You probably don't want to read the whole thing (trust me), so I'll just hit the high points for you.
The article is an interview with Nicholas Sparks...and Miley Cyrus. Yes, this is a high point.
Everyone likes an element of surprise, right? Here is the surprise from this article: Nicholas Sparks decided to be the one saying things that make people slap their forehead and go, "What the hell is wrong with this person?" Yeah, you would have thought Miley Cyrus would be the one. Right? Surprises are nice...right?
Some excerpts from the article:
"A Farewell to Arms, by Hemingway. Good stuff. That's what I write," he says, putting it back. "That's what I write."
Um...?
Cormac McCarthy? "Horrible," he says, looking at Blood Meridian. "This is probably the most pulpy, overwrought, melodramatic cowboy vs. Indians story ever written."
Sparks' favorite tale of youth? "I think A Walk to Remember," he says, citing his own novel.
Asked what he likes in his own genre, Sparks replies: "There are no authors in my genre. No one is doing what I do."
Look, here's the deal: I'm sure Nicholas Sparks is great at what he does. Right? And certainly, Cormac McCarthy (especially Blood Meridian - ever read it?) is not for everyone. But to say that Cormac McCarthy is horrible...
I mean, Hemingway thought Faulkner was horrible. Faulkner thought Hemingway was horrible. But look - 80 years later, and we still read their stories. We still study their works in our universities. We still assign their books in our high-schools.
Cormac McCarthy - 80 years from now: We might very well still be reading his books. We might very well still be studying him.
Nicholas Sparks - 80 years from now: Who?
Look, if you write Beach Books (i.e., the kind of books a reader can breeze through in an afternoon while people are swirling around and no one, including the reader, is really paying close attention to anything at all), that's wonderful. We need those escapes, and I applaud you for doing it and for doing it well.
But...if this is what you do, please. For the love of God and all that is good and holy. Keep your yap shut. Keep your opinions inside. You'll come out on the other side smelling much better than this.
Am I wrong, Dear Reader? Please, tell me that I'm missing something.
Tell me that I'm wrong...
[be a pal. follow me…]
*on this website*
*on twitter*
*on facebook*
I keep trying to think of something witty to say. About the time I think I have something I slap my forehead. Ummm, yeah . . . I mean I say dumb things but I know my limits. Wow.
ReplyDeleteOf course, Mark, in fairness: Cormac McCarthy may have won the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize and had a book turned into a movie that won the Academy Award for Best Picture, but I doubt he's ever gotten to hang out with Miley Cyrus. And...accomplishments like that - you know, hanging out with her - have a tendency to go to one's head. I guess Sparks's comments are understandable.
ReplyDeleteJordan, after reading that and putting much thought into my life and writing goals. I've come to this decision. Eff trying to be a good writer and writing entertaining reads. I'm going to tell stories about tween girls and hope to Jesus that I get to hang out with teenage divas. *fingers crossed*
ReplyDelete(Being absolutely serious) I hate to impugn the work of someone like Sparks. It's like I talked about here, the important thing is this: Nicholas Sparks gets people to read. And there's nothing bad that can be said about that.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, however, why take shots at a National Book Award/Pulitzer Prize winner like Cormac McCarthy?
McCarthy is not deriding Sparks for writing Beach Books.
If you're Sparks, just keep your mouth shut and do what you do. Geesh.
Blinded by the bright spotlight of his own success, another mega-seller loses all perspective...
ReplyDeleteCriminy.
Well huh. This is pretty weird. I can understand accidentally saying something that's construed as arrogant or ignorant, but here it sounds like he's going out of his way to be an ass.
ReplyDelete...or maybe he's just brilliant and I hadn't noticed yet? Huh.
I did read the whole article because I thought at first that maybe Sparks was being facetious.
ReplyDeleteGuess not.
Colleen, I think that's a good way to put it.
ReplyDeleteJen...I think you summed it up as well as anyone can. Ha! - "...or maybe he's just brilliant and I hadn't noticed yet? Huh."
Marisa, wouldn't that have been nice? Oh well.
I agree it's poor form for one writer to trash another, but you seem to be saying Sparks has no right to speak his mind. Don't agree with that so much, JM. Mr. Sparks is entitled to say what he wants. Let him suffer the consequences (although I suspect the few upset critics and bloggers will cause a small jump in his sales rather than a decrease).
ReplyDeleteAnd before you write off "silly puff" novelists, think back to the publication of "Pride and Prejudice" and "Wuthering Heights" and how those novels were viewed in their day. Who would've guessed?
Patricia,
ReplyDeleteYou make a fair point with the reaction to "Pride and Preudice" and "Wuthering Heights," but you neglect to mention two things: 1) Those were written by women, in a time when woman novelists were not given much credence at all, and 2) Those novels were polarizing - which is different from being simply brushed aside.
I also agree that he'll see an upshoot in sales, but when someone has sold over 60 million copies of his books, the money gained from anything I say (or anyone else says) is negligible. And certainly, he has every right to speak his mind! I just think it's an odd choice, by someone who is generally agreed to be a "nice, safe, entertaining read," to compare himself to Hemingway, and to take shots at one of the most highly-esteemed living writers. He might not be a fan of what McCarthy does, but a level of respect should be present.
But of course (and always!), we're all entitled to our opinions. Sparks is no exception - I simply question his thought-process and judgement.
