Here's a novel idea ...your novels too long!

[paladinb]

Hi all,

I recently finished a parnormal thriller which I intended to be the first part of a trilogy. I've been sending the MS out to various uk based agents without any success. I wasn't particuarly disheartned as I knew it was going to be a long process trying to get it published (I manageed to get my first novel published by a small press back in 99). Anyway this week I contacted a professional writers workshop who were given out free advice on query letters. They told me after reading my letter that they weren't suprised I hadn't had much success as my book was over 200,000 words long it was going to be a tall order for any agent to take on.

So I'm faced with the daunting prospect of either trying to condense my MS down to a more 'acceptable' size(what sort of size is acceptable?) or trying to split it into two, perhaps even three books. The story is pretty complex with a lot of characters and I'm afraid if I try and cut it in two it won't seem like two complete stories but rather two halves of a whole. My worry with condensing is the loss of plot or character development.

So I'm wondering if anyone out there has faced a similar problem and how they dealt with it.

To be honest though I'm open to any weird and wonderful suggestions!

[Birol]

That's not really a novel problem. It's nothing new. If you search through this forum, you will find that acceptable length and what the different standard lengths are for novels have been discussed in depth often.

As for whether you should condense your novel or separate it into two or more books, this is not a question that is easily answered without seeing the manuscript. It may also be a matter of preference on your part. What are you willing to do to your story in order to increase your chances of having it published?

[Jamesaritchie]

Hi all,

I recently finished a parnormal thriller which I intended to be the first part of a trilogy. I've been sending the MS out to various uk based agents without any success. I wasn't particuarly disheartned as I knew it was going to be a long process trying to get it published (I manageed to get my first novel published by a small press back in 99). Anyway this week I contacted a professional writers workshop who were given out free advice on query letters. They told me after reading my letter that they weren't suprised I hadn't had much success as my book was over 200,000 words long it was going to be a tall order for any agent to take on.

So I'm faced with the daunting prospect of either trying to condense my MS down to a more 'acceptable' size(what sort of size is acceptable?) or trying to split it into two, perhaps even three books. The story is pretty complex with a lot of characters and I'm afraid if I try and cut it in two it won't seem like two complete stories but rather two halves of a whole. My worry with condensing is the loss of plot or character development.

So I'm wondering if anyone out there has faced a similar problem and how they dealt with it.

To be honest though I'm open to any weird and wonderful suggestions!

I'd say they were definitely correct. 200K is way too long. Especially for a paranormal thriller. For any thriller.

I believe any story can be told at any length. In fact, I know it can. How long our novels are is a decision we make. As long as King's "The Stand" is, that same story was also written as a short story. There are multitudes on novels out there that began life as short stories or novelettes.

If you want to sell a novel, you need to decide going in roughly how long it's going to be, you can't let a novel run away with you. It's all a decision. And if you do exceed this length, you need to put it on the chopping block.

But I wouldn't say "condensing" is the right approach. It's darned near impossible to condense or cut a novel by half. The "easy" way is to start over at page one, and leave out some characters, some subplot, etc. And quite probably some regular plot events.

[Linda Adams]

Particularly with thrillers, watch out for being overly complex (a genre hazzard). It's very easy to make the story too complex and need extra chapters and scenes to get everything explained. You may want to look particularly at the early part of the book where the story was set up. There may actually be excess chapters caused by setup issues. I just got through with a round of edits on mine where I cleared up one last set up issue--five chapters have come out because there were suddenly no longer necessary (and probably one more). Along with that went a number of characters who were required because of the setup problem.

Thriller for a first book is 90K-120K.

[scarletpeaches]

This is a strange occurrence. I see plenty of books of over 200k on the shelves all the time, both by new and established writers, in all genres. But then I also heard recently that the UK publishes more new books a year per head than any other country in the world!

To me, 200k isn't long at all. In fact, short books seem to be the rarity over here.

[Garpy]

Actually, you'll be surprised how easy it is to read through your work and excise a paragraph or two on every page. It's actually quite a rewarding experience knowing that you've distilled your work further....that what is left, are the better words.

For a thriller, 200k is quite beefy. But then rules are there to be broken.

[scribbler1382]

I don't think anyone is saying a book can't be 200k and be good, complete, concise, etc. As pointed out, a look at the bookshelves will show it can be done. I think the point that needs to be made is that any agent is going to look at it and decide that it's a harder sell than a 100k book. This has nothing to do with quality, but with likelihood of selling percentages.

