# What books made you wonder, "How did this get published?"



## Darlene Jones (Nov 1, 2011)

I've had this experience many times. Nora Roberts and Nicolas Sparks come to mind.


----------



## Jorean (Jul 31, 2010)

Any thing by Sparks I will second. I will also have to add the Twilight books. They were just painful.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Sadly, some of the Christian novels I've picked up by accident as Kindle freebies were so badly written I can only assume that they only got published (by a Christian publisher) because they're Christian.

Also, "The Last Queen" by CW Gortner - everyone else seems to love but my God, with poor grammar like "a symbolic symbol" and "I could care less" (additionally, being a modern term in a historical novel!), I really don't understand how this made it passed an editor and into print, much less why readers love it so much.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

_The DaVinci Code. Hannibal. The Twilight Saga._

Bestsellers, all.

Shows what I know.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jan 20, 2010)

A symbolic symbol! That's great. Do you think it might be a symbolic symbol of symbolism?


----------



## EStoops (Oct 24, 2011)

Okay, perhaps a subversion of the question, but I'm baffled at how some of the fantasy authors that pump out nothing but doorstoppers first get into the business. Even being a fan of a few doorstopper series myself, I'm not sure how they convinced someone to take a chance on those things. It's not that the writing is bad, or the story staid (though some that started original have now been parodied/copied into triteness.) It's that there's so much of it.... it's not a quick buck. I'm not sure how the epic writers get a foot in the door these days.

More on theme, I'm not sure how "Ariel" by Steven Boylett got anywhere. It squicks me out, and I'm not quick to squick at all. 

Another thing that baffles me is how series that are fast degrading (Cassandra Clare's Infernal Devices comes to mind) that do not have a LARGE die-hard fanbases and writers with protection from the editor stay in publication. I can understand money, but how does something large, bad, and selling only moderately stay in the game?


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Thalia the Muse said:


> A symbolic symbol! That's great. Do you think it might be a symbolic symbol of symbolism?


That would be even better, wouldn't it?


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

I can't say much here, since the books I most dislike are usually super popular and the reads I adore don't get the attention I would expect. A good read is definitely in the eye of the beholder. I will say the biography on Princess Diana that I'm currently reading has so many typos and formatting errors I'm considering returning it, something I've never done before with an ebook. I'm actually enjoying the book, I just wish the publisher had put more effort into the formatting.


----------



## jabeard (Apr 22, 2011)

EStoops said:


> Okay, perhaps a subversion of the question, but I'm baffled at how some of the fantasy authors that pump out nothing but doorstoppers first get into the business. Even being a fan of a few doorstopper series myself, I'm n


That's because a lot of those authors didn't start with doorstoppers.

To take one popular modern example, George R.R. Martin spent decades doing a variety of shorter materials (indeed, for many years he was primary a short story guy and a screenwriter) before publishing the first Song of Fire and Ice Book.

There are the occasional types that get in immediately, but when you start drilling down you start finding all sorts of writing credits more often than finding someone who basically is a totally publishing newbie getting in with a doorstooper. That being said there are exceptions too, both back in the day when publishing was more permissive and even today in the more tight environment. For example, to the best of my knowledge, Terry Goodkind pretty much managed to get in the game without any significant previous work (but I might be wrong).


----------



## Todd Trumpet (Sep 7, 2011)

Okay, this is the third time I've dipped into this exact same joke well in as many months, but I can't resist:

The tax code.

Todd


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

To get really cynical for a moment, the only books I think this about are ones that are actually good.  Considering all the rubbish out there, it's amazing when something of quality manages to slip through.


----------



## samanthawarren (May 1, 2011)

_Pattern Recognition_ by William Gibson

Absolutely awful. It made its way around my office. I finished 3 pages, but someone was able to get through 20 before giving up. I have no idea how they managed it.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2011)

The Vampire Kisses story, though I'm actually not unsure how those books got published. They are a fun, light (even if mega cheesy corny) read for YA (the _younger _end of YA). It's entirely possible my hold up was that I wasn't the target audience, so the content was too mild for me. Also, I think the author is a famous comedian, so that surely helped.

Mostly, I am good at picking books, so it's rare that I make a mistake in this area. Meaning I don't often pick up the books that WOULD make me wonder "How did this get published."

Truth is, some amazing books never make it and some real crap gets through, but when you look at the books that sell, it's more useful (for writers, not readers, and IMO)to look at why a book sold despite it's flaws.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

Maybe Bridges of Madison County.

