Ending on a dramatic note. Question?

[Nateskate]

Instinctively I think I know the answer to this question, but I'll ask it anyway.

Genre: Epic Fantasy.
Issue: Series

Each book has to be satisfying. My gut tells me to end the story on a dramatic note. Example, in the Wizard of Oz. You can end book one after the terrible chase, and they reach Emerald City. Then you can pick up book two, centering on their encounter with the wicked witch of the west. But can you end it in the fanciful city before the encounter with the great and powerful Oz?

How much can you play with this formula. Lets say you have a series of dramatic points in your story. Would you conceivably stop the story between two dramatic points?

In this case, it's purely a word-count issue. Well, I shouldn't say that. Buffet science realizes that there are diminishing returns from filling your plate after you've reached satiety. Any thoughts on the science of where to end each story in a series?

To some degree, if it's like Star Wars. People were kind of ticked where movie two ended, but they came back for movie three. And in the long run, movie two is a fan favorite.

[karlitea]

As a reader of epic fantasy, I enjoy a good hook and look forward to the next in the series. However, it's a thin line. Publication between two books in a series is usually a year, and often longer. That's a long time to be left dangling. As a reader, there has to be some sense of satisfaction or completion to the end of the book, and anticipation to read the next adventure.

[azbikergirl]

I agree. IMO, the story questions raised at the beginning of book 1 must be answered by the end. But that doesn't mean the end of book 1 can't introduce new story questions and problems. ;)

In my (heroic fantasy) novel, which is book 1 of 2, all the story questions raised in the beginning are answered. But when the Big Mystery is solved, it raises more questions and reveals a bigger challenge to whet the reader's appetite. That's the plan, anyway.

[Nateskate]

I agree. IMO, the story questions raised at the beginning of book 1 must be answered by the end. But that doesn't mean the end of book 1 can't introduce new story questions and problems. ;)

In my (heroic fantasy) novel, which is book 1 of 2, all the story questions raised in the beginning are answered. But when the Big Mystery is solved, it raises more questions and reveals a bigger challenge to whet the reader's appetite. That's the plan, anyway.


In my story no mystery is solved in part one. Their is an unveiling of worlds. Ultimately the protagonist is on a journey to learn the secrets of the Universe before he can face the ultimate evil, (though he doesn't know it yet) with no guarantee of success.

Rather, the issue in this book (technically book two) is survival. He's a target, and doesn't know why, which propels him on the second leg of the journey, to find out why before he's dead, because with all nature unleashed against him, it's only a matter of time before this unseen enemy kills him. So in and of itself, survival is a goal of the book, and hopefully in dramatic fashion. But it's not just about survival of one, but kingdoms.

There are countless plots, subplots. Why is the missing prince of one kingdom, who disappeared just after ascending to the throne, fighting for the army of another?

The protagonist is unaware of a secret his mother kept from him. She is not who he thought she was. She lied and made up a past, and that secret becomes increasingly important. A side story is her coming to terms with her past, and the lies she told.

Kingdom is rising against kingdom, unaware who the real enemy is. "Who's the pawn, who's the player?" is a constant theme throughout the story, which ultimately engulfs every kingdom in the known world.

[azbikergirl]

How do you know where to end the book if the main story questions aren't answered? Or did I misunderstand your post?

[Ella]

Hmm. I am having the same problem.
Antagonist is after protagonist. Main problem. By end of story, the good guy gets away, to another planet, nonetheless, and the #2 book picks up here. Is this too much of a hanger?

[Nateskate]

How do you know where to end the book if the main story questions aren't answered? Or did I misunderstand your post?

The series has an end, so I know where everything is going. I wrote the whole thing out instead of one book at a time.

However, I've done some re-writes because A) The length of my books were too long. B) Some parts just needed major editing. c) Not being satisfied, I added another book to the front end of the series, a creation account that stops in what would amount to the second age.

The new book one is done. (This is like the Old Testament of the story, introducing plot lines, and the beings and how the races came to be) I'm in the process of finding an editor to make sure it's spruced up enough to interest an agent.

My question is really about book 2, which is the real beginning of the series, which would be comparable to book one of LOTR to the Silmarillion.

Imagine taking what was intended as a trilogy, and splitting it into 4-5 books. That's what I'm doing now. That means creating a new ending place for book one, and a new beginning place for book two. Considering that book one was origionally 150,000 words, and I want it at 100,000-preferably less, I either throw away 50,000 words, or restructure the story. I chose the later.

Since I have a bunch of dramatic moments. I can either pick one of them as the new end, or should I not worry about that. Is it okay to stop somewhere in the middle? That's kind of the question.

Honestly, I'm not sure there's a graceful way to do this because it is like the LOTR- one big story, and not five separate stories. Some stories don't have a perfect pause.

Example: I think Matrix Reloaded ended in a terrible place. I was more frustrated than happy.
But I think the LOTR- The Two Towers ended in a natural place, at the end of a dramatic moment, the victory at Helm's Deep. In effect, it isn't the end of the war, but it was the end of a battle in the war.

