Sarah Palin’s ghostwriter to blame?
Posted on 02 December 2009 by Karen Risch
I’m going out on a limb here, bringing up the volatile subject of, er, um, politician cum author Sarah Palin. I hesitate. I hem.
Ahem.
Excuse me. What I mean to say is that I hope you have no idea about my political leanings when you’re done reading this. Because I don’t want to get blasted by either Sarah Palin-o-philes or Sarah Palin-scoffers. Because it’s not about politics (a subject on which I do have strong opinions but no professional cred), but about ghostwriting, something that is my field of expertise. Vicki and I have ghostwritten enough bestselling nonfiction books that we’ve stopped counting, and both of us have worked with our fair share of Big Personalities.
Which brings me to Sarah Palin and her instant bestseller, Going Rogue: An American Life. More particularly, to the alleged falsehoods contained therein and the speculation that maybe they’re all Lynn Vincent’s fault. Sure, blame the ghostwriter. It’s a slightly suspicious profession anyway, right? Besides, who ever heard of someone like me saying boo about her author-client? Isn’t that what nondisclosure agreements are supposed to prevent?
True, we ghosts are a quiet lot. Mostly because that’s how we like it. I like my clients, too, and I’m quite content with the one-line credit I get in the acknowledgments. I’ll take obscurity, thank you.
It’s the nature of ghostwriting: clients tell me their version of events, reveal to me how they see the world, and then I assume their voice and write their message. When it’s going well, they’re amazed that I seem to know them so intimately and can formulate and articulate some of their inchoate thoughts. We develop a special creative chemistry, intense while it lasts.
The most frustrating type of client, though, is the one who doesn’t really read what I’ve written, who glosses over and pronounces the text fabulous without actually assessing the tone or bothering to notice nuance. Honestly, the biggest perks in this profession come when a client picks up on a particularly well-turned phrase or extolls the elegant structure of a chapter. In pursuit of these kudos, and even more so because it amuses me, I’m fond of hiding “easter eggs,” like choosing certain words that have particular, but private, significance for the client. There’s a lot of satisfaction for me in that kind of wordplay.
But not every client has the time to spend appreciating what I do or the inclination to stroke my ego.
So that leaves me wondering: how closely did Sarah Palin read her manuscript? Because if her ghostwriter relied upon sources other than interviews with her client, or if writing that 400-some-page book was done quickly and without a whole lot of pondering the facts, I can see how mistakes would get made. How, when a ghostwriter was in the throes of producing prose, she might have made an error two. (I’ve done it. Heck, I did it last week.)
And whose fault is it if such errors make it into print? Ultimately, who’s responsible for the accuracy of a personal story?
One of the troubles with Big Personalities as clients, in my experience, is how important it is for them to look good. There’s a fair amount of self-deception that can come with the territory, some rewriting of history even in their own minds. What’s the cliche? You start believing your own hype. It’s a rare individual who can work their marketing magic to attain celebrity and still stay grounded in what’s real and true about themselves.
Responsibility for the quality of a book, including accuracy, is shared between the co-writers. When clients tell me stories from their own lives that make them look saintly, or other people look like crumbs, it’s my job to dig a little to see if there’s more to it. And to write about it in such a way that readers can infer that the tale is subject to interpretation. And if straight-up facts are to be included—stuff I can verify or correct with a simple Google search—then I should be looking that up and asking for clarification if there’s something questionable.
The bottom line is that collaboration brings shared pride in good work and shared remorse in faulty work. If there are problems with Sarah Palin’s book, then it’s up to her to publicly set the record straight. And it’s up to the ghostwriter to privately apologize to her client.
But here’s where the politics get sticky, and where I’m going to plead the Fifth: Were the reported errors in Going Rogue intentional distortions of the truth, insignificant mistakes made in the heat of getting a book out (on par with, say, typos), or a reflection of the shifting sands of “truth” as it’s remembered through the filter of a Big Personality?
I suppose you’ll have to read the book to form an opinion. Or not.
* * * * *
Want to be notified by email whenever we post something new? Join our mailing list.
You might also like to read:
5 responses to Sarah Palin’s ghostwriter to blame?
Leave a Response
-
Connect
Excellent article Karen. You did a great job of staying above the political fray and staying on message about ghost writing. Thanks for sharing.
Very informative, Karen. I admit that I will probably not read Sarah Palin’s book although, Lord knows, I’ve read a number of reviews about it. Still, it is interesting to hear how the process of ghost writing works and your perspectives. Thanks for not going rogue and sticking to the facts, just the facts!
I’m so proud of you……
Sigh. Despite my best efforts, I received this note via Facebook: “I read your blog Karen. I’d be curious to know how much trouble you went to in analyzing the accuracy and then blogging about any books written by someone on the left. How about a careful analysis of the facts behind Al Gore’s writings on so-called global warming? I like a little balance in my view of the wolrd. Sara Palin’s book made its debut at #1 on the NYT best seller list, despite efforts from those around the country, like yourself, to convince others that her book is not credible.”
My response: “No trouble at all. Because that wasn’t my point. I don’t even know for sure if Palin’s book contains inaccuracies–and for purposes of my blog post, I don’t care. I’m not trying to convince anyone about her credibility or lack thereof. What I’m saying is that the responsibility for the quality of a ghostwritten book is shared, neither Palin’s nor Vincent’s alone. You might want to reread my post without your “leftist propaganda radar” up–I was actually quite careful to leave the question of Palin’s veracity unanswered. The point was to comment on a subject that’s pertinent to my profession, not my politics.”
Love this interview about ghostwriters and their responsibilities: http://is.gd/bAUXR