Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Battle of the Books - Why Obama whups Clinton in the war over word ownership.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:47 PM
Original message
Battle of the Books - Why Obama whups Clinton in the war over word ownership.

Battle of the Books

by Jason Zengerle

Why Obama whups Clinton in the war over word ownership.
Post Date Friday, February 22, 2008

The Clinton campaign's latest tactic is to smear Barack Obama by claiming he plagiarized material in some of his speeches. As many pundits have noted, this was a move right out of Karl Rove's playbook--try to take an opponent's strength (in this case, Obama's eloquence) and turn it into a weakness. But when you consider the different approaches that Hillary and Obama took in writing their respective books, the Clinton campaign's attack is especially Rove-ian: When it comes to the issue of ownership of words, let's just say Obama is on much firmer ground than Clinton.

For Clinton's two literary efforts--the 1996 book It Takes A Village and the 2003 book Living History--she used ghostwriters. That's no grave sin: Plenty of politicians use ghostwriters. But it should be noted that Clinton didn't exactly shower hers with credit. In Village, Clinton infamously failed to include Barbara Feinman--the ghostwriter Simon & Schuster paid $120,000 to help Hillary with the project--in her acknowledgements. Hillary haters subsequently made Feinman a literary martyr, alleging that she'd written the entire book. More recently, Hillary's advocates told the New Yorker that Feinman's work was so unsatisfactory that it was basically unusable and Hillary didn't credit her out of spite. The truth probably lies somewhere in between--which still doesn't make Hillary look particularly good.

Nevertheless, Clinton did seem to learn her lesson from the episode and in Living History, she acknowledged the help of ghostwriter Maryanne Vollers. But Clinton didn't go so far as to list Vollers's name alongside her own on the book's cover, a gesture plenty of other presidential candidates--including John Edwards and John McCain--have made. As for Vollers's feelings about her work with Hillary, the novelist Walter Kirn--who lived in the same Montana town as Vollers--once wrote that Vollers came to conclude that "there was no Hillary, really, just a creature concocted by her people who was happy to be a concoction of her people." Vollers subsequently disputed Kirn's characterization, branding him a "delusional Clinton hater" and reaffirming her admiration for Hillary. When I called both Feinman and Vollers to learn more about their experiences working with Clinton, neither one was able to tell me about them due to the confidentiality agreements they'd signed. The editors of Village and Living History--Becky Saletan and Nan Graham, respectively--did not respond to phone messages, nor did Lissa Muscatine, a former Clinton speechwriter who reportedly helped with the writing of Hillary's two books. And Feinman's former literary agent, Flip Brophy, who brokered her deal for Village, refused to discuss the matter with me, branding it "old history."

Obama's literary efforts, in contrast to Hillary's at least, are an open book. As a relatively unknown young lawyer with a smallish book advance, Obama obviously couldn't afford a ghostwriter for his 1995 memoir Dreams From My Father, so he wrote the book himself. But anyone familiar with the story of Raymond Carver and Gordon Lish knows that editors sometimes do more than just massage an author's prose--they can also rewrite it. So I called Henry Ferris, who was Obama's editor on Dreams, to ask him how many of the words in that book were Obama's. Ferris didn't have too many specific memories of the work he did with Obama more than a decade ago. "He and his book now are seen in such different ways than I was looking at them at that time," Ferris explained. "I didn't take on the project thinking he'd be a leading candidate for the presidency." But Ferris was absolutely adamant about one thing: "He wrote it completely and totally all by himself," Ferris said. "No one helped him." He added, "The manuscript needed shaping and focus, it needed editing, a lot of which he did based on suggestions I made. He was a terrific writer, a great stylist. ... This was not a job where I went in and had to completely redo this book for him. He needed the kind of guidance any first-time writer would need."

For his second book, the 2006 The Audacity of Hope, Obama got enough of an advance ($1.9 million for a three-book deal) and was certainly busy enough with his work in the Senate--not to mention laying the groundwork for his presidential campaign--that no one would have blamed him for going the ghostwriter route. But, according to Rachel Klayman, the Crown editor who worked with him on Audacity, he didn't. "I get irritated when people ask, 'Does he have a ghostwriter?' because it's the opposite of that," Klayman told me. "Not only does he not have a ghostwriter, he's on an entirely different plane from most writers editors work with." Klayman said that Obama's writing process was similar to that of many authors: He'd write a draft of a chapter--oftentimes working at his computer late at night--and then send it to her and a group of other people (although in Obama's case these people weren't just friends but mainly political and policy advisors) for suggested edits.

As for what Obama sent in, Klayman said, "I've never worked with any other writer who needed less line editing than he did. That's how clean his writing is. That doesn't mean we didn't do some editing. I did a lot of different things. But he's sort of a self-editing phenomenon. Sometimes my role was to stand back and watch him edit himself." She added, "Working with him was so much like working with someone whose day job is being a writer. He is a writer as far as I'm concerned. Jacob Weisberg said he's more like a writer who became a politician than a politician who became a writer."
In other words, the prospect of Hillary beating Obama in a battle over the ownership of words is about as strong as her current prospects of beating him for the nomination.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=611a6e67-b8b0-49c5-aac3-b0658697bdb9&k=97827
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mags Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cause, Obama can do anything!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, he can obviously write. I'm sorry if that bothers you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgetrimmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. To cover my ass from the candidate fans, I do not endorse nor do I
like any of the main contenders....

Further, people can be swayed by good oration... look at Hitler and the people of Germany... so many will object to that reference, perhaps you would prefer Martin L. King and his ability to move masses with oration, perhaps even Winston Churchill... O- there is a theme building, orators who move people in times of national disturbance to create a new beginning... hmmmmmm ...my point is to lay claim that eloquence is not enough to sway me, although when used well will bring about a smile to my face...

Expression is what we have and the use of words as a tool or a form of art, sometimes both to bring words of expression into reality as form of speech, words of law, foundations to nations, concepts in arts, science, business, politics ad infinitum. However, what content is there to the expression of the words? Without a concept or form to which those words are applied the words fall like beautiful flowers into a vase on a clear table top emanating spectacular reflections of light and imagery; In time the flowers will fade, wither and die leaving behind an empty vase on a clear table top perhaps even still emanating light and imagery. So, regardless of the words, their beauty and charm or charmlessness or ugliness I need more than just good oration from my president. What I need from my president is good ideas, proper action to move those ideas into foundations for a country that is of, by and for the people as a mass of individuals not a selection of few individuals or corporations or financial super-powered persons yet those few are still embodied in the mass of individuals that make this nation whole. That is what I need from my president, and if my president can wrap that in poetic prose and present it with appealing aesthetic all the better, as long as what we are getting is the content not the allurements of linguistic folly.

May the best candidate win, whoever the hell that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC