How many more famous people are going to write childrens' books?

[Roussette]

Sick to death of it, it's just a money making exercise and they are no better than someone who can actually write. It's only their name that is getting the book published and the writing could be crap.

Alison Steadman is on BBC1 now with her childrens book, yesterday was Harry Hill on with his book he's written. Madonna, Russell Brand, Katie Price, Frank Lampard, David Walliams, Cara Delevingne - the list goes on and on.

What about talented childrens authors who have to get by on their talent and not their name? I'm probably being U and grumpy

Book industry is dying slowly. Anything which keeps it afloat is a good thing.

I don't think so - 184,000 books were published in the UK in 2014!! www.theguardian.com/books/2014/oct/22/uk-publishes-more-books-per-capita-million-report - more than any other country in the world.

The book industry is changing, not dying.

Miranda Harte has one out too. Saw it last week in waterstones. We have Russell Brands pier piper of Hamelin and where disappointed although the illustrations where amazing.

'Tim Minchin's' children's book is actually just the lyrics to 'When I Grow Up', with illustrations.

David Walliams is massively overrated, imo. Julian Clary and Tom Fletcher are both genuinely good children's writers - likewise Simon Mayo - although of course the question remains as to whether we would ever have found this out had they not been famous for other reasons first.

There are some good celeb writers though. The Simon Mayo Itch books are excellent. I thought Julian Clary’s books were really funny. We saw him at a book festival where he was promoting the first Bolds book. There were a few embarrassing middle-aged women at the front waiting for him to deliver some double-entendres (which he didn’t), but the children clearly had no idea who he was and no interest: the whole talk focused on the illustrations/illustrators and was superb.
I think the David Williams books appear to be churned out and are a poorly written pastiche of Ronald Dahl, as a result I refuse to buy them. I suppose if publishers know that adults will buy Names it makes business sense to use them. That’s an incredibly depressing way to look at publishing though. Perhaps it’s time to set up a minority quality publishing house that seeks out quality writing for young people?

The thing is, Sunny, the major publishing houses are putting out literally dozens of excellent children's books by new children's writers for every 'celeb title' they publish. I know; they get sent to my desk for review.

It's a bit like the way regional theatres always have to plan an Alan Ayckbourn and an Agatha Christie into every season - guaranteed bums on seats enables them to present untried, more experimental stuff, too.

I'm not saying it's ideal, btw - and certainly there's a disparity in terms of the publicity they receive (again, I'm complicit in that ) - but there is another side...

I'm a ghostwriter - not for children's fiction though.

The person above who said the celeb can sometimes get half of the advance must know different people to me! A few years ago, a publisher seemed shocked that I would turn down £10k flat fee to write the memoir of someone who had got an advance of £1.5 million. Someone must have taken it though.

It's across the board really - fiction and bloggers as well as memoir (most people know that the latter tends to be ghosted though). One of the main problems is that there are writers out there who will do a book for so little, which has more of an impact than anything.

I find this trend very depressing. Can't stand David Walliams especially, he is so overrated and insanely smug.

I agree with PP about JK Rowling too, Harry Potter was great but she should have left it there, it's just getting embarrassing now, they are milking it so much and she's letting them.

Multivac- that’s really interesting to read because those books really aren’t publicised well. I live in a small town that, like all small towns nowadays, has an annual literature festival. There are loads of events for adults and loads for small children (pre-school and KS1), plus a fair amount for teenagers.
There is very little for 9-12 year olds (especially able readers who don’t yet want to read about sex or dystopias), and I think that’s a key moment for children - especially boys - to disengage, so could potentially be a brilliant time to market to them if it were done in the right way.
I wonder if our book-buying habits also affect this: if we buy books on amazon, you can’t really browse in the way you would in a proper bookshop, and its algorithm tends to direct you towards more of the same - usually in terms of author name rather than style of book.

I see J K Rowling as someone with a great imagination, but hugely wonderful as a writer. The Harry Potter world is wonderful, and amazingly full; she's obviously thought hard about it.
B books 1-2 aren't really great writing. Books 4 onward need a much better editor.

So it's not really a surprise that when she is trying to write a more plot-based than imagination-based book it's not good.

Philip Pulman or whatever he's called seems to have a one track agenda "The Catholic Church is bad" which the only books I've read of his seem to spend most of the time trying to beat you round the head with.

Sandy Tokvig (I don't think that's a right spelling either)'s book "Hitler's canary" is pretty good, ds enjoyed it. And Jenny Nimmo as well (Charlie Moon, even if they are a blatant attempt at Harry potter mark 2) are well written.
Both those are ones I got, read and then looked at the author afterwards and thought "oh, it's her."

Bear Grylls. Several series.

There is very little for 9-12 year olds (especially able readers who don’t yet want to read about sex or dystopias), and I think that’s a key moment for children - especially boys - to disengage, so could potentially be a brilliant time to market to them if it were done in the right way.

Oh those books are there, I promise! Check out Lauren Wolk; Christopher Edge; Gill Lewis... so many more!

YANBU - this pisses me off too.

I also agree Harry Potter and the Cursed Child wasn't great - it seemed like fan fiction IMO. Such a shame, as I love Harry Potter and think JK Rowling is a really talented writer.

There is very little for 9-12 year olds (especially able readers who don’t yet want to read about sex or dystopias), and I think that’s a key moment for children - especially boys - to disengage

Ooh also try out the Alex Rider books - they're brilliant. And a book called Bootleg by Alex Shearer. Maybe the Young Bond series as well by Charlie Higson?

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child was designed to be seen, not read. Most playtexts don't work as a standalone read (c.f. Shakespeare!).

I really liked Sandy Toksvig's book Hitler's Canary. And I read it before I knew who Sandy Toksvig was (I am not from the UK).

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child may have been designed to be seen and not read, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the fundamental lack of understanding of the existing characters (Hermione to dumb to keep teenagers under control, Hermione and Ron raising a daughter who was a real shit, Harry being a shit dad, Ron being treated as a joke character... I could go on, but spoilers prevent it), and the plot which was a massive contradiction of a lot of the messages of the original books. Not to mention the crappy time travel plot.

I struggle to see how that could be solved by a few whizz bangs in a theatre, unless they make you simultaneously blind and deaf so therefore unable to comprehend the abomination of a plot.

Maybe the Young Bond series as well by Charlie Higson?

Sorry, but that made me laugh, given the thread topic! (Great books, mind)

Not quite on topic but, I noticed yesterday that DD's Enid Blyton book has a recommendation from Kate Winslet on the back.

What, because nobody would buy a children's classic unless it's endorsed by some middling actress?

Cursed child is universally lauded as a play. I would not slag it off if you have not seen it.

2014newme what we're questioning is whether it is lauded as a play because anything that gives the fans more Harry Potter is appreciated, or whether it's genuinely a good play, and added into that, is it genuinely a good play that makes good use of the Harry Potter characters and universe.

It's lauded as a good play in its own right. Read the reviews. Or go and see it.

214 we might go and see it if it wasn't in two parts and each part costing a family of 5 roughly the same as our car is worth to see it.
Two parts are so clearly to get maximum money (ditto the last film) that it's quite embarrassing.

We'd love to go too. My dd has wanted to go for aaaaages but yes tickets are more than our car too. We also live a long way from London. Almost impossible to organise if you don't live near and aren't loaded. I too went off JKRowling when it came out. Money making exercise and nothing less.