to series or not to series...

[10trackers]

Yes, it's a verb.

Anyway, today I got to thinking. I'm writing a seven-book series, and I keep reading the advice to end the first book with most plot threads neatly wrapped up so it can stand alone. But the thing is, the seven 'separate' plots are so connected with each other, and the other six MCs are so established in the first book already that it would be madness, madness I tell you, to make it a stand-alone. Sure, there's a plot that gets resolved in each novel and most end with a HFN or HEA, but there's an overarching plot that just progresses slowly (and has to because of its nature).

So I figure, I pitch it as a series when the whole thing's done. I have more than enough other novels to pitch if this doesn't get picked up, so I'm not too worried about that. I have four other novels brewing with series potential, so...

But now I wonder, are there people out there like me who are too attached to their series actually remaining a series to make huge adjustments so the first novel can stand alone? Or am I being silly? :D No, don't answer that.

(Can I change the thingie under my user name back to New kid, be gentle? :D)

[Richard White]

While you see the book as a series, you have to plan as if the second book will never come out. If something strange happens and your next book isn't picked up/published/whatever, could your readers still read the first book in your series and feel like they had a good solid story there with a conclusion? Would they be angry at you for leaving them hanging if your second book never came out?

I like to recommend the Star Wars method for writing. A New Hope had a start, a middle and a conclusion. Sure, the Empire was still out there, Darth Vader hadn't paid for his crimes, Han Solo still owed money to Jaba, Luke hadn't won the girl's heart and he still needed a lot of training to "become a Jedi Knight".

But -

If The Empire Strikes Back had never been made, Star Wars would still be ranked up there as a major movie. It set records for staying in theaters for over 100 weeks in some places. Why? Because people felt like they got their money's worth.

TESB was actually a better movie, but people walked out of the theater mad when it came out. Why? Because it ended in a cliff hanger and we knew we'd have to wait another two-three years before it was resolved. The problem was, Lucas could do that because most of us had invested so much time in the Star Wars universe with "A New Hope" that he knew we'd come back for #3. If he'd pulled that with Star Wars to begin with, I don't think the first movie would have done as well and the second wouldn't have had the lines waiting for it like it did.

So, to make a long story short (too late!), look at your series and figure out can you tie up an arc of your overall story in one book. If so, that's your first book. Note, I'm not saying tie up all the loose ends, but give the audience a beginning, middle and conclusion to something, even if it's defeating a minor villain only to find out there's really a bigger bad guy over the horizon.

[Shadow_Ferret]

What Richard said. The readers should be able to read the first book, be satisfied with the story, and still want to see more of the world you've created, without being forced to read more to find out an important unresolved story line.

[10trackers]

I was thinking about having it be a series deal, though. Either have it be a series, or not have it be published at all. Of course, the first novel will make the reader curious enough about all those other characters and about the overarching plot to want to read the other parts. Or at least, that's the plan!

even if it's defeating a minor villain only to find out there's really a bigger bad guy over the horizon.

Dude, that's a great idea! *rewrites last part* Thanks, you're awesome! That way I can have my cake AND eat it too!

Also, your name makes me snicker. One of my MCs is a writer and that's his pen name :D I'm gonna have to change that!

[10trackers]

What Richard said. The readers should be able to read the first book, be satisfied with the story, and still want to see more of the world you've created, without being forced to read more to find out an important unresolved story line.

True. I hadn't even thought about the readers yet. I was still thinking about the process of pitching. Of course they shouldn't feel forced to keep reading. I don't know what I was thinking!

[Capital]

Personally I despise series.

But recent successful debuts show that non-stand alone series are a valid bet.
Name of the Wind, First Law and Prince of Nothing all have inconclusive first books (I was unlucky to purchase all three - oh well, you live you learn).

By comparison, Lies of Locke Lamora and Kushiel Dart, also first books in series, did have a solid conclusion, which made me happier, though I only liked Locke and hated Kushiel.