Then again, I am always afraid to read these threads, for fear that one of my books will be mentioned.


----------



## Darlene Jones (Nov 1, 2011)

I didn't expect my question to raise such interest. Reading is so personal in terms of individual tastes, but it seems we've all come across books that  have us wondering what the publisher was thinking.


----------



## ciscokid (Oct 10, 2010)

Forrest Gump.  Worst book I ever read.  It's hard to believe someone took that book it made it into such a wonderful movie.  

Anything by Iris Johanson.


----------



## wordsmithjts (Nov 14, 2011)

I often wonder how the Twilight books got published and why they are so popular. I'm also wondering how The Davinci code was published. To me it is a long boring read. Its an interesting story but it was not well written. It needs massive editing.


----------



## samanthawarren (May 1, 2011)

wordsmithjts said:


> I often wonder how the Twilight books got published and why they are so popular.


That one's easy. There are a ton of females out there (both young and old) who have similar personalities to Bella (withdrawn, insecure, clumsy, etc). We all want to hope that there's something better out there. Twilight offers that hope while providing entertainment and escape.


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

Jan Strnad said:


> _The DaVinci Code. Hannibal. The Twilight Saga._
> 
> Bestsellers, all.
> 
> Shows what I know.


Ditto. And add anything by James Patterson. And, on an unrelated note, Doctor Zhivago.


----------



## Derz7sk (May 14, 2011)

Thalia the Muse said:


> A symbolic symbol! That's great. Do you think it might be a symbolic symbol of symbolism?


I have seen these used, sometimes in books about endangered species which are in great danger.


----------



## Jim Krieger (Oct 8, 2011)

you all gave great examples.  The thing that REALLY gets to me is, somewhere, someplace, some agent or his lackey looked at these and said, Wow, we need to publish this!"  How many of you are like me, a first time nobody who has written a good book and can't get an agent.  I have to laugh at the system.  the turds float and the gold sinks.


----------



## WriterCTaylor (Jul 11, 2011)

Jan Strnad said:


> _The DaVinci Code. Hannibal. The Twilight Saga._
> 
> Bestsellers, all.
> 
> Shows what I know.


Yes, but were they best sellers due to the promotional team behind them, because they made it on to some list somewhere or was it just plain luck?


----------



## youngadultfiction (Jul 28, 2011)

I would agree about Twilight, i really tried to read it, but just couldn't stand it! I think i got to about 100 pages before i gave up.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I have to confess I wasn't expecting to like Twilight and its sequels - but I did. I know all the faults, and sparkly vampires make me want to vomit. I don't think that it sends out a good message to teenage girls when their options are animals or dead things, and I didn't think it was particularly well-written. But for some inexplicable reason, I enjoyed reading the books!


----------



## D/W (Dec 29, 2010)

Dara England said:


> I'm actually enjoying the book, I just wish the publisher had put more effort into the formatting.


I'm currently reading Darkest Child: A Novel, which gets excellent reviews. I'm enjoying the way it's written and the story itself, but the ebook formatting is driving me batty! I've had it for several months, so perhaps the problems have been corrected now, but it's almost unreadable with at least _two_ blank lines between paragraphs.


----------



## leigh7911 (Sep 16, 2011)

DebBennett said:


> I have to confess I wasn't expecting to like Twilight and its sequels - but I did. I know all the faults, and sparkly vampires make me want to vomit. I don't think that it sends out a good message to teenage girls when their options are animals or dead things, and I didn't think it was particularly well-written. But for some inexplicable reason, I enjoyed reading the books!


Same here!


----------



## Debra Purdy Kong (Apr 1, 2009)

I agree with a number of authors others have already mentioned here, but going back aways, I shook my head at the writing of a Danielle Steele and a Jackie Collins novels. But they were hugely popular writers, and maybe the average reader doesn't care about great syntax as much as a great, page-turning story filled with romance, sex, or gossip. They got published because they were going to make their publisher a lot of money. Great literature, they weren't; but they sold an awful lot of copies of their books, so who am I to judge?


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

_Twilight_, although I couldn;t finish book one, perhaps it improved. _Wicked _ and its sequels, although I read them all (and have just acquired the last book). I have a love/hate relationship with Maguire's work. (Ducking)

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Danielle Monsch (Aug 21, 2011)

balaspa said:


> Then again, I am always afraid to read these threads, for fear that one of my books will be mentioned.


Ain't that the truth!


----------



## DonnaMarieRogers (Jul 6, 2011)

Danielle Monsch said:


> Ain't that the truth!


