James Patterson got it wrong?

Most new writers regard best-selling authors with something close to reverence. They look at reviews of the latest book, and wonder what it must it be like to sell millions of copies of your latest book, and to have mastered your craft to the degree that every new book is guaranteed to be a hit.

Undoubtedly, it must feel pretty good. But let's take another look at a critical few words in that last sentence: "To have mastered your craft to the degree that every book is guaranteed to be a hit..."

Hmmmm. SOME popular writers have gone pretty close to mastering their craft. Others, however, seem to 'lose it' as they continue to produce books. The quality deteriorates, or the books have an 'assembly line' feel to them. The plots become banal. Increasingly, readers feel that the author has 'sold out'.

This is exactly how I felt last night, reading the latest offering by a popular novelist. When I began this article, I wasn't sure whether I'd actually use his name, because I don't believe in doing hatchet jobs on writers. Then I reconsidered. If I were writing a book review, I'd be expressing my opinions, so why not do it here?

So here goes. I am aware that there are lots of things that this author does well, and that he has a huge fan base. If you're one of those fans, you may completely disagree with me.

I'm talking about James Patterson, and specifically his novel CROSS COUNTRY. Several of James Patterson's recent books have been co-written with Michael Ledwidge, and I wasn't keen on those, either... but I wondered if a book written without a co-writer might signal a return to his old form.

Regrettably, no. Here are the reasons that I finally decided, 200 pages into the book, that I wouldn't be finishing it - and I probably wouldn't be reading any more James Patterson novels.

The book featured Alex Cross, the main character who has appeared in a dozen of Patterson's earlier novels. I enjoyed the first two - Kiss the Girls, and Along Came a Spider - but gradually, I began to feel that Patterson's trademark short chapters and fast pacing were short-changing the reader. The latest book, CROSS COUNTRY, seems to be all speed and show, with little substance. However, let's get to specifics. Here's are my main concerns.

1. 
   
   Alex Cross has supposedly taken on a less dangerous role, for the sake of his family, after having his life threatened on many occasions and also risking his family's well-being. He is in a new relationship, and happy. Yet... he changes his mind and once again risks everything.
   
2. 
   
   His motivation for chasing a vicious gang from Africa is that they brutally murdered a woman who been his girlfriend in his college years, as well as her whole family. The gang continues to target families, dismembering their victims with knives and machetes. He decides he can't let it go because it was an old friend (too bad about his family's feelings and what he's put them through in the past.)
   
3. 
   
   Even though his almost-90-year-old grandmother (who has been the chief caregiver for his children for many years) goes to the extent of hiding his passport to keep him home safe, he decides to chase the Main Bad Guy to Africa. This is without any official backup to speak of - in fact, active opposition.
   
4. 
   
   As soon as he reaches Africa he is thrown in prison and beaten, over the course of several days. He has his nose broken, and hears from other prisoners that he is likely to die there. Luckily, after three days he is sprung from prison by the local CIA contact and warned to leave the country (but of course he doesn't).
   
5. 
   
   He goes to a local market immediately after having his broken nose reset by a doctor. Is he concerned about the frightening things that have been happening to him, and the fact that he'll be lucky to survive this trip? No. Here he is, battered, sore, bruised, and with that recently broken nose - most of us would scarcely be able to move - and thinks about how much he is enjoying Africa. The text reads: "My pulse ran high the whole time, but in a good way. Faced with squalor or not, I was finally pumped to be here. Africa! Unbelievable!" and a short time later (after his CIA contact has deserted him and told him that he'll probably end up dead) "So I wandered back inside and bought some fresh fruit - mangoes, guavas and papayas. Delicious! Might as well live it up while I could."
   
6. 
   
   Against all advice, knowing virtually nothing about the country and having no backup, Alex decides to chase his quarry to Sierra Leone. (His plan? To ask questions.) Once there, he is ambushed by the gang. Even though there are several of them holding his arm down ready to chop it off at the elbow, he magically manages to throw them off and escape. (Totally unbelievable.) Does he learn his lesson? Does he admit that he is way out of his depth in this country? Of course not. He decides to keep going... still with no backup and no plan.
   

At this stage, I gave up. I didn't believe in Alex Cross, I didn't believe in his convenient escapes, and I felt that his actions were, in fact, too stupid for words. His supposed concern for his own family was just lip service, and the plot was continually manipulated just to get this hero from one scene to the next.

There are lessons to be learned from this. Don't ever think that once you are published, you can relax - even if your books are on the best-seller list. You always need to think analytically about WHY your characters do things. You need to think about logical human reactions to pain and fear, and have your characters behave accordingly.

(c) Marg McAlister
(c) Marg McAlister and Writing For Success. You may pass this newsletter on to others or reproduce the content that is copyright to Writing4Success provided that the articles are not changed in any way without permission. All copyright details or Writing4Success articles must be reproduced, and the following resource box included.
Illawarra E-Publishing
PO Box A47
Shellharbour, NSW 2529
Australia

And still he will sell for his fans will be blinded by the name.

So very true. But if he bombs a second time and his 'fans were disappointed with Cross Country and are also disappointed with his next one, they may not buy him again. That, I think is what she is talking about here. Some will not buy his next one if they don't like this one.

Keep in mind that Patterson does it differently than most writers. Like syndicated cartoonists, he has a team of employees who write and do research, etc. Major cartoonists employ some that draw, some that write. I knew a man in Indiana who had worked on Dennis the Menace and Marmaduke. At the time he was working on Garfield. Patterson takes a similar approach and by doing so is very prolific, but a reader can't be certain of who did the actual writing of a story.
This really isn't an entirely new approach. Dozens of dfferent writers wrote Nick Carter books, but apparently on their own rather than as a team. Other writers have employed researchers.
That concept doesn't appeal to me so I've never read a book with Patterson's name on it.

I think that enomous success of some writer is result from critic of the readers or lack of critic.

Actually, the concept does appeal to me. I have a couple of projects that I'd LOVE to put a team on some day.


I just don't understand why Patterson is such a big seller. Everything I've seen of his is completely pedestrian.

Hmmm ...sounds like he has become or is simply the editor, piecing together parts of stories written by others. Wouldn't that be more difficult than just writing your own story?

Not the way I see it.
For one thing, somebody could just trade on the name. Buy from writers and put it out under your name. Tom Clancey.

Another is, let's say you have some cool idea for a series of stories in the Civil War or Fifties or something. An overall concept, like a TV series. So you get researchers to compile bibles on the era, focusing in on events and places you're interested in.
At that point, you're still the writer.

Next step, let's say you identify some pretty good young writers, maybe nab them from TV shows, where people are used to working with existing characters and setups, give them plot outlines, beat charts, etc. Creative meetings. They access the research.

So you say "OK, he finally confronts the spy in the confederate capital building, but he grabs the girl and flees with our hero in hot pursuit."

And somebody writes it up. Maybe somebody with a lot more enthusiasm for chase scenes or fights or steamy kisses than you have. And they run it past your reality checkers for the description of the capitol, etc.

You put this together and go over zazzing up the style, etc, just as if it were one of your own drafts. Writers are pretty much editors anyway.

It's done in TV writing all the time.