I’ve been puzzling for the past two days, since the latest plagiarism / ghostwriting scandal hit social media, about why I find the use of ghostwriters to create fiction so disturbing. After all, I’ve been a ghostwriter myself, many times. I’ve written letters, articles, reports, white papers, and many other government and commercal documents that would go out with some one else’s name on them. After one particular Government Budget, I wrote articles that would appear in the same publication for opposing sides: one by a bishop and the other by a financial planner.
I also have friends who are ghostwriters: who take the stories that other people have to tell and craft the words that make them come alive in a reader’s head. Sports people, politicians, victims of crime, mountaineers, ladies of pleasure — all sorts of people have their names on autobiographies or how to books that were written for them.
So why shouldn’t a busy person pay someone else to turn their idea into a novel that they then publish under their own name?
I’ve mulled it over, and I’ve come to a conclusion. It’s a lie and a cheat.
If you’re a pop star, and you want to produce a book about your life or your craft or your favourite recipes, the concepts the book presents are all yours. The book is presenting you. Even if the words are provided by someone else, you are not deceiving the reader. They’re getting what they set out to get — a book that tells your story, or shares your knowledge, or lets them cook the food you like to eat.
When I sell you a fiction book with my name on it, I’m doing something fundamentally different. I am selling you something with a particular voice, a way of building character, a type of descriptive writing, a tone and style that comes from being written by me. My stories are all different, of course, but they carry the same hallmarks. If you buy a Jude Knight story, you expect to read a Jude Knight story — and you will. I write my own books.
I am an author because I write my own books.
The celebrity who has a ghostwriter write their autobiography is not an author and isn’t claiming to be; they’re a celebrity with their name on a book about them. If that book is about their experience as a round-the-world solo yachtsman and they’ve never been on the ocean in their life, then they’re a liar — not because someone else wrote their book, but because they are misrepresenting who they are.
The person who gets other people to write their fiction books for them is claiming to be an author, and that’s a lie. They are misrepresenting who they are.
But wait, you say, maybe they have written some books. One or two or six. That makes them an author, doesn’t it? Not of the rest of the books they claim, that other people have written, it doesn’t. They’re cheating their reader of the repeat experience of the author’s voice, and to me, that breaks a compact between writer and reader, a trust relationship, that should never be broken.
Most people don’t (and can’t) write a book a month.
So here’s the thing. I don’t publish as often as I’d like. I have various ailments. I have a day job. But even in a perfect world, I wouldn’t publish once a month. If I did, I’d be compromising the quality. I write fast, but I still need time to edit, to proofread, to have the occasional conversation with physical, rather than fictional, people.
And very few people can publish once a month. If you see a writer doing so, be suspicious. There may be a good reason. The amazing Grace Burrowes had a huge number of manuscripts before she published the first, so they came out in quick succession. Others save early books of a series to publish quickly. I plan to do this with the first few books in the Children of the Mountain King series so I can publish one a month for six months. And some people do write fast and have no friends. I’m not saying it can’t be done.
Just be careful out there. It’s a jungle, and I’ve just discovered that it’s full of ghosts.
Nora Roberts has a series of posts on the plagiarism/Amazon-gaming scandal. The latest directly addresses her thoughts on people who sell books they’ve written to be published under someone else’s name.
http://fallintothestory.com/whiskey-tango-foxtrot/
But do take the time to go back through the others. Love that woman’s turn of phrase.
Ghost writing should not be confused with plagiarism. Ghost writing is a legitimate profession. I don’t think there is anything wrong with ghost writing at all….
1. some people don’t want their name in the public arena, so want to have the work under another authors name while still having an outlet for their work.
2. It’s not that different from using a pen name for a different genre, so that readers don’t buy your book by mistake – they want to make readers think it’s someone else.
3. It provides employment for authors who are not good at marketing etc but can write really well
I don’t think there is anything wrong with ghostwriting – plagiarism absolutely not the done thing at all and is illegal. But if a reader likes your book I really don’t think they care who wrote it. In fact, most readers don’t remember an authors name anyway.
I quite agree that plagiarism is always wrong. I also agree that ghostwriting is a legitimate profession. I’ve been a ghostwriter, and still do a bit of it in my day job. On the question of ghostwriting fiction, we’ll have to agree to disagree. Your point 2 is the answer to point 1. I use a pen name so that I don’t confuse readers of my fiction or clients of my day job, since writing (commercial writing) is my day job.
And yes, I agree that if readers like your book they don’t care who wrote it. But if they want another book by the same author and someone else wrote it, I think they’re entitled to feel cheated.
I don’t necessarily agree that books produced fast are substandard. I’m a slow writer myself, but when I first started reading romance, and looking back at the publishing record of writers I admired, I saw that writers like Nora Roberts and others often wrote 9 or 10 category romances a year — and it was all through discipline and hard work. Others I know today write fast and their books are good. But there’s a lot of dross on the market as well. The pressure to produce books quickly is insidious, and that’s what leads to cheating.
I’m not saying it can’t be done. I write fast myself, when I am writing. I figure I can do 520,000 words a year, if I could just maintain good health, while still leaving enough time for editing and research. That’s quite a few books. (Except I tend to write long. Sigh.)
I once heard Marie Force speak about her process. She writes all morning, edits all afternoon, and has a team of three people to support her: one does technical stuff, one social media, and one the business side, if I remember correctly.
