DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE IS SATIRE AND MEANT FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY.
In late March, the news finally broke that the haunting wraith of James Patterson was finally exorcized from his Palm Beach compound by the United Coalition of Librarian-Knights. The covert operation has been mired in controversy ever since, but the UCLK has remained steadfast and confirmed in public statements their intent to target other eternal author-wraiths, such as Dan Brown.
It’s clear that they aren’t backing down—but at the same time, neither are the publishers. Hachette Book Group, in a joint statement with Penguin Random House and HarperCollins, has thoroughly denounced the UCLK, calling for legal and martial action. They reiterate that ghostwriter contracts have been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court and thus the UCLK had no legal standing. They have notably refrained from comment on any theoretical moral standing.
But no matter which side you’re on, the question remains: Is the sun finally setting on the eternal wraith model of authorship? And if so, what will the new dawn of publishing look like?
First, some context. Author-wraiths have dominated the literary field since the late 80s, when modern ghostwriting contracts first took shape, and have been industry-standard for more than three decades. While mortal authors still have their niche, every major publishing house gets the bulk of their publications from author-wraiths. Their ability to churn out consistent chart-toppers is highly valued, despite frequent criticisms about the quality of the work, with many arguing that the coded messages ghostwriters frequently try to insert into the books has led to a dissonant reading experience that jars immersion.
Others turn the debate to the ethical side of things, which, prior to any contact with ghostwriters—who are typically forbidden from speaking on their experiences due to contract—was highly speculative. However, the UCLK has ritually burned the contracts of Patterson’s former ghostwriters, which, while not legal, does sever the magical contract binding their speech. One ghostwriter, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retribution from Patterson acolytes, said that they were overjoyed at their newfound freedom and are looking forward to writing “anything but more Alex Cross. Please, god, anything else. Anything at all,” confirming their dissatisfaction.
This, obviously, has raised some big concerns in the literary community. Many are calling for boycotts of author-wraiths, or laws regulating the practices. Sales have already seen significant dips, and things are looking dicey. But what will fill the yawning void?
Unfortunately, experts have yet to come to consensus on what the world of publishing will look like once the dust has settles—indeed, it seems the only thing we can be certain of it uncertainty.
Some suggest that more ethical alternatives, such as Stephen King’s psychic drain model, may become popular. Others have proposed that generative AI could function as an ethical ghostwriter replacement, but as these models lack the flesh for the eternal wraiths to sustain themselves, that will have to wait until meat synthesis is more efficient.
Another possibility is reverting to the previous mortal-author-centric system. However, publishing houses dismiss this idea on the grounds that fragile human bodies simply cannot churn out content at the same demanding space. When a representative was asked if perhaps the increase in quality would make up for the deficits in quantity, they appeared to not hear the question.
