Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Is a ghost writer an honorable professional, or a hack? [closed]

+0
−0

Closed by System‭ on Apr 12, 2017 at 23:07

This question was closed; new answers can no longer be added. Users with the reopen privilege may vote to reopen this question if it has been improved or closed incorrectly.

David Jacoby writes:

“Some of the best and most rewarding writing I’ve done has been ghost, because (in my case, anyway) the LACK of a byline allows my normally rather, ahem, obnoxious ego to take a nap.” You don’t have to worry about taking the public criticism of your content. You just write.

Paul Magee, of Subvert Magazine, writes:

"As a reader, I lose respect for someone who uses a ghostwriter. There are plenty of people I admire who have had writers do the technical job of writing their books for them, but they tend to be given “co-author” or similar status. To not give credit is to pretend you did it, which shows a lack of character in my eyes."

Is a ghost writer an honorable professional, or a hack?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/27504. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

1 answer

+0
−0

Most works of art bear the artist's name. Most works of craft do not. The person who paints your portrait signs their work. The person who paints your house, or your sign, does not.

Using a ghostwriter to produce a work of craft writing is no different from hiring someone to paint your house. It is your house and you get the praise for it. But if you hire someone to do a piece of art writing -- a novel or a poem -- for you, there is a degree of deception involved from both parties.

Unfortunately, though, there is something of a grey area here, in the realm of what is curiously called creative non-fiction. It is not clear if such work is presented as a work of art or craft. If an athlete writes a biography that sells based purely on interest in their career, we can reasonably call that craft, and not be surprised if a ghostwriter was used. But if a biography is presented as a work of art, as something that might be read by someone who is not already a fan of the subject, then it feels odd if the true author is not acknowledged.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads