A post by Marina Sofia at Finding Time to Write (and the discussion that follows the post) has got me to thinking about how books become blockbuster best-sellers, even if they really aren’t very high-quality. Of course, there are several factors that play into this. Sometimes a promotional campaign just happens to strike a chord with readers. Sometimes there aren’t a lot of books by established successful authors coming out in a given month, so a book gets more notice. There are other factors, too. One of them (and this is where the discussion I refer to comes in) is what you might call the “herd instinct.”
One can look at that instinct in two ways really. One is that if a few people buy and “talk up” a book, suddenly everyone’s talking about it. That’s especially true if the few people who start the conversation are very well-respected. In no time at all, the book’s a major best-seller whether or not it’s actually very well-written. I’ll be candid here; publishers and others in that business (many authors too, if truth be told) count on that instinct when they’re trying to sell books. That’s why major reviewers and bloggers are always getting complimentary copies of books and invitations to do reviews. It’s also why extremely successful authors are always getting requests to do book blurbs and recommendations. I don’t have to list examples here of what I mean; you can probably think of lots more than I can.
There’s another way one can look at the “herd instinct” too. It’s often happened that a novel becomes a bestseller, and then publishers and sometimes authors rush to put out very similar novels. The hope is of course that if the first novel has been so successful, other novels like it will be too. We see that in all kinds of fiction really and certainly in crime fiction.
One example of this is the case of Stieg Larsson’s Millennium trilogy. That’s the story of investigative journalist Mikael Blomqvist and his researcher Lisbeth Salander. In the novels that feature them, Blomqvist and Salander uncover corruption, abuse and murder at the highest levels of business and government. And in their personal lives, each (but particularly Salander) has to cope with some awful events. Readers have had a variety of different reactions to these novels. Many have absolutely loved this series; others not so much. But the main point is that the series has sold millions of copies. It’s been the talk of book clubs, blog reviews and films for several years now.
The tremendous success of the Millennium trilogy has arguably made it much easier for Scandinavian crime fiction to be translated and marketed to audiences in other parts of the world. Of course highly talented Scandinavian authors such as Maj Sjöwall and Per Whalöö, Henning Mankell, Peter Høeg and Karin Fossum have been writing since long before the Millennium trilogy came to English-language markets. But since that time, the work of those other authors has enjoyed a re-birth of interest. And authors such as Åke Edwardson, Camilla Grebe and Åsa Träff, and Åsa Larsson have had the opportunity to get their work “out there” in markets that might not have been available to them had it not been for the phenomenal response to the Millennium trilogy.
And that is one of the positive effects of “the herd instinct.” When an author from one place or who writes one kind of book has success, this can open the door for other authors who might otherwise not have the opportunity to get their work noticed.
Another positive effect of this phenomenon is that issues and topics that need to be discussed can be brought out into the open. For instance, the Millennium trilogy addresses issues of the status of women, high-level corruption and other important topics. The more people talk about those serious social problems the more chance they have of being addressed
There are of course negative effects too of “the herd instinct.” One of them is that novels may be published primarily because they’re superficially similar to the blockbuster novel, not because they’re really high quality in and of themselves. Here’s just one example. Thomas Harris’ Red Dragon and later The Silence of the Lambs are compelling portraits of a brilliant but psychopathic killer Dr. Hannibal Lecter. In those novels we learn just a little about how such a person’s mind works and why a person might be a truly psychopathic murderer. Those particular novels are (in my opinion, so feel free to differ with me if you do) well-written and well-executed.
But here’s the problem. Publishers, agents and authors saw the success of those novels and the films based on them. That success arguably opened the door for many, many badly-written, truly gory and gratuitously violent novels featuring serial killers. If you’re a crime fiction fan, you know how many novels there are out there with serial killers in them. Some are good; many are not. If you’re a writer, you know that there can be a lot of pressure to write that kind of novel.
And it’s not just the serial-killer motif that’s arguably been overdone. For example, Ian Rankin and Michael Connelly are very different writers in a lot of ways. They have in common though that their respective protagonists John Rebus and Harry Bosch have a history of going up against authority figures. And both authors’ series have been extremely successful. That “maverick” streak works for both Bosch and Rebus in part because they are otherwise well-developed characters with interesting backstories. In part it works because both Connelly and Rankin are talented authors who create interesting and absorbing stories and have worked hard to build their characters.
The fact is though that because these authors’ creations have been very successful, there’s arguably been a rush to create protagonists who have trouble with authority and have the reputation of being “mavericks.” Some of those characters are well-written and interesting. Others…are not. And there is lots of extremely well-written crime fiction where the protagonist isn’t a maverick who constantly has conflicts with authority figures.