That said, it's your book. You know what it needs to be, what it wants to be (remember, in the end, the book is the boss), and what it can't be. The trick is finding the right balance between public perception and how far you're willing to compromise your original vision. Which can be VERY tricky.

Good luck.

[Jamesaritchie]

This is a strange occurrence. I see plenty of books of over 200k on the shelves all the time, both by new and established writers, in all genres. But then I also heard recently that the UK publishes more new books a year per head than any other country in the world!

To me, 200k isn't long at all. In fact, short books seem to be the rarity over here.

I seriously doubt you see many 200K books on the shelves that were written by first time novelists. You certainly don't in the USA. There are always exceptions, if a novel is really great, it may sell regardless of length, but 200K is too long to stand much chance of selling as a first novel. There simply aren't very many slots open for novels of this length.

The average lengt of novels is 80,000-120,000 words, whether you're new or established. But until you can prove the reading public will buy your novels, exceeding this length makes selling very tough. And even established writers are being pressured to cut down on length.

Four out of five first novels lose money, and the longer the novel is, the more money it loses.

If you really want to sell a novel, the best thing to do is learn what length publishers want, then give it to them. It's a choice. Writing a 200K novel is easier for most new writers because it takes less discipline. Nearly all publishers have guidelines for length, and stepping outside these guidelines makes selling many times more difficult. Starting a novel without first knowing these guidelines really makes selling the novel immensely more difficult.

[scarletpeaches]

With all due respect James, it is not your place to say what I see when I go into bookshops. I am speaking for the country in which I live, and your post comes across as overbearing. Yes, you are a writer and so is everyone else on this board. No one knows it all, everyone is wrong sometimes. To suggest authors of longer novels are less disciplined than other writers is just plain rude and we are all better placed to judge what we see in our own individual lives and careers than others.

[paladinb]

Thanks for all the comments so far whatever I decide to do it's nice to get so much positive advice so quickly.

[maestrowork]

Without reading your ms, it's realy difficult to tell. It could be that 200K is the right length... what do your betas say? Chances are, it may really be too complex with too many subplots and characters, etc. Maybe go through another revision and see?

I would probably suggest against splitting it to two since a dualogy is rare for thrillers. You probably do need to trim it down.

[paladinb]

If you really want to sell a novel, the best thing to do is learn what length publishers want, then give it to them. It's a choice. Writing a 200K novel is easier for most new writers because it takes less discipline. Nearly all publishers have guidelines for length, and stepping outside these guidelines makes selling many times more difficult. Starting a novel without first knowing these guidelines really makes selling the novel immensely more difficult.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I appreicate your honesty(after all I did ask for comments) but there was nothing easy about spending six years(several hours a day alongside my regular job) to write a 200k novel or any novel of any length. To be honest when I was writing my story I wasn't concerned with the length in terms of publication I just wanted to tell a story I thought other people might enjoy reading.

As for being a new writer I suppose that depends on what the definition of a new writer is. If the definintion comes down to published works then yes that would class me as new (one book published so far just over 80k) but I have been writing now for over twenty years and it has only been recently I've been trying to get my work published.

[paladinb]

Without reading your ms, it's realy difficult to tell. It could be that 200K is the right length... what do your betas say? Chances are, it may really be too complex with too many subplots and characters, etc. Maybe go through another revision and see?

I would probably suggest against splitting it to two since a dualogy is rare for thrillers. You probably do need to trim it down.

The thing the story actuallu crosses a number of genres but I was advised it was better to place my work in as it would be easier to pitch to a potential agent.

My test readers seem to think it would be difficult to cut into two books they've also said the the story doesn't have any padding as such(neither answer really helped me,,lol). I am going to go through it again through with a view of seeing if it can be revised.

[Jamesaritchie]

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I appreicate your honesty(after all I did ask for comments) but there was nothing easy about spending six years(several hours a day alongside my regular job) to write a 200k novel or any novel of any length. To be honest when I was writing my story I wasn't concerned with the length in terms of publication I just wanted to tell a story I thought other people might enjoy reading.

As for being a new writer I suppose that depends on what the definition of a new writer is. If the definintion comes down to published works then yes that would class me as new (one book published so far just over 80k) but I have been writing now for over twenty years and it has only been recently I've been trying to get my work published.