[Nateskate]

Hmm. I am having the same problem.
Antagonist is after protagonist. Main problem. By end of story, the good guy gets away, to another planet, nonetheless, and the #2 book picks up here. Is this too much of a hanger?

If everything is done well, it can work. It's like Star Wars episode two. It works because everyone couldn't wait to get back in the theatres. That's really the point.

Yeah, it frustrates people, but in a good way. I'm a LOTR freak, and I simply pined away waiting for movie two and movie three. It was like, "I can't wait that long." But you know what? I'd be happier if I knew I was waiting for a movie four, and a movie five.

So, frustration isn't necessarily a sign of failure.

[Ella]

Honestly, I'm not sure there's a graceful way to do this because it is like the LOTR- one big story, and not five separate stories. Some stories don't have a perfect pause.

Example: I think Matrix Reloaded ended in a terrible place. I was more frustrated than happy.
But I think the LOTR- The Two Towers ended in a natural place, at the end of a dramatic moment, the victory at Helm's Deep. In effect, it isn't the end of the war, but it was the end of a battle in the war.

I think you've answered your own question. Look for a natural place. If you have a series of climactic events, choose the one with the highest point and finish after that, with a bit of 'afterglow'. You'll also need a good one to start the next book and hook the reader, but we don't want to finish book one with the pie in mid-air. (pie in face analogy. Just made that up. :D)

I may have answered my own questions as well. I think the most important bit is not having the very last scene being a wild one, but having some space to ease off the excitement a little.

[katiemac]

Hmm. Okay. Let's talk about plots, and maybe that will help sort everything out.

I believe you shoudl have some satisfactory ending to each novel in the series. You said you have numerous subplots and storylines as well as the main plot, so let's work with those.

Ideally, each subplot is a piece of the main plot. You can make these subplots the main plots of your individual books. Overall, it's still a subplot. You describe this "secret" from the hero's mother. I'm sure it will be mentioned in book 1, but then it can become the source of revolution around book 2. The satisfactory conclusion of book 2 comes with the revelation of this information in the climax. The information revealed will continue to play throughout book 3, but now we're really focusing on "the Main Plot," which deals with the hero finally overcoming or succumbing to the antagonist.

Basically, you need to treat your stories as building upon one another (which I'm sure you're doing), but also realize they're stories and need the existence of a beginning, middle and end. I do believe the natural arc of the story will play itself out if you let it.

[Ella]

You describe this "secret" from the hero's mother. I'm sure it will be mentioned in book 1, but then it can become the source of revolution around book 2. The satisfactory conclusion of book 2 comes with the revelation of this information in the climax.

:Jaw: How the heck did you know? :Wha:

[katiemac]

I get ESPN.

[Nateskate]

Hmm. Okay. Let's talk about plots, and maybe that will help sort everything out.

I believe you shoudl have some satisfactory ending to each novel in the series. You said you have numerous subplots and storylines as well as the main plot, so let's work with those.

Ideally, each subplot is a piece of the main plot. You can make these subplots the main plots of your individual books. Overall, it's still a subplot. You describe this "secret" from the hero's mother. I'm sure it will be mentioned in book 1, but then it can become the source of revolution around book 2. The satisfactory conclusion of book 2 comes with the revelation of this information in the climax. The information revealed will continue to play throughout book 3, but now we're really focusing on "the Main Plot," which deals with the hero finally overcoming or succumbing to the antagonist.

Basically, you need to treat your stories as building upon one another (which I'm sure you're doing), but also realize they're stories and need the existence of a beginning, middle and end. I do believe the natural arc of the story will play itself out if you let it.

I'm trying to think of generic ways to say this without giving away the story.
As stated, book one reveals the various races. The one race from the first realm is essentially human, with a twist. Again, it's akin to having humans/elves and hobbits. But they story is not at all related to LOTR, so they are much different in type.

The story explains how the supper races (of humans) are formed, and how the one race shrank. But strangely, the super races are all arrogant and see the rest of their kind as inferior slaves.

Now, there are subclasses of the race from the second realm. These creatures, by nature, have tremendous powers, shape shifting, flying, enormous size and strength, the ability to become solid or etherial, passing through rock. And they divide and form sub-classes, and though they are nueter, through enchantments breed another type of being. One of the evil cast, become somewhat like the Marilyn Mansons of their species, and actually mutilate themselves into giant bat-winged creatures. I'm not a Marilyn Manson fans, but they are so evil, like the Darth Vadars of the dark side, that I imagine if this is ever a movie, people will enjoy the scenes wherever they appear. When they fly over head, they suck the life out of the plants below, leaving a trail of death wherever they go.

By the end of book one, you have all of these species engaged in a war, either seeking to destroy,or seeking to survive.

Book two opens with a brief introduction to these players, and the war. Then you go from these two sides planning to resume their war, one to destroy the world, one to save it, to the human drama.

There are a number of places in book two where various lives are on the line. I could end on one of these, or have a pause. It could end on one of the revelations, because their are many. In a sense, I think I had one thing in mind, and it's either the point where the protagonist enters the place of revelation, or after he recieves the first revelation, that somehow, the survival of his world depends on choices he makes.