Good points about the Austin and Bronte novels, JM, but I doubt anyone of the times would have expected long-lasting popularity, much less classic-status, for these works.
ReplyDeleteI forgot to mention that McCarthy will probably see a tiny surge in sales as well. I, for instance, haven't read "Blood Meridian", and I'd like to see what Sparks was talking about.
This is why I stick to watching "Castle," a TV show about a fictional fiction writer. It's like reading a book without reading a book. I guess you could say that about most TV, but at least this show revolves around authors and books. Right?
ReplyDeleteAnyone who has published a book should be proud of their accomplishment, but not egotistical. I prefer to hear from authors who show great humility in what they've done, not ones who talk about how great they are and how great their writing is.
ReplyDeleteI have read one Nicholas Sparks novel--and in his defense, I don't think it was one of his more popular ones--but it was...well...not good.
In any case, when I hear an author say, "I am so smart! I am so smart! S-M-R-T!" I simply want to say, no, sorry you're not. And then never read their books.
Jordan #2 - As you are the only person I know personally who has commented on this blog (or...probably, who has read this blog at all), I feel it is incumbent upon me to extend apologies to the anonymous world on your behalf. However (in regards to the *other* comment you posted today), you did have some very good ideas. I think the naked picture idea is especially poignant. Not me, though - maybe someone sexier. Like Gabe. Or Will.
ReplyDeleteSuzannah - I think that's interesting what you said. I imagine that for someone who gets a lot of acclaim, it's more difficult to maintain the "great humility" of which you spoke. And yet, many of those writers manage to remain grounded. But it seems as though piles of cash and great monetary success go to someone's head a lot faster than acclaim and awards, which is ironic to say the least.
I read the fluff, but it's not 'literature' by far.. but I guess I can't make fun of Sparks too much as a writer he makes a lot more money at his 'fluff' than I do.
ReplyDeleteIt's like my opinion of Thomas Kinkaide.. the same.. I think his art is overrated and over commercialized just like Spark's fluff, but I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank...
shakes head... but I agree with you.
Amie - I think the flip side of "He makes a lot of money" is, "He gets a lot of people to read." And I think that's an awesome thing, regardless of the kinds of books he writes. But still, I think it's (pretty much) universally agreeable to say he doesn't write the kinds of books McCarthy writes. And he's certainly not Ernest Hemingway!
ReplyDeleteYou are 100% on the mark. I laughed at this post. Nobody does what he does? Is he serious? Thanks for the blog.
ReplyDeleteLooks kind of like Mr. Sparks is going for publicity with the umm... Andy Kauffman approach? lol I do think Cormac McCarthy is pretty awesome since I read The Road a few months ago, but I have to admit I was irritated by the writing style at first because I can't imagine ANY first time / unpublished author getting the exact same book taken on by an agent without being named Cormac McCarthy, you know?
ReplyDeleteWolfgang - Excellent, excellent point. I think of stuff like that often. Usually it's something like: A writer's fourth or fifth novel, at the point where they are no longer being quite as serious with their work, and I read it and say, "Really? If this was their first novel, they would never find an agent and a publisher."
ReplyDeleteOf course, with McCarthy it's not so much a criticism like that - not like we're talking about him "no longer being as serious with his work." But you're absolutely right. I mean...how did they give a writer like him a shot in the first place? It seems like the culture of publishing has changed since he got into the game, where they no longer foster Uniqueness to such a large degree. Too bad.
So I realize this is an old post, but hey, it's new to me. I'm thinking I should follow all your old links to catch up on everything I missed before arriving in Blogville, and I just might take some time to do that this afternoon.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I'm glad you referenced this post yesterday because it was one I needed to read. If I had to list the many fears I have with writing, one of the first that comes to mind is my words lack substance. And clearly, I don't want that to be the case.
I would never call my W.I.P. "great literature." or anything that could be interpreted to mean the same thing. And that's okay, as long as it has substance. My goal as a YA writer is to create engaging stories relatable to teens of diverse backgrounds. By engaging them in a well-crafted and entertaining novel, I aspire to force kids to think, reflect, and view things from multiple prospectives. I want them to connect with my characters emotionally - feel empathy for their situation - and have the passion to respond to literature in a creative, insightful way, And of course, I want them to learn new things and promote literacy in the process.
All that being said, I would never call anything I've written to be this unbelievable literary revelation. This is something I honestly never sat down and thought about, and now I feel I need to. I know my writing will never read the same way as a classic; professors will not be assigning them and I never it being added to a high school reading list. But, I don't want to ever feel like I've created a "silly puff" novel, because although people do, I would be disappointed in myself. Quality is important.
The one thing I can say, as Suzannah pointed out above, is I'm not egotistical - I never have been, and I don't think all the Pulitzer and Newbery Awards could ever change that. It's not who I am. I respect (real) authors, regardless of genre, for the products they've created and stories they've told. So, I'm hoping that even if I end up publishing a "silly puff" novel one day, I won't be one who irritates people with an inflated ego.
Um, wow.
ReplyDeleteSorry, JM, I am finally reading through some of your old posts and stumbled across this one. I, too, read the article "just in case" you may have taken what Sparks said out of context, but nope! He really IS overly-conceited!
I knew there was a reason why I've never read one of his books. Bleh.