So you can really go any way you like about it, if you judge by the history. My usual take on this, as mentioned in a few other posts, is that the writer should write A Story they want to write. How long it is - doesn't matter. If the story is worthy, it will get picked up and editors will help you split it properly.

[MattW]

There's a publishing angle to this (which others can speak to) and the readers' angle.

If you are going to write a story with seven intertwined poltlines, do so with extreme caution. Readers will be very disappointed if there is no payoff for their time invested. You should have a conclusion (to greater or lesser degrees) in each book (especially the first) to make the journey worthwhile instead of a series of cliffhangers. Otherwise you are setting up a big payoff way down the line, which most readers won't stick around for - we are fickle and impatient.

And, echoing other advice, write your story, make it interesting. If it turns out to be 1 book, or 17, you will know when you are done, not when you start.

[Richard White]

Talking to agents on Twitter, most are looking for a solid first story, but they're going to ask "is there more to this story you can tell?" It's apparently getting harder to sell a new author to publishers who's going to tell a high fantasy story followed by a sword and sorcery story followed by a SF story followed by another independent sword and sorcery.

It seems publishers want to build a writer and their world together and then have them "experiment" with other genre once they're established.

[Stellan]

It's apparently getting harder to sell a new author to publishers who's going to tell a high fantasy story followed by a sword and sorcery story followed by a SF story followed by another independent sword and sorcery.

As someone who is currently working on a gothic fantasy, an epic space opera, a steampunk horror adventure, and a Regency romance with robots in, this just sent a cold shiver down my spine. Brrrr. I'm not sure I have the attention span to only play in one world, or one genre.

[SPMiller]

Series sell, but they sell on the strength of the first volume.

[MattW]

As someone who is currently working on a gothic fantasy, an epic space opera, a steampunk horror adventure, and a Regency romance with robots in, this just sent a cold shiver down my spine. Brrrr. I'm not sure I have the attention span to only play in one world, or one genre.
Pen names are how many authors have managed multiple-genre disorders.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

http://magicalwords.net/david-b-coe/shameless-self-promotion-and-the-wonderful-world-of-branding/

[NYCutie]

go 10 go!

[rmgil04]

I was thinking about having it be a series deal, though. Either have it be a series, or not have it be published at all.



At the risk of sounding rude, pitch it like that to an agent and you'll end up on the not published side.

I'm kinda with Capital. In some ways I don't like series. At least I don't like it when they deliberately leave the ending open. Think of it this way. Write book one as if it can stand alone. When people read it and get a sense of conclusion, they'll become more likely to be invested in it when the next comes out.

End book one with a deliberate series mentality (ending reads like "to be continued.") I can all but guarantee you'll lose people. You need to get a few books in to get the reader fully invested in the characters before you can get away with leaving them dangling.

[NYCutie]

Rmg, I normally dont like series either, but when the author can pull it off Im glad for it :D

[Capital]

At the risk of sounding rude, pitch it like that to an agent and you'll end up on the not published side.

I'm kinda with Capital. In some ways I don't like series. At least I don't like it when they deliberately leave the ending open. Think of it this way. Write book one as if it can stand alone. When people read it and get a sense of conclusion, they'll become more likely to be invested in it when the next comes out.

End book one with a deliberate series mentality (ending reads like "to be continued.") I can all but guarantee you'll lose people. You need to get a few books in to get the reader fully invested in the characters before you can get away with leaving them dangling.


I wasn't too clear, my bad - I am quite ok with "to be continued" from the established authors (GRRM, Stephen King). Debuting authors of "first in NEW AWESOME quadriology" on the other hand, make me suspicious and reluctant. That said, as recent debuts show, a new author can be successful even with "to be continued" debut in series.
I honestly don't know how things work out on average with "first in series" pitches - maybe Name of the Wind was one huge exception/one of few outliers. So I am not sure if I can agree or disagree with rmgil's first statement on publishability.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Personally, I love series. If I fall in love with an MC, I like to know there are more of his/her adventures on the horizon for me to read. I'm thinking series like Doc Savage, The Shadow, Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, et al.