LOL...I was just thinking the same thing...I was almost afraid to scroll the replies!


----------



## GerrieFerrisFinger (Jun 1, 2011)

Darlene Jones - Author said:


> I've had this experience many times. Nora Roberts and Nicolas Sparks come to mind.


I second Nora Roberts. Her stories are fine for what she's doing, but the head-hopping drives me f'''''' crazy. How does she get away with POV changes twice in a paragraph?


----------



## William Woodall (Jun 8, 2009)

I've had this experience quite a few times.  But happily, most of the books were so forgettable that I don't even remember the title or the author anymore.  Some of the ones I've picked up have been so bad that I've truly wondered if the publisher was drunk that day when he/she decided to print such worthless pulp.  I realize that a good story is very much in the eye of the reader, so to speak, but I've never understood how books could sell with sloppy writing, poor plot development, trite and overused characterization, and that whole laundry list of amateurish mistakes writers so often make either through laziness or inexperience.  That's theoretically one of the main functions of a publisher- to weed out such things.


----------



## pinkysoll (Nov 20, 2011)

I actually like Nora Roberts books, when I was much younger romance novels were my thing. 

However sometimes you really wonder how some books get published with all the grammatical and spelling errors,
you'd wish people took out the time to get a proof reader or editor to check them out before getting published.

All that being said, I still commend self published authors for the taking the step towards their dreams.


----------



## Skate (Jan 23, 2011)

I think the worst book I ever read was by Catherine Cookson, one she wrote when she was in her nineties and published, I'm sure, simply on the strength of her name. Characters would hold a conversation and then meet another character and repeat the conversation to them verbatim. Never mind that the reader had already heard it all before. It was rather sad that they let her publish it really, because I'd always enjoyed her other books.


----------



## Richard Raley (May 23, 2011)

Peter Orellun's "The Unremembered" comes to mind as the most recent.  Not just that it was published, but that Tor seemed to think it was some hugely amazing epic fantasy novel, promoted it to huge levels, and spent money on a top notch map and cover.  Then it turned out to be a purple-prosed Robert Jordan rip-off and promptly bombed into the discount bin.


----------



## anguabell (Jan 9, 2011)

Cookson, Steele, Collins - thing like this will always find their readers, and if they bring a few moments of enjoyment into people's lives, I don't feel like criticizing them. Nothing wrong with that.
What bothers me are genuinely bad history books with mistakes, typos, misidentified pictures, printed on a horrible paper (and often costing a fortune).
And another type of "how did this get published" books - like when some authors are kind of losing their grip at the end of their life or for some other reason, and those books still get published, completely unedited, rambling, full of repetitions ... Christie's Postern of Fate, some late work of Angela Thirkell... This is just sad. And not how these writers should be remembered.


----------



## Guest (Nov 21, 2011)

In both my recent cases it wasn't because of flaws with the author or story as much as flaws with the publisher.

Jean M. Auel's latest, the Shelters of Stone. I know it was the end of a series and guaranteed to be a best-seller, which is why it was released, but I am surprised the publisher let it go out like that - particularly the four year gap between two chapters with no explanation or section break. I would have expected someone at the publishers to notice this and fix it, even if it meant a slightly longer wait.

Terry Pratchett's Snuff in ebook - did no one at the publishers read this before it came out? The sheer number of typos and misprints in the ebook was astounding, yet the hardback was fine.


----------



## Anne Maven (Apr 18, 2011)

Danielle Steele for sure. Haven't read too many works with predictable plots and multiple deaths in space of a few hundred pages. My tear glands refuse to work around her sad stories.


----------



## Alicia Dean (Jul 11, 2011)

I could NOT agree more. I've never been able to get through one of her books. The head hopping gives me whiplash. And, I'm sorry to say, I don't what all the fuss is about Evanovich. I tried to read the first Stephanie Plum novel, and couldn't get into it. I thought it tried too hard to be amusing. And the part where she talked about what Joe did to her when she was six was quite a turnoff. Sorry. That's probably just me. 



GerrieFerrisFinger said:


> I second Nora Roberts. Her stories are fine for what she's doing, but the head-hopping drives me f'''''' crazy. How does she get away with POV changes twice in a paragraph?


----------



## EStoops (Oct 24, 2011)

Richard Raley said:


> Peter Orellun's "The Unremembered" comes to mind as the most recent. Not just that it was published, but that Tor seemed to think it was some hugely amazing epic fantasy novel, promoted it to huge levels, and spent money on a top notch map and cover. Then it turned out to be a purple-prosed Robert Jordan rip-off and promptly bombed into the discount bin.


