Prolific authors sacrificing quality?

[dwndrgn]

I was thinking about this as I was looking at the great number of books published by Mercedes Lackey. From my experience, it really depends on the author. For example, Mercedes Lackey has done tons of books but she uses different worlds, themes, messages, etc. and she seems to do it well, I've seldom read a book of hers that didn't at least satisfy for 'entertainment value'. But other, like Piers Anthony, write an awful lot but end up doing similar themes over and over again.

What do you guys think? Are there other authors out there who are prolific but still good?

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

It's hard to generalise. Asimov was incredibly prolific, both inside and outside the sf genre, but he maintained a pretty even quality. Terry Pratchett seems to have an immense bibliography but from what I hear he is very consistent, too. Jack Vance is another prolific writer (well, he's been writing for some 60 years now) but has maintained a certain base level of quality, even if his themes fall within a certain 'Vancian' sphere. Its fair to say that his prose has only improved with time, though.

On the other hand I can also think of excellent writers who just didn't or haven't written enough - Cordwainer Smith and Barry Malzberg are two examples that spring to mind.

 

[Chefo]

Actually, Terry Pratchett is quite inconsistent. I've read quite a number of his Diskworld series and while he is fully capable of being absolutely hillarious, he is also capable of being rather boring. It comes to inspiration, I guess.

As for quality, Robert Jordan is the prime example of an author who has sacrificed it to get some cash. I own the first 6 books of the WoT series in two languages (they are that good) and books 7-9 in English. The truth is that after book 6 the quality dropoff is so obvious that I just couldn't bring myself to spend another $30 to buy book 10 in the hope that something will finally happen. When I finally read it, I must say that I couldn't get past page 350, it was THAT boring. To sum it up, I think it is a disgrace to RJ and a mockery with his fans for him to produce a book that any person in the right mind will find so obviously lacking in quality.

I switched to GRR Martin instead

Chefo

 

[erickad71]

George is great! When I read the wedding scene, my jaw just dropped into my lap. I am so terribly impatient for the next book to come out.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Steven Erikson is another worthwhile author for discerning fantasy fans to check out.

 

[Hypes]

I completely agree when it comes to Robert Jordan. I got perhaps a hundred pages into it then put it back on the shelf. It's collecting dust as we speak. Its only use, as far as I am concerned.

 

[littlemissattitude]

I completely agree when it comes to Robert Jordan. I got perhaps a hundred pages into it then put it back on the shelf. It's collecting dust as we speak. Its only use, as far as I am concerned.

Doorstop, maybe?

I don't know. I've been thinking about this question since it was first posted a week and a half ago or so, and I've still not come to a definite conclusion about it. I think that maybe it depends on the writer. If a writer really has stories to tell or things to say, and can operate fairly decently in the language (technical things like grammar), I don't see that writing a lot necessarily means sacrificing quality. On the other hand, some writers who write a lot seem to keep cranking out the same story over and over again, just with different details. (I haven't seen that as much in SF and fantasy, as I have in the romance novel genre, but I'm sure it happens.)

I don't know that I really read many authors who would even fall into the cagetory of hugely prolific. I've never read anything by Robert Jordan or Terry Pratchett or Mercedes Lackey. Stephen King and possibly Clive Barker (both of whom write a lot and often tend to write long) might fit this profile. I think King's work has gotten a little more predictable over the years, much more than Barker has - "Coldheart Canyon" is in some ways miles away from Barker's earlier novels (I definitely recommend it with the warning that there is, as often with Barker, some sexual content that might not be appropriate for children). Another writer, some but not all of whose books I've read, is Dean Koontz. While I've enjoyed some of his work, he seems to be one who tends to recycle plots to a certain extent (lots of loners and outsiders who have had some personal tragedy in their lives go out to right some wrong).

 

[Hypes]

(lots of loners and outsiders who have had some personal tragedy in their lives go out to right some wrong)

Yes, that's a very clichèd plot these days. And not limited to literature, either.
Everyone's hero seems to be an orphan whose parents were slain by some mystical creature/homicidal lunatic/evil empire/ad nauseum.
You can save the world with an ordinary upbringing. ::sigh:: Really!

As for the doorstop... That job is already filled quite adequately. Thank you, J.K. Rowling.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

David Gemmell is perhaps one of the most prolific writers out there at the minute. You know that feeling when you go into a book shop and your author has yet another book out, and it was only a matter of weeks when you put down their last book. As David Gemmell has become more prolific, I believe that the quality of his writing has become much better. Just my opinion. I am sure that quantity normally signifies a step down in quality.

 

[BAYLOR]

It's hard to generalise. Asimov was incredibly prolific, both inside and outside the sf genre, but he maintained a pretty even quality. Terry Pratchett seems to have an immense bibliography but from what I hear he is very consistent, too. Jack Vance is another prolific writer (well, he's been writing for some 60 years now) but has maintained a certain base level of quality, even if his themes fall within a certain 'Vancian' sphere. Its fair to say that his prose has only improved with time, though.

On the other hand I can also think of excellent writers who just didn't or haven't written enough - Cordwainer Smith and Barry Malzberg are two examples that spring to mind.

Two writer that I wish had written more then they did.

 

[Woofdog2]

It certainly varies by author. Robert Silverberg could put out a lot of text/time but I enjoyed everything by him I read. Harry Turtledove (who used to write wonderful single-novel stories) could fill up volumes of his alternate timeline series with repetitive phrases and expositional text to such a degree I wondered about doing a stat. analysis of how often a book reminded us that char x. liked southern tobacco or char y had radiation damage impairing their gait. (also how many extra pages were filled with the long alien phrase for uranium).

 

[Ronald T.]

David Gemmell is perhaps one of the most prolific writers out there at the minute. You know that feeling when you go into a book shop and your author has yet another book out, and it was only a matter of weeks when you put down their last book. As David Gemmell has become more prolific, I believe that the quality of his writing has become much better. Just my opinion. I am sure that quantity normally signifies a step down in quality.

I agree that the David Gemmell's books were great. They were always entertaining. Now that he is gone, I will miss his powerful story-telling.