Fantasy Trilogies (again, probably)

PenDragon · Feb 20, 2006

I've been looking into the whole 'Fantasy Trilogy' concept. Personally when done right I love them. There are of course some really bad ones that seem to be the same old characters/plot points rehashed. It also seems like they might be losing favour to the long running series (or never ending series in the case of WoT).

I've found this interesting article Deity of Choice, Not Another Bloody Fantasy Trilogy?

Where Epic Fantasy Went Wrong? is also interesting, I don't agree entirely with the author's views on Tolkien (much as I love Tolkien) he paints Tolkien as one of the only truly 'original' world builders. I disagree in the context in this article. Tolkien didn't create Middle Earth and it's people out of a vaccum. He was steeped in icelandic sagas, old english poetry, and Arthurian legend and he drew on this. The author then goes on to site James Barclay's Chronicles of the Raven series as original, which I find mind boggling.

Then there is this which is just funny Nick Lowe's The Well Tempered Plot Device it's pretty vitriolic but mostly bang on. However not sure why he singles out Susan Cooper and Douglas Adams. Cooper was writing for children and Adams had tongue firmly in cheek.

Anyway, wondered what everyone thought?

Fantasy Trilogies, love them or hate them? Have they had their day? Anyone writing one, going to write one, written one?

victoriastrauss · Feb 20, 2006

Purely from a publishing perspective, the fantasy trilogy is a robust and enduring form, and that doesn't look to be changing anytime soon. Some readers may dislike them, some writers may disdain them, and some critics may get up on a soapbox and deplore them--but editors certainly are buying them.

- Victoria

arainsb123 · Feb 21, 2006

If I were to write a fantasy series, I'd probably write at least four or five books in it to give it more time to catch on, and because sprawling epics (The Dark Tower, Harry Potter) sell better than trilogies for the most part.

Although I wouldn't continue writing in a world if I got sick of the characters or plot arc.

zornhau · Feb 21, 2006

Word on the street is: publishers generally prefer to buy trilogies from new authors. Ideally, you need one finished novel, plus outlines for Volume 2 & 3. Volume 1 has to be potentially standalone for obvious, if depressing, reasons.

Oh, btw, Where Fantasy Went Wrong seems to confuse milieu story with epic. Epics aren't about exploring unique worlds. They're about big scale adventure.

MattW · Feb 21, 2006

PenDragon said:
I've found this interesting article Deity of Choice, Not Another Bloody Fantasy Trilogy?

Could you update this link please? I only see the text "Deity..." in place of the URL.

PenDragon · Feb 21, 2006

Not sure what went wrong there Matt, try this link...

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/juliet.e.mckenna/articletrilogies.html

MattW · Feb 21, 2006

One detail that is overlooked here is that Tolkien was not writing a triology. That was a publishing decision.

You write as much story as you need, and see where the breaking points are. Does it fit in Three Act structure? Five Point Arc?

I don't think I could set out to write a trilogy without a much more detailed outline than I prefer. Even then, I would be writing it all as one tale, skipping around bits and then filling in later. My WIP has more details and potential for multiple volumes, but it is not set up that way by design. From my POV, there are not enough good stand alones in epic fantasy - too mcuh focus on the long haul trilogies (or septologies).

All that being said, was Toliken all that original? His tales were so popular because they resonated with the mystery, adventure, and magic that humans have been sharing in written and spoken word for millenia.

Kevin Yarbrough · Feb 21, 2006

I'm starting a fantasy trilogy, but it has more of a religious bent to it. To be honest it is a religious/fantasy/sci-fi/adventure/mystery series. The way I have it set up I can have two series spin offs from it if I so feel the need to write them.

To answer your question, I love them. I love the longer series as well but trilogies seem just the right size to get a big story told without over-killing it. In my ever growing file of storuies to pen I have about ten trilogies to write. A couple that are longer, four and five books, and more than fourty single and twenty sequel books to write. I sure hope one of my boys will be a writer cause I will never finish them all.

Wesley Smith · Feb 21, 2006

For the most part, I cannot stand trilogies for the simple purpose that I like my stories to be complete in and unto themselves. I've read a number of novels that ended on a cliffhanger, and I almost never pick up the next book (Tad Williams, I'm talking to you).

Also, I just think that writing in trilogies is bad for bidness. I can't tell you the number of times I've gone to the used book store and seen a book with "second book of the Ooga Booga Trilogy" on the cover. And the times I've picked the book up, I almost always end up dropping it because, as the second chapter of a series, there is information and exposition that the author assumes I'm going to understand because I've read the first book. But, I haven't. It's a real hurdle to get into one story split into three books.

Kevin Yarbrough · Feb 21, 2006

Wesley Smith said:
(Tad Williams, I'm talking to you).

I like Tad Williams. I thought his "Otherland" series was very good.

Wesley Smith said:
It's a real hurdle to get into one story split into three books.

Not if you have all three books.

I like them because it makes the story longer and I can get to know the characters and the world a little more than I can in a single book.

PenDragon · Feb 21, 2006

MattW said:
From my POV, there are not enough good stand alones in epic fantasy

I do like a good Trilogy, but I agree, there should be more stand alone fantasy novels.

