YA Must-Reads discussion

Hi guys :)

So I'm crafting up a post for my blog A Blonde Librarian about ghostwriters and I just wanted a few opinions.

I recently read a book (Girl Online by Zoe Sugg et al), which although it has never been officially stated - was obviously not all Zoe's work...and it left me in a pickle.

I wanted to review the book on my blog...but who do you praise? Although the ideas may be Zoe's...the process of turning ideas from your head into a readable, coherent book is a tricky one that not everyone can do. Whilst I did thoroughly enjoy the book actually....I decided not to review it as the subject of ghostwriters leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

I was just wondering what your thoughts are. Do you agree with people using ghostwriters, and not disclosing it? Where their name appears on the cover...and not the person who actually wrote the words inside?

Do you think that it should be a law that ghostwriters are disclosed and given proper credit for their work? Or do you not really care?

Do you think it's okay for 'authors' to credit a book as their own, when they didn't write it?

Do you lose respect for people who use ghostriters? Do you feel betrayed/duped?

I'm just curious for other people's opinions on the subject??

Thanks

Lauren

I do think that the ghost writer should be given more credit as they are the ones who wrote most of the book. Sometimes I do lose respect for fiction authors who take all the praise for books which really shouldn't have their name only plastered on the front cover.

Hi, Lauren -

Interesting topic!

I guess my first question is why you're so sure that Zoe Sugg didn't write all of it? (Looks like an interesting book, btw.) I wouldn't write a blog claiming it was partly ghostwritten unless you have very strong evidence (sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen).

If authors were legally compelled to disclose ghostwriters, ghostwriting would probably cease to exist (or authors would simply flout the law). I don't see how anyone - readers, authors, or ghostwriters - would benefit from that.

I don't admire people as authors if they use ghostwriters (e.g., Glenn Beck), but the ultimate goal for me is reading (or writing) a good story, so I wouldn't not read a story if I knew a ghostwriter was involved. I also might consider having a ghostwriter work up an outline of a story (a suggestion by one writing self-help guru), but I'm skeptical about how that would work out. Books that use ghostwriters seem to be inferior stylistically to other books, in my limited sampling of clearly ghostwritten novels.

The frustration for me at the moment is that I have maybe a dozen first-rate novel ideas, and I want to see them developed NOW! I can conceive of hiring a talented "plot person" (if such a thing exists!) to give me some story line input. Then I would pick and choose or perhaps reject the ideas.

I've had very good luck with this approach on my covers. Most of them are all me, but some are collaborations, where the graphic artist's main contribution was the idea. For instance, a cover for a romantic novel - I had a female graphic artist give me suggestions on images and font, which were better than what I'd come up with (imo). I then altered the images and added my own. I plan on giving her partial credit (but then my ego's not too tied up in cover art).

Again - very interesting subject! :)

Naomi wrote: "I do think that the ghost writer should be given more credit as they are the ones who wrote most of the book. Sometimes I do lose respect for fiction authors who take all the praise for books which..."

I agree, I don't mind half as much when someone is open about using a ghostwriter (Katie Price), but when it's kept hush hush that's when the issue becomes shady

Lawrence wrote: "Hi, Lauren -

Interesting topic!

I guess my first question is why you're so sure that Zoe Sugg didn't write all of it? (Looks like an interesting book, btw.) I wouldn't write a blog claiming it ..."

Thanks for the comment Lawrence.

Like I mentioned, it hasn't been officially disclosed that Zoe used a ghostwriter, so I will never come out and just accuse her on my blog...however it is pretty obvious judging from certain clues...and also how on certain bookseller websites it is listed as 'author: Zoe Sugg et al'.

I agree about a good story being good no matter who it was written by. I chose to read the book even knowing that a ghostwriter might've been used - because I really wanted to read the story...and like I said I did enjoy it...I loved it infact. I just struggle when knowing who to praise on the book, when the author is hidden from view. I don't want to praise the person who's name is just on the cover.

I also think that, like you said, it's fine to use a bit of help - hell, everyone needs it! If someone can help you turn your ideas into pages that's great, but I think that such people should be properly credited and thanked for their work and input...not brushed under the rug.

It all comes down to disclosure for me. If someone says they used a ghostwriter (and names them), you can view the book properly, praising one person's ideas, and the other person's writing etc. But when it's all cloak-and-dagger I just lose alot of respect and love for the book in general which is a shame.

Well, I feel similarly (I generally dislike the idea), but again, if you revealed the names of a ghostwriter, they wouldn't - by definition - be ghostwriters, would they? They'd be "co-authors." The problem I see is that if this were legally mandated (which I would never approve of, since I think contracts between individuals can rightfully be made on their own terms) or if authors simply agreed to list all contributors, that authors would then be hesitant to use unnamed contributors. The result would be a sharp reduction in the employment of ghostwriters. I'm guessing the many writers who do assist other writers without credit would not appreciate that. After all, many writers choose to be paid for uncredited work, and I think they have the right to do this. Don't you?

Lawrence wrote: "Well, I feel similarly (I generally dislike the idea), but again, if you revealed the names of a ghostwriter, they wouldn't - by definition - be ghostwriters, would they? They'd be "co-authors." ..."

Yes definitely. Everyone is entitled to do their job, and if a ghostwriter is happy to receive money for writing a book for someone else, and not being credited for the work - then who is anyone else to complain about that. I definitely agree, I think it's a broad area that doesn't get discussed very often

I thought it was very well-done of you to bring this up, Lauren. You've got me thinking about it now... :)