Looks like I'm the only "other opinion" at this stage!!
Actually I meant to come back to this thread a while ago but forgot about it.
Thanks
Penitent re IDing when ghostwriters are used (in the Cussler thread)
and thanks
Matt for the
link (your post under Clive Cussler Feb 03,'07 3.36pm).
'Crofts' pretty well answered all my Q's. However, I'd just like to comment on his statement: "Being a ghost is a matter of suppressing your own ego completely, which is a good discipline for any writer." When he said this, I understood him to be talking about when he actually interviews/writes about his subjects. Claire Bott stated in the article, .... "probably makes Crofts the only writer in the world without an ego". I disagree. IMO he has excellent self-esteem & is very proud of what he does & according to my dictionary, this means he does have an ego.
With regards to ghostwriting itself, Crofts also said: "These people are living the lives I don't have to live, because I can just go in, find out all about it, and then move off again. I love it."
Technically, he's still a journalist isn't he
Re it being OK for ghostwriters to be used as long as they're identified/acknowledged - yes I agree but you (
Penitent), said in the Dick Francis thread (Feb 08, '07 12.05am)
Well, I believe that nothing is a good as the original.
Does this mean if you know a book has been written by a ghostwriter, you won't read it - believing it not to be any good as the "original" author hasn't written it?