Anything To Sell A Book

By Keith Boykin, in books
Thursday, June 15 2006, 6:34PM

book plus bomb equals megaphoneI'm getting a little tired of the trend of people saying outrageous things just to sell the book. The latest example, of course, is Ann Coulter, whose new book Godless: The Church of Liberalism attempts to skewer liberals and progressives and 9-11 widows for their lack of faith. Never mind the fact that some reports indicate that Ann herself hasn't been a faithful participant in her own church, the truth is she's probably not concerned about whether people go to church. She's concerned about saying the most outrageous things possible to hawk her books.

Sadly, she's not the only one, and she's certainly not the first to sell her soul to make a buck in the literary world. It was only a few months ago when Oprah Winfrey was hosting a show with now disgraced memoirist James Frey, who acknowledged to Oprah and the world that he fibbed a bit in recounting his heroic struggle to overcome drug addiction. And let's not forget the young Harvard student who plagiarized her manuscript and fooled her publisher into giving her a fat royalty advance before her slight of hand was discovered.

For me, of course, the example of this trend that hits closest to home is the slew of "down low" books that came out in the past year or two solely to capitalize on and sensationalize on this old phenomenon and transform it into a 21st century Frankenstein. One of these books even claimed that black women make up 68 percent of all new AIDS cases when the truth was only 18 percent.

When fear and hype are your currency, the truth gets sold down the river very quickly. Why bother to make a rational argument when you can simply scare your audience by pushing their pre-programmed fear buttons? Why bother to tell the truth if you can make ten times as much by stretching it? It's no wonder some "authors" are choosing the quick buck instead of a long process of hard work.

What's also disturbing is that so many of these authors are purportedly writing nonfiction. It would be quite another thing, I suppose, if they were making up sensationalistic stories to sell their novels. Fiction is supposed to be fantasy. But there are enough fantastic stories in real life already that we don't have to lie about them and make up new ones. After living through September 11, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of communism, two presidential impeachment proceedings, and the assassinations of numerous world leaders, I think there's plenty of drama going in already in the world. But I believe it was Tom Clancy who said the difference between fiction and reality is that fiction has to make sense.

Certainly, the movement toward literary sensationalism is not new. It was P.T. Barnum who allegedly said a century ago that nobody ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the people. We all want people to pay attention to our words. Authors are no exception to that rule. But whatever happened to integrity and truthfulness in the words we write? Hopefully we don't have to lie and shame ourselves just to get attention.

(Editor's Note: I found the graphic above on someone else's web site and I can't remember where I got it from or else I would credit the site. I just don't want to give the impression that I created it myself, especially not in an article where I talk about truthfulness in writing.)

Comments (10) reveal

Comments conceal

Juston
June 15 2006, 7:07PM

Hi, Keith:

That graphic is from David Carr's column in the Monday Business section of The New York Times. The artist who should be credited is: Ingo Fast.

Thanks, Juston.

jazzi
June 15 2006, 8:36PM

I think a lot of time these authors are just giving the public what it wants. We appear to be shocked & suprised when we find out we've been lied to but the truth is most of us like the sensational. That's why tabloids & people like Wendy Williams are so popular. You've got to know that most of what appears in Star magazine, Enquire & the like is not true & yet these tabloids have sales that run in the millions, so clearly someone is reading this trash. Wendy & people like her have more shit with them than a baby's diaper after diarrhea, still she is one of the most listened to radio personalities in the New York tri-state area. She has built a franchise off of sensationalism. She couldn't have done it without the help of the public.

jazzi
June 15 2006, 8:42PM

One more thing....

I'm no theologian but the first few verses in the fourth chapter of 2nd Timothy talks about how the time will come when people will have an almost zero tolerance for truth & will gather around ministers who will simply tell them what they want to hear. It says that they will turn away from the truth & open their hearts to fables & lies. I know this is aimed at the church but I can't help but see how much this applies to secular society.

