Ghost Writers . . . Why not?

If he can afford to do all that and he doesn't feel like writing, why should he care if more books roll out with his name on them. I didn't read the other thread, but I don't understand why ghost writing is an accepted practice.

Maybe I should check out the other thread before further comment.

There's nothing wrong with it all if you can find somebody willing to do all the work and share the money with you.

Patterson has one of the most valuable assets in publishing - name recognition. His name can sell books that are practically guaranteed to make money.

If you can do that, you can basically write your own ticket.

brokenfingers said:

If you can do that, you can basically write your own ticket.

Click to expand...

Or write your own book. I still don't get it. If I ghost write a book for James Patterson and it sells a bajillion copies, I may make a nice paycheck on James Patterson's name, but I still don't know a) if I'm any good or b) I could sell a book on my own.

It's just a weird way for money to change hands and I don't get it.

(grasshopper) said:

Would you use a ghost writer to help you become famous?

Click to expand...

I don't think it's possible to do so. Any writer good enough to make you famous by ghostwriting your books isn't going to bother ghostwriting for an unknown.

And frankly, writing for a living sounds much nicer to me than spending all day on the beach.

I think putting your name on something you didn't write is dishonest. It breaks an implicit bond of trust that is fundamental to book reading. It dehumanizes and cheapens the author-reader relationship.

Sure, it's a business, everyone gets paid, and maybe most of the audience for these kind of books don't notice, but that doesn't make it right.

MTF

Perks said:

Or write your own book. I still don't get it. If I ghost write a book for James Patterson and it sells a bajillion copies, I may make a nice paycheck on James Patterson's name, but I still don't know a) if I'm any good or b) I could sell a book on my own.

It's just a weird way for money to change hands and I don't get it.

Click to expand...

I was answering it from the perspective of the author doing the hiring. If your name alone makes you money - why bother going through the trials and tribulations of actually writing it?

As for why writers do it for other authors: It's a paycheck. They still have to eat and pay bills while waiting for their own work to be submitted and published.

And some find that doing that helps them hone their skill and pays a helluva lot better than posting on a blog or posting on message boards.

Many people like to write and are quite good at it, but aren't good with ideas and plots etc. Plus they don't feel the need to be "validated". The paycheck is validation enough.

I guess...

brokenfingers said:

I was answering it from the perspective of the author doing the hiring. If your name alone makes you money - why bother going through the trials and tribulations of actually writing it?

Click to expand...

Because:
1.) without the trials and tribulations, you don't get the pleasures, either; and
2.) if you're not writing the thing, you aren't a writer. Your name may be on a book, but you're not a writer, you're a fake.

Aconite said:

Because:
1.) without the trials and tribulations, you don't get the pleasures, either; and
2.) if you're not writing the thing, you aren't a writer. Your name may be on a book, but you're not a writer, you're a fake.

Click to expand...

All I can say is - that's your opinion, but you can believe Patterson is laughing all the way to the bank.

And how do you think he got the name recognition? By writing.

Just because a mechanic is good and eventually gains good name recognition and builds up his business, does that mean he must always work in the garage?

If you're into writing for the pleasure and self-satisfaction - fine and dandy. But don't forget publishing is a business.

brokenfingers said:

Just because a mechanic is good and eventually gains good name recognition and builds up his business, does that mean he must always work in the garage?

Click to expand...

Ack! Brokenfingers, what are you saying? I'd love to get paid for my writing, I really, really would. (I mean really.) But someone intelligent enough to be able to write a book that appeals to enough people to make them rich is probably bright enough to make money at any number of things. I know I am. I want to make money writing, but I write because I enjoy it. It's not a means to a creative end; that I'll get good and proficient and then decide that I've acheived, arrived and I'm all finished.

Perks said:

Ack! Brokenfingers, what are you saying? I'd love to get paid for my writing, I really, really would. (I mean really.) But someone intelligent enough to be able to write a book that appeals to enough people to make them rich is probably bright enough to make money at any number of things. I know I am. I want to make money writing, but I write because I enjoy it. It's not a means to a creative end; that I'll get good and proficient and then decide that I've acheived, arrived and I'm all finished.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, Perks. What I don't understand is why people are saying:

"This is how I feel about it so why doesn't he do it like that?"

Not everybody has the same motivations or desires as you, my friend. There are all kinds of people in this world.

Some get paid just for signing their name to a manuscipt. That's the way it is.

I don't understand the rancor, myself.

Ludlum (both alive and since death), Clancy, many others, too. It actually is a small part of the reason I don't read these writers' books, but only a small part. I don't find it reprehensible so much as humorous. After all, we have many political leaders who use anonymous people to write and think for them. Douglas Adams, in his Dirk Gently series, invented an electric monk, a labor-saving device who would believe things for you so you didn't have to believe them yourself.

caw.

brokenfingers said:

Some get paid just for signing their name to a manuscipt. That's the way it is.

I don't understand the rancor, myself.

Click to expand...

Because I feel he's taking credit for someone else's work, and I look down on people who do that, that's why. I value honesty. You seem to be saying that if it makes money, it's morally okay, and I don't agree with that.

Just because a mechanic is good and eventually gains good name recognition and builds up his business, does that mean he must always work in the garage?

Click to expand...

Not if he doesn't want to. But if he stops working in the garage, he's not a mechanic anymore. Putting his name on the garage and having other people do the work may make him money, and good for him if it does. But if he claims to work on each car himself when he doesn't, he's a liar, and it doesn't matter if the reason he's where he is now is because once upon a time he did the work he claims to do now.

If you're into writing for the pleasure and self-satisfaction - fine and dandy. But don't forget publishing is a business.