And ultimately, the evil chasing him may not be nearly as dangerous to his cause as the temptations, which includes the option to walk away, ignore the battle, find an Oasis, and live a relatively safe life, if there is such a thing. Well, all of those things are portrayed throughout the story. I guess I can always end with a question, "which way will he turn?"

Now it may sound like I'm giving away the whole thing, but really, the story is probably going to wind up over 1/2 million words. Perhaps I will end book two with Frodo proverbially reaching Rivendale. And my question is, should I stop after they escape the ringwraiths, or after the council of Elrond?

[NeuroFizz]

Nateskate,

I've had an experience that may apply to your situation. I've completed a two-book mystery saga (I don't think it's appropriate to call two books a series), the first with a word count in the high 70k range, and the second a little short, in the high 50k range. My initial thought, just from a length perspective, was to combine them. However, in the first the whodunnit is resolved. The second is really a psychological suspense that starts after the solved crimes. I introduced the idea of combining them to a professional editor, who happens to be one of the authors of a well known editing book. His comment was incredibly logical and reasonable. The two stories have very different primary sources of tension/resolution, so combining the two would be a huge mistake. In his words, one storyline would detract from the other--one would have to be the major plot and the other a subplot, which doesn't work. By extrapolation, if you have a single primary source of tension and resolution (regardless of the number of subplots), it should be one book. The only way you can break it up and not cheat the reader (book buyer) is to make darn sure that every individual book has a very different source of tension and resolution. There can be an overarching plotline for the series, but it can't be thrown out as the primary plot at the beginning without resolution--you know, the describe-a-gun, you-have-to-shoot-it thing. A book series is just that--a series of books. It's not a series of book-length chapters. And dramatic moments don't constitute reasonable break points for a book.

No offense, but you all seem to think that Star Wars is a good model for a book series. Remember that a movie patron invests seven or eight dollars and two hours in the story while a reader invests twice that much cash and much more time in the book. The reader will expect a full resolution of the story for that much time and money. I wouldn't suggest that anyone model their writing after what happens in a movie theater. Model it after the Harry Potter series of books. There is minimal reference to the overarching storyline while each book has its own plot, subplots and resolution. The reader gets totally drawn into the immediate story of the book without seeing it as a piece of a larger story, although there are enough suggestions of a larger story that lets the reader's imagination soar.

As authors, we shouldn't be looking for the "minimal publishable unit" as a way to construct a topic series. We should be looking for the best complete story to entertain the reader. There's nothing wrong with keeping the reader guessing in a story, but guessing in a straight-ahead plotline shouldn't span from book to book unless you are darn sure that each book stands on its own and provides maximal satisfaction to the reader. If the reader feels like he/she bought the first book just to set up the second, I bet he/she won't be very happy, or very willing to get out the pocketbook again.

If your stories fit the Harry Potter model, you're in great shape.

The story sounds very interesting. Good luck with it.

[zornhau]

As a reader, if the author doesn't answer the immediate story question at the end of the book, I don't buy the sequel, or any of the author's books ever again. And I warn my friends.

However, I don't mind hooks for sequels if:

The book covers smaller ark of an explicitly advertised larger ark, e.g. one stage of a bigger quest.
Or

The answer to the story question poses another question: Will they defeat the powers of darkness? Yes, but now can they reclaim a world overrun by demon-possessed nanotechnology...?

[maestrowork]

Just look at Harry Potter. The first book would be a good enough stand-alone book. Most of the questions are answered and the story ends. There are hooks for sequels -- what will happen to Harry and company next year? What about Who-shall-not-be-named? In fact, those two arcs (Harry's school life and his nemisis) are really what bring the whole series together... but they're such long arcs that they are not intrusive of the "main" stories of each book. It's especially true for the early books. Now we're up to book five, things are different. Rowling has the luxury to NOT resolve a lot of things and leave loose ends untied, etc. because WE KNOW there's going to be book six and we KNOW millions will be buying.

Same with Star Wars. The New Hope was a complete movie all by itself. Yes, it has hooks at the end (what happens to Darth Vader? How about the war? It's not over yet...) but it's a complete story, and if there were never going to be another Star War, it would have been a satisfying story.

Empire Strikes Back was different. By then clearly there was a franchise -- New Hope just made $millions in the box office. It's a no brainer. That's why Lucas could afford to leave the audience hanging with a cliffhanger because he had already promised a trilogy. That is JUST brilliant. He's doing the same with the prequels.

My advice is, do the same thing. Make your first book as complete as possible, with perhaps an overaching backbone (war is not over... evil is not completely defeated, etc.). If your story and characters are strong enough, there will be demands for sequels. And when your first book sells like hotcakes, you can do anything you want with your second, third... if it doesn't sell, all bets are off.

It doesn't mean you shouldn't plan your series ahead of time. Sometimes it's worthwhile to do so. Our own Liam just sold a six-book deal. It could happen. But the first book better be GOOD.