Let us not say there is no entertainment value here... the reviews are a riot.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

Oh, "The DaVinci Code."  Sheesh.


----------



## James Conway (Jul 7, 2011)

There are an awful lot of books that fit that bill. In fact I don't finish the majority of the novels I start. On the flip side of the coin are the writers that I've met that are unpublished. I just can't believe that there is so much talent languishing on the vine. That is why I like Indie publishing. The writer remains in controll of his own fate!


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

samanthawarren said:


> That one's easy. There are a ton of females out there (both young and old) who have similar personalities to Bella (withdrawn, insecure, clumsy, etc). We all want to hope that there's something better out there. Twilight offers that hope while providing entertainment and escape.


Being stalked by a really, really old sparkly guy is something better?

Youch!

Bella is also obnoxious and a snot who looks down on everyone around her. She isn't to insecure to despise all the kids who try to make friends with her and sneer at them. But maybe that's what the withdrawn, insecure girls out there really do want.

It would be nice if, instead, they found some novels with something positive in them. Something? Make that anything.

Actually, though, I am pretty sure I know how it got published. Someone at a publishing company cared nothing about quality and everything about sales. Well, they're in business and they judged that one right.

Top on my list of OMG what WERE they thinking? Snooki


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

_The DaVinci Code_ (starting with nonsense in the title should be warning enough), The Doomsday Book (one of the not many books I was tempted to burn, years of research? Yeah, right  )


----------



## Brad Murgen (Oct 17, 2011)

_The Malazan Book of the Fallen_ series by Steven Erikson - makes no sense.

_The Pillars of Creation_ by Terry Goodkind - unbelievably bad.

Anything Piers Anthony has written in the last 15 years, or any collaboration he's ever done. His early stuff is great, but his recent stuff is subpar.

What's sad is that these get published because enough people historically buy their material.


----------



## fixerbook (Dec 20, 2011)

Moonwalking with Einstein. This is a perfect example of why it's all about who you know.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

I rarely wonder why a book got published (some awfully written stuff sells by the million). But I very often wonder why a book didn't get edited properly.


----------



## michaelabayomi (Dec 13, 2011)

DYB said:


> Oh, "The DaVinci Code." Sheesh.


While The DaVinci Code may not be the greatest book ever written (personally I prefer Angels and Demons), I still consider it a very enjoyable read. And apparently, millions do as well. Hence the success.


----------



## Light (Dec 25, 2011)

The Swan Thieves.  As much as I loved The Historian, this one is plodding, boring mess.  I've been trying to finish it for ages.  I will, eventually, but it's rather a chore.


----------



## Guest (Dec 26, 2011)

I'm getting this a lot more often lately and it's beginning to depress me.


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

ciscokid said:


> Anything by Iris Johanson.


I love Iris Johanson. It just goes to show that everyone's tastes and opinions are different, which is why some books are bought by publishers and others aren't. Editors are readers just like us.


----------



## Guest (Dec 26, 2011)

Eat, Pray, Love is absolutely, positively, 85% fiction and bad fiction, at that.

ONLY Oprah would celebrate something that narcissistic, clueless, self-indulgent, and... well... bad.


----------



## kea (Jun 13, 2011)

Barring horrific grammar and/or crazy typos, sometimes a story or it's characters simply give a reader what they need at the time. I've read some books that needed serious editing for redundancy and typos, but came away with a character that stays with me. True, the best authors have impeccable technical skills and can spin a thought-provoking story. Some readers just want to come away with a feeling and are clueless to the technical skills (good or bad) behind the story. Twilight caters to the "nobody" many teen girls and even grown women feel like at times. Meyer sets Bella on path to romance and self discovery that many people envy. That feeling overrides the occasional clunky prose. On the other hand, I have a friend who couldn't get into Muriel Barbery's Elegance of the Hedgehog because she found prose too high falutent. I just loved the story and her character voices!


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

kea said:


> snip... On the other hand, I have a friend who couldn't get into Muriel Barbery's Elegance of the Hedgehog because she found prose too *high falutent*. I just loved the story and her character voices!


I kept reading that as "high flatulent". Very potent description!


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

Honestly, this thread just shows how we all have different tastes in books, even in the same genre.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

The only books that really bother me are ones that are badly edited. There is just no excuse for multiple misspellings and grammatical errors. One or two slipping by is acceptable but a book riddled with them is not.


