I know we haven’t gotten into too much discussion on ghostwriting, but the topic has always really fascinated me. I do not understand how a person has it in them to think it is ethical for someone to write a book for them and then take full credit for it. Being a student where the consequences for this are extremely high, I cannot help but to look at it the same way for grown adults. If you take credit for something that is not yours, not only your name should be damaged, but also your bank account and whatever other measures are necessary to get the point across to other celebrities or politicians that are doing the same thing.
One question I am thinking about is whether or not that book would sell, had the real author been listed on the cover. I think than in one way, people are purchasing it solely because they like that person, and if someone else wrote it, it wouldn’t make much of a difference. On the other hand, I would never purchase a politicians book because I always have the thought that maybe there is a ghostwriter behind it. I guess my question would be what types of people (celebrities, athlete, politicians, etc.) does it seem to be less of a crime if a ghostwriter is behind it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I feel completely similar to you regarding this whole ghost-writing thing. I don't understand how it's an acceptable practice. I know we're going to be discussing it more in terms of the business world soon, and that might make a little more sense. For instance, when I hear of a good, new book, perhaps one suggested by Oprah, I am pretty indifferent to the author. However, in a academic or business-like environment, I can see the name on the work influcing my opinion. Which makes ghost-writing even more shady to me..
i see both of your points as to the alleged immorality of ghostwriting, but at the same time it is a necessary practice in many jobs and allows things to run smoothly. To play the devil's advocate, I also think that sometimes ghostwriter's allow a person's thoughts and ideas to really come alive and be communicated in the way the "writer" never could have written or expressed. I really doubt Suzanne Sommers, Lance Armstrong, or even Britney Spears all have the writing "chops" to be published, but at the same time their stories and subsequent books have inspired a lot of people. Is that really such a bad thing?
Hmm...
This is a really interesting topic and I don't know how to feel. On one hand, I understand the time constraints of celebrities, and you only have a limited time to strike while your name is hot. You do what you can, even if that includes ghostwriting.
However, I can see the other side. If a child idolizes someone, then it is like finding out Santa Claus is really your parents.
I haven't read the article yet - hopefully the more we get involved with the topic, the more able I will be to develop a preference.
I think it's different for politicians and celebrities. Politicians generally don't have the time to write their own speeches (unless it's their memoirs). I think the person whos name is on it gives the ghostwriter the ideas, and the writer fills in the rest.
I find it more acceptable for a celebrity to have a ghostwritten book compared to others. It just seems obvious that their book wouldn't have been written by them in the first place. But I also think it doesn't really matter if a novel is ghostwritten because what the reader should be concerned about is what the text has to say...not necessarily who wrote it.
I agree that this is some what of a serious issue. I posted earlier in the semester that I was reading Obama's book and I thought it was well written, but I don't find him a fantastic public speaker, and I also think the two walk hand-in-hand. But the thought that his book was written by a ghostwriter never crossed my mind. I always knew it happened, but I was too naive to think that someone writing a book like this would allow someone else to present his platform, that's his job.
Post a Comment