I don't necessarily like stories that I have to read in chronological order to get the gist of the whole story line though.

[Death Wizard]

Personally I despise series.

But recent successful debuts show that non-stand alone series are a valid bet.
Name of the Wind, First Law and Prince of Nothing all have inconclusive first books (I was unlucky to purchase all three - oh well, you live you learn).

By comparison, Lies of Locke Lamora and Kushiel Dart, also first books in series, did have a solid conclusion, which made me happier, though I only liked Locke and hated Kushiel.

So you can really go any way you like about it, if you judge by the history. My usual take on this, as mentioned in a few other posts, is that the writer should write A Story they want to write. How long it is - doesn't matter. If the story is worthy, it will get picked up and editors will help you split it properly.

When it comes to fantasy, I much prefer series over standalones. But there's little doubt it often makes for a more difficult sell to the publisher.

[NYCutie]

I'm hoping my series gets picked up fast, but Im not holding my breath atm since I havent even finished the first of the series..

[Liosse de Velishaf]

Actually, there are plenty of debut authors who get a series sold. It's not that it's necessarily more difficult. I think there's a strong correlation there, but you need to consider the underlying factors. There's a website out there that shows what's been published in the fantasy genre over the last several years, and the debut standalones aren't all that much ahead of the debut series.

[Capital]

I'm sceptical of those lists because they don't include the total size of agent's stack of 1) incoming queries 2) unsuccessful takes.

The bottom line is - only exceptional work is published, standalone or series book 1 (which is further broken down into inconclusive book 1 like NotW or conclusive book 1 like Locke Lamora).

Conclusion: write an exceptional book. Don't worry about series, standalones, or other specifics until an editor is looking at it and making appropriate suggestions.

--OK before the replies start popping, I have to note that exceptional =/= critically acclaimed. I can't really say "write a mediocre book and hope it catches agent/publisher on their good day".

[K.L. Townsend]

Talking to agents on Twitter, most are looking for a solid first story, but they're going to ask "is there more to this story you can tell?" It's apparently getting harder to sell a new author to publishers who's going to tell a high fantasy story followed by a sword and sorcery story followed by a SF story followed by another independent sword and sorcery.

It seems publishers want to build a writer and their world together and then have them "experiment" with other genre once they're established.

This is the vibe I'm getting myself and while I can understand it, it also makes me a bit sad. I've discovered I tend to settle in genres that are closely linked, but which are still different: YA SFF, UF/Contemporary Fantasy and Paranormal Romance. There is significant overlap between them, but they are different enough in many ways to be different genres or subgenres.

I like to jump around. Keeps things fresh for me.

But like I said, I can understand why publishers are slanted this way. it's audience and name building.

[efkelley]

An editor recently told me that it's 'about pennies and pounds and being in for both'. Essentially, a brand new author needs to publish three books before you can tell if he'll soar, flop, or slide into the midlist. If they like the first one enough to publish, they'll certainly be looking for two more.

Seven books, on the other hand, may be more difficult to sell as an unestablished author. This is not to say you shouldn't try, but the odds are against it from the outset.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

This is the vibe I'm getting myself and while I can understand it, it also makes me a bit sad. I've discovered I tend to settle in genres that are closely linked, but which are still different: YA SFF, UF/Contemporary Fantasy and Paranormal Romance. There is significant overlap between them, but they are different enough in many ways to be different genres or subgenres.

I like to jump around. Keeps things fresh for me.

But like I said, I can understand why publishers are slanted this way. it's audience and name building.


You can brand yourself as someone who writes a little in a lot of genres, but you have to be just that much better than you would otherwise.

[M.Austin]

I love series and I wish you could write it how you wanted. Unfortunately, that isn't how the ball rolls here.

[SPMiller]

Actually, there are plenty of debut authors who get a series sold. It's not that it's necessarily more difficult. I think there's a strong correlation there, but you need to consider the underlying factors. There's a website out there that shows what's been published in the fantasy genre over the last several years, and the debut standalones aren't all that much ahead of the debut series.http://members.optusnet.com.au/~mgoodin68/locus.htm

Debut writers sell shitloads of series. But don't believe me. Read the sales announcements.

