Ghost writing...

[SckizoBoy]

Huh... well, I'm currently listening to this the Stephenie Meyer episode of 'the Write Stuff' [http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vkxj4/The_Write_Stuff_Stephanie_Meyer/], a BBC Radio4 literary panel show.

One bit bugged me, regarding Crystal 'by' Jordan aka Katie Price, all whose novels were written by Rebecca Farnworth. It begs the question(s), do celebrities really expect to be taken seriously when they release novels/books that for which the ghostwriting is basically an open secret? And what is the motivation for people to be ghost-writers in such contexts?

Thus: should ghost-writing be permitted at all? Or should all authors always be credited?

 

[Limecake]

It's the same thing with music, should Singer's be credited for songs they never wrote? I mean it's no secret when this happens either.

and the reason Ghost writers do it is because of money, simple. I promise you that book sold many more copy's just because it had a celebrity who 'wrote it'. This is especially important in the book market, since there are just so many books released all the time it's important to stand out.

plus I'd be willing to bet a lot of people who bought this book didn't know it was ghost written.

 

[SomeLameStuff]

I don't see the point of it really. Maybe it makes sense in the old days, where women wern't seen as equal and couldn't publish anything because of it. But this obviously doesn't apply NOW, so I have no idea why they're still going with it.

 

[Giest4life]

As someone who has firsthand experience with this, the practice is going in because two main factors: a) Economics b)Skill. Publishing is an expensive business, yes, digital publishing is far cheaper, but it also has a far smaller market compared to conventional publishing. If a publisher wants to publish something, they want to make sure that they can make a profit out of it. Authors are also, in a sense, brand names now (like J.K. Rowling, Stephanie Myers, Stephen King, and etc.) and they know a well established "brand" is far more marketable and so we have ghost writing.

The second main reason is skill (I'm going to stretch this a bit): not everyone is cut out to write a book. A good idea and an ability with the pen is actually the farthest thing from writing a book, which requires a lot of time and attention. People like Sarah Palin, I imagine, have absolutely no writing skill whatsoever, but she still wants her story heard. And the obvious way to that is to employ a ghost writer. Even if you have writing skill, such as a friend of mine, who is probably the most technically gifted writer I know, you don't always have the time and resources. My friend has a wife, two kids, an ailing father, and a full-time job, needless to say, he just can't find the time to actually write, but still his head is full to the brim, almost bursting with ideas. What does he do? He employs [or should employ, but he's far too proud] a ghost writer.

Ghost writing is not always a bad thing, but it also means people who should never be published, actually see their names on the Bestseller's list.

 

[Fwee]

Ghost writing sometimes provides an opportunity for a talented person to not only get paid to do something they (hopefully) love, but get their work out to a wider audience than would be available to them under their own name.
Personally, I have used the idea of a ghost writer to criticize public personae that I myself dislike. Call them lazy, untalented, fake, whatever. But really that's just me being troll-ish on something. The way I see it, if the Ghost Writer and Ghost Writee (for lack of a better vocabulary at the moment) have an agreement and both parties are happy, it doesn't really matter whose name is on the cover.
I'm reminded of all the Eastern movies that are presented in America that famous directors "present" in the video market. Tarantino is the first to come to mind in this case. He's not usually personally involved with the production of these movies, but adds his personal pull to generate a wider circulation of films he enjoys.

 

[Littaly]

I'm kind of intrigued by ghostwriting, I don't know why, the whole idea is just very interesting (also, it has the word "ghost" in it, which makes it sound exciting).

I guess the ghostwriter is in it for the check, or they just care about that their message and/or craft reach the public, not so much how.

And for the celebrity that hires them, I guess they don't expect people to find out, or at the very least they don't expect their target audience to find out. Or they have actually written the majority of the book themselves and just hired a ghost to sort out the less important parts.

So many questions, and they only lead to more questions!

 

[Rawne1980]

I noticed you mention Katie Price and then asking if "celebrities" expect to be taken seriously.

I'm quite unsure if anyone at all has ever or will ever take Katie Price seriously.

 

[electric_warrior]

It's the same thing with music, should Singer's be credited for songs they never wrote? I mean it's no secret when this happens either.

and the reason Ghost writers do it is because of money, simple. I promise you that book sold many more copy's just because it had a celebrity who 'wrote it'. This is especially important in the book market, since there are just so many books released all the time it's important to stand out.

plus I'd be willing to bet a lot of people who bought this book didn't know it was ghost written.

That's not really comparable. A singer/performer adds their talents to the finished article to make it better, i.e. Elvis' siging made his songs better than they might otherwise have been.

A similar situation would be Milli Vanilli, who didn't write, sing or play any of the instruments on any of their songs. They were regarded as frauds, and so should these celebrities.

