A Book a Year

 

A book a year has ruined a good many authors, I suspect.

I have a friend who, I always believed, could have been a great writer. I would read his early work--short stories and first novel--and see certain passages and think, "He could be one of the greats--truly great." That thought doesn't come often even if you have friends who are really good writers. You read good stories and pieces you enjoy but rarely read fiction with a touch of genius here and there, a voice that takes you to another world--a world that, if sustained, can be created only by a great writer.

But he got a contract--a big contract from a major publisher. We all celebrated and thought, "Now, he'll have a professional editor, and now he'll be a great writer. Maybe not a popular writer. Something better. A real writer, a writer who has the potential to entice readers years, perhaps even decades, into the future." That's what we thought.

His contract stipulated that he write a book  a year. Now, Annie Dillard, a truly great writer, says it takes 5-10 years to write a book. Period.

A book a year. My friend wrote a book a year but never a great book. And his books didn't sell after a while because they become, as you would expect, redundant and trite. You've read one, you've read them all--that sort of thing. The big publishing house dropped his contract. He didn't mind so much since, though not rich, he had made enough and invested well.

I minded in my own way, though I never said so to him. It wasn't my place to do so, as we in the South say.

I've been listening to a book by another author who writes one a year. They sell well because she writes genre work and people read them all, no matter what. The editor should have sent this one back, though, and told her to take another year. The story doesn't really pick up until midway through, and even then, her most important "trick" doesn't work and should have been dropped, which would have entailed rewriting the entire book. Which is what she should have done.

Some authors will never be more than genre writes, don't care, and are happy to be so. The ones who have the potential to be better--both my friend, who did not write genre, and genre authors who could be another Agatha Christie-like author--are the ones who stay on my mind. 

I wonder how many authors who could have been at the very least really good drive down to mediocrity because they get a contract that calls for a book a year?