Entertainment Value

James Patterson is basically an entertainment machine. What he does is produce books merely for entertainments sake and not for literary value. Sure, these things are entertaining but does that make it right?

I guess I have two ideas on the subject. One being that people want entertainment. That's the reason we read, watch movies and television. If something wasn't enjoyable to us, why would we participate in it. So, entertainment is good, but I do feel that there needs to be something of value as well. Big deal that James Patterson doesn't produce great American literature. He's bringing something else to the table that not everyone has to participate in. Not gonna lie, sometimes I like to read cheesy trashy romance novels. They're ridiculous and fun, but do I categorize them as great works? NO WAY. They're just entertainment for entertainments sake.

The other idea is that if that's all people are willing to read what will happen to literature. In a way I feel like the numbers of people who want to read something of substance is diminishing and that James Patterson is contributing to that. He is part of the reason why the American people only go for the things that are purely entertainment instead of something like American Skin or even a classic like Pride and Prejudice. I don't like James Patterson books just because I think the writing is shitty, but that's because I'm looking at it from an authors perspective, not from the entertainment perspective.

So, is it wrong for people to want entertainment only? Or is it okay? He is bringing people into the bookstores and maybe those people who only read his books will stop and see a cover that catches their eye. Read the back or the book jacket and say "Hey, this looks really good, I'm gonna buy it." Or who knows, maybe they just bypass Juno Diaz, Norman Mailer and Toni Morrison and head straight for James Patterson, Stephen King and John Grisham.

Another thing that I'm surprised nobody talked about was the fact that he uses co-authors and pays them handsomely for their work. There's two sides to this as well. He is using his fame and fortune to help out a writer who he thinks has talent and can collaborate with him while offering them a paycheck so high they can quit their day jobs. The downside is, they're helping him to produce his campy trashy crime novels. The co-author of his newest book seems to be okay with that, I don't know if I could be, especially since James Patterson is keeping the rights to the book. That's a shitty deal in my opinion.

Now I'm starting to ramble.

Rachel OUT