[katiemac]

Nate,

I know you're trying to explain in generic terms, but there's no way any of us are going to be able to give you a definite answer without seeing the actual material. Can you show this to any of your friends/family and see if they have an opinion? You wouldn't necessarily need a writer's eye for something like this, just a reader's. If not, you may want to PM a writer here you trust and see if they have the time to look it through.

Finally, I know you're using Star Wars and LotR analogies here to help us understand what you're doing, but I am slightly concerned because I think it can be dangerous for you. Just don't get mixed up, and do what seems best for your story.

[Lenora Rose]

Make your first book as complete as possible, with perhaps an overaching backbone

Overaching backbone - the result of all the BIC needed to complete the project?



Seriously.

Nateskate: One comment about choosing not to attempt to trim your work caught my eye, because an early draft of one story I wrote was 180k words (oops). It's now almost down to 135K (Cut in two different editing sessions - in the first one, I only successfully cut 25k out. In the later one, I added scenes and still managed to cut the whole further. In some places I cut over 500 words from a chapter wihtout cutting a scene, just cutting paragraphs then trimming passives). So it's not impossible.

And personally, while I know a couple of people on this site have said they usually have to go back in and add detail, in every epic fantasy/sf rough draft I've critiqued that there's room to trim the prose (Even in the cases where the world-building or characterization desperately needed expansion, there were still overwritten paragraphs and irrelevant scenes.)

Also, while people harp on the 100k thing, if it needs to be at least 130k to tell a good story, make it 130k and go with it.

I'd be inclined to advise against moving the climax of book one around. Your instinct for where to end book one the first time is probably more "right" than any other place you could move the close to - since you were planning it as the first book, you probably have more threads of resolution than you realise already in place (Our subconscious does understand "Book" sometimes more than our conscious mind does), so emphasizing those would be easier than coming out with new ones.

Note that ALL the above is generalities from someone who hasn't read your work. All of the above could therefore be entirely wrong. You could have the tightest, most spare prose since Hemingway, and a better climactic scene available to end book one than the one you actually used.

It sounds like you have a finished draft and you're debating how to rewrite.

I'd suggest, before you do anything based on your own feelings, getting beta readers for book one, and hitting them with two questions - "does it feel complete enough of itself?" and "If you were to cut scenes, what would you get rid of?" And don't make any decisions on your next draft until they answer these. If you've already had it beta-read, but didn't get clear answers to these questions, call your betas back.

[Nateskate]

Nateskate,


If your stories fit the Harry Potter model, you're in great shape.

The story sounds very interesting. Good luck with it.

The reason for "Star Wars" metaphors is that I like to draw upon ones easiest to understand. I can't comment on Harry Potter.

It's much deeper than Harry Potter from what I know of Harry Potter. One of my fears would be that some parts are too deep. Equally, there are fears that some parts would seem too shallow.

In book one, after a brief creation, you have (I don't call them humans) waking up and wondering where they came from. The first person you meet is not a central character, his grandson becomes the first, and most consistant protagonist in the book. But you have talking animals.

Yikes, "Mr Ed!" No, there's a very deep reason for having a world full of animals talking, and there's utter sadness when through a wicked enchantment, the "Dullness of thought" comes, diminishing both human and animal mental capacities.

My greatest concerns was that people would mistakenly read the beginning, and assume this book and series are trite entertainment. The first protagonist wants to know the meaning of life itself, and the changing of things is part of the question, "Why is there suffering in the world?"

Ultimately, along the way, in the series you have the personification of Wisdom, an idea I stole from Solomon. But you aren't going to find quasi- profound sounding jargon. Everything about this personification is as deep as people want to go. Why does this personification never appear the same twice? Why does "her" dwelling keep changing from a cave, to a palace to...well, you'll have to read the story. The key protagonist introduced in book two has to figure these things out. The fate of the Universe depends on it.

I wrote this with several things in mind. 1) There's always a moral to the story. With me it's not one, but a multitude.

2) Fantasy lovers loved to be teased with riddles. The ones who will enjoy this the most are people who look for secret meanings. The direction of the journey itself may have a meaning. Why was this placed over here? (Yes that would drive some people nuts- but the story is designed to be read without considering those things. You can read it just as a straight ahead fable) Years later, it would delight me to think that some people will be (hopefully) chewing the fat, debating what this or that meant.

3) I wanted it to be entertaining. I want to make it something people hate to put down, even people who don't particularly like fishing for deep insights.

4) In the grand scheme of things, I want it to be meaningful to the point where people get epiphanies as they read. Countless people face real life choices in this story. Even in the romances, people shoot themselves in the foot like in real life.

"Do I tell the truth, or spare someone's feelings?" "What are the consequences of bitterness? What are the consequences of holding a grudge?" Alot of things are set in motion by people who had no particular malice, simply they had no insight.

[katiemac]

It's much deeper than Harry Potter from what I know of Harry Potter. One of my fears would be that some parts are too deep. Equally, there are fears that some parts would seem too shallow.