I didn't mean to say writing the novel was easy. Writing is never easy, but it's much easier to write too long than it is to write to proper length. If you think writing that 200K novel was hard, try turning it into a 120K novel.

It always easier to write a 200k novel because you can pretty much put whatever you want into it. A 120K novel means you have to pick and choose every step of the way. What you leave out of a novel is at least as imortant as what you put in, and length is too important to just write something you think others will like reading.

Readers like 120K stories just fine.

Writing for publication, particularly for new writers, means giving publishers (And bookstores and distributors) what they want, at the length they want it. Sometimes first novels of 200K do get published, but you're really bucking a stacked deck at this length.

It's just too common. New writer after new writer writes novels that are almost twioce as long as what publishers want. Sometimes three or four times as long. Then they start think about cutting the book into two or three books, or trying to figure out some way of cutting it, and it's all needless, and usually goes nowhere.

Best to find out what length publishers want, and then tell a good story that readers will love at that length. Writing to length doesn't mean you can't tell a wonderful story that readers will love. Writing to length does mean there's a far greater chance readers will actually have the chance to read it.

[James D. Macdonald]

I posted at some length about this here (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=406030#post406030).

[Andrew Jameson]

I posted at some length about this here (http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=406030#post406030).
If there's anything I love, it's subtle and appropriate puns.

[Writer2011]

Hey if it takes that long to tell your story then fine :) I certainly wouldn't make my story shorter especially if it meant leaving something important out...

[paladinb]

It's just too common. New writer after new writer writes novels that are almost twioce as long as what publishers want. Sometimes three or four times as long. Then they start think about cutting the book into two or three books, or trying to figure out some way of cutting it, and it's all needless, and usually goes nowhere.


Thanks's for the advice...as I said before you're entitled to you opinion. I personally do not see any future work I do on my novel be it condensing, splitting...whatever as needless or going nowhere.

[maestrowork]

Hey if it takes that long to tell your story then fine :) I certainly wouldn't make my story shorter especially if it meant leaving something important out...

But that's the thing: Is everything important? As writers, we tend to think that everything is important, vital for the story. Can we really step back and objectively evaluate the book and see if something, characters even, can be removed? I, for one, was able to cut 15,000 words from my manuscript not because I didn't think the writing was good or it showed great characterization, etc., but because I finally realized it wasn't important to the "story" that was being told. I could probably cut another 5000 words if I want or need to and the story will still be intact and good.

People in the movie/TV business do that all the time, because movies and TV have time contraints. So they need to cut, and sometimes really, really good footage, or moments that are dear to the director... Just watch the theatrical version vs. the "director's cut" of Lord of the Rings or the "deleted scenes" on any DVDs, and you can see what have been cut and why...

[Andrew]

I would be proud of writing one that long--if I'm proud of the product. If I'm proud and pleased with the novel, I'm not going to worry whether its 50,000 or 200,000. Just my opinion--sounds like a great body of work to me.

[Jamesaritchie]

Hey if it takes that long to tell your story then fine :) I certainly wouldn't make my story shorter especially if it meant leaving something important out...

Every writer thinks everything they put into a novel is important. It usually isn't so. It only takes 200K to write a novel if you want it to take 200K to write a novel. Sometimes this is a good choice, sometimes not, but it's alays a choice.

[Jamesaritchie]

Thanks's for the advice...as I said before you're entitled to you opinion. I personally do not see any future work I do on my novel be it condensing, splitting...whatever as needless or going nowhere.

It's your novel, and you should make the decisions. But do keep in mind that your words aren't precious, and because you think it's right doesn't mean it is. Be open to editoral and agent suggestions. They usally know what really makes a novel one readers will love.

[SpookyWriter]

I cut about 20,000 words from my first novel and then went back and added 5,000. I actually torn the manuscript apart and put it back together again after deciding what worked and what I could eliminate. So, I ended up with about 73k novel which I hope is much better.

I am writing another novel that is a thriller and if it reaches 100k before editing then I'm happy to start with that and pare it down until it is clean enough to send out.

Jon

[maestrowork]

Didn't Stephen King say your subsequent drafts should be at least 80% in length of the previous draft? Or something like that?

Every writer should learn how to cut. Yeah, it's painful, but also necessary.

