Successful Books have an Anti-Formula

Have you ever wondered what makes a book so famous or pondered what makes books worth while reading? Well, as it turns out, the formula to a successful book is no formula at all. This may seem far fetched, fairly void of thought, and even a little obvious, but hear me out. Everyone continually convinces each other that being original is the best way to do something if you are going to do anything, whether it be write a book or compete in a competition, but how many times have you heard the term "Formula Flick" been tossed around, and how long have people been copying each other in the hopes of leeching off others' success? Copying each other has been a problem since the beginning of time, even before man and woman existed-hence the term "monkey see, monkey do". To create something truly original is a gift not only to themselves, but also to the world. The best books that have been written, be them classics or contemporary, do not follow a formula, even if they share similar aspects. The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins rose to fame and brought with it a new rise in the dystopia genre. The reason behind The Hunger Games's undeniable success is that it appealed to both male and female viewers with vivid imagery, constant action, and very subtle romance. This brought on a new wave of strong female heroines in the literature. The Hunger Games also contained in-depth and logical explanations and

history for the back story between our time and theirs as well as thoroughly convince the reader he or she this could be a possible future because Collins made the world so different from ours to immerse the reader yet contain an eerie likeness to that of our own; this ended up being the backbone for the book's success. Now, if we are to look into the success of the Harry Potter Series by J.K. Rowling, we see an entire world generated and engineered to almost flawlessly mimic life itself.
Rowling knowingly decided to create an entire new world so magic would not seem so out of place, and she succeeded with flair. Unlike The Hunger Games, whose setting was mainly personified by the hardships of the districts, the Harry Potter Series contained a world based on magic and mischief but contained the same aspects of life we experience today such as a government, set laws, discrimination, politics, economic competition, career choices, and professional sports but all of which have a magical twist to them. Rowling executed it wonderfully, creating a dreamland filled with as many wonders and secrets as problems. She writes you into a world of her own creation, and she does things I'm surprised other authors don't seem to do, and that is give real conversations. The way the characters talk about stuff from the wizarding world really is how people talk about day-to-day stuff, and since the reader and Harry haven't lived in that world, you get a feeling of being out of place without feeling confused because they will talk about stuff that isn't crutial to the plot and sometimes isn't even mentioned again, and that's fine because when an author includes something, it has purpose and relevence to the story that is being told, and the purpose of writing in unnecessary aspects of the wizarding world is to better develope not just the wizarding world, but also the facade of entering said world. We cannot, however, rely on the pattern that the setting
 can determine a book's worth. Twilight by Stephanie Meyer became a national phenomenon, loved by tween girls and hated by boys of
all ages. The reason for this book's success is still unknown to this day, but it has created a new wave of bad supernatural romances and permanently scarred vampires as a whole. A possible reason for Twilight's success may be due to its romantic ideals such as a partner who was waited thousands of years for you or the idea of a perfect soul mate, but that still doesn't excuse the fact that a suicidal teenage

girl falls in love with 1016 year old stalker guy and they a baby that kills the girl, but don't worry, the girl comes back to life and her other stalker guy friend falls in love with her newborn baby. Again, the reason for this book's success is still unknown. Going along with the idea that the thing that makes a book successful is its originality, many of the classic literature you read in class is meant to teach you something-shocker, I know. Some of these writings were famous in their day, in fact most were. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck was based entirely to show the hardships of migrant workers during the Great Depression. Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain was written with the purpose of having a book with a child as a protagonist who was not a "model child". Now, don't get me wrong, obviously, a good book must be well written, have numerous plot and literary devices, and overall be appealing, but anyone could see that anything entertaining and meant to please an audience must be done better than the competition, but the reason I can not say "Success has an anti-formula" or "Success in the entertainment business has an anti-formula" is because, generally speaking, they do. Even Pixar has a formula they follow when the write their stories. In fact, they have 22. Every Pixar movie starts out with this formula:

People have even started making their own for non-Pixar movies as well.

The reason I say successful books have an "Anti-Formula" instead of not having a formula is because their formula is not having one. No two books can be similar; originality is key, and you only get one shot at a book idea, and if someone else has done something similar, whether it be in plot, social relationships, setting, or characters, before you, the slot has been taken, there is hardly any room room for it. That is why so many books are under-appreciated, their slot was taken by another book or multiple books, and the book was neglected the chance to be famous. Society is ever changing and it does not like repetition, so it can only handle a certain amount of each familiarities between books.