Worst successful writers and authors

[ivylass]

I would also suggest Jean Auel, of the Earth Children series. Clan of the Cave Bear was pretty good, interesting premise. Valley of the Horses had charm and a love story. Mammoth Hunters started me going, “Say what?” Ayla started turning into Mary Sue in Plains of Passage. I muscled through Shelters of Stone but didn’t bother with Land of Painted Caves. Auel loves to repeat herself and can’t write sex scenes worth crap.

[CalMeacham]

@typoink

I’m surprised at all the mentions of Dan Brown; it’s been a while since I schlepped through The Da Vinci Code but my recollection is that it’s a dumb story decently well-told. It’s dumbed-down and simple, but it struck me as fitting for the type of yarn he was trying to spin. He lost me instead with the eye-rolling plot and the absolute bullshit he tried to pass of as true backstory. I knew I disliked the book ten pages in, but was never tempted to not finish it. I think that counts for something.

If you Google “Dan Brown Writing Style” you’ll find lots of entries. It’s not merely his dumb plots – a lot of people have taken pains to dissect the man’s phrasing and choice of words:

I am still trying to come up with a fully convincing account of just what it was about his very first sentence, indeed the very first word, that told me instantly that I was in for a very bad time stylistically.

The Da Vinci Code may well be the only novel ever written that begins with the word renowned. Here is the paragraph with which the book opens. The scene (says a dateline under the chapter heading, ‘Prologue’) is the Louvre, late at night:
Renowned curator Jacques Saunière staggered through the vaulted archway of the museum’s Grand Gallery. He lunged for the nearest painting he could see, a Caravaggio. Grabbing the gilded frame, the seventy-six-year-old man heaved the masterpiece toward himself until it tore from the wall and Saunière collapsed backward in a heap beneath the canvas.

I think what enabled the first word to tip me off that I was about to spend a number of hours in the company of one of the worst prose stylists in the history of literature was this. Putting curriculum vitae details into complex modifiers on proper names or definite descriptions is what you do in journalistic stories about deaths; you just don’t do it in describing an event in a narrative. So this might be reasonable text for the opening of a newspaper report the next day:
Renowned curator Jacques Saunière died last night in the Louvre at the age of 76.

But Brown packs such details into the first two words of an action sequence — details of not only his protagonist’s profession but also his prestige in the field. It doesn’t work here. It has the ring of utter ineptitude. The details have no relevance, of course, to what is being narrated (Saunière is fleeing an attacker and pulls down the painting to trigger the alarm system and the security gates). We could have deduced that he would be fairly well known in the museum trade from the fact that he was curating at the Louvre.

The writing goes on in similar vein, committing style and word choice blunders in almost every paragraph (sometimes every line). Look at the phrase “the seventy-six-year-old man”. It’s a complete let-down: we knew he was a man — the anaphoric pronoun “he” had just been used to refer to him. (This is perhaps where “curator” could have been slipped in for the first time, without “renowned”, if the passage were rewritten.) Look at “heaved the masterpiece toward himself until it tore from the wall and Saunière collapsed backward in a heap beneath the canvas.” We don’t need to know it’s a masterpiece (it’s a Caravaggio hanging in the Louvre, that should be enough in the way of credentials, for heaven’s sake). Surely “toward him” feels better than “toward himself” (though I guess both are grammatical here). Surely “tore from the wall” should be “tore away from the wall”. Surely a single man can’t fall into a heap (there’s only him, that’s not a heap). And why repeat the name “Saunière” here instead of the pronoun “he”? Who else is around? (Caravaggio hasn’t been mentioned; “a Caravaggio” uses the name as an attributive modifier with conventionally elided head noun “painting”. That isn’t a mention of the man.)

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000844.html
–or–

Renowned author Dan Brown woke up in his luxurious four-poster bed in his expensive $10 million house – and immediately he felt angry. Most people would have thought that the 48-year-old man had no reason to be angry. After all, the famous writer had a new book coming out. But that was the problem. A new book meant an inevitable attack on the rich novelist by the wealthy wordsmith’s fiercest foes. The critics.
Renowned author Dan Brown hated the critics. Ever since he had become one of the world’s top renowned authors they had made fun of him. They had mocked bestselling book The Da Vinci Code, successful novel Digital Fortress, popular tome Deception Point, money-spinning volume Angels & Demons and chart-topping work of narrative fiction The Lost Symbol.
The critics said his writing was clumsy, ungrammatical, repetitive and repetitive. They said it was full of unnecessary tautology. They said his prose was mired in a sea of mixed metaphors. For some reason they found something funny in sentences such as “His eyes went white, like a shark about to attack.” They even say my books are packed with banal and superfluous description, thought the 5ft 9in man. He particularly hated it when they said his imagery was nonsensical. It made his insect eyes flash like a rocket.