Steve
June 15 2006, 11:22PM

Jazzy - interesting note about 2nd Timothy. And what does it say of the outcome? I bet it's the coming of the anti-christ. And in my opinion, Ann Coulter comes close.

How about this for a sensationalist statement? I'd like to shove a glass harpoon up that broads twat, twist it and break it off.

Derrick_the other one
June 16 2006, 12:01AM

While I find Ann Coulter’s comments about the 9/11 widows repulsive, at the heart of her argument lay a battle black gay, lesbian, and transgender people have been fighting for a long time. I have not read Coulter’s book but, from the numerous interviews I’ve seen her appear in, she seems to be suggesting that when someone suffers a tragedy, as in the 9/11 attacks, they cannot be challenged on anything they say because they are “victims.” If anyone challenges these “victims,” their authenticity as victims will come into question. In the context of gay and lesbian people, we are constantly challenging the churches “authenticity” as it relates to issues of gender and sexuality. Yet, many myopic Christians tend to dominate these conversations because they can always raise the “good book” (read bad gay, lesbian, and transgenderd people) as their supreme evidence as to why we are anathematic.

Derrick_the other one
June 16 2006, 12:37AM

Moreover, in order to “counter” Coulter’s argument, many people have been using sexist, homophobic, and transphobic rhetoric. It has been said she is an “old hag” who “has never been married.” Also, people describe her as having an “Adams Apple” (Christianity used from the “opposite” perspective). It is important we retain our critical diligence, even when dealing with people whom we find intellectually barren.

jazzi
June 16 2006, 9:21AM

I agree that being a victim of anything doesn't exempt one from criticism. There is however a huge difference between criticism & attacking someone with whom you disagree. Ann Coulter reffered to these women as "the witches from East Brunswich" & said that they were rejoicing in the deaths of their husbands. To me, that's not a challenge. That's beyond criticism. That's not even intelligent debate. Her goal was to be insulting & she was.

What I have discovered is that when people have to sling mud, it's usually because they lack the intelligence to debate. If Ann wants to "challenge" the politics of the 9/11 widows or anyone else for that matter, she's free to do so. But you don't hurl insults, act childish & be disrespectful of someones grief & then claim that you're merely challenging them. No one is above being challenged but it doesn't have to get personal.

Derrick from Philly
June 16 2006, 10:52AM

Derrick: I hope I'm not being sexist when I say that she's the ugliest, skinny white gal I've seen in a long time, and her personality (if you wanna' call it that) doesn't help. Even if she were a liberal Democrat she'd still be...well, nevermind. But I know I'm not sexist. How could I be? Hell, I'm barely a man myself(that male pattern baldness will do it everytime). I know that heartless, right-wing, anti-Christ bitches don't have a monopoly on ugliness. I just calls 'em as I sees 'em. There even some ugly people in our gay world-- from drag queens to DL thugs...why, even some body builders are ugly (from the neck up, ofcourse).

Donald[TypeKey Profile Page]
June 16 2006, 11:52AM

You can now add HTML to your comments. Don't know HTML? It's cool - we've also added those nifty formatting buttons to make it easy. Discuss this and other new features on the message board.

T. Zac
June 21 2006, 1:13AM

Worse than Ann Coulter is J.L. King. I say this because the people she attacked are not defenseless.

Nobody however (well except you) came to the defense (by speaking truth as loudly) of the people J.L. King sold out by his hyperbole, misused statistics and out right lies in his horrible book.

He sold out Black women (by spreading lies about why they are the highest new infections of HIV), Black men (by promulgatnig the idea that sterotypical masculine Black men are spreading the most deadly plauge to women especially Black), and finally he sold out Black gay men one of the most marginalized group of people in the United States.

I wish there was a way to funnel every dime he made off of those book into HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention and treatment programs, and finally the pockets of HIV positive women men and children.

I wish there was a way to funnel every dime of Ann Coulters book into the accounts of struggling progressive non-profits.


Post a comment