Do You Really Want To Write A Blockbuster?

[Paul Whybrow]

I came across this informative article, about how to write a blockbuster:

Writing Fiction: Do You Really Want to Write A Blockbuster?

The article's writer Robert C. Worstell refers to a guidebook called Making A Blockbuster, which was written by Al Zuckerman. He should know what he's talking about, as he founded Writers House in 1974, which is now one of the largest literary agencies in the world.

The article is well worth a read, with revealing information contained in the blue highlighted links—especially Jane Friedman's dissection of Book P & L—how projected profit & loss figures determine whether a publisher will commit resources to a book.

Zuckerman makes a wise observation about the type of person who buys a novel that's written and marketed with the intention of becoming a blockbuster:

That public, which is affluent (with hardcover novels these days costing between twenty-five and forty dollars) and which comprises no more than 3 percent of our population, also tends to favor stories set in the worlds of characters who are powerful, rich, and famous, as opposed to environments inhabited by convicts, small farmers, blue-collar workers, welfare recipients, or even “average” middle-class families.

Reading that assessment again, I realise that the environment of my Cornish Detective novels is entirely "inhabited by convicts, small farmers, blue-collar workers, welfare recipients, or even “average” middle-class families." They're the victims, villains, witnesses and gormless bystanders of my crime stories! Which means, I'm not headed towards having blockbuster sales. Note to self: insert more powerful millionaires oozing charisma.

​

 

[Rich.]

Well, according to the article's (to my mind at least) narrow definition of what a blockbuster is, then no I don't want to write a blockbuster. But would I like to be a fantastically successful novelist whose books are sold on seven continents, translated into a gazillion languages and regularly adapted for stage and screen? Why, yes, of course. I have an imagination and I'm not afraid to use it.

I wouldn't worry about your detective novels, Paul. It sounds to me like they have plenty of the ingredients for commercial success. From how you've described them here on the forums, I can see a gritty BBC adaptation just waiting to be commissioned.

 

[Howard]

These days, I'd rather skip the book part entirely and just make films, but that way even greater madness lies, so whaddaya gon' do?

 

[Louise]

Thanks Paul. The article makes fascinating reading and I liked the conclusions. If you don't love what you're writing, then why write?

On the millionaires though, I wonder if its one of those 'chicken and egg' things. I understand that high stakes and high concept makes for more exciting plots but when it comes to setting I'm puzzled. Do readers buy that stuff because it's what they most want to read or more because it's easily available and heavily promoted?

I think it's one of the problems with children's books too, which of course is my main area of interest. Agents and publishers frequently say they want more strong female and multi-faceted characters, as well as more diversity in terms of ethnicity, orientation etc, and in real world settings. But when you look at the equivalent blockbusters, the majority of what gets published and sells is talking animals who are male being naughty and talking animals who are female being good.

 

[Amber]

Are we working on the tragic premise that shit writers sell and geniuses get overlooked? Which is undoubtedly sometimes the case. But not always. Maybe never. If nothing else, selling writers have touched on something.

But yeah. Let's make moving pictures. Forget about language. Who needs internal dialogue and empathy expressed with words. Who needs language?

I love the movie Idiocracy. If I remember correctly, the most popular movie of the time is the image of an ass. For two straight hours. There might be farting. It's very Andy Warhol.

It's also what happens when people forget how to use language. It's not only books that suffer, eventually movies go into the crapper too.

But TV. I think TV is experiencing a Renaissance. At least there's that.

 

[Matnov]

Not sure I could ever, even if I wanted to, take a paint by numbers approach to writing. As to the rest of the 'fame and fortune' notion, well I would take the fortune part but the fame, you can keep that. Too much hassle and I am far to grumpy and contrary to ever make a success of any kind of life spent in even the dimmest of public spot-lights. I would be in real 'Frog and the Scorpion' territory in that you could coach, cajole and dangle all sorts of carrots in front of me in terms of playing the game, saying all the right things and reflecting whatever the zeitgeist was with the promise of a bright and beautiful career as my reward and I just know I would balls it all up, just the sake of the lolz. The temptation would be too delicious to ignore.

 

[Quillwitch]

Well, according to the article's (to my mind at least) narrow definition of what a blockbuster is, then no I don't want to write a blockbuster. But would I like to be a fantastically successful novelist whose books are sold on seven continents, translated into a gazillion languages and regularly adapted for stage and screen? Why, yes, of course. I have an imagination and I'm not afraid to use it.

I wouldn't worry about your detective novels, Paul. It sounds to me like they have plenty of the ingredients for commercial success. From how you've described them here on the forums, I can see a gritty BBC adaptation just waiting to be commissioned.

Yes, I second that! They have a very telly feel to them. It´s a question of getting them into the right hands.

 

[Quillwitch]

Thanks Paul. The article makes fascinating reading and I liked the conclusions. If you don't love what you're writing, then why write?

On the millionaires though, I wonder if its one of those 'chicken and egg' things. I understand that high stakes and high concept makes for more exciting plots but when it comes to setting I'm puzzled. Do readers buy that stuff because it's what they most want to read or more because it's easily available and heavily promoted?

I think it's one of the problems with children's books too, which of course is my main area of interest. Agents and publishers frequently say they want more strong female and multi-faceted characters, as well as more diversity in terms of ethnicity, orientation etc, and in real world settings. But when you look at the equivalent blockbusters, the majority of what gets published and sells is talking animals who are male being naughty and talking animals who are female being good.

Bingo! I was considering starting a thread with information i´ve looked up about middle grade and YA novels best selling novels ( in the last 5 years ), vs most "notable" books or books parents recommend, vs what agents are supposedly wanting. HUGE differences! I´d rather listen to the cold, hard facts (numbers).