole creative process up to one potentially unreliable writer.

No, instead they'd turn books over to the same committees that make all those unbelievably bad movies Hollywood cranks out every year.

johnnysannie · Jul 3, 2006

I would hardly class Michener in the same group as James Patterson. And although - as has been mentioned - Michener sometimes hired others to do research, it's long been my understanding that he did all the writing himself on each of his different novels. Although most are in depth historicals of a place (Hawaii, Texas, Centennial,CO, Chesapeake Bay) each work is quite different with varied characters and storylines.

zornhau · Jul 3, 2006

On the other hand, if you poke around, a lot of pros seem to have beta readers, brainstorming buddies, and pro crit circles.

maestrowork · Jul 3, 2006

They do write their own stuff, but they also have a team working with them -- beta readers, editors, people to bounce off ideas, researchers, etc. Some, like Tom Clancy, do have their "factories" but they are always marketed as such. When Clancy put his name on a book, he wrote it. That's not to say he didn't have help, but writers do have pride in their work, and if someone co-author with them, they always credit them.

bsolah · Jul 3, 2006

zornhau said:
On the other hand, if you poke around, a lot of pros seem to have beta readers, brainstorming buddies, and pro crit circles.

I have beta readers, people I can brainstorm with, and crit groups. That's surely not a thing only for the big guns.

Jamesaritchie · Jul 3, 2006

Art who?

two40 said:
Have you considered that maybe some of these high volume writers don't care one bit about the art and instead are churning out book after book of the same drivel simply because it sells?

Art who? I guess I have more respect for the reading public. Their the folks I'm trying to write for, so I'll let them decide what is and isn't art, what is and isn't drivel.

About 99% of the real drivel I see always has the word "Art" attached in ten foot high letters.

Summonere · Jul 3, 2006

This notion is partly symptomatic of a Failure to Understand that a writer’s job is to Make Things Up. If he wasn’t good at making things up, he’d soon find himself out of a job. The more he does this, the better he gets at it.

But the notion is also partly symptomatic of this: Some authors license their Names so that others may write novels with the Name on the cover. Don Pendleton, for instance, did this. Some of Robert Ludlum’s unfinished works have been ghostwritten and published with his Name on the cover.

Not surprised to see that Patterson has done this, too.

silentpoet · Jul 3, 2006

I was thinking along these same lines though a little different. Stephen King said in On Writing that he just sits down and writes. Well if I just sit down and write, it comes out with crap. I have to have an outline, if nothing else then in my head. My talent is not at the level.

Heinlin(sp) seems to point to something along the lines of committee in Stranger in a Strange Land(I think that was the one).

I think I could benefit from the co-writing experience and being part of a group might even be more beneficial.

MadScientistMatt · Jul 4, 2006

Writers have a lot of different approaches, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. It seems there is no One True Approach here.

Stephen King, for example, just sits down and writes with only some vague notions of where his book is going. And he's added that sometimes these notions are wrong - for example, in Misery, he'd expected his hero to get killed off soon and it to be a short story. Other writers use outlines or storyboards. But they almost always go alone or sometimes with a (credited) partner.

The trouble with writing by comittee is that everyone has their own idea of the characters and plot, and those don't always work together.

cwfgal · Jul 4, 2006

two40 said:
Have you considered that maybe some of these high volume writers don't care one bit about the art and instead are churning out book after book of the same drivel simply because it sells? It would not surprise me if they did have a committee. Nothing surprises me when it comes to money.

I suspect they don't care one bit about your definition of art, or mine, only their own. Who's to say which is better?

The majority expresses their vote in spending dollars. And if the majority think it's art, who am I to argue? I don't have to agree with their opinion but it doesn't make my opinion any more right than theirs.

I doubt there are committees involved. Staffers, yes.

Beth

Storyteller5 · Jul 4, 2006

Let me toss out something I believe about writing that maybe applies to how prolific some writers are (published or not). If you do commit to BIC and write often, creativity does tend to be a little easier. Keeps the writer in that mindset. Besides, if I could write for half the day uninterrupted, yeah, I think I'd be more prolific too.

maestrowork said:
They do write their own stuff, but they also have a team working with them -- beta readers, editors, people to bounce off ideas, researchers, etc.

That explains the long list of acknowledgements at the front of novels!

bsolah said:
I have beta readers, people I can brainstorm with, and crit groups. That's surely not a thing only for the big guns.

Nah, just means that you are in good company with that habit!

Jamesaritchie · Jul 4, 2006

silentpoet said:
I was thinking along these same lines though a little different. Stephen King said in On Writing that he just sits down and writes. Well if I just sit down and write, it comes out with crap. I have to have an outline, if nothing else then in my head. My talent is not at the level.

Heinlin(sp) seems to point to something along the lines of committee in Stranger in a Strange Land(I think that was the one).

I think I could benefit from the co-writing experience and being part of a group might even be more beneficial.

Heinlein was a one draft wonder. No help, no committee, and one draft usually did all the work.

Truth or Fallacy?

Court Jester

Old kid, no need to be gentle.

AW's Resident Commie

Over the hills and far away

Fig of authority

California Dreaming

Guru

Writer of wrongs

Swordsman

Fear the Death Ray

AW's Resident Commie

practical experience, FTW

Empirical Storm Trooper

On the rocks

Say something...