.
| Hearsay: |
The NYT Magazine takes an (ironically?) in-depth look at the James Patterson publishing meat-grinder—a powerhouse operation that scoops up the literary equivalent of the hooves, lips, and assholes fallen between the slats of fiction’s abattoir kill-floor grating and churns and presses this slurry into the pink goodness of a nitrate filled foot-long street-meat called “the popular thriller”.
No sooner had Patterson established himself in the thriller market than he started moving into new genres. Kirshbaum didn’t initially like the idea; he was worried that Patterson would confuse his thriller fans. Patterson’s first nonthriller, “Miracle on the 17th Green,” published in 1996, did very well. That same year, Patterson wanted to try publishing more than one book despite Little, Brown’s view that he would cannibalize his own audience. In addition to “Miracle on the 17th Green,” Patterson published “Hide and Seek” and “Jack and Jill,” each of which was a best seller. From there, Patterson gradually added more titles each year. Not only did more books mean more sales, they also meant greater visibility, ensuring that Patterson’s name would almost always be at the front of bookstores, with the rest of the new releases. Patterson encountered similar resistance when he introduced the idea of using co-authors, which Little, Brown warned would dilute his brand. Once again, the books were best sellers. “Eventually, I stopped fighting him and went along for the ride,” Kirshbaum says.
Patterson’s vision of a limitless empire forced Little, Brown to reorder its priorities. Publishers have finite resources, and the demands of publishing Patterson were extraordinary even for a blockbuster author. Some Little, Brown editors worried that other books were suffering as a result. “To have one writer really start needing, and even demanding, the lion’s share of energy and attention was difficult,” Sarah Crichton, Little, Brown’s publisher from 1996 to 2001, told me. “There were times when some of us resented that. When Jim felt that resentment, he roared back. And he was too powerful to ignore.”
Crichton says she was continually surprised by the success of Patterson’s books. To her, they lacked the nuance and originality of other blockbuster genre writers like Stephen King or Dean Koontz. “Jim felt his ambitions weren’t being taken seriously enough,” Crichton says. “And in retrospect, he was probably right.”
Dude, you got to know that, no matter what your sales are, what you’re doing is irredeemable when even your publisher says you don’t have “the nuance and originality” of Dean Koontz. Your publisher. The person who invested hours and hours of her life in you. Tsssssss. Ooooooo. Buuuuuurrrrnnnn.
January 2006
December
2005
November
2005
October
2005
September
2005
August
2005
July
2005
June
2005
May
2005
April
2005
March
2005
February
2005
January
2005
December
2004
November
2004
October
2004
September
2004
August
2004
July
2004
June
2004
May
2004
April
2004
March
2004
February
2004
January
2004
December
2003
November
2003
October
2003
September
2003
August
2003
Bookninja © Copyright
The opinions expressed on this site are those of individual participants
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the site owners,
organizers, or other participants.
[powered by WordPress.]
January 25th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
As a test, I just read his MURDER OF KING TUT, billed as a ‘non-fiction’ thriller.
No thrills. Definitely fiction. And an upraised middle finger to any and all fans who would pay $30 for this ill-conceived garbage. Calling it ‘poorly written’ is an insult to poor craftsmen.
It is without a doubt the worst, most contemptible piece of trash I’ve ver come across.
January 25th, 2010 at 4:44 pm
More power to these guys. I’m sure they are writing what they read, and are in their element.
Still, when someone says: “the nuance and originality” of Dean Koontz, that person probably has Alzheimers.