Thread: The formulaic novel.

Right, here’s the formula.

A Rom-com, mystery-thriller... Reason – highest selling genres.

A male MC... Reason - females will accept Male MCs. Males tend not to accept female MCs.

Two female MCs who have scenes together where they talk... Reason – females buy more books.

These scenes must be writtenby a female... Reason - if written by a male they will turn out to be lesbians.

One of the female should be playable by Meryl Streep... Reason –film rights, duh!

It should contain a horse or a dog which show life-saving faithfulness, preferably to the antagonist... Reason – weepie appeal.

The conclusion should show revenge, death and redemption, but not to the same MC. Reason – you’ll never cast the other roles if Ms Streep gets the death scene as well as revenge and redemption.

Fat lady sings. Reason - Elton's busy.

What else?

Mandatory death of the 'can't be disliked by anyone' character; really pull on those emotions!

i can't think of any books that use more than one of those. two at a stretch. what exactly is your point, OP?

Originally Posted by qwertyman

Right, here’s the formula.

A Rom-com, mystery-thriller... Reason – highest selling genres.

A male MC... Reason - females will accept Male MCs. Males tend not to accept female MCs.

Two female MCs who have scenes together where they talk... Reason – females buy more books.

These scenes must be writtenby a female... Reason - if written by a male they will turn out to be lesbians.

One of the female should be playable by Meryl Streep... Reason –film rights, duh!

It should contain a horse or a dog which show life-saving faithfulness, preferably to the antagonist... Reason – weepie appeal.

The conclusion should show revenge, death and redemption, but not to the same MC. Reason – you’ll never cast the other roles if Ms Streep gets the death scene as well as revenge and redemption.

Fat lady sings. Reason - Elton's busy.

What else?

You know what's really funny? The book I'm writing as a response to Twilight contains pretty much every single one of these elements. I had myself a right old chuckle.

Leave room for a sequel. A series will make more money than a book, even if you pull the plot from the series straight out of your ass.

Originally Posted by Chirios

You know what's really funny? The book I'm writing as a response to Twilight contains pretty much every single one of these elements. I had myself a right old chuckle.

Leave room for a sequel. A series will make more money than a book, even if you pull the plot from the series straight out of your ass.

On a serious note: I can't understand how people who do such things (farming a series, for example, purely motivated by money) live with themselves. I consider writing to be much more than just a way to make a quick buck; heck, the creation process as a whole, and I think those who don't must be seriously lacking something inside.

Originally Posted by philistine

... I consider writing to be much more than just a way to make a quick buck...

A quick buck!

Originally Posted by qwertyman

A quick buck!

Hi philistine,

Publishing is a business and writing is a creative process they live off each other.

If a publisher knocked on your garret door and asked you to write a formulaic novel, what would you say?

This is not the same question as an editor reading your script and saying, cut chapter four and make the MC a dwarf. It’s a commission.

Originally Posted by qwertyman

Hi philistine,

Publishing is a business and writing is a creative process they live off each other.

If a publisher knocked on your garret door and asked you to write a formulaic novel, what would you say?

This is not the same question as an editor reading your script and saying, cut chapter four and make the MC a dwarf. It’s a commission.

I'll look over the condescension in that post, and answer your question:

I wouldn't write it. Why would I? I write, paint and draw because I enjoy doing so, and have enjoyed selling the work (to those who it might appeal to), even greater. If I knew there was a market for someone who wanted a, b and c typical cliche nonsense (those box-art photographers come to mind-- yeuch), then I'd pass the opportunity on by.

I realise my opinion is very much different from yours, evidently, and many others, though I was primarily an artist before a writer, and I guess my core principles are as solid as Japanese anti-earthquake technology. Writing or painting something simply because some told me to; well, I wouldn't be able to do it. No heart, no dice.

Condescension…. splutter, splutter!

It was a statement followed by a question followed by a qualification.

Writing or painting something simplybecause some told me to; well, I wouldn't be able to do it. No heart, no dice.

Okay, we obviously see things differently.I take a broader view of a writer’s job.

TAXI!

Originally Posted by philistine

On a serious note: I can't understand how people who do such things (farming a series, for example, purely motivated by money) live with themselves.

Probably the same way that people who spend their days stacking shelves at Walmart live with themselves. There's nothing wrong with working for money and if you write the next Da Vinci Code you won't have to worry about money for the rest of your life.

Originally Posted by movieman

Probably the same way that people who spend their days stacking shelves at Walmart live with themselves. There's nothing wrong with working for money and if you write the next Da Vinci Code you won't have to worry about money for the rest of your life.

That's a terrible example. Stacking shelves at a supermarket, assuming one had that job, would be done with the intention of surviving; to provide a living for oneself, no matter how meagre and ill-catering such a salary could provide. Writing a puddle-deep novel on the other hand, is, despite the opinion of many, still quite difficult, and requires a willingness (assuming it bore the same success as Brown's magnum opus) which is, in accordance with basic survival, completely unnecessary.

Originally Posted by philistine

On a serious note: I can't understand how people who do such things (farming a series, for example, purely motivated by money) live with themselves.

You don't understand how they live with themselves? Seriously? They live with themselves by paying for food with the money that the Farmed Series brings in.

I see Phillistine's point.

And, ironically, it's something you see in books (and movies) time and again.. the author/musician/painter/filmmaker/actor finds himself at the end of a corporate leash, told how to construct his craft, and, when he expresses his desire to produce something new, something spiritual, meaningful, something of significance to him, he's told patronizingly, "Oh, you don't want to do that, dear artist. Trust me. That is rubbish. This is what sells. This is what you were meant to create." and the artist, cliche as it may be, responds by lashing out, by tearing up the formulaic manuscript or smashing the synthesized recording, and expresses triumphantly his newfound self-respect.

And the publisher/agent/corporate fat cat responds by yelling "You'll never work in this town again!"

Originally Posted by qwertyman

If a publisher knocked on your garret door and asked you to write a formulaic novel, what would you say?

Possibly -- if I had the time and the money was right and/or I needed the money. I would be perfectly capable separating the task from my personal writing -- and would look at it as purely a business proposition -- not as some artistic compromise or sell-out. I've written plenty of ad and marketing copy -- I'd consider writing a novel for hire to be something similar. It's writing -- but it's not MY writing.

I'm sure the people who do it regularly aren't hindered by any artistic pretensions. They likely see it as a good way to make money -- probably doing something they enjoy. More power to them.