"The way people speak and write nowadays makes my head hurt." Act 1, Cyrano deBergerac

I have no idea how to get an “official” day declared but I’d like to figure it out and suggest one. It will be called: “In Honor of ‘With’” Day. With? With whom you would rightly ask? In this case, the day will be set aside to thank and celebrate the talents and collaboration of the “With” who sits solidly, quietly and barely noticed beneath the “By” name on book covers these days.

Like most blog posts and columns I write, several stars (AKA stories and headlines) collided and I started to think about the underappreciated, workhorse writers whose words make certain books come to life. Don’t misunderstand me: I’m not sure many of these books should ever come in contact with a printing press or see the light of a Kindle, but I don’t make that decision. What’s done is done, and in cases like this, done in large part due to the skilled writers who tell the story of the celebrity “author” on the cover.

First, the good news. According to the New York Post, no publishers appear to be interested in publishing the memoirs of Nadya Suleman, the Octomom. She’s been shopping a book around but so far, no takers. I’m positive that’s not due to a wave of rational thinking crashing onto the shores of Manhattan; more like overexposure for a woman who doesn’t have a story that hasn’t already been told on the pages of People or Us magazines. Nonetheless, I guarantee you Suleman’s book would have carried a “with” credit.

Now the bad news: Nicole Polizzi is publishing her first book. A novel, for God’s sake. From the mind of Snookie. It’s due in January and titled something like “A Shore Thing.” Some kind of ‘falling in love at the shore’ epic, no doubt. The book’s online listing doesn’t list her “With,” and I can certainly understand that. The “With” in this case will probably use a pen name to ensure that he or she will continue to work in the publishing industry. And I don’t blame the writer for one second. Getting paid to write anything these days is something of a miracle. So go with God, “With,” whoever you are.

Although it occurs to me that there could be a reason to buy “A Shore Thing.” You know those books and websites that suggest surprising uses for everyday objects? I could buy this book, cut out the middle of all the pages (leaving the perimeter of each intact) and use it to hide my good jewelry in plain sight. Well, if I owned enough good jewelry to warrant that, I would. Let’s face it: once this book is on a shelf, no one would ever pull off again, right? That thing would sit there for years, untouched, and my jewelry would remain safe.

Snookie’s as yet unnamed collaborator notwithstanding - who may turn out to be quite a story-teller, who knows - the list of “With” ’s is long and distinguished. They’ve assisted all kinds of authors telling all kinds of stories: from Lee Iaccoca to Howard Stern; from Patti LuPone to Laura Bush. They listen. They take notes and tape hours of interviews. The best of them smooth out the details and evoke a “voice” we’ll all recognize on the page, while suppressing their own. They watch “their” book climb the bestseller list, and congratulate the author.

Sure, they’ll cash a check for their work. But I’d like to see them take a bow of their own. So who’s with me? I’m proposing April 1, birth date of Edmond Rostand, the French dramatist who wrote the play, Cyrano de Bergerac. If anyone knows the story of supplying someone else with words and taking no credit, Rostand’s character does.

So there it is: Let’s set aside April 1, as our official “In Honor of ‘With’” Day, celebrated the world over by everyone who loves a good read.

Twist this.

From the “I almost can’t take this anymore” file, we have the following update, courtesy of Levine Breaking News, my absolute favorite daily news feed:

“Kate Gosselin is launching a series that will profile everyday women facing personal challenges "Twist of Kate" will follow the reality star and supermom as she visits the homes and workplaces of her subjects, where she will exchange insights for living. The 12-episode season will premiere in late summer, the TLC network said Thursday.”

First off, a reminder to those who haven’t read this fact previously. I’ve never once watched an episode of Jon and Kate + 8, the “reality” show that catapulted the couple and their many offspring into the national consciousness. But let’s assume for the sake of argument, that it was somehow entertaining and diverting. At the very least, it was a train wreck and many people couldn’t seem to turn away from it week after week.

Let’s also assume that Jon and Kate played their roles very well and the audience found ways to identify with them as characters, in roles, creating drama and tension. Let’s finally assume that the children – as close to voiceless victims as anyone could be – emerge from this bizarre chapter of their lives healthy and relatively unscathed as a result of their parents’ egos and pursuit of fame and fortune based on nothing more than fecundity and fertility drugs.

Kate has since moved on to another venue, a more glamorous train wreck called Dancing with the Stars. Once again, truth: I’ve never watched this, either. But my expert on the show – Howard Stern – tells me she comes off as rude and obnoxious. And that she can’t dance. What a surprise!

The question is: can’t she just go away now? Apparently not. Someone somewhere did a focus group or polling research or some reading of her Q rating and determined that a measurable and significant enough group in America was not yet finished following the adventures of Kate. Which brings us to TLC, which now stands for The Laughable Channel, because what they want us to learn is a joke, and their announcement of the new series.

If Kate is a supermom (hate that; it’s a meaningless term in every way), what the heck is she doing taping a new television show that has her visiting the homes and workplaces of women “facing personal challenges?” Why isn’t she home with her eight children? What on God’s green earth does she have to offer ‘women facing personal challenges’ in terms of brilliance? Oh, sorry – that’s not right. They’ll simply “exchange insights for living.”

Let’s pretend I’m a woman facing a personal challenge and Kate comes knocking on my door. Assuming I didn’t need or value her insights about life because I’m not also the mother of eight children including sextuplets or trapped in a loveless marriage because of a television production commitment, I’d like to imagine my side of the exchange would sound something like this:

“Kate, thanks for stopping by and bringing the entire “Twist of Kate” production crew into my living room; but I don’t know you. I never watched the show about your family and I’ve never watched you try to dance. I haven’t read even one article written about you, your ex-husband, or your children. I didn’t buy nor read your book and I haven’t tuned in to see you interviewed on any program. In other words, your notoriety alone is the one and only reason I have any idea at all who you are.

That said, you seem to think you can help me if we exchange insights for living. Super. Me first: Kindly leave. The day I believe - in even the most far-fetched, inscrutably infinitesimal way - that an ex-reality show “star” who basically exploited her children and private family life in exchange for fame and money could possibly have become elevated and enlightened to the point where she has something worthwhile to share with me about something as critical as "life challenges," based on nothing more than her kind of quasi-celebrity status is the day I take the tailpipe.”