Okay. So I've made a mistake. I read maestro's post and wrote mine with the intention you would have read Rowling's series, and therefore would be able to use that as an example for the way she is writing the series.

Here's my suggestion, then. I think you should read the first book (and even the second after) in the series, Sorceror's Stone, or if you're in England, Philosopher's Stone. It's short and you can fly through it in a day. Even if you don't like the story, it might really help you out with your problem. The books are organized one for each year in Harry's life. That alone gives you the "end" point of the novel, the end of his school year. But throughout that school year, you're also given the subplots and main plot for each book which is also eventually resolved. However, once every climax happens, new information is still revealed so the story will continue.

I think these novels have more definite endings and more proper resolutions for books in a series than, say, the Tolkien novels which were initially written as one giant project.

[Lenora Rose]

It's much deeper than Harry Potter from what I know of Harry Potter.

Don't mistake a discussion of structure for a discussion of substance. We were talking about the Harry Potter story format (Reasonably independant books at the start, growing more story-arc related only once it's clear the audience is established), not the Harry Potter story substance (School of wizardry, ultimate evil, self-sacrifice, silly jokes about house elves and quidditch).

[Nateskate]

As a reader, if the author doesn't answer the immediate story question at the end of the book, I don't buy the sequel, or any of the author's books ever again. And I warn my friends.

However, I don't mind hooks for sequels if:

The book covers smaller ark of an explicitly advertised larger ark, e.g. one stage of a bigger quest.
Or

The answer to the story question poses another question: Will they defeat the powers of darkness? Yes, but now can they reclaim a world overrun by demon-possessed nanotechnology...?


What if the question is, "Can mankind save itself from itself?" That isn't resolved in one sitting. But it is a question worth pondering. In essence, how many questions are deeper, or more important to solve? In fantasy, you have "types". What better way to bring up great questions than to phrase them in stories like Lord of the Rings?

I once wrote a song that was never recorded. It's basic premise is this, "Pharoah has no friends, only slaves and slave-drivers." But a slave-driver may pressume to be closer to Pharoah (yeah, I'm in his Possee!), simply because he isn't on the cracking end of a whip, and may get an extra slice of bread at the end of the day. The mistake is to presume that people who use us, care about our welfare, when they only care about what they can get out of us. In real life, how many people can't tell the difference, and so you have people like M.C Hammer, who open their doors to people who left him broke.

The question is, will humanity figure it out before they crack up the car called the world? Well, isn't that what fantasy is about? (Well some) The Numenorians trusted Sauron, thinking he was a friend. He exploited their fear of mortality. They opened their doors to him, and through his council, brought down their kingdom. To me that is one of the most profound lessons of Tolkien's story. What Sauron couldn't do through military might, he did through praise and offering his assistance.

That kind of fantasy appeals to some, and not to others. I presume my story may be loved by some and others will leave it on the shelf. I just have a hope it appeals to more than enough to keep the publishers happy.

[Nateskate]

Don't mistake a discussion of structure for a discussion of substance. We were talking about the Harry Potter story format (Reasonably independant books at the start, growing more story-arc related only once it's clear the audience is established), not the Harry Potter story substance (School of wizardry, ultimate evil, self-sacrifice, silly jokes about house elves and quidditch).

Point taken. I haven't read Harry Potter or looked at the films. I have gathered there are morals to the story from what I've heard.

That's a good question about story-arc. There's a beginning, middle and end. But there's not one beginning, middle, and end in the sense it's a world, and a world continues until the end. But a life ends, a kingdom ends, and hopefully they end well. Each generation has it's own wars to solve, and issues to deal with. In this sense, you have a continuing arc.

I can only use metaphors to make this point. Frodo is on a mission to save the Shire, not to be king. Aragorn is on a mission to save a Kingdom, not the shire. These are interwoven people with interwoven purposes, but they have a common enemy, and that enemy doesn't just threaten Gondor, but Rivendale, the Shire, the mines of Moria. People who would have no common bond otherwise, are brought together. Yet you can tell the story of Aragorn and Eowyn, it is a story within a story. Tolkien's greatest challenge was breaking up what was one story. He didn't see the natural pause. But he sure had a story to tell, and eventually he simply had to divide it somewhere.

In this same way, there are a number of people who have their own agendas, and kingdoms having their own agendas. But there are enough constants to tie them together in the sense that this whole world has a common enemy. But not everyone in the world understands this. You kind of want to shake the people in book two, because although they are a new generation, you just wish they wouldn't make the same mistakes of the first two ages. Yet, book two isn't simply a rehash, it takes the whole story to a new level.

I have faith in the story, perhaps a stubborn faith. My only questions are have I told it well? This may be weird, but I bet if you take fifty of the most skilled people here, they might tell my story better than me. That is, if they thought of it.

I will not dare to think I'm the most skilled writer. Yet, for whatever reason, it's my story, and mine until it is birthed onto the rack of a Barnes and Nobels shelf. So, I do ask questions, and am gleening insights, though it may seem contrary.

[Nateskate]

Okay. So I've made a mistake. I read maestro's post and wrote mine with the intention you would have read Rowling's series, and therefore would be able to use that as an example for the way she is writing the series.