Don’t make fun of renowned Dan Brown

[BrainGlutton]

@Battle_Pope

The very quintessece of excretion!

I do love Smith, his purple prose is part of what makes reading his stuff fun - that and the fact he apparently never heard of the term ‘overkill’.

Duane Elms:

And there were blinding flashes everywhere and deafening reports,
Coruscating energies and glib macho retorts.
Planets smashing planets and an antimatter sphere,
With Lensmen on the warpath, bad guys tend to disappear.

[BrainGlutton]

@TonySinclair

From Second Stage Lensman:

ETA: Absolutely no truth to the rumor that she did her waiting in the Lakers’ locker room.

Shouldn’t this have gone in post #85?

[Infovore]

I’m not sure if he counts as “successful” in a commercial sense, but given that his work has survived to this day I’d say he’s successful in that respect: H. P. Lovecraft.

Adore his world, the whole Cthulhu Mythos, “things man was not meant to know” world full of squamous, gibbous, eldritch abominations sleeping under the sea…

…but man, the guy’s prose was turgid! I tried to wade though it once and gave up, switching to different authors writing in the Mythos.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Infovore

I’m not sure if he counts as “successful” in a commercial sense, but given that his work has survived to this day I’d say he’s successful in that respect: H. P. Lovecraft.

Adore his world, the whole Cthulhu Mythos, “things man was not meant to know” world full of squamous, gibbous, eldritch abominations sleeping under the sea…

…but man, the guy’s prose was turgid! I tried to wade though it once and gave up, switching to different authors writing in the Mythos.

Actually, I think that his style is part of what gives him staying power. Some folks write in a transparent style: their prose flows so smoothly that you never notice it, focusing entirely on the story. Others, like Lovecraft (and Bradbury and Faulkner and a lot of others), bring the prose itself into focus. For better or worse.

If Lovecraft had written in transparent prose, I don’t think anyone would much remember his monster tales. Although now I’m tempted to rewrite “The Dunwich Horror” a la Hemingway.

[DrDeth]

@silenus

For pulp stories they weren’t that bad, Neither were the Destroyer books that were written by Richard Sapir and Warren Murphy. After they stopped the quality went down considerably.

Yes, I agree, actually not bad at all. Same with the Casca Eternal Mercenary series.

[PeskiPiksi]

@Knorf

So therefore for me someone like J. K. Rowling does not really belong on the list, because there are some truly distinctive creations in her work, for all the constructions like, “‘open,’ he hissed…”

This is just a tiny nitpick, and I realize you were defending her, but this isn’t the first time I’ve seen this so I feel a compulsion to speak up.

Even as a fan I will be the first to admit JK Rowling is far from perfect as a writer (for one, she leaves plot holes you could drive a Mack Truck through), but the above quote is not incorrect in context. In that scene, Harry is speaking Parseltongue, aka “Snake Language,” in which every word is hissed.

So, “‘Open,’ he hissed…” is perfectly fine usage in this case, IMHO.

FTR, I completely agree with the rest of your post.

[CalMeacham]

I had to come back to post this, the end of the review I quoted the beginning from above:

The 190lb adult male human being nodded his head to indicate satisfaction and returned to his bedroom by walking there. Still asleep in the luxurious four-poster bed of the expensive $10 million house was beautiful wife Mrs Brown. Renowned author Dan Brown gazed admiringly at the pulchritudinous brunette’s blonde tresses, flowing from her head like a stream but made from hair instead of water and without any fish in. She was as majestic as the finest sculpture by Caravaggio or the most coveted portrait by Rodin. I like the attractive woman, thought the successful man.

Perhaps one day, inspired by beautiful wife Mrs Brown, he would move into romantic poetry, like market-leading British rhymester John Keats. That would be good, opined the talented person, and got back into the luxurious four-poster bed. He felt as happy as a man who has something to be happy about and is suitably happy about it.

Don’t make fun of renowned Dan Brown

[CalMeacham]

@Infovore

I’m not sure if he counts as “successful” in a commercial sense, but given that his work has survived to this day I’d say he’s successful in that respect: H. P. Lovecraft.

Adore his world, the whole Cthulhu Mythos, “things man was not meant to know” world full of squamous, gibbous, eldritch abominations sleeping under the sea…

…but man, the guy’s prose was turgid! I tried to wade though it once and gave up, switching to different authors writing in the Mythos.

I have to disagree. Lovecraft, for all his faults, knew good grammar, and how to achieve the effects he was after with his choices of words and his phrasing. He was an effective editor, and rewrote stories by others. There are a lot of people who think that he should have accepted the editorship he was offered. But it would’ve meant moving to Chicago, and I think that might have killed H.P. Moving to New York almost did. He needed the atmosphere of Providence to survive.
No, you might dislike his writing, but don’t call Lovecraft a Bad Writer. He knew his craft.

