stand alone novel. what is it??

Status
Not open for further replies.

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
Okay, so I've just read book 3 in a 7 volume multi-volume novel, and I find no satisfying resolution, just a "...to be continued" type of ending. What kind of likelihood do think I will expect that volume 4 will be any different, or volume 5, or volume 6. I'll have to put out my money and invest my time in those books, not to get satisfying reads, but just to prepare me for book 7 when it will all be tied together. Because, like you said, jumping to book 7 will not make any sense unless I read books 4-6. If I find book 3 unsatisfying, what is the incentive to keep reading, or to keep shelling out my cash?

If you find it unsatisfying because the story falls flat and you don't care about the characters, then you have every reason not to buy the next volume.

But the readers who like these kinds of stories read them because they love the world, the characters, and the story, and they'll happily go wherever it takes them. It's not about getting to the resolution; it's about the journey. I know readers of a certain very popular multi-volume work who sigh with relief every time they realize that the next volume to be published is not also going to be the last one.

Obviously this only works if the story is so deeply immersive and compelling that it makes such a journey worthwhile.

It really doesn't take much effort to have some kind of satisfying resolution in a novel-length book, whether it's in a series or part of a multi-volume novel. I'm trying to appeal to anyone who wants to write the latter, to think about giving some type of satisfying resolution in every single volume, and I don't buy the argument that the multi-volume novel mechanism prevents, or even discourages this. Of course, there will be an overarching plot that drives the full treatment, but we writers have around 100,000 words or more to provide some subplots or substories that can be tied up, in a satisfying way, in each and every single volume.

A writer can deliberately structure it that way, yes. But there are those like Tolkien (and like me) who simply wrote a very long book, which, in his case, the publisher refused to print as one volume. Don't know if you've ever read The Lord of the Rings, but there are no resolutions until you get to the third volume. There are, however, turning points, which is where the publisher divided the work into volumes.

Here is what I consider a money grab--when the author makes no attempt to provide a satisfying resolution to any aspect of the story at the end of a volume, instead relying solely on incompleteness of the major story arc as the lure to get the reader to buy the next book. And I'll stand by my descriptor of that as being a blatant money grab. And yes, I will hold the author responsible.

Unless they say so, how do you know they're doing it as a money grab? Some stories just take a lot of room to tell.

I'd certainly like to know if you think that all multi-volume novels fit within that description, or if you think that this description is a necessity to writing multi-volume novels or an unavoidable consequence of producing them. Because I don't buy that either.

In the multi-volume stories I've read, there's generally some kind of smaller narrative arc within each volume. This arc might be concluded (though leaving much else undone) at the end of the volume, or it might simply represent a milestone in the main arc, stopping at a major turning point. I've seen it done different ways.
 

Reziac

Resident Alien
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
7,451
Reaction score
1,177
Location
Brendansport, Sagitta IV
Website
www.offworldpress.com
But the readers who like these kinds of stories read them because they love the world, the characters, and the story, and they'll happily go wherever it takes them. It's not about getting to the resolution; it's about the journey.

That's me -- I'm there to live in the world, not to depart it ASAP. But don't leave me going "Whaaaaa.....??" at the end, either. I'm not so concerned with a resolution as that where it leaves us makes a satisfying kind of sense.
 

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
If you find it unsatisfying because the story falls flat and you don't care about the characters, then you have every reason not to buy the next volume.
I have any number of reasons to buy or not buy the next volume, and I've detailed one of them. I am me, and I've given one of my preferences and the reasons for it.

But the readers who like these kinds of stories read them because they love the world, the characters, and the story, and they'll happily go wherever it takes them. It's not about getting to the resolution; it's about the journey. I know readers of a certain very popular multi-volume work who sigh with relief every time they realize that the next volume to be published is not also going to be the last one.

Obviously this only works if the story is so deeply immersive and compelling that it makes such a journey worthwhile.
That's fine, but it doesn't change my views on the issue, or make my opinion any less valid.