The “herd instinct” can make it very tempting to write in a certain way or to buy one or another author’s work. But that’s not how very good books get written. So in my opinion (don’t be afraid to differ with me if you do), it’s just as important for authors to write good stories regardless of what the latest trend is. It’s also important for readers to be aware of this “herd instinct.” Savvy readers already are.
*NOTE: The title of this post is the title of a Beatles’ song.
It’s always funny to see authors trying to jump on the latest trend, and the process is even more insane now that books can zoom from first draft to e-book in record time. We have to be very careful book shoppers these days, don’t we?
Pat – We certainly do have to be careful, both in our reading and our writing. And you’re right too that it’s doubly an issue now that books can go from a raw document to “for sale” in a very short time. It’s so very important to focus on what makes for a good book, not what everyone is reading. They are not necessarily synonymous.
There is an interesting post and discussion about this topic over at Reading Matters (Kimbofo), Margot, if you don’t mind me providing the link: http://kimbofo.typepad.com/readingmatters/2012/07/jumping-on-the-fifty-shades-bandwagon.html (about The Book That Must Not Be Named). How publishers are cashing in on that particular bandwagon.
It always makes me smile how a certain mindset among publishers is to produce lots of books that are the same as last year’s “unpredicted success” title – I am thinking, eg, of all the grammar books that followed Eats, Shoots and Leaves and all the “Why Don’t Penguins’ Feet Freeze” followups, all of which seemed to be on the remainder shelves a week after Christmas from what I could tell. (As with all these zombie Austen/Lincoln idiocies).
I agree there are some beneficial results of this, eg it gives translated fiction a better chance when Stieg Larsson sells well, & J K Rowling’s success had a hugely beneficial effect on children’s book publishing. (Unfortunately, now seems to have reverted to vampires and angels…..but it did result in plenty of more traditionally, good storytelling type of children’s books, and reprinting of classics, which is all to the good and what children like reading).
Maxine – Thank you for that link. I will definitely check out that conversation. Folks, Reading Matters is a terrific site; do pay a visit.
It is interesting how publishers think putting out books that mimic the success of last year’s big hit will work. In the end, as your examples show, it does not. I have to admit I loved Eats, Shoots and Leaves, but that doesn’t mean anything else copying it would be good. Readers are not stupid; they know what’s good and what’s not.
That said though, you are quite right about Rowling’s opening the door for some other very good books for young people. And that, I think, is a good thing. Of course in my opinion, Rowling should get a Nobel Prize for Literature, but that may be just my opinion. As you say, sometimes some very good novels get readers they wouldn’t have otherwise gotten when one particular book or series is a hit. So maybe the “herd instinct” isn’t all bad. But it does mean one has to be careful about what people say is “the thing to read.”
As soon as I read this post, it reminded me of the 50 Shades of Grey book. I know there is a lot of controversy about it because it’s full of sex but it’s not written well. I guess all writers could write to please the reader with aspects they feel will betray themselves. I write stories I feel proud about.
Clarissa – I love the way you put that. Writers need to write stories that make them proud. Writing a good story is the key to everything else.
I think it’s easier for the herd to follow a current reading trend than it is a writing trend simply because of the length of time it takes to write a full length novel. Well for some of us anyway! There is a natural instinct to herd though and you’ve picked it out brilliantly in the literary world!
Rebecca – Thank you
– That’s awfully kind of you. You’re quite right that it takes much longer to write a book than it does to read one. And that’s another reason it’s so important for writers to write what’s good, not necessarily what’s “the latest thing.” That could very well change.
I think, the flipside of the “herd instinct” is that it robs the writer of originality — of new thought, new idea, and new content. What could be is substituted for what already is. Still, if copycat novels in a copycat genre sell and the publishers and filmmakers are happy, who are we to object? We have a choice: we don’t have to read them.
Post-Rowling, I haven’t been inclined to read a fantasy series, though my daughter swears by the Inheritance trilogy by Christopher Paolini. He’s much too YA for me. I might be more inclined to read the Millennium series by Stieg Larsson, another strong recommendation from her, and the Hunger Games series by Suzanne Collins. In all three cases, the “ayes” far outnumber the “nays”.
While I have my favourite series-authors too, I like to surprise myself by reading non-genre, non-series specific books by non-stereotyped writers, like the ones who gave us “Atlas Shrugged,” “Catch-22,” “Doctor Zhivago,” “Catcher in the Rye,” “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Slaughterhouse-Five,” and “The Picture of Dorian Gray,” to name a few.