By the way, any links to or info on the five Point Arc? It's a term I'm not familliar with.

Kevin Yarbrough said:
it is a religious/fantasy/sci-fi/adventure/mystery series

Now that sounds interesting.

I get fantasy, sci-fi and mystery as I know those and understand how they could be combined, you've lost me on religious and adventure. What is the religious genre Don't the other genre cover adventure or is there somthing specfic you're taking from the adventure genre (I'm unclear on what the adventure genre is anyway so you might have to explain).

Wesley Smith said:
I can't tell you the number of times I've gone to the used book store and seen a book with "second book of the Ooga Booga Trilogy" on the cover.

I know, I have the same problem in libraries, it's a pain.

PenDragon · Feb 21, 2006

Kevin Yarbrough said:
I like them because it makes the story longer and I can get to know the characters and the world a little more than I can in a single book.

That's the main appeal for me too.

HConn · Feb 21, 2006

I like trilogies when all three books are on the shelves. Until that point, I hate 'em.

I don't like unfinished stories.

Pthom · Feb 21, 2006

HConn said:
I like trilogies when all three books are on the shelves. Until that point, I hate 'em.

Yeah, me too. Especially when the books on the shelves are Volumes II and III ... It took me forever to even begin the Hechee series by Frederick Pohl, because I could never find the initial story: "Gateway."

I've read several trilogies (or longer) where the first novel has a satisfying conclusion, but where the balance of the series is unreadable (or at least unenjoyable) because too much depends on what happens in the initial volume.

Saanen · Feb 21, 2006

I don't much like trilogies or series. I was in the used book store today looking in the fantasy section, and like Wesley Smith above, all the books I picked up seemed to be "Book Two." I found one that seemed interesting and read the first page, thinking if I liked it enough I'd see if I could find the first book at the library, but it was incomprehensible! It was clearly picking up where the first book left off, without any transition. Hey, if it can't stand alone, it shouldn't be published without the first half.

badducky · Feb 21, 2006

I despise trilogies as an art form.

DESPISE!

EVIL!

BAD!

Everytime I see someone, somewhere, writing more than one book in a world, I roll my eyes. Artistic expression requires density. Density requires honing the bok down to it's core, and writing only one. Each subsequent book may be a commercial success, but they are often artistic failures.

Everyone talks about LoTR, but come on, people, we all know The Hobbit was his best book, and it stood alone just fine.

The only decent fantasy series books I've read are by LeGuinn, Lloyd Alexander, and Pratchett (who succeeds by SPOOFING the mechanical conciets).

*True story* Once I was in line behind this guy buying the latest from Robert Jordan. I asked him if he liked it. He sighed, got this far-away look in his eyes, and he said, "Well, I've invested so much time and energy into this, so I feel like I have to finish." Then I asked him again if he liked it. He shrugged. He said, "Eh, I liked the first couple. Now I'm just trying to see how it ends."

Long series of books tend to tell the same motifs over and over again.

I hope I never write a trilogy, ever!

In contemporary art the ones who are

Sage · Feb 21, 2006

I think fantasy writers tend to write series or trilogies because they've invested so much work into the world. There should always be something new to explore, because the reader (& often the writer) has not experienced all of the world. Maybe it's a bit lazy of them, but why spend the energy to make up a brand new world again, when you've already done it. This leads to sequels, trilogies or series. Perhaps new characters or the same ones could be used. Perhaps ones only touched upon can have the spotlight, while the old MCs get pushed to the background. There's so much to explore, it's hard not to surrender to the siren of your pre-established fantasy land.

mhughes · Feb 21, 2006

I have two works in progress right now, one of which is a trilogy. It was originally going to be a single book but the story just got too big. The world is pretty developed and so are the conflicts. I think cramming it into a single book would be unfair to my sanity.

Now, my second WIP is going to be a standalone book. I'm focusing not so much on the world (a lot takes place on Earth) and more on the characters and story. I kind of like it that way.

So, um, what was I saying? Oh yeah, it depends. I like LoTR. I got tired of Jordan after four books but I've been stuck on Potter through all six. Some of my favorite books I wish the author never would have written a sequel.

Kevin Yarbrough · Feb 21, 2006

PenDragon said:
Now that sounds interesting.

I get fantasy, sci-fi and mystery as I know those and understand how they could be combined, you've lost me on religious and adventure. What is the religious genre Don't the other genre cover adventure or is there somthing specfic you're taking from the adventure genre (I'm unclear on what the adventure genre is anyway so you might have to explain).

Action/adventure is James Rollins, Clive Cussler type books. Lot's of action. Mine is more adventure because the MC is finding relics much like Indiana Jones. Deciphering the clues, trying to find them and having people try to kill you while you look for them.

Religious because it deals with Angels and Demons and a secret sect that has been formed to save mankind from Armageddon.

Now, back to trilogies. We have heard from other authors who have had publishers or agents tell them that their mss was to long, that no one wanted a 6-800 page book from an unknown author. A trilogy can help you here by cutting the book down, making it more buyable for the market.

