Quote:
|
I don't think the McDonalds analogy works. There are scientific (even if sometimes still debated) assessments that can be made with regard to the nutritional value of food. (I guess you could try to run something like nutrition vs education and taste vs good-writing or something ... but that gets messy, those pickles will drop out. ) There is no equivalent with writing or other such art.
|
A pastry chef would take issue with the suggestion that his work is not an art-form. A chocolate eclair made at a French patisserie has no real nutritional value. But is it a "well-made" dessert? I guess that depends on the patisserie, but you get the point. What about the pie-pockets at McDonalds? They're certainly popular, and sell in the millions. Are they well crafted baked goods?
Britney Spears, well crafted music? Her albums outsold Chopin.
The difference is art value vs. product value. Sales are an indication of product value, and in that sense Twilight is a well crafted product. Maybe even a well-written product, if the writing was done with mass consumption as its primary intent. If product value is a primary function of literature and an acceptable measurement of quality, then I suppose you would be correct.
If product value is removed from evaluation, is it well written literature? That's a different question, one that takes into account subjectively measured but commonly accepted criteria of literary craft. But that's the point: it's a different question, and even if your answer is "Yes," then sales figures are not part of that answer.
I contend that it should be removed, which means popularity is independent of "bad writing" or "good writing." It can be a result of those things, or it can be a result of marketing, or popular psychology; but it is not inherently related. So the answer to "Can a popular book be badly written?" is yes, of course it can. Doesn't mean it is, or isn't.
But I could be wrong. Honestly I'm rather dumb and usually talk out of my butt.