A writer can deliberately structure it that way, yes. But there are those like Tolkien (and like me) who simply wrote a very long book, which, in his case, the publisher refused to print as one volume. Don't know if you've ever read The Lord of the Rings, but there are no resolutions until you get to the third volume. There are, however, turning points, which is where the publisher divided the work into volumes.
We work in a different time, and I don't think that citing classics as a "how to" template is possibly the best advice to give to new writers who are writing their first multi-volume story for our contemporary publishers and our contemporary readership. Again, that is my opinion.


Unless they say so, how do you know they're doing it as a money grab? Some stories just take a lot of room to tell.
I've explained my reasoning. I believe, as contemporary authors, we owe the reader more than just finding a convenient break point as the ending of a volume that is sold as a cover-to-cover book. I would be shocked if a story long enough for a multi-volume treatment wasn't full of subplots, inciting events, and action-reaction chains that would allow a progression of reasonably satisfying endings through any number of break points. There has to be way more than cool world building and fantastic characters. Something has to happen to those characters in those worlds in each and every volume. I seriously doubt that a publisher would say to an author, "you've hit the 100,000 word mark, time to terminate this book. Make the next paragraph the opening for the next book" (or something similar). And I suspect you gave your break-points more thought than you are letting on in your story series.

In the multi-volume stories I've read, there's generally some kind of smaller narrative arc within each volume. This arc might be concluded (though leaving much else undone) at the end of the volume, or it might simply represent a milestone in the main arc, stopping at a major turning point. I've seen it done different ways.
And if handled well by the author, this would likely satisfy me in each volume. And this would NOT fit my view of a money grab.

And you didn't answer my final query. Do you think that the "to be continued" ending, as I have described as a money grab, is a necessity of writing contemporary multi-volume novels or an unavoidable consequence of producing them?
 
Last edited:

Vella

Is iníon léinn mé
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
363
Reaction score
33
Location
Elsewhere
I should be able to pick up that second book and get some satisfaction of resolution from the story, even if I don't ever read books one and three. I have no problem with a series or a triology (why are they almost always in threes?) with an overarching story as long as I do get some resolution in the individual stories prior to the last one. As I mentioned earlier, if the ending of one book (or movie) is nothing more than the equivalent of "...to be continued," I get pissed. Please realize that I will invest not only money, but a significant number of hours of my life in reading a book. And if the ending is a blatant, "you have to buy the next book to see what happens," I will hate the waste of money, but I will really be offended by the arrogance of the author to think that I have to shell out another big chunk of my valuable time to get the satisfaction I should get from each and every individual book I buy and read. If I don't get that satisfaction, I'll avoid that author in the future, which is a personal decision--others may be perfectly satisfied with that author. But my money and my time are of great value to me, so anything that resembles a blatant money-grab, like "you have to buy the next book to get any kind of resolution," will be totally avoided. And the author will fall off my to-read list, and onto the "nope" list.

Aah, thanks for clarifying this. I get what you mean. I've been lucky and mostly avoided books that end like this.
Movies, on the other hand.... >.>

I don't refuse to, but I might as well. I write (for lack of a better term) high concept satire; i.e., situation-based satirical fiction. By the time I'm done, I've pretty much mined the situation for what it has to offer from a satirical standpoint. A second book with the same people in the same situation would be a chore to read, let alone write.

I find the same thing in my adult fantasy. By the time my stories have finished, I'd be really scraping for extra conflict, extra character development directions, extra things to go horrifically wrong. If I managed to find them for another book, they would absolutely be "extra", in every sense of the word.
 

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
I have any number of reasons to buy or not buy the next volume, and I've detailed one of them. I am me, and I've given one of my preferences and the reasons for it....That's fine, but it doesn't change my views on the issue, or make my opinion any less valid.

Not meaning to imply otherwise. I only objected to the characterization of writers of multi-volume novels as money-grabbers. You have since clarified that you only apply that to authors of a certain type of multi-volume novel. And from the way you describe it, I don't think I've encountered that sort of book before (with the exception of the one mentioned below). I'd be interested to learn of a specific example or two of what you're talking about.

