The Times Online’s Luke Leitch has so graciously outlined for us the “10 Literary One-Hit Wonders,” a list that feels as though Leitch quickly patched it together to meet a deadline. In this article we’re presented with a majority of authors who died before or soon after their novel was published, making it impossible for them to give us their second “hit.” A better list could be put together of authors who won a Pulitzer but faded away into obscurity; I would say that’s a better distinction of a “one-hit wonder.” Still, Leitch had a deadline to meet so he spent some time on Google and came up with his list. With my powers of logic and my intense knowledge of literature, I’ll now refute every author on his list as a “one-hit wonder.” Here goes.

To Kill a Mocking Bird (Harper Lee): The kind of immediate and public success that this novel earned could drive a shy person like Harper Lee back into the shadows, which it did. It won the Pulitzer, became a successful film, and was even voted “Best Novel of the Century” in 1999 by the Library Journal. Ms. Lee herself said about the book, “I never expected any sort of success with Mockingbird. I was hoping for a quick and merciful death at the hands of the reviewers but, at the same time, I sort of hoped someone would like it enough to give me encouragement. Public encouragement. I hoped for a little, as I said, but I got rather a whole lot, and in some ways this was just about as frightening as the quick, merciful death I’d expected.” How do you follow a novel like To Kill a Mocking Bird? Maybe Harper Lee found what she had to say and said it all with this book, making it unnecessary to write another. Or maybe she never even wrote Mockingbird in the first place; there were rumors that Truman Capote actually wrote it. If Lee had spent the rest of her life writing unsuccessful novels then I could see Mockingbird as a one-hit wonder. She didn’t and it’s not. She wrote a great book and retired with her money.

Gone With the Wind (Margaret Mitchell): Another Pulitzer-winning novel made into a successful film. Mitchell was a journalist who focused on writing book reviews, interviews, and personality sketches. She started Gone With the Wind when she was bedridden with a broken ankle and couldn’t work on her normal journalistic endeavors; the novel was an attempt at diverting herself from her injury. Later, after making a connection with MacMillan editor Harold Latham and enduring a disparaging comment from a friend to the tune of “you’ll never be able to write a book,” Mitchell compiled her manuscript and made it happen. She wrote her book and was happy. Perhaps she would have written another novel, but she died in a car accident in 1949. How does this equate to “one-hit wonder?” It really doesn’t. Novelists may spend a decade working on a new book. Those who are taken from us in an accident, who may have written something great had they not died, shouldn’t be classified as “one-hit wonder” — they never got a chance to be otherwise.

Wuthering Heights (Emily Bronte): What can I say about Emily Bronte? She published the first volume of Wuthering Heights in 1847, she died in late 1848 from a cold, her sister Charlotte published the second volume of the novel after Emily’s death, and her sister Anne wrote “Agnes Grey” which is essentially the third volume of the trilogy. Emily never had a chance to become a “one-hit wonder” because of her untimely death. Why label her with this negative moniker? I’m sure had she not died at the age of 30 she would have continued writing and would have probably been quite successful.

Catcher in the Rye (J.D. Salinger): Yes, noted recluse Salinger is a “one-hit wonder.” Really? People who like Salinger read all his published work voraciously. Furthermore, he only published one novel — the rest of his work is short stories and and novellas. It’s also well-known among fans that he indeed continued to write after he ceased publishing and that when his time comes we’ll get to see the work he has been doing over the last 40 years. Salinger, another recluse who didn’t want all the attention, earned himself stalkers with his success and rightfully so retreated from the public eye. “One-hit wonder” implies a person succeeded once and subsequently failed. So far this isn’t true of any of the authors we’ve analyzed. Salinger made a choice to stop publishing, he wasn’t forced out of the game.

The Picture of Dorian Gray (Oscar Wilde): All right. I’m beginning to think that Luke Leitch is just confused. I think he (or his editor) is confused about what the phrase “one-hit wonder” really means. Let’s review the article’s title and tagline: “10 Literary One-Hit Wonders: Luke Leitch looks at those authors for whom one book was enough.” This implies negativity! The tagline implies that one book was enough for either the author or the public and in these cases we’ve seen so far it is patently not the case. Oscar Wilde as “one-hit wonder?” Are you kidding? The man changed humor. Dorian Gray was a successful novel and had Wilde written another novel that would have been successful, too. How do I know? I just do. Also, Dorian Gray was published in 1890 and Wilde was imprisoned in 1895 for his sexuality. When released in 1897, he returned to the public in ill-health and subsequently died in 1900. Yup. What a “one-hit wonder” doofus.

A Confederacy of Dunces (John Kennedy Toole): How much time should I bother to spend refuting this one? Toole committed suicide before Dunces was even published. So distraught that he couldn’t find someone to publish his masterpiece, he chose to end his life. Once his novel was finally published, spearheaded by his mother, it won the Pulitzer and gained a cult following. Can anyone explain to me how this is classified as a “one-hit wonder?” The book never even came out, Toole never saw its success, and he never even had a chance to have a chance at a second novel. This list is really wearing on me.

The Bell Jar (Sylvia Plath): The logic behind his list continues to exponentially fade. Plath hardly even had a chance to continue on. She wrote poetry and taught writing classes. The Bell Jar was published in 1963 and she committed suicide months later. She was a tortured person, emotionally distraught, and didn’t want to continue living. She never saw The Bell Jar become a “hit” or maybe she wouldn’t have killed herself. But then again, maybe she would have. I’m sure her doting fans would not have allowed her hypothetical subsequent writings be anything less than a “hit.” She’s not the literary equivalent of Rick Astley. She died at 30. Not a “one-hit wonder.” Sorry.

Black Beauty (Anna Sewell): She began writing later in life. Black Beauty was published in late 1877 when she was 57, became a huge success, and then she died of an illness six months later. Yes, she is definitely a “one-hit wonder” seeing, again, as she never even had a chance to write a follow-up. Are you beginning to see how absurd this list is?

Dr Zhivago (Boris Pasternak): Pasternak was condemned in the Soviet Union for Dr Zhivago and it wasn’t published in Russia until 1988 (it was published originally in Italy in 1957). Best known in his home country as a poet, he was quite successful with My Sister Life, a collection of poetry, in 1921. Oh, and he died of lung cancer in 1960 — only three years after Dr Zhivago was published. So maybe he would have written a successful follow-up novel if his country’s government hadn’t threatened him and he hadn’t died right after it came out. Good pick, Times Online. Definite “one-hit wonder.”

The God of Small Things (Arundhati Roy): Our last item on the list is really damn absurd. Roy is still alive and still young for a writer at 47. The God of Small Things, a semi-autobiographical novel which was, I’m assuming, extremely difficult to write due to its political and personal nature and it was published in 1997. After the novel’s success, Roy turned to journalistic non-fiction and advocacy writing and only in 2007 announced she was working on a second fiction novel. Luke Leitch has condemned her to “one-hit wonder” before she even has a chance to finish and publish her second novel. How does that make sense?

I’ve done this analysis to demonstrate how absurd “journalism” is these days. Isn’t The Times supposed to be a reputible news source? Shouldn’t their entertainment/books section at least have a little substance? I think Luke Leitch or his editor came up with the idea of doing some half-baked literary top 10 list and this drivel is what he vomited out. Not a single author listed should be classified as a “one-hit wonder;” most of them died before they could take a crack at a second novel or they made a conscious decision not to publish anything else; not a one of them failed. In Arundhati Roy’s case, she hasn’t even been given the opportunity to write her second novel before she’s labeled “one-hit wonder.” Really, this is just awful writing. Awful journalism. They should be ashamed of it.