I generally dislike series with volumes that have inconclusive endings. For example, I will never buy the sequel to Name of the Wind, if it ever comes out. However, one advantage Rothfuss has over us is that he writes damn well. If only his storytelling matched his prose skills.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~mgoodin68/locus.htm

Debut writers sell shitloads of series. But don't believe me. Read the sales announcements.

I generally dislike series with volumes that have inconclusive endings. For example, I will never buy the sequel to Name of the Wind, if it ever comes out. However, one advantage Rothfuss has over us is that he writes damn well. If only his storytelling matched his prose skills.


Yeah, that's the site. And I've seen a great deal of anecdotal evidence as well, especially for writers in certain subgenres.

[ChaosTitan]

I was thinking about having it be a series deal, though. Either have it be a series, or not have it be published at all.

You may get a series deal, but not for seven books. Not from a major publisher. Not for an unknown writer. Two or three-book deals are the norm, with more being bought after the publisher sees sales numbers on the first couple.

A small or e-press might be willing to take a chance on a seven-book series, but this sort of "all or nothing" thinking is unrealistic.

If you're adamant about it, though, put this seven book opus aside and write a standalone. Or a trilogy. Something you can sell to get your name out there and build an audience. Then, once you have a sales record, you can try your luck with the opus.

Series sell, but they sell on the strength of the first volume.

Exactly. Which is why even new series deals tend to be for two or three books.

[10trackers]

If you're adamant about it, though, put this seven book opus aside and write a standalone. Or a trilogy. Something you can sell to get your name out there and build an audience. Then, once you have a sales record, you can try your luck with the opus.

As I mentioned in my first post, I am writing standalones and trilogies :). I'm not putting the opus aside since I'm not writing with the ultimate goal of getting published, but to get the stories in my head out. Getting published is a secondary goal, however important.

The purpose of me asking this question, as I said in the OP, was that I wanted to know if there were others out there who felt the same. In the process of reading all your replies, though, I've gotten a pretty good idea of how I want to take this thing further and how to manage to hook the reader without forcing him to read the rest.

Thanks, all, for taking the time to think about this and reply. I really appreciate your comments!

[MattW]

There is another recent trend for new authors: releasing all volumes of a trilogy over 3 or 6 months.

Good for the reader, and I assume the publisher as well. The author gets the chance to see the full story in print, and have the reader only wait a few weeks between installments, not several years. Buzz and momentum work well in this case, but I can't say if they've been big successes, only that they appeal to discouraged readers who have tired of waiting long stretches.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

There is another recent trend for new authors: releasing all volumes of a trilogy over 3 or 6 months.

Good for the reader, and I assume the publisher as well. The author gets the chance to see the full story in print, and have the reader only wait a few weeks between installments, not several years. Buzz and momentum work well in this case, but I can't say if they've been big successes, only that they appeal to discouraged readers who have tired of waiting long stretches.


Got any examples?

[IdiotsRUs]

Brent Weeks comes to mind. They were released pretty close together.

[jallenecs]

Personally, I love series. If I fall in love with an MC, I like to know there are more of his/her adventures on the horizon for me to read. I'm thinking series like Doc Savage, The Shadow, Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, et al.

I don't necessarily like stories that I have to read in chronological order to get the gist of the whole story line though.


Agreed, on all counts. I like the Dresden Files as an example. There is a continuing story arc happening (he says it's going to be twenty books, then an apocalyptic trilogy to finish the story arc). but right now, each casebook stands by itself. I myself read them out of order and did not feel dissatisfied. I got the "I'm going to have to read these again in order eventually" feeling, but each book in the series had a beginning, middle and ending that more than satisfied on its own.

as somebody who is working on book one of what I hope will be a contemporary fantasy/horror series, that's the goal I'm aiming at: each book is a finished story in itself, but also pointed toward that far reaching story arc.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

Brent Weeks comes to mind. They were released pretty close together.