I already know basically what my books are going to be about. The first book will set the stage, bring in the MC and introduce you to the storyline. He goes about finding the relics, which he does, but Armegeddon has begun.

Book two brings the antagonists back and war begins. Earth gets destroyed. The protagonists come to help and civil war begins with humans in the middle.

Book three is where man starts to take sides in this war and the protagonists begin to wonder if we are worth saving. Should they leave us to die and head back home or stay and help us? They are losing the war and only a miracle will help them anyway. Should they skip out, or stay?

Euan H. · Feb 21, 2006

badducky said:
Each subsequent book may be a commercial success, but they are often artistic failures.

Uh...no, I won't say it.

Once I was in line behind this guy buying the latest from Robert Jordan. I asked him if he liked it. He sighed, got this far-away look in his eyes, and he said, "Well, I've invested so much time and energy into this, so I feel like I have to finish." Then I asked him again if he liked it. He shrugged. He said, "Eh, I liked the first couple. Now I'm just trying to see how it ends."

About halfway through the thirdbook of G. Martin's mammoth series, I realized the same thing. I wasn't really enjoying it anymore; I just wanted to reach the end. As he hadn't (and hasn't) written the end yet (and God only knows how many years it's going to take for him to reach it), I stopped reading. When he finishes the series, I'll buy all the books and try going through them all at once.

IMO, the preponderance of trilogies in fantasy is the same kind of phenomenon as the size of the books themselves. In what other genre do you get books of 200,000+ words that don't tell a complete story? Why is fantasy so prone to bloat?

According to this guy, the trend in SFF is toward shorter novels. Seems to me that the best books in fantasy (e.g., the Drawing of the Dark, The Anubis Gates, Song of Kali--that kind of thing)are already much slimmer than the vast volumes common in epic fantasy. But then again, what do I know?

ChaosTitan · Feb 21, 2006

HConn said:
I don't like unfinished stories.

Ditto.

My sister gave me a sci fi novel for my birthday a few years ago. On the back it mentioned it was the first of a two-part story. I put the book away until the second part came out three months later, and then read them both.

It's the same reason I haven't read King's Dark Tower series yet. I wanted to wait until the entire thing was published. Of course, now The Gunslinger is languishing on my nightstand under two other novels I need to finish first.

I also waited until The Green Mile came out in a collected trade paperback, rather than reading the installments. Call me impatient, but I prefer to have the story waiting for me, rather than me waiting for it.

IggytheDestroyer · Feb 23, 2006

I started out writing a one-parter but as I went, it grew and grew to the point that it, now, almost has to be a trilogy. Luckily, even though it is one continuous story, each of the three parts contain uniquely different motivation and environments. Some of the characters even change between them. My only problem now is that the first book is ending with a cliff-hanger. That is not something I care to do. Hopefully I can give it a little more finality so that 1 and 2 can stand alone. 3 won't have that problem.

victoriastrauss · Feb 23, 2006

I always wonder when I see this sort of discussion--are all you readers who don't like trilogies helping to support non-trilogy-writing authors by buying those authors' books? With a few notable exceptions, most non-series authors are significantly less successful than their series-writing counterparts.

- Victoria

Elincoln · Feb 23, 2006

I love to read Fantasy, and it doesn't matter whether the book is a stand alone or a trilogy. I will buy the book as soon as it comes out and read through it. Sure, I might have forgotten what the last one or two books had or (in the case of a series) get confused over which events happened when, but I'm submersed in another world and having a blast going along with it. And yes, I have been known to read the trilogy all over again once I have all three books, just to get the total experience. I still read the Valdemar Series from Mercedes Lackey atleast once a year.

Having said that, there are some series I have stopped reading just because they have gotten too long. Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time is the top one on that list. I stopped at book 9 because I learned he wasn't stopping at #10. It was a chore just to read #8. It seem to slow down and start talking about things I would skip over. When I realized I had skip over two chapters, it was time to give it up.

My WIP is the first in a trilogy, but it is also going to be the first trilogy in a whole series. When I finished the trilogy outline, I realized it wouldn't be enough. There was still more that needed to happen with my MC, not to mention the two other MCs whose fates were intertwined with hers, and then I started writing outlines for their children's adventures (because one actually goes back in time to interfere with the original trilogy), and now I am brainstorming a trilogy was would become the prequel to the trilogy I'm doing now and so on.

Shadow_Ferret · Feb 23, 2006

I love series. I have been reading them all my life. In fact, I rarely pick up anything by authors that aren't series. I like to know that if I finish one book and have fallen in love with the characters that there are more of the same that I can dive into. I'm not even that fond of trilogies. I don't want three and out. I want to continue with my friends book after book after book.

Fantasy Trilogies (again, probably)

Dragon with a Pen

Writer Beware Goddess

Learning!

Swordsman

Company Man

Dragon with a Pen

Company Man

Will write for peace of mind

Will write for peace of mind

Dragon with a Pen

Dragon with a Pen

Whore for genre

Word butcher

No Time For Chitchat, Kemosabe.

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Profesionel Speelchecker

Will write for peace of mind

Unspeakable

Around

Writer Beware Goddess

Official Daydreamer of AW

Court Jester