Prashant – You make a well-taken point. There is often pressure on authors to create “copycat” books and series. And of course you’ve hit on one simple way for the reader and filmgoer to avoid this “copycat” phenomenon: simply don’t read that kind of book or see that sort of film. In fact if the reader and filmgoer read and view only innovative books and films, there might not be as much “copycat” work.
I don’t read much fantasy myself although I know there are some very good series out there. And you’re right that both the Millennium trilogy and The Hunger Games novels have gotten an awful lot of positive feedback.
Sometimes it’s nice to read a little outside one’s normal genre. It makes for a nice change of pace and allows one to “meet” some interesting new authors and characters. So I don’t blame you at all for stretching yourself that way.
Stieg Larsson’s Millennium trilogy certainly precipitated the “herd instinct” of many publishers and booksellers. How many parodies have been done — including right here — of “The Next Stieg Larsson” phenomenon. It’s actually hilarious, but not so for writers, I’d think.
Or another one I’ve enjoyed “The Queen of Swedish Crime Fiction.” I like one of the authors who is featured this way, but it’s still open to satire.
There are so many books that can stand on their own merit without these characterizations, so it’s too bad that is the standard. And what it means in terms of publishers’ and booksellers’ demands must be awful to writers.
There are so many good books out there that may not be published or if published, not well promoted because they aren’t what the industry wants.
And yet, what does a reader face when entering a bookstore? Stacks and shelves of books on display that one may have no interested in reading. Head for the back shelves is my motto. Same is true in the library. Avoid the best-seller shelves and look elsewhere. However, trying to persuade the library buyers to purchase unusual or global or not highly publicized cooks is difficult. They part what’s on best-seller lists.
Even the New York Times best-seller lists often make me cringe. Where are the good books I ask? Sometimes one or two make it, but not often.
Kathy – There really is a lot of pressure on writers sometimes to create certain kinds of stories and use certain kinds of “formulae” because they’ve been successful. Part of that pressure comes because as you say, bookstores tend to stock books that have sold very well and books from popular authors. So it can be very hard for an author to get his or her work “out there.” For the reader, it can be difficult to find innovative work. As you say, if it’s in the bookstore it isn’t likely to be prominently featured. And it won’t be touted in The New York Times. Of course in these days of the Internet it is possible for a less well known author to get her or his work publicised and for a reader to find something that’s not on the best-seller list. But that takes effort and it can be hard to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff when it comes to what’s good writing and what isn’t. The effort not to “follow the herd” can be well-rewarded though if one finds a terrific new book or series.
I think if Stieg Larson had lived, his books would have far less of an audience. Although had he lived, he may have edited them more carefully and rid them of so much violence and wordiness. Writers today don’t get to write what they want, they write what sells if they want to keep their publishers.
Patti – That’s a sometimes very uncomfortable but very true fact about today’s publishing world. Writers have to keep in mind what’s likely to sell. That doesn’t mean that very good work can’t become a bestseller but it does mean that “What people will buy” really matters.
The herd instinct also explains why readers continue to buy titles by famous authors who have succumbed to publishing pressure by hiring ghost or co-writers and many times to awful result. I have crossed several authors off my list who have done this. I’ve also stopped reading ad copy about books because I’m so tired of “the next whoever” or “another whoever.” I have widened my reading to find for myself new authors who really have it.
Barbara – Oh, well said!! I completely agree! There are far too many authors who started out doing good or even very good work but as you say have succumbed to publishing pressure or who have simply stopped making a sincere effort to write well. And yes, blurbs and ad copy are distracting and seldom informative…
And how much we readers value this and other great blogs where we can find out about books we want to read. As I said, the NY Times bestseller lists doesn’t offer much. Occasionally, a book review might point out a good book, as the NYT did this week with Tana French’s Broken Harbour.
But few mysteries are reviewed except in the NYTBR and even there, mainly well-known authors are included, although one can get suggestions of better books.
So it’s off to independent means to find out about interesting books, including global ones which often don’t get much of a play over here.
Also, small publishers’ websites can offer rich books.
Kathy – You’re right that independent reviews can often be a terrific source for books that may not make it to the NYT best-seller list but are certainly worth reading. And yes, the smaller publishers are often excellent, excellent resources for finding innovative and well-written books.
And this blog, too! Even the quizzes bring up tantalizing series.
Thanks Kathy
– I’m very glad you feel that way.