The majority is mostly wrong . . . is this true of books?

This is a thread that can explore something relevant to writers and readers and everything related to writers and readers. Thank you for starting it.

Although I don't look at bestsellers now, I will say that I respected them when I first started reading. They can be very entertaining, and they can make a certain kind of person want to write, and this is a good thing.

That's the thing about being a writer: You want other people to write. You want books to be printed. There really is not a bit of competitition, it's all about standing on each other's shoulders and being thankful for the view.

But, in general, bestsellers don't want to beautify the view or take it to higher peaks. Bestsellers don't really add to the scope or depth (or height) of the view. But this isn't the case for some writers. Some writers want to take things further, some want to add something novel and original to the existing body of literature, like a student getting a Ph.D. in mathematics, to some, writing is more of a struggle to make something that hasn't been made before, not just making a variation of an already-told story.

Again, thanks for getting me to think. I really appreciate this thread.

Since I've begun writing, I try to look out for what makes best sellers the way they are. True, there may be factors other than writing. But the majority, in a particular time period, do find the book compelling enough to propel it upward. There has to be something about the author other than an established fan following/base (Nora Roberts, JK Rowling etc). The Twilight series garnering attention on a grand scale must have something different.
The way I see it, many of these books, regardless of writing style, take the reader away from their practical lives very completely. Most books are meant to do that, perhaps not all succeed. Twilight represents angst, danger, love and something no human can reach, Eat Pray and Love chronicles a journey that most will be unable to replicate in their lives with the same passion.
Ofcourse, I'm a newbie. Likely I'm missing something here.

James Everington said:

I'm slightly misquotingf you here, but I don't think Herman's Hermits could ever be put in the 'arty' category!

Click to expand...

I had to remind myself of their music, and yes they were very successful and a notable pop act; not arty at all.

I'm not sure if the UK has something similar to Australia's Rage program. Basically Rage is a long running music video program that does all the latest videos (no matter who the artist is), guest programming of an artist's favourite videos, and during the morning it does the Top 50 countdown. Over the holiday period they do flashback presentations and do the Top 20 songs from various months of a given year in the past. These are a real eye-opener. Some songs you recognise, some you vaguely remember, others you'd swear never existed: and this is in the Top 20, not the Top 100 or the indie or metal charts! The last one I saw was from 1992, the year of Pearl Jam, Soundgarden and Nirvana; none of which were in the countdowns. All 3 changed the face of music, yet their singles were relatively short lived in the Top 20 charts, Nirvana having a #1 for several weeks before dropping down the rankings. We don't think of BILLY RAY CYRUS, BOYZ II MEN, MR. BIG, JOSE CARRERAS & SARAH BRIGHTMAN, or LUTHER VANDROSS & JANET JACKSON. We don't think of the best selling albums as Nirvana's Nevermind outside of the Top 10 albums for the year.

So I see it as influence, popularity and longevity that make something memorable. A lot of fiction is only read once, so it will only ever make the work a footnote to history unless the author endures and is popular.