I think that James Patterson and his protégés along with Michael Connelly are laughing themselves all the way to the bank. Actually, I think they just chuckle every time they get a notice that their royalty checks have hit. Their latest books are so much alike it’s ridiculous. Connelly attempts to use Patterson’s twisted psychotic outline for his latest book, Scarecrow. Patterson actually mentions Connelly in his book, Swimsuit (“At the time, I was an ex-cop turned mystery writer, but since my last book had gone almost straight from the shipping carton to the remainder racks, I was a third-strike novelist doing the next best thing to writing pulp fiction. I was reporting crime for the L. A. Times, which, on the upside, was hoe the highly successful novelist Michael Connelly got his start”) and appears to model his character on Connelly.
Connelly, on the other hand seems to want to be semi-autobiographical in his book, using a similar character, a soon to be dismissed writer for the L. A. Times who grasps his last assignment and turns it in to a new career, and a two-book deal so that he, too can leave the Times.
Another thread that loosely lashes both stories together is the demise of the newspaper industry as we know it. Technology has taken over. The online Blog and electronic quickly updated version of the paper is usurping the power of the print version, etc.
But getting back to the collusion theory, I sometimes watch the TV series Castle. This series revolves around a waning best selling novelist who has latched on to an opportunity to tag along with a real detective to learn what real police work is like so his next series of books (based in the detective) will be realistic. The connecting tissue here is that in a couple of episodes, Castle has a poker party at his house where he and Patterson, Connelly, Stephen J. Cannell, (all playing themselves) play poker and quickly give each other tips on writing. (Ka ching!!!! Ka ching!!!!)
Now I’m thinking that this new form of best seller production is sort of similar to the junk bond market or pyramid marketing, or predatory lending. Initially there is a great market for it, but once it becomes diluted, the bottom drops out of the market and a lot of folks will be finger pointing at the cause of the demise of reading. People will become bored with this cutesy form of old boy networking. They may actually become insulted by the lack of creativity being used to take their money. They may stop buying books.
Since the publishing industry is stoking this disaster, they will probably blame the gaming industry, the schools, the public and anyone but themselves for causing the death of reading as we know it, because they chose quantity over quality.
This is the type of greed that forces change. Assembly line production of books that are supposed to engage the reader does not work. The market becomes glutted and the consumer becomes sated. Now what? There is no anticipation. Although we sometimes wish our favorite author would write faster, we still want a well thought out, non-formulaic well written book.
Those of us who like a well crafted read may have to find alternative sources and venues. I see a market for self published e-books that can be downloaded to Kindle’s competitors for a price that mostly goes to the writer, a percentage going to the reader device producer. Why not Kindle? Because if it’s ties to Amazon. There has to be a cadre of lesser known writers who are producing well written police procedurals, murder mysteries, law and order books. We just have to support them.
