Back away from the nonfiction, James Patterson.

Normally I'm content to live and let live where author James Patterson is concerned. Sure, I think he's an unbelievable hack and all that is wrong with the state of American fiction and consumers' current reading habits. But, as he typically writes (or contracts with others to write) thrillers, which are not my cup of tea, I don't tend to think much about him at all. I don't, for example, hate him with the heat of a thousand white-hot suns, the way I hate Thomas Friedman. Thomas Friedman is special for me that way.

But now the man is starting to come out with nonfiction titles, which is where I'm going to have to draw the line. His first title was a "medical thriller" titled Against Medical Advice (co-authored with Hal Friedman), which I glanced at but didn't read. I did note, however, that it was at least superficially a book that could pass for adult reading--more than twenty words on a page, chapters that were sometimes longer than 2 or 3 pages, and at least a half-hearted attempt at putting together a cohesive medical tale. But now? Now he's come out with something called The Murder of King Tut: The Plot to Kill the Child King--A Nonfiction Thriller (it's co-authored by Martin Dugard). I thought, well, I'm interested in Egypt. I thought, I should really keep up with what Patterson is doing, because readers do seem to love him. So I checked it out.

And, much like Jodi Picoult, I find that nobody can illustrate quite how bad James Patterson is better than Patterson himself. I submit, from the second chapter:

"'This is James Patterson calling. Is Michael around? I have a mystery story to tell him.'

As most people would expect, I love a good mystery, and I thought I might have unearthed a real doozy to write about, which was why I had put in a call to my editor at Little, Brown, Michael Pietsch, who is also the publisher.

As I waited for Michael to come on the line--he usually takes my calls, night or day*--I looked around my second-floor office. Am I completely mad? I wondered.

The last thing I needed right now was another writing project. I already had a new Alex Cross novel on the fires, and a Women's Murder Club brewing, and a Maximum Ride to finish. In fact, there were twenty-four manuscripts--none of them yet completed--laid out on the expansive desk surface that occupies most of my office..."

The mystery that Patterson was calling Pietsch about was a book about the life and supposed murder of King Tut, with alternating chapters from 1300s BC, and the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries  when Howard Carter was excavating Tut's tomb. Even a cursory glance at his book indicates something is slightly off. If your third-grader brought this book home, you would look it over and say, "Honey, shouldn't you be reading something harder than this by now? Where are my tax dollars going?" It literally looks like an easy reader for kids just out of picture books.

I should have put in the half hour it would have taken to read the whole thing so I could critique it properly, but I'm now getting to an age where I am too protective of each of my half-hours. Fie on you, Patterson, and your book assembly line.

*I'll bet he takes your calls, since I'm assuming you've made him massively rich and he is, in fact, probably contractually obligated to kiss your ass at all times.

Comments

[Jessica]

I *wondered* how he wrote so many books! It never occured to me that it might have been a team effort. Just goes to show that most things are worse when a committee is involved.

[Bibliomane]

I have to confess, I grabbed the rental copy (because the regular copy has a waiting line, natch) to see if chapter 2 quote was indeed the truth. I should not doubt you. It's astonishing that this is a finished book, as I know any self-respecting editor would get out the red pen and start hacking--or put it in the circular file and get the author to start over. As a good librarian, I remind myself that every book has its reader, but it's so disheartening to think of all the great authors whose books never receive the sort of attention they deserve because publishers are so intent on pushing this dreck on the paying public.

[Citizen Reader]

Jessica,
Well, he started out writing the books himself, but I think the last five years at least have seen most of his books crediting his co-authors. Now, on one hand, that's probably helping a writer who wouldn't make much money on their own stuff piggyback onto a great deal, but I still think overall it hurts all the great published authors whose books don't sell as many copies simply because they don't have the name recognition. In all fairness I did read one of his early books and I can't say I'm much of a fan of his solo efforts either.

Bibliomane,
Please do doubt me! I like being double-checked because if it got someone else out there to gawk at this book in disbelief, I feel like I'm getting somewhere. I too feel terrible for the really good authors--and the authors who try to write good books--who don't get anywhere because the people reading these days are too busy reading books like this. I can't even blame the publishers--it sounds uppity as hell, but I really do blame the readers. I'm not one who thinks everyone should read "literary" fiction, but honestly, reading this sort of thing seems equivalent to an adult watching Hannah Montana and expecting to be taken seriously for their adult tastes.