Click to expand...

I know very well publishing is a business, thank you. I simply don't believe the ability to make money trumps everything else, like actually doing the work you claim to do. I wouldn't want to stop writing and just have my name on the books, because what makes a writer is writing the books. If you don't enjoy the writing part, why write?

Once again. Your opinion - and it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the realities of the publishing business.

brokenfingers said:

Once again. Your opinion - and it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the realities of the publishing business.

Click to expand...

You said you didn't understand why people were upset about it. I told you why I did. My opinion? Sure.

As for your constant refrain, "Publishing is a business, so whatever makes money is okay"--lots of people in publishing don't agree. Plenty of successful authors think using a ghostwriter is wrong. Your opinion is not universally held in the publishing biz either, friend.

You said you didn't understand why people were upset about it. I told you why I did. My opinion? Sure.

I understand people not liking it. I just don't understand people getting upset about things they have no control over and being judgemental.

As for your constant refrain, "Publishing is a business, so whatever makes money is okay"--lots of people in publishing don't agree. Plenty of successful authors think using a ghostwriter is wrong. Your opinion is not universally held in the publishing biz either, friend.

Hmmm, I don't know where you got that quote from - but I never said that. I merely said publishing is a business. Meaning if you want to play the game, you have to learn the rules and forms of accepted behavior. That's all.

If a person doesn't like the rules - then find another game. It's as simple as that.

I never made any judgement calls on the rightness or wrongness of it. Merely pointed out the reality of it.

Aconite said:

I simply don't believe the ability to make money trumps everything else, like actually doing the work you claim to do.

Click to expand...

An admirable principle, and one that a lot of creative people still follow, fortunately. Charles Schulz never used a 'ghost' cartoonist, even when Parkinson's began to give him trouble. Theodore Geisel (Dr. Seuss) had to become virtually incapacitated before he permitted anyone else to draw the pictures for his last book or two.

But if you've ever worked for a big corporation (and that's really what Patterson is these days), it's not a principle that gets you ahead. We, in this nation, lionize people who make tons of money doing doodleysquat (interesting that you used the word "Trump", isn't it?), and denigrate people who actually do the real work.

People buy Patterson's books because they have the name 'Patterson' in big embossed metallic letters on the cover. He earned that right, I guess, by creating a formula that caught on, at some point. Now he's exploiting it. Caveat emptor.

caw.

brokenfingers said:

I merely said publishing is a business. Meaning if you want to play the game, you have to learn the rules and forms of accepted behavior. That's all.

Click to expand...

No, your implication is that I have to accept that these things are right, not just that I have to accept that they are part of the business. I have every right to judge the rightness or wrongness of aspects of publishing or any other business or endeavor. Dishonesty bothers me, whether I can do anything about it or not. What I don't understand is your belief that if I can't change it, I should think it's okay.

Once again, you're putting words into my mouth. Please don't do that. I say what I mean and mean what I say.


Good luck in all your writing endeavors.

blacbird said:

(interesting that you used the word "Trump", isn't it?)

Click to expand...

"To trump" was used in card playing long before Donald was out of diapers, so it's use is not as meaningful in this context as one might think.

I wonder if the Great Masters hired other people to do their paintings for them but signed their own names? Maybe so. I guess that's just the art business.

(grasshopper) said:

In another thread where it was mentioned that James Patterson used a ghost writer, I noticed that many people said that they want to write their own books in their own style.

My question is: What’s so bad about using a ghost writer?

I mean, This Patterson fellow may be on to something, don’t you think?

He’s probably out there sipping pina coladas on a cruise ship in the Bahamas, or playing 18 holes at Pebble Beach, or maybe getting a nice tan in Waikiki while someone else is slaving away at a keyboard.
I’m honestly having difficulty wondering what’s wrong with this picture.

Note:
I'm editing this post to clarify the question.

Would you use a ghost writer to help you become famous?


Once famous, would you use a ghost writer to free up your life so you could enjoy all that money?

Click to expand...

Yes, a ghost writer can help you become famous. And rich. So if these are your goals, then, by all means, use a ghost writer. But the one thing a ghost writer can't make you is a writer. If you wish to be rich and famous for the hard work and talent of someone else, then ghostwriter yes. If you want to be rich and famous because of your own hard work and talent, then ghostwriter no.

People who use ghostwriters are not themselves writers, and to my way of thinking, in cases like this are really getting rich and famous on the backs of people who are better, more talented, and harder workers than they will ever be.

And I say this as someone who has been a ghostwriter. I would never, however, ghostwrite for someone like Patterson.

Freeing up your life shouldn't be waht it's about. My life is free. I can do what I want, when I want. And what I want is to be a writer. What I want is to say, "I did that." If you don;t want to acually be a writer, then you should find the thing in life you most want to do and go do that. A life freed up to spend money someone else earns for you seems like a useless, wasted life to me.

If you're going into writing to be rich and famous, you've really taken a hard road. I don't know about famous, but there are far, far easier ways of getting rich.

brokenfingers said:

I understand people not liking it. I just don't understand people getting upset about things they have no control over and being judgemental.

Click to expand...

Lack of being judgemental is the worst kind of being judgemental. It means you judge that thing to be perfectly fine.

And it's been my experience that pretty much the only things in life we have no control over are the things we fail to get upset about.

Jamesaritchie said:

Lack of being judgemental is the worst kind of being judgemental. It means you judge that thing to be perfectly fine.

And it's been my experience that pretty much the only things in life we have no control over are the things we fail to get upset about.

Click to expand...

I find it odd that a guy who ghost-writes disagrees with ghost-writing.