We work in a different time, and I don't think that citing classics as a "how to" template is possibly the best advice to give to new writers who are writing their first multi-volume story for our contemporary publishers and our contemporary readership.
I didn't cite Tolkien as an example of how do it, nor am I advising new writers to emulate him. I only mentioned him first as the progenitor of the modern trend toward multi-volume novels in fantasy, and then as an example of a multi-volume story that is not a series.

I've explained my reasoning. I believe, as contemporary authors, we owe the reader more than just finding a convenient break point as the ending of a volume that is sold as a cover-to-cover book. I would be shocked if a story long enough for a multi-volume treatment wasn't full of subplots, inciting events, and action-reaction chains that would allow a progression of reasonably satisfying endings through any number of break points. There has to be way more than cool world building and fantastic characters. Something has to happen to those characters in those worlds in each and every volume. I seriously doubt that a publisher would say to an author, "you've hit the 100,000 word mark, time to terminate this book. Make the next paragraph the opening for the next book" (or something similar).
For the most part, no. Although I can think of least two duologies that were published that way. The most recent one is Connie Willis's WWII time travel novel that was literally broken in half and published in two volumes (Blackout and All Clear), months apart. Which, btw, won both the Hugo and Nebula awards.

And I suspect you gave your break-points more thought than you are letting on in your story series.
Ummm, well <cough>, if only I had. No, silly me, I thought I was writing a single book. I had no plan to break it up into volumes, until it reached the point where I realized I had no choice. Still, each volume will at least end on a turning point.

And you didn't answer my final query. Do you think that the "to be continued" ending, as I have described as a money grab, is a necessity of writing contemporary multi-volume novels or an unavoidable consequence of producing them?
I can't answer that until know exactly what you mean by that kind of ending. Because, really, many popular works might fall into that category, depending on how you define "to be continued." George RR Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones, et al). Diana Gabaldon's Outlander, etc. Patrick Rothfuss's The Name of the Wind, which does literally just stop at the end of the first volume, with no kind of resolution.

So I guess I'd like to know if you consider them money-grabbers, or if we're looking at a far narrower definition of "to be continued."
 
Last edited:

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
I'd have to read those books to see how they carried through to the end, Beth, so I can't answer for you. Since they are written by experienced and well-respected authors, I would be surprised if they would rely solely on the lure of the incomplete overarching plot to carry me (as a reader) to the next volume. But if they did, I'd have a hard time trusting the next volume to do anything but the same on the way to the final volume, and I'd be very unlikely to spend any more money on the series.

I have never referred to an author as a money-grabber (that is a phrase you have used). I do refer to stories as being a money-grab, with a very specific definition of what that means. As a parallel, I am not a stupid person, but I do quite a few stupid things. So I see a big difference between calling one work of an author a money grab and calling the author a money grabber. The former refers to a interpreted result (my interpretation) while the latter requires specific author intent.

The preference in this matter of endings boils down to how wide an audience we want to reach with our stories. In every genre, there will be a group of hard-core supporters who may not care so much about some technical aspects of story construction within the genre (like the nature of the endings of books in a multi-volume novel). But to attract readers who are either multi-genre readers, or who primarily read other genres, it may require a little more attention to how each volume ends to get them to follow through the entire series. I am one of those who rarely reads fantasy, but I am open to trying just about anything. But since I'm not a specific enthusiast, I do require a little more from each individual book in a series. It doesn't take much, though, since I am an enthusiast of quality novels regardless of genre. Yet, my version of quality may be a little different than that of someone totally immersed in the genre. [I doubt I'm a lonely outlier in my view on novel endings, and several previous threads about stand-alones suggest that I'm not on an island.] So the decision we all have to make about writing in our genre relates to the breadth of readers we want to engage with our stories. Do we want to write exclusively for the "choir" (as in "preaching to the choir") or do we want to have our stories appeal well beyond the genre? There is no wrong decision there, and we can't reach them all, but I'd certainly hope my stories would/do appeal to readers outside of the hard-core followers of my genres.
 
