Talk:John Auchard

Untitled
For Four Trials, I changed it from 'ghostwritten' to 'collaboration with.' Considering that John Edwards put John Auchard on the front cover, 'ghostwriter' doesn't fit.


 * Ghostwriter does fit. Some ghostwriters get credit on the cover - in fact, that is customary.--SpinyNorman 23:50, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Spiny Norman is incorrect. Certainly most political books are written without the co-writer on the cover page or title page. John McCain was one of the few, with Mark Salter, to put the co-writer's name on the cover and title page, as does John Edwards. Few political candidates admit to such help. "Ghostwritten," suggests something hidden; in the acknowledgments Edwards notes that his co-writer "knows a good sentence when he see one and, frankly, when he writes one." This unusual frankness does not merit the sometimes deceptive connotations suggested by a "ghostwritten" book. 18 December 2005.--

Spiny Norman continues to blur the distinction between collaborator and ghostwriter, and he clearly likes the blunt club of "ghostwriter" instead of the more accurate, in this case, "collaborator." Norman keeps changing it back and his stubbornness will probably win out in the end, but an effort is being made in the publishing world to distinguish between "ghostwritten" books and "with" books or genuine collaborations. Here (below) is a link that suggests how reputable journalists recognize the difference between a "ghostwritten" book by Howard Dean and a collaboration with Edwards. There was in fact a small controversy, discussed in both Newsweek and The New Republic, noting how Howard Dean's "ghostwriter" was never acknowledged at all, while Edwards' collaborator was given up-front treatment. It would be good if someone at Wikipedia could consider the evolution of political biographies and make a firm decision on collaborator or ghostwriter.--- 6 January 2006. --

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3868556&p1=0


 * Auchard is descibed as a "ghostwriter" for the Edwards book by many people, including here:  --SpinyNorman 08:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

With Spiny Norman, Wikipedia faces a mentality that seems to rejoice in being stubborn, or, I guess, spiny. Greenberg is cited as Norman's prime authority, but of course the Greenberg essay attacks Edwards as a weak candidate and therefore it may not have been Greenberg's main concern to put Senator Edwards in the best light. The http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3868556&p1=0  site noted above does in fact make a distinction between collaborator and ghostwriter; and THAT relevant article is actually ABOUT the issue of ghostwritten books and collaborations. (Therefore Norman is unfair in claiming that my last edit back to "collaborator" was unsubstantiated; also he changed "University of Maryland" to "University of Mayland," which of course is incorrect.) Some people will always use "ghostwriter" with sloppy latitude, and it seems that as long as Norman finds "many people" doing so, that seems good enough reason for him to dig in his heels. My hope is that he will allow for such important verbal distinctions in Wilkipedia. I would invite Norman to contact Professor Greenberg directly (Norman cites Greenberg in his last discussion point) and ask his opinion, for Greenberg is both a journalist and a distinguished scholar (of Richard Nixon); I would be happy to have Greenberg vet this discussion and make the final call. Certainly that call might have more authority than Norman's ghostwriter call or mine own for collaborator. -- ChicagoPete, 9:45 A.M., 8 January 2006 (EST)


 * Politics aside, how many books has John Edwards written? As far as I can tell, "Four Trials" is the first.  In a business where it is standard practice for people to use ghostwriters, it is really reasonable to expect Edwards to have taken time from his busy schedule to take a first stab at writing a book?  Of course not.  In the meantime, Auchard is described as a "ghostwriter" so it is fair to describe him thus in this article.  In the absence of any evidence regarding the nature of this "collaboration" (for example, at interview in which Auchard states that Edwards wrote a rough draft which was then polished by Auchard into the final version...)  --SpinyNorman 03:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I followed Spiny Norman's suggestion of an example that might work for him ("an interview in which Auchard states that Edwards wrote a rough draft which was then polished by Auchard into the final version...") and some online research produced several interviews with Mr. Auchard. Here is one which seems to answer Norman's exact question and to give evidence there was in fact a draft of the book BEFORE Auchard joined the project. http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:UqvSM5HlXS0J:www.inform.umd.edu/News/Diamondback/archives/2004/02/13/news8.html+auchard+diamondback&hl=ja "I wrote over 100 pages of notes on his book, some good, some bad," Auchard said. "After that I was asked to come in on it with him." The reporter states: "Auchard said all of the words were Edwards' own, but he was just able to turn them into a book." The rest of the article, from the University of Maryland newspaper, notes how they worked together and got to know each other. I hope SpinyNorman reads the article in its entirety and, unless he can show that either Edwards or Auchard spoke elsewhere that there was no such collaboration, he will act in good faith and finally let "collaboration" stand. Aside from the particulars of this discussion, it is in fact true that publishing houses increasingly distinguish between ghostwritten books and genuine collaborations, which Four Trials seems to be. I hope that Wikipedia will become more aware of the difference. -- Chicago Pete, 9 January 2006

I have been following this debate for quite some time now and feel that Chicago Pete's most recent citation from the University of Maryland newspaper interview seems to clinch it for "collaborator." I am also aware that John Edwards is writing another book called Blueprints: The Architecture of Our Lives, so writing books does seem to fit in with Edward's busy schedule---Fernando Di Sallustio

Actually SpinyNorman's recent suggestion for "co-written" seems to hit it on the head. I like it even better than my term "collaboration" or of course "ghostwritten." I'm happy this worked out and that the Wikipedia system produced a consensus that improves on both other options.... ChicagoPete, January 9, 2005

Additional Info
I happen to have Professor Auchard as a teacher this semester for his Intro to Novels class. Please respond here if there's anything I could contribute (I have his class syllabus saved, could be useful) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.175.80 (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)