These days, yes, much of children's publishing is chasing money like the rest of the publishing world. But that wasn't always the case and it still isn't the case for all publishers -- Charlesbridge, for example, still feels that celebrity books cheat the reader and they won't publish them. Period. Not can't -- won't. Not unless they had a submission (not an idea, a submission) from a celebrity that showed the person can actually write a good book. They believe that selling poor quality books to ignorant parents CHEATS young people and they won't do it. You see, the buyer of most children's books ISN'T the reader...it's the parent who grabs recognizable names -- celebs, adult writers slumming in the children's department, or media tie-in books. So, yes, some folks feel it doesn't cheat the reader but others feel it does. Neither view is about jealousy but about how we perceive the business.
And I have SPOKEN to editors at some of the celeb happy publishers who say...yes...celebrity books DO make it harder for them to sign the next WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE. You see, there's no guaranteed money for an unknown WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE but there is guaranteed money (or so they hope) in Billy Crystal or Madonna. Unfortunately, there is OFTEN not as much money as the publisher bet on. Celebs are expensive -- very, very expensive and that expense is not always met in sales. A celebrity IS IN FACT consuming funds that could have been spent on real books -- funds at a publisher are finite. If the celeb consumes them, then two things happen (1) some new good authors don't get published that year by that publisher and (2) the publisher throws MORE money at the promotion of the celeb book because they've already put all their eggs in that basket, they can't afford for the basket to rip.
Chasing names has nearly killed publishers before -- ask D.K. Publishing what chasing the first of the new Star Wars books did for their bottom line. It costs massive amounts of money to chase names and if you bet on the wrong name, it can kill your company. But it's the way things are right now.
Ask doctors how they feel about frivolous lawsuits and you'll hear HOURS about it. But they can't do anything about it. It's the way things are right now. Still, we understand that the way things ARE can suck. The way things are in children's book publishing is not good for new writers or writers of new unusual books (since publishers tend to like "more of what's selling, only a little different). If a book about a fuzzy duckling sells great, you can lay money that you'll see at least 6 books about fuzzy ducklings in the next year.
Personally, I'm not JEALOUS of Madonna (well, maybe of her voice -- I can't carry a tune.) I am not JEALOUS of her writing skills (or the skills of the non-children's writer Kabalaist who ghosted the books). I write better, so why would I be jealous? That would be stupid and I am rarely stupid. I am frustrated with the direction the children's writing business is headed because I think books for kids SHOULDN'T be seen as a commondity like peanut butter. I think they are supposed to be FOR children...meant for children, written for children, entertaing, enlightening, exciting FOR CHILDREN. I believe they aren't supposed to be an outlet for a celebrity to make us think she/he's a good parent. I believe they aren't supposed to be bought for the name and discarded because they're unreadable. I guess I -- personally -- believe the way publishers like Charlesbridge believe. I believe children's books are important to our society because I believe children are important -- and that publishers have a calling that many are failing. Those very publishers haven't always failed, but they are today. I believe that's sad.
And I feel that way without a bit of jealousy involved...just frustration and a little sadness. After all, I'm a parent too. In all honesty, I would love to see celebs published the way Fred Gwynne was published -- because they really are good. We would still have celebrity books. We'd have some of Julie Andrews, and we'd have Jamie Lee and we'd have Henry Winkler -- but we wouldn't have Madonna, Katie, or really most of the others. We'd still have some adult writers writing for children. We'd have Coraline and Hoot but we wouldn't have James Patterson's wretched Christmas book.
Personally, I believe that even if publishers bought according to QUALITY no matter who wrote it, they would still sell books. They sold books before Rowling's charming tales made children's publishing a blockbuster world. But there would be fewer good children's writers collecting "I'm sorry, but I couldn't get it past marketing at the acquisitions meeting" notes and fewer parents lamenting that "there aren't any good kids books these days." And we wouldn't see excellent authors like Jane Yolen turning to tiny publishers when her book isn't quite commercial enough.
Of course, my dream isn't going to change the way things are -- I know that, but it doesn't mean I can't dream. That's what writers do.