Here's my suggestion, then. I think you should read the first book (and even the second after) in the series, Sorceror's Stone, or if you're in England, Philosopher's Stone. It's short and you can fly through it in a day. Even if you don't like the story, it might really help you out with your problem. The books are organized one for each year in Harry's life. That alone gives you the "end" point of the novel, the end of his school year. But throughout that school year, you're also given the subplots and main plot for each book which is also eventually resolved. However, once every climax happens, new information is still revealed so the story will continue.

I think these novels have more definite endings and more proper resolutions for books in a series than, say, the Tolkien novels which were initially written as one giant project.

We're talking in real time, so I didn't see this second thread. In a sense, book two of my series, through the end of that particular series, revolves around someone who is fifteen when he starts out, and he isn't very much older when he finishes. Book one is different in that it spans more than one lifetime. It is the odd duck, but an interesting duck. Book one is kind of like the chain-linked legends of the Greeks or Norse myths, but more consistent, and heading in a planned direction. You not only have the creation of mythical races, but the destruction of races, how they slip out of memory into various legends.

[Nateskate]

Overaching backbone - the result of all the BIC needed to complete the project?



Seriously.

Nateskate: One comment about choosing not to attempt to trim your work caught my eye, because an early draft of one story I wrote was 180k words (oops). It's now almost down to 135K (Cut in two different editing sessions - in the first one, I only successfully cut 25k out. In the later one, I added scenes and still managed to cut the whole further. In some places I cut over 500 words from a chapter wihtout cutting a scene, just cutting paragraphs then trimming passives). So it's not impossible.

And personally, while I know a couple of people on this site have said they usually have to go back in and add detail, in every epic fantasy/sf rough draft I've critiqued that there's room to trim the prose (Even in the cases where the world-building or characterization desperately needed expansion, there were still overwritten paragraphs and irrelevant scenes.)

Also, while people harp on the 100k thing, if it needs to be at least 130k to tell a good story, make it 130k and go with it.

I'd be inclined to advise against moving the climax of book one around. Your instinct for where to end book one the first time is probably more "right" than any other place you could move the close to - since you were planning it as the first book, you probably have more threads of resolution than you realise already in place (Our subconscious does understand "Book" sometimes more than our conscious mind does), so emphasizing those would be easier than coming out with new ones.

Note that ALL the above is generalities from someone who hasn't read your work. All of the above could therefore be entirely wrong. You could have the tightest, most spare prose since Hemingway, and a better climactic scene available to end book one than the one you actually used.

It sounds like you have a finished draft and you're debating how to rewrite.

I'd suggest, before you do anything based on your own feelings, getting beta readers for book one, and hitting them with two questions - "does it feel complete enough of itself?" and "If you were to cut scenes, what would you get rid of?" And don't make any decisions on your next draft until they answer these. If you've already had it beta-read, but didn't get clear answers to these questions, call your betas back.

I'm about 90 percent done with my revision of book two. While I'm doing that, I've printed it out, and I've been doing edits, so the final story may change a little.

I'm absolutely trimming away like crazy. And I actually love hacking entire pages out of the story. That doesn't mean I can't hack even more out, but I will wind up eventually asking a professional editor to help with the final hack, lest I miss something.

So, restructure, hack, restructure, hack. And if something will make this better for the book shelf, but I think it's important, I've also pondered an "After the series appendix" with parts some readers might have wanted to see." The assumption is that if the story actually is popular, then die hards would want to see the missing pieces. If it's not popular, then what's the point anyway.

By the way, it is a better story now. At first I regreted doing this, but now there are times in proofing I can't put my own story down.

[zornhau]

What if the question is, "Can mankind save itself from itself?" That isn't resolved in one sitting. But it is a question worth pondering. In essence, how many questions are deeper, or more important to solve? In fantasy, you have "types". What better way to bring up great questions than to phrase them in stories like Lord of the Rings?


That was covered by my

The book covers smaller ark of an explicitly advertised larger ark, e.g. one stage of a bigger quest.

You can have a whole series of books on the question "Can mankind save itself from itself?" Each book could have a cliffhanger relating to the series question. But each book would also have to have it's own ark and a satisfactory conclusion, e.g. They reclaim the Mystic Healing Sword of Tweng, but by the time they bring it home, things have got much worse.

[Nateskate]

That was covered by my


You can have a whole series of books on the question "Can mankind save itself from itself?" Each book could have a cliffhanger relating to the series question. But each book would also have to have it's own ark and a satisfactory conclusion, e.g. They reclaim the Mystic Healing Sword of Tweng, but by the time they bring it home, things have got much worse.

Thanks for explaining that. I didn't quite grasp it. This is absolutely the case. In a sense, (my version of humanity) is threatened by an evil alliance that has the power to move invisibly, or reveal itself. It will do whichever further's its purpose.

But here's the twist. Normally you would have a learning curve. In the first age, they discover a supernatural weapon. And surprisingly, another weapon is found later.