[Flapdoodle]

With all due respect James, it is not your place to say what I see when I go into bookshops. I am speaking for the country in which I live, and your post comes across as overbearing. Yes, you are a writer and so is everyone else on this board. No one knows it all, everyone is wrong sometimes. To suggest authors of longer novels are less disciplined than other writers is just plain rude and we are all better placed to judge what we see in our own individual lives and careers than others.

Well I'm in the UK, and on my last trip to Borders last week, books of this size were pretty rare - most were definitely in 80,0000 - 120,000 region. The only large book is that Jonathon Strange thing.

[Gabriele]

This is a strange occurrence. I see plenty of books of over 200k on the shelves all the time, both by new and established writers, in all genres. But then I also heard recently that the UK publishes more new books a year per head than any other country in the world!

To me, 200k isn't long at all. In fact, short books seem to be the rarity over here.

So, since I aim for publishing in the UK - because with the Roman Britain and Mediaeval Scotland settings of my novels, and me being German it makes sense - I must not worry about length so much?

Because Kings and Rebels will indeed become a big fat doorstopper of a book, and I'm not entirely sure I can keep the other three under 150K. :D

[scarletpeaches]

Well I'd read it for sure! :D

[SusanR]

So, since I aim for publishing in the UK - because with the Roman Britain and Mediaeval Scotland settings of my novels, and me being German it makes sense - I must not worry about length so much?

Because Kings and Rebels will indeed become a big fat doorstopper of a book, and I'm not entirely sure I can keep the other three under 150K. :D

Gabriele,

I sure do hope those books are published soon. My son is gaga for the Roman Empire.

SusanR

[Gabriele]

Ouch, I better go and finish those beasties, then. :D

But there seems to be a market for Roman Empire fiction. I had an editor stop by my blog a few days ago (yes, those things do happen) and she told me she read my snippets and that I should get those books published because there was a market for "good Roman novels."

[aruna]

My own books end up being in the 500+ page bracket when published. I never had a problem with length; nobody ever told me they were too long, and I was never asked to cut. They just happen to be that length. There's a whole subset of readers who want and relish long novels - I am one of them. I know many such readers. And publishers need to cater for them as well. I remember my German editor telling me how much she loved a really long novel. When I pick up a book to browse in a library or bookshop, it's always a fat book. If a book looks slim, I don't even bother to look at it, I want to lose myself in a story that seems to have no end.

That said, I am watchful of word count. I aim to say things in as few words as possible. Removing subplots, I think, is not the answer; in my books at least, the subplots are so interwoven with the main plot it would be like trying to pull a single thread out of a tapestry - the whole things falls apart.

So this is what I do:
I have one entire revision dedicated to cutting. That means I go through the whole ms once more just to look for places I can tighten the writing. I aim for 100 words per page. Think of it, in a 500 page ms that's 50000 words gone! And what's more, not only do you not notice the missing words, but the writing itself is crisper, tighter, more dramatic, BETTER! Sometimes I don't manage those 100 words, but then I spot a scene that really is superfluous, and that goes.

I've now developed an eye for flab. The book I am reading at the moemnt is only 400 pages long, and yet at least half of it is flab. It could be cut by 200 pages. Many conversations in it are just that - aimless chat. Could easily be snipped. Writers must be ruthless.

Make sure that every single scene counts - make sure that without the scene, the next scene would be impossible. Nothing is there just for pleasure; everything moves the story forward, every single word. Especially, cut every description by half. Cut introspections, internal monologues, by half. Cut each bit of dialogue by half. You'll be amazed at how much better your writing is for the trouble

[aruna]

Historical novels are particularly prone to being lengthy, and guess what, that's what readers of that kind of book love! I would not want to read a 300 page historical novel. It would seem too slight from the very beginning.

[Mike Coombes]

Aruna's advice is spot on - learn to spot flab and don't be afraid to excise it - make every scene, and every word, count.

One thing I'd suggest is have a real good think about your story, what it's about and how it gets where it's going. Then rewrite it as a short story in 2,500 words or less. NOT a synopsis, but a retelling, cutting anything that isn't critical, cutting out the long-winded and the overly descriptive, removing redundant characters etc... in fact anything that doesn't contribute to moving from scene to scene to conclusion.

It's hard - you have to weigh the importance of every single word, but it will teach you so much in terms of tightening your work and making words count.