[Marmota]

I think everyone has their limits, and the bad authors that they will read (for me that's usually Nora Roberts) and the bad authors that they won't touch (Patterson, Danielle Steele, the guy who writes the Spenser books). I don't know why Nora Roberts' formula is comforting to me, but Dan Brown's is just irritating...

[Kathy]

I recently suggested to our dear Robin that she should do a display of Books Ostensibly Written by James Patterson, but Not Really. Should be plenty there to keep that one alive for a long time.

[Brandon]

"Co-authored"? You give Patterson too much credit.

I hate Patterson with the fire of ten thousand suns. Not because he's a hack--and a terrible hack, at that--or because of his brand of fiction. I hate him because we're so oversaturated with him. I can deal with Dan Brown every couple of years, but Patterson every couple of months? Jesus. Seriously, how many books a year does his name appear on? 10? Imagine if Hollywood released 10 Tom Cruise-Mission: Impossible movies annually. Then you'll understand how tired Patterson makes me.

The passage you quoted proves that both Patterson and his publisher are tools. I bet Michael would stop returning Patterson's calls if Patterson said, "Hey, buddy, great idea! In my next book, I'm going to kill off Alex Cross, disband the Women's Murder Club, and cut off Maximum Ride's wings! Whaddya say? Buddy? Hello? Anyone there? Hell-OOOOooo ..."

[Rachael]

Wow, you picked a winner. I can't stand Patterson, but it's sort of on par with how I can't stand Grisham: don't force me to think about him and he can go merrily on his way. But I never thought actual people would try to read one of his books. And especially not one of the obviously horrid books. This is even worse than I could have imagined.

Do you think they just sent it right from his co-author's laptop directly to the printer? I mean, shouldn't an editor have stopped that?

(Btw, if you want a good read on ancient Egypt, pick up the book on her by Thomas Hoving. It's one of the reason's I was a archaeology major. Fascinating read--well I thought so when I was 15...hope it holds up.)

[Citizen Reader]

Marmota,
Oh, I totally agree. It's not that I'm totally opposed to easy or hack or comforting genre reads--in the same way that I love TV shows like Gossip Girl. They should be a guilty pleasure, absolutely (says the girl who consumes torrid Regency romances, Robert Parker, and chic flicks). But they should be just that--guilty. I still don't think we should be happy that all people seem to be reading is Patterson (which, at his rate, would still have them reading 5-10 books a year). It's the equivalent of being excited that someone is eating nothing but cotton candy--"Hey, at least they're eating!"

[Citizen Reader]

Kathy,
That is SO AWESOME. I expect to be told when that display is up so I can come visit it.

Brandon,
Well, we each have our "hatred of a thousand suns" author, and I'm more than happy to let you hate Patterson. I agree with you that it is unbelievable production that is so unseemly--the guy is working on 24 manuscripts, for the love of pete. That just isn't right. He must make all the other hack authors feel like real dopes for only putting out one book or so a year.

I'm guessing his publisher would still take his calls, even if he did cut off Maximum Ride's wings (I shouldn't find that image funny, but I do). Evidently he takes his calls about hack Egyptian mysteries. At this point I'm pretty sure the guy could publish his grocery lists and people would still buy and read them. "Wow, James Patterson buys ketchup too! He is so accessible. And when I saw he was buying tartar sauce, I just had to turn the page to see if he was buying fish sticks too!!"

[Citizen Reader]

Rachael,
Your comment just tickles me to death. "I never thought actual people would try to read one of his books." Tee hee! I'm an actual people.

If you read that conversation with Michael Pietsch, who is both his editor AND his publisher, I think you can probably figure out how many editors are still employed by most big publishing houses. Fewer and fewer all the time, would be my guess. Why spend money editing when people will clearly read any old thing that gets them to turn the page?

I will get the book on Egypt by Hoving, thanks. I used to love reading about Egypt, and it might be fun to delve back into it. (I totally wanted to be an Egyptologist after reading Robin Cook's "Sphinx.") Then I realized there probably weren't a whole lot of job openings for Egyptologists in the Midwest. D'oh!