 

[Trivun]

I agree with ghost writers as a concept, and think it's a decent career to get into if you don't want the credit for writing. However, if you use a ghost writer, you shouldn't be forced to reveal the writer's identity, but you also shouldn't be allowed to claim credit yourself for writing it. So in the Katie Price example, she should be credited as a businesswoman but not as an author, and the books should all say "Written on behalf of Katie Price, by 'Anonymous'" (assuming the ghost writer doesn't want their name on the book instead), or with the real author's name on there instead. Crediting 'writers' who only use ghosts is nothing more than an insult to the hard working people who do put their time and effort into actually writing these works themselves.

Not to mention, as a writer myself, I would never want to delegate my work to a ghost, and I certainly wouldn't want to be one myself. I'd rather create my own work than write someone else's idea and then see them get the credit for it...

 

[WouldYouKindly]

Legally, there is no problem with it. Creatively, I have massive problems with it. If you are neither intelligent or patient enough to write a book, then don't have someone write a book so you can slap your name on it. It's that simple. When you do that, you're claiming to have a skill that you don't actually have. It's like when a singer lip syncs or pretends to strum an instrument live.

It's why I'll give a modicum of respect to anyone who fully writes their own songs into a coherent whole. I don't really give a shit if Lil Wayne writes his own songs since they make no fucking sense a lot of the time. Which brings me to my last bit of personal preference, never sacrifice content or coherency for the sake of flow.

 

[omega 616]

Huh... well, I'm currently listening to this the Stephenie Meyer episode of 'the Write Stuff' [http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vkxj4/The_Write_Stuff_Stephanie_Meyer/], a BBC Radio4 literary panel show.

One bit bugged me, regarding Crystal 'by' Jordan aka Katie Price, all whose novels were written by Rebecca Farnworth. It begs the question(s), do celebrities really expect to be taken seriously when they release novels/books that for which the ghostwriting is basically an open secret? And what is the motivation for people to be ghost-writers in such contexts?

Thus: should ghost-writing be permitted at all? Or should all authors always be credited?

I assume ghost writers do it 'cos they get big bags of money. Why else would you do work for no credit?

From what I understand (which is very little) starting out as a writer is tough, so times can be pretty hard. Then a rich celeb with no talent's or skills (besides her breasts) wants to write a book and look like she has an IQ score over a rock, they hire a writer to do the boring stuff, give them a juicy bag of money and go there separate ways.

If it is found out to be ghost written the rich celeb has already made her money back and the ghost writer has some popular, well read books out there and has a shot at being the next Stephenie Meyer (the only writer I can think of at the moment AND spell).

 

[xdom125x]

Sure it should be allowed. I look at the person that has a ghostwriter as saying "this is in a similar vein to many of my stories and will most likely appeal to my audience that might overlook this book if they didn't recognise the name of the author. Or this might not have been published without help (from me)". Okay, it can also pretty easily be interpretted as the "author" saying "I have no goddamn talent but want people to think that I do", but I prefer the former.

Also, as somebody else said earlier, a lot of authors' names are practically brand names now, and I'd see it as an author getting somebody else's work into the spotlight using the power behind the author and the skill of the actual writer.

I would seriously prefer it if the actual author was at least credited as a co-author, but if somebody is more concerned with getting their book out to the public (edit: and those big bags of money. I don't know how I forgot those.) than getting credited as the author, who am I to complain?

 

[Craorach]

I don't mind Ghost Writing as long as it has a valid reason and the person claiming most of the credit is both open about it, and contributed reasonably too it. People shouldn't be allowed to hide the fact, or claim.. or behave as if.. they contributed to something more than they actually did.

There should be a preface stating anything from "I did almost nothing and simply gave the author a very rough idea" or "I did extensive work and notes, but do not have time to do the writing myself".

 

[Kinokohatake]

It's the same thing with music, should Singer's be credited for songs they never wrote? I mean it's no secret when this happens either.

and the reason Ghost writers do it is because of money, simple. I promise you that book sold many more copy's just because it had a celebrity who 'wrote it'. This is especially important in the book market, since there are just so many books released all the time it's important to stand out.

plus I'd be willing to bet a lot of people who bought this book didn't know it was ghost written.

I know if I ever wrote a song I wouldn't listen to it if I also had to sing it. And song writers are generally given credit at awards ceremonies but are often not as popular as the singers.

 

[CoreyBlake]

I'm not a fan of ghostwriting, especially because it isn't necessary. Over the past 10 years I've developed an interview process that helps authors of non-fiction work to produce a book without having to possess the necessary writing skills. The work is completely in their own words, just guided and shaped by a professional team. Check out 8 reasons NOT to hire a ghost writer: www.writersoftheroundtable.com