----------



## onlyminordetails (Nov 29, 2011)

I find this thread to be highly amusing! The only thing I can think of to add is that after Twilight, there was a boom in the YA department surrounding various either vampire or other paranormal creature stories that had a similar theme. Stupid heroine, stalker boy, yada yada yada... Yes, I did like Twilight, and still do to some degree, but the stuff that got churned out to profit off the vampire obsession was awful. And the Twi-fans ate it up! I enjoyed a few of them, but _VERY_ few. If it was a series, it got worse--and if I liked the first book, I hated the second. The vampire trend is still going on, but it's gone down dramatically, thank goodness. I don't think I could take many more repeats.


----------



## kea (Jun 13, 2011)

mashadutoit said:


> I kept reading that as "high flatulent". Very potent description!


LOL! And I made sure to spell it properly so it wouldn't turn out that way!


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

I'm more apt to give some leeway to a new or indie author (who is also probably pretty new) because they haven't had the hand holding and grooming that a lot of the "bigger" authors have had.

That being said...

I didn't see what the fuss over The Davinci Code was.  I was mildly entertained but quickly forgot it.  

Twilight was a joke but I know how it got published.  And that all I have to say about that.

I've only read a couple from James Patterson (None of the Alex Cross novels) and can't see why everyone thought he was great.  

Anything Laurell K Hamilton churns out now is lower than rubbish.  Even many of her hard core fans admit that they all suck but the reason they keep reading is because 1. They started at the beginning or 2. They are hoping they will get better.  Sadly because people keep buying them they will keep publishing them.

Iris Johansen is fine... except her Eve Duncan series... I started reading it because I found it interesting, but about 5 or 6 books in it was the same freaking story over and over and over again and I finally gave up.  Now I avoid all the Eve books like the plague.

I finished Let the Right One In a month or so ago and had to drag myself thru it.  I haven't the slightest idea how anyone thought it was scary, creepy or anything but dull.

Personally I've found that I usually end up not liking the more mainstream books/authors these days.  I've really started looking towards the more unknown authors for my stuff.  Their egos aren't too big yet to think they can write drivel and that it's ok.  They still take pride in their work.


----------



## Keith Houghton (Dec 27, 2011)

The title of this topic made me smile 
When it comes to a lot of Indie work available on Kindle, maybe it should read: "I can see why this didn't get published" !

Keith  

PS: Just kidding, I'm an Indie too!


----------



## EStoops (Oct 24, 2011)

Keith Houghton said:


> The title of this topic made me smile
> When it comes to a lot of Indie work available on Kindle, maybe it should read: "I can see why this didn't get published" !
> 
> Keith
> ...


There's a grain of truth in every joke.


----------



## ValeriGail (Jan 21, 2010)

This thread makes me smile!  

What I hate is walking down the one isle in my small town walmart... which happens to be the only major store available, and the only place to get a new book in town (unless you have a kindle  ) and see that one isle covered in vampires.  please.  Give me a break already!  I wish the fad would move on.  There are so many better books out there that could be stocked on that shelf available to our community, and yet walmart takes up the space with half dressed vampire chicks with blood dripping from their teeth and necks.  Its aggravating.  

Others that have already been mentioned that are on my WT? list... Nora Roberts for sure.  My mother has read every single one.  She passes them to me, and I hand them right back.  LOL.  Danielle Steel too, but she is a good seller.  I have used books in my consignment shop, and she sells.  Seriously.  I'm on the Fence with Amanda Quick... I used to like her for her whit, but now that I'm older I haven't been able to make it through a book.  

I love indie books though and tend to head there with my money.  I find the most interesting reads, and have yet to leave an indie book with regrets.  Ever.


----------



## morriss003 (Feb 20, 2009)

This is a good thread, for it shows how different people view literature.  I hated Gore Vidal and Norman Mailer and I loved Twilight and Harry Potter.  I loved Shelby Foote's Civil War Series and hated Will Durant's History.  I can't stand Nora Roberts suspenses, but I love her romances.  Stephen King is boring, but Heinlein is marvelous.  Johanna Lindsey is either great or terrible.  Can't live without Jayne Ann Krentz, can't stand Judith Krantz.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Jean M. Auel's final book in the Earth's Children series,  The Painted Caves. Dear sweet merciful HEAVENS! Someone should have RIPPED 1/3 of that book out before sitting down to do the rest of the editing. I waited 30 years for the final book and *it was CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Yes, my parents let me read Clan of the Cave Bear at 10 years old.


----------