[CalMeacham]

Oh, God – here’s another Dan Brown parody. I can’t resist:

Luckily, if you don’t want to read the actual book, there’s always @Nunferno. This Twitter account is currently retelling the entire story of Inferno from start to finish—more or less.

@Nunferno is careful to feature a selection of spot-on Dan Brown parodies, from unnecessarily clumsy details (“Langdon opened the brown door. ‘Hello renowned symbologist, Mr Langdon, 46,’ said the unknown woman, 23. ‘Hello unknown woman,’ said Langdon.”) to some beautifully crafted similes (“Her lips were full like IKEA on a Sunday and her eyes smouldered like a sack of kittens on a barbecue.”). It’s a worryingly plausible read.

What’s Inferno actually about? Well, it has something to do with Dante, and features the middle-aged Langdon solving a mystery alongside a beautiful young women. Aside from that, we wouldn’t want to spoil it for you. We’ll leave that to @Nunferno.

Go see this page. Some of the best quotes won’t be copied:

Dan Brown's "Inferno" meets its match in fiery parody @Nunferno

[Finagle]

@RickJay

Among popular authors, Stephen King is one of the BEST. He is a legitimately great author. Not all his books are his best, but his best are amazing.

Stephen King is kind of a special case. He’s really is a very competent writer, and his shorter pieces can be excellent, but few other authors manage to give me that special “I’ve completely wasted my time” feeling that he does in his longer novels. The “MacDonalds” analogy is spot-on. After I finished The Stand, I felt the same kind of self-loathing I get after I splurge on a Big Mac and fries while on a road trip. I get that not every book you read has to be a classic, and god knows, I’ve read some forgettable trash in my day. But something about the ratio of actual entertainment to words in King’s books, combined with an absolutely prosaic writing style, means that you’re investing a huge amount of time for not much payoff. It’s like driving across Kansas to have someone yell “Boo!” at you.

[Boyo_Jim]

But there IS a payoff to driving across Kansas. At the end, you’re no longer in Kansas.

[BrainGlutton]

@Infovore

I’m not sure if he counts as “successful” in a commercial sense, but given that his work has survived to this day I’d say he’s successful in that respect: H. P. Lovecraft.

Adore his world, the whole Cthulhu Mythos, “things man was not meant to know” world full of squamous, gibbous, eldritch abominations sleeping under the sea…

…but man, the guy’s prose was turgid! I tried to wade though it once and gave up, switching to different authors writing in the Mythos.

I must admit to a similar attitude toward Lovecraft as silenus’ toward E.E. “Doc” Smith.

[terentii]

Nobody has seen fit to mention John LeCarre? I’ve tried reading his books, but when I’m a hundred pages in and still nothing has happened, I tend to give up on them.

[JackieLikesVariety]

Marion Chesney

the mystery series about Agatha Raisin and Hamish Macbeth are both wildly popular and bad, very bad.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@terentii

Nobody has seen fit to mention John LeCarre? I’ve tried reading his books, but when I’m a hundred pages in and still nothing has happened, I tend to give up on them.

Uh, no, nobody’s mentioned John LeCarre, because he’s arguably (and I so argue) the finest espionage writer in history. Your lack of appreciation for a slow burn novel does not remotely reflect on his skills as an author.

[bmoak]

I’m going to go with Clive Cussler. I spent a few weeks staying with a relative in a small town with limited material in the tiny library and worked my way through Cussler. Dirk Pitt is the biggest Marty Stu I’ve ever seen in a work by a mainstream author.

[What_Exit]

James Fenimore Cooper is the first that comes to my mind. His crap is unreadable and dreary. But Twain described his dreck far better than I could hope to.

I’ll defend E.E. Doc Smith, I know his style is dated and pulpy but it is at least the best example of classic Space Opera there is and he knew about how bad it could be, just check on the story within the story in Children of the Lens.

Qadgop the Mercotan slithered flatly around the afterbulge of the tranship. One claw dug into the meters-thick armor of pure neutronium, then another. Its terrible

[What_Exit]

@Ethilrist

J.R.R. Tolkien. There’s no way in hell he would have been able to sell LOTR if he submitted it today: way too wordy, way too long, big, long rambling walk across a swamp absolutely killing any momentum for the entire middle third of the book…

That is nearly trolling on this board.

You’re correct it probably would be edited down today. But J.K. Rowling actually self indulged in her own version of slow slogging through the march in the final Harry Potter book so apparently some publisher will put up with it if the rest of the story is great enough.

Also the Hobbit has no slow parts at all and is a true page turner. So a bit harsh calling him the worst.