My crack about ‘no friends’ was unfair, I will admit. I was thinking of Isaac Asimov, who says his wife had to steal and lock away his typewriter to make him stop. He also claimed to seldom rewrite. He wrote fast and his first drafts were near publishable quality. Wow!
I’m not saying fast writers are bad writers. I’m just suggesting readers take a second look.
It’s a lie and a cheat. Say it again.
The business realities that underlie this situation are abusive and ruthless. The priority Amazon gives to frequent release and other factors outside my control is demoralizing.
Yes, very demoralising. We are being penalised for being honest and for being human.
Thank you Jude for your thoughts. It is hard as a reader to wrap my mind around the concept of ghost writing for fiction. If the author cannot write it themselves does that really make them an author? When I first started doing Arcs, I thought it was the greatest thing ever because I was helping the author who I admired. What I did not realize was there were some who were putting out 1-2 books a month and having gazillion reviews and even some that offer to give you the .99 to buy the ebook. Plus it became evident all their books are .99. There are many or at least 10 or so I have seen that do that. I do not like or support them anymore and I feel it is wrong they have “bestsellers” because of that. Being able to write to me is a precious gift that I admire so much from you and all of the true authors. I think you have to put so much of yourself out there when you release a story. Anyway did not mean to get carried away but I do thank you for your perspective which I 100% agree!
Thank you, Lori. They’re buying reviews, too. There are apps around that will test reviews to see if they’re genuine, and these books that come out so regularly seem to be failing the review test. One author tested the reviews of the book that started this latest scandal, and on a scale of A to F, where A is genuine and F is fake, the reviews tested as ‘F’ for reliability compared to the plagiarised author’s book, whose reviews scored as ‘A’.
Apparently an ‘author’ can go to a review mill with a blurb or synopsis, and buy reviews churned out by the hundred and posted by people who get a few cents each to put up a review they didn’t write on a book they never read.
I don’t really object to another writer helping a celeb get their autobiography or recipes in order, but the person who did the grunt work and diplomacy to clean it up and mae the subject look good should get editor or co-writer credit. The celeb is already known for something else. I don’t thin I can respect a celeb who suddenly writes good prose, when their mastery of language is far iffier when live. And really, the co-writer DOES deserve credit. That’s the core anyone who works on the first draft especially should be credited.
I don’t like when fiction authors become a brand, that the writer behind the curtain is some unaccredited other. The first like this I discovered was either Carolyn Keene or VC Andrews. While this is distasteful, I can understand the estate/family’s wish to protect the creator’s ip. (We’ve seen enough instances in the last few years where an ip can be destroyrd) The Holmes body is just emerging from the estate’s control. Inevitably quality and the essence of Nancy Drew starts drifting away from the core. Not because the character grows, but because it’s like a 20th generation photocopy.
(There are some exceptions to the-writer-as-a-brand, of course. Stephen King is the most prolific to me, but even he’s had dry spells and blocks. Barbara Cartland was doing around 22 books a year for at least ten years. They were short and for more formulaic than her early better works- and she was open about how she used dictation and secretaries to record the first drafts. It’s easier for voice input today, and I know of a bunch of skilled fanfic writers like one who uses voice input to post over a thousand words a day over multiple stories)
Talent and technique can do many releases a year, especially if they are poorly edited. So many releases IS a warning flag of not just ghost writing, but poor editing, many books in a trunk or dead author with books in the trunk.
In general, I don’t like ghost writing, mostly because the one who did the hard work (and it is harder work to finish and fix another’s concepts) One friend offered me the chance to ghost write his amazing ideas that he had no skill in writing. I had to be careful as he thought the idea was the hard part. **every writer may roll their eyes NOW** Even aside from knowing I’d be doing 95% of the work for 50% of the benefits, I had trouble explaining that the idea just did not get my writing muse interested. Writing without the muse’s interest is almost impossible- My one NaNo crashed from that.
I have talked to very few if any writers who have a shortage of ideas. A really good ghost writer is good enough to write for themselves, and I think staying as a ghostwriter is a true waste of talent.
Name the co-writer is a good basic principle — a courtesy in non-fiction and an absolute must in fiction. Think Anne McCaffrey, who co-wrote several books with her son. He then went on to write a couple in the same opus by himself. There’s another sf writer too who is quite famous for collaborations with younger writers who then go on to have their own careers. Name isn’t coming to me, though
..
There’s multiple. Actually that seems to be a warning a SF writer is slowing. Marion Zimmer Bradley and her protege Mercedes Lackey are known for it. Zelazny, Asimov, Anthony, and many more. It’s rare when an author doesn’t.
Ah yes. Mercedes Lackey was the one I was thinking of. She seems to enter into a mentor relationship with the younger writers, and she gives them front cover billing. That’s kind of nice, I think.
It’s a pass it forward thing. With the lively convention circuits, there’s opportunity to meet most authors in SF/F. ML is 2nd generation of that subset, but MZB is being forgotten as she peaked 60s-80s. I’ve had dozens by both. Even L Ron Hubbard (aka dianetics) set up a large SStory and to paperback writing competition that started a few.name authors. I wish I had the time to keep up with just the blog of authors i’ve liked. I’m holding at three.
We see some of that in Romance, certainly in the past and still here in New Zealand.