This is not the victory. With these, barely a remnant of (I'll call them humans, but this isn't inferred by the book) survive the first onslaught.

Essentially, the evil alliance explains their objectives. This never changes. Their success depends on the utter anhilation of a species.

My twist is that every time evil fails, it is set back, but it gets smarter, one step closer to its goal. And for this reason, it changes tactics for book two. It hides, like a snake recoiling in a hole, waiting for the right moment to strike.

Instead of humanity being better equipt, they are starting from scratch. But there is also more to the Universe than these two races from two realms interacting. In fact, there are seven realms. One is completely hidden since the dawn of creation.

An extremely powerful being sees this dilema, and realizes that the dark alliance will destroy these creatures and their world. He is fond of them, despite their sometimes goofiness, and intervenes. There are seven Hidden Mysteries living in a secret realm. They are beings of unfathomable powers, so much so that when introduced, they send shivers into the heart of the evil alliance. "BUT" even their hands are tied, because it has been decreed the fate of this world is in the hands of the occupants. Technically, to use a metaphor, the world is in the hands of mankind to build it up, or blow it up. Whatever happens is ultimately in their hands.

So, although the beings on their side may want to save them. Their hands can be completely tied by them, so that humanity, in essense, wind up imprisoning their own helpers. In fact, there are creatures putting their lives on the line to save these beings, which makes the blissful ignorance of these creatures even more frustrating.

They are unwittingly capable of unleashing good and evil, and so, the question is, "Are they ever going to figure out the rules of the game in time to save their race and save their world?"

So humanity is in the driver's seat. They either learn, or unwittingly unleash their doom. There are hidden weapons, hidden powers, all burried in their world. They now have hope, because, although the Mystery refuses to fight mankind's battle, he can teach them the history of the war, the rules of the game, and the powers available to them.

Book two is evil saying, "We're back, and we've learned our lessons. We are more dangerous than before, and this time we'll succeed." They are aware of the Mystery who has entered the world. But they also realize humanity has become fat and happy, and completely ignorant, and their goal is to keep them that way until "Check-Mate".

But the evil alliance is threatened suddenly by something that happens with this fifteen year old, and they see him as an enemy. Because of the rules of the game, there is a power that prevents them from striking him directly, and as stated, they set nature against him. And of course, there are a series of dominos set in motion.

* I use the phrase "humans" and "Humanity". Likewise, it is never inferred this is our "world". In the story, neither is stated or inferred. I'm just useing these terms to make the point clearer.

[Lenora Rose]

nateskate: From the way you've been answering questions and long rambles, it's looking like you're headed in the right direction with this.

Which of course leads to my next question.

Your book two is the one that was originally book one. Can it still stand alone for those who haven't read book one? How about book three?

This, I think might be the make or break, as much more more than whether the climaxes work. If books one and two have satisfying climaxes, that's great. It's fantabulous. it will lead people back to read the next one.

If the next one doesn't start in a way that a newcomer can get, though, then it won't attract *new* readers... and new readers make the world go 'round.

And of course, we're all thinking well ahead of that big publication hurdle. Ah, well, it's better to think about it now than to blink, look at the editor, and go "What? I never thought of that..."

[Nateskate]

Just look at Harry Potter. The first book would be a good enough stand-alone book. Most of the questions are answered and the story ends. There are hooks for sequels -- what will happen to Harry and company next year? What about Who-shall-not-be-named? In fact, those two arcs (Harry's school life and his nemisis) are really what bring the whole series together... but they're such long arcs that they are not intrusive of the "main" stories of each book. It's especially true for the early books. Now we're up to book five, things are different. Rowling has the luxury to NOT resolve a lot of things and leave loose ends untied, etc. because WE KNOW there's going to be book six and we KNOW millions will be buying.

Same with Star Wars. The New Hope was a complete movie all by itself. Yes, it has hooks at the end (what happens to Darth Vader? How about the war? It's not over yet...) but it's a complete story, and if there were never going to be another Star War, it would have been a satisfying story.

Empire Strikes Back was different. By then clearly there was a franchise -- New Hope just made $millions in the box office. It's a no brainer. That's why Lucas could afford to leave the audience hanging with a cliffhanger because he had already promised a trilogy. That is JUST brilliant. He's doing the same with the prequels.

My advice is, do the same thing. Make your first book as complete as possible, with perhaps an overaching backbone (war is not over... evil is not completely defeated, etc.). If your story and characters are strong enough, there will be demands for sequels. And when your first book sells like hotcakes, you can do anything you want with your second, third... if it doesn't sell, all bets are off.

It doesn't mean you shouldn't plan your series ahead of time. Sometimes it's worthwhile to do so. Our own Liam just sold a six-book deal. It could happen. But the first book better be GOOD.

Technically, the book I'm talking about is book two, not book one. I've already ended book one. The fates of civilizations are already decided. Then the dilema, "A final solution must be found, or eventually this evil alliance will destroy the world for good." It's not written like that, but this is the gist. "We've saved the world this time, barely, and with immeasurable casualties, but if the evil alliance gets the upper hand again, the world is doomed."