Hmm... Not read him before.

[MattW]

Brent Weeks comes to mind. They were released pretty close together.
That's the one...name escaped me and I didn't remember to go look it up.

Sadly, I bounced off those books really quick (50 pages or less). Too bad - it would have been nice to read something complete from start to finish.

Like I said, a great opportunity to maintain reader excitement. That is, if they can get into the book in the first place. With delays from Martin, Lynch, Rothfuss, and others, its easy to see how publishers could be interested in something done from a new author, as long as the quality is there.

[Capital]

That's the one...name escaped me and I didn't remember to go look it up.

Sadly, I bounced off those books really quick (50 pages or less). Too bad - it would have been nice to read something complete from start to finish.


I read it in full if only to seal my hatred for trilogies/series from new authors. Not buying anymore. Rather wait until they become well known and too famous to produce crap. But that's pretty much a flip of a coin (hi Sword of Truth)

[ColoradoMom]

Personally, I love series. If I fall in love with an MC, I like to know there are more of his/her adventures on the horizon for me to read. I'm thinking series like Doc Savage, The Shadow, Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, et al.

I don't necessarily like stories that I have to read in chronological order to get the gist of the whole story line though.

I am a series fan as well. I picked up Pandora's Star after reading Fallen Dragon (both by Peter F Hamilton) and was pleasantly surprised to learn that it had a sequel. Then I picked up The Dreaming Void, again not knowing it was a series, and was thrilled to learn that there was another book waiting for me to read when it was done. (Although TDV is not a stand alone.)

My WIP will be series if the first one gets picked up, but all will be stand alone. In fact, I am blogging the prequel right now. More as a way to better understand some lesser characters, but it is pretty fun to have such an intimate knowledge of a world or set of characters.

For example, when Paula Mayo showed up in The Dreaming Void I immediately perked up. To see this character appear in this book after knowing her so well in past books which were not really related, was a pleasant surprise. I have never been a space opera fan but it seems that my innocent purchase of Fallen Dragon has made me a believer.

[Liosse de Velishaf]

I am a series fan as well. I picked up Pandora's Star after reading Fallen Dragon (both by Peter F Hamilton) and was pleasantly surprised to learn that it had a sequel. Then I picked up The Dreaming Void, again not knowing it was a series, and was thrilled to learn that there was another book waiting for me to read when it was done. (Although TDV is not a stand alone.)

My WIP will be series if the first one gets picked up, but all will be stand alone. In fact, I am blogging the prequel right now. More as a way to better understand some lesser characters, but it is pretty fun to have such an intimate knowledge of a world or set of characters.

For example, when Paula Mayo showed up in The Dreaming Void I immediately perked up. To see this character appear in this book after knowing her so well in past books which were not really related, was a pleasant surprise. I have never been a space opera fan but it seems that my innocent purchase of Fallen Dragon has made me a believer.


PFH is a sneaky bastard. Got me back into Space Opera, too.

[MattW]

And, as I've said in prior threads, there are series then there are series.

You can have Terry (Brooks or Goodkind) putting out book after book in an open ended series.

Or you can have Martin and Jordan with series that have a large story arc with a definite end, and each book which gets tied up (more or less).

Then you can have series like Brust and Gemmel, where each novel is more or less connected to the others, but the continuing story arc is less important than the arc of each edition.

[Kitti]

The problem with wanting to write it as a definite, 7-book series is that if your first books don't sell well enough (especially if you get serious diminishing returns, with less people buying book 2, even less buying book 3) then your series will get dropped. You can be pretty confident of a 2 or 3 book deal, but anything beyond that....

If I remember correctly, Dresden Files was one of those "series" that the first three books were all written and sold together. Naomi Novik's books are another "series" like that - expanding out of a trilogy once there was evidence of enough audience appeal. But those are (to the best of my knowledge) the open-ended type of series, not a 7-book story arc.