[Jamesaritchie]

The point with length isn't really how long the book is, but how long publishers want novels of the type you've written. Depending on the kind of novel it is, first novels can be very short or pretty darned long, but what they can't be is longer than publishers want for that kind of novel.

Fantasy novels, for example, tend to be much longer than many genres, even for first novels. But publishers want them this length. You have to be aware of what publishers want, or you have to be lucky and write what they want through sheer chance. Knowing what they want in advance is a heck of a lot easier.

[Mike Coombes]

The point with length isn't really how long the book is, but how long publishers want novels of the type you've written.

This is true. Have you ever tried selling someone something they don't want?

[Jamesaritchie]

If a book looks slim, I don't even bother to look at it, I want to lose myself in a story that seems to have no end.



I love long novels, as well, but slim books can be just as good or better. Slim does not mean slight, and long does not mean good. There are certainly millions of readers for long novels, and publishers do cater to them, but most often they do this with established writers. Four out of five first novels lose money, and the longer the novel, the more it loses.

A 200K novel from a first time writer must be an incredible read, and it must be in the right gerne, else it just isn't going to sell, no matter how many people like long novels.

[fallenangelwriter]

James, out of curiosity, what length DO publishers want a fantasy?


I have a WIP i'm quite enamored of, but I suspect i'd have to stretch to draw it out significantly over 100,000 words.

[Birol]

Most publishers have guidelines online if they accept unsolicited or unagented manuscripts. A quick search with Google turns them up.

BAEN (http://www.baen.com/FAQS.htm#Manuscript%20Submission%20Guidelines)

DAW (http://www.dawbooks.com/static/html/submissions.html)

TOR (http://www.tor.com/gdlines.html)

The above are just a few examples and include length requirements. You will see that they vary.

[Sage]

I must be blind 'cuz I don't see the length requirements for TOR. On the other hand the other two are looking for longer length, which is great(!) for my WIP, & not so good for my NaNo novel as it currently stands (sorry Euterpe, but I want Jian's story published first if I can). Anyway, thanks, Birol.

[Birol]

Oops. You're right. I did find one that only wanted novels around 80K.

[aruna]

A long, long time ago, while writing my very first novel, the one that never got published, I asked my then agent how long it should be. She said,
"As long as it has to be."

[batgirl]

I must be blind 'cuz I don't see the length requirements for TOR.

I think Tor did give a suggested length for their paranormal romance line, but I can't find the page of those guidelines. It may have been taken down if they have enough submissions. CathyC might have info on that, as she was published there?
My vague recollection is that it was something like 90k to 120k, but I may be making that up. There was also a different submissions address for it.
-Barbara

[maestrowork]

Sometimes the best way is to go to your library or book stores and check out the kind of books you're writing, by the publishers you'd like to publish your book... the # pages should tell you what they expect. Aside from the extremes (like JK Rowling's 800+ monster), I'll bet they fall between 250 to 400 pages (which is about 70000 to 120,000 words).

[dantem42]

It's the rare novel that genuinely needs to be 200,000 words. I have read two recent novels in that ballpark (Emperor of Ocean Park by Steven L. Carter and A Traitor to Memory by Elizabeth George), and while they were both basically good novels, I felt they could have used the hand of a merciless editor.

Interesting that Emperor was a first novel, so it's always possible for a first-time author to get a long novel into print if there's enough hoopla surrounding it. Still, the average publisher is not going to want to take a chance like that on a first-timer unless there is some very compelling reason. Someone established like Elizabeth George can push the publisher around a bit if she doesn't want her work thinned out, but not you.

The first thing to do is examine whether you overwrite. Do you write things like "not unlike" instead of "like"? One agent told me to read the whole novel out loud and see where it feels constipated. The first draft of my novel was 134,000 words, and I managed to cut it quickly to 115,000 just by streamlining my prose. I cut out another 7,000 words by cutting things that didn't genuinely contribute to plot or characterization. Sometimes this means pulling out some of your favorite lines, but if they are good ones, you can often find some other place in the book to use them.

Next is probably to have a highly literate reader in your genre slog through the manuscript. My bet is that he or she will tell you that you need to simplify plot or characterization.

[paladinb]

Thanks all for the excellent advice you've taken the time to give. Last week I began to work through my manscript with a view of 'cutting the fat' from my story. Taking some of the avice onboard I've been quite suprised by the amount 'extra pros' I've trimmed. It's early days yet but a good start, thanks again all!