In a sense, it would be liked the Jedi realizing they needed to find a Luke Skywalker, or their cause is doomed, because the Emperor has grown so strong, the Universe will fall.

[Nateskate]

nateskate: From the way you've been answering questions and long rambles, it's looking like you're headed in the right direction with this.

Which of course leads to my next question.

Your book two is the one that was originally book one. Can it still stand alone for those who haven't read book one? How about book three?

This, I think might be the make or break, as much more more than whether the climaxes work. If books one and two have satisfying climaxes, that's great. It's fantabulous. it will lead people back to read the next one.

If the next one doesn't start in a way that a newcomer can get, though, then it won't attract *new* readers... and new readers make the world go 'round.

And of course, we're all thinking well ahead of that big publication hurdle. Ah, well, it's better to think about it now than to blink, look at the editor, and go "What? I never thought of that..."

We'll find out. Instead of trusting my instincts, I'm paying an editor with publishing experience to give book one a thorough go through. She has a Ph.D in Medieval lit, is published, and I wanted to consult her awhile back, but she was too busy. Honestly, I wanted her boyfriend to edit it, because he's a Ph.D in Critical Writing from the Midwest, who is a published fantasy author.

If she sees fatal flaws in the story, I'll ask for a consult with her boyfriend, but I suspect she'll do that anyway.

Honestly, if Book One is bought, I'll probably take the same approach with book two.

Again, this is a paradox. I have small faith in me as a novelist, but great faith in the story itself, so much so, that I'm investing a great deal into it, in terms of time, and now to pay someone to scrutinize it. Perhaps book one is already good enough to submit. But this is my first attempt, and I believe first impressions are often the most important. I want it to be the kind of book an agent will kick themselves for passing over. Better yet, I'd rather it be something they'd fight over. I guy's gotta dream.

[maestrowork]

Nate, if you are working on book two, and you think book one by itself would sell, then yeah, do what you want, and end on a dramatic note to hook book 3. Still, the main story in book two has to have a good resolution for it to be satisfying. But yeah, throw in a bone at the end so your readers would want more.

But like a lot of people say, you'd better sell book One.

[zornhau]

Nateskate: it sounds like what you have is classic sequel-fisher epilogues, which should be fine. Last chapter ends with protags vowing eternal love and settling down to raise a family: quest over, ark complete.... turn the page and you get....

Epliogue

Evil Henchman held out his right eye and stared at his overlord with his remaing orb. "But master, I failed, but you spared me."

The Overlord accepted the dismembered ocular organ and took mouthful of ganglia. "Indeed. You will shortly have an opportunity to redeem yourself. Behold the Doomsday Wrath Machine!"

[NeuroFizz]

The Overlord accepted the dismembered ocular organ and took mouthful of ganglia. "Indeed. You will shortly have an opportunity to redeem yourself. Behold the Doomsday Wrath Machine!"

Good gore, but change "ganglia" to "optic nerve." There aren't any ganglia out near the eyeball. He'd have to pull out pieces of brain with the eye to get ganglia. First he'd have to get past the optic chiasma (where the two optic nerves cross), and messing with that would probably destroy vision in the remaining eye as well. I know it was just an example, but sometimes people see this stuff and use it. Otherwise, you are right about ways to tease for a continuation of the saga. This one is relatively blatant, others can be much more subtle. Both are effective, particularly once a readership is established by the author.

[zornhau]

Thanks for the correction!

[Nateskate]

Nate, if you are working on book two, and you think book one by itself would sell, then yeah, do what you want, and end on a dramatic note to hook book 3. Still, the main story in book two has to have a good resolution for it to be satisfying. But yeah, throw in a bone at the end so your readers would want more.

But like a lot of people say, you'd better sell book One.

Yeah, that's the trick, isn't it. If book one sells, the other pieces fall into place. I'm cautiously optomistic.

[Nateskate]

Nateskate: it sounds like what you have is classic sequel-fisher epilogues, which should be fine. Last chapter ends with protags vowing eternal love and settling down to raise a family: quest over, ark complete.... turn the page and you get....

Epliogue

Evil Henchman held out his right eye and stared at his overlord with his remaing orb. "But master, I failed, but you spared me."

The Overlord accepted the dismembered ocular organ and took mouthful of ganglia. "Indeed. You will shortly have an opportunity to redeem yourself. Behold the Doomsday Wrath Machine!"


I'll deviate a little from the book, and talk a little bit about some things important to me. I started my book with two goals, no creation story (I caved), no direct reference to God, well in the sense of Tolkien's Illuvatar/Eru, it is inferred, but I wanted to take this story outside of direct involvement, to throw the fate of "this civilization" in the hands of "this civilization."

I planned to avoid what so many fantasies do, have a Messiah Figure. And I think I succeeded here. In essense, you are left with questions. Since there are subsequent generations, "Will there be a Frodo of THIS age." Sure Frodo saves the world, but who will save it when he's gone? Heroes throughout are not Messiah figures. They are not destined to save the world. Rather, they have a choice to step up and make choices with grave consequence.