Last edited:

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
The original phrase you used that caught my attention was this:

so anything that resembles a blatant money-grab, like "you have to buy the next book to get any kind of resolution," will be totally avoided.

No, you didn't specifically call authors who write such books money grabbers, but you didn't have to. In the same way that someone who tells lies is a liar, someone who writes books intended to be money-grabs is...well, what would you call them? You're surely not ignorant of the implications of your own phrasing.
 

Buffysquirrel

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,137
Reaction score
694
A stand-alone book is exactly what Lirael wasn't. And no I haven't forgiven.
 

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
No, you didn't specifically call authors who write such books money grabbers, but you didn't have to. In the same way that someone who tells lies is a liar, someone who writes books intended to be money-grabs is...well, what would you call them? You're surely not ignorant of the implications of your own phrasing.
My bolding.

And I am not ignorant of the implications. They are quite clear, but I guess I have to repeat them for you.

Jeez. I've already explained the difference between doing something stupid and being stupid. If someone does something stupid, I'm not going to call them stupid, I'll say they did something stupid. There is a huge difference because the evaluation is on the event, not on the person.

If a publisher encourages an author to carve a large manuscript into more than one volume, and I view one of the volumes as a money grab, I won't say that the author is a money grabber unless I know there was intent on the part of the author, namely to cut the books in a way where profits took a higher priority than the quality of the story or the enjoyment of the reader. Similarly if an inexperienced writer breaks a volume in a way I deem a money grab, I won't assume it was the authors money-driven intent. If there was cause for suspecting that kind of intent, however, then and only then would I call the writer a money grabber. But if the writer had good intentions, yet the book was carved in such a way that was not to my liking, I would focus the criticism on the product, assuming the author didn't intend it in that way. How an author intends a book to come out and how a person like me may interpret it can be very different, and unless I know for sure about the author's intent, I'll focus that criticism on the book, not on the author, and then I'll just walk away. And using the words "money grab" to describe that book is fair game without making assumptions (or having knowledge) about the intentions of the author. So there certainly is a difference between calling a book a money grab and calling the author a money grabber (which I have never done in this thread) The difference has been clearly stated more than once now, but if you want to ignore that so you can feel offended, have at it.

This is the third time you have attributed words and meanings to me that just weren't there. You keep taking offense at these phantom phrases and phantom insults even though I've explained how you have misquoted me and misinterpreted my words. I have a different opinion than you on this issue, and this discussion has been a really good one for showing the posters and numerous lurkers the two sides to this argument. This is a good way to give those people a chance to see the diverse opinions so they can make up their own minds on the issue. This is the way AW is supposed to work.
 
Last edited:

Buffysquirrel

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,137
Reaction score
694
Maybe Beth's position derives from the fact that the phrase "money grab" implies intention on the part of the grabber. If you don't wish that implication to be inferred, a different expression might be in order.
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,478
Reaction score
268
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
If the ending of one book serves only to entice the reader to buy the next book to "see what happens next," I'll not only refuse to open my wallet to the next book, I'll never buy another book from that author.

I feel exactly the same way. But that’s your opinion, and my opinion. Not everyone agrees with us, and when someone such as BethS points this out they are not attacking you.
 

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
If a publisher encourages an author to carve a large manuscript into more than one volume, and I view one of the volumes as a money grab, I won't say that the author is a money grabber unless I know there was intent on the part of the author, namely to cut the books in a way where profits took a higher priority than the quality of the story or the enjoyment of the reader. Similarly if an inexperienced writer breaks a volume in a way I deem a money grab, I won't assume it was the authors money-driven intent. If there was cause for suspecting that kind of intent, however, then and only then would I call the writer a money grabber. But if the writer had good intentions, yet the book was carved in such a way that was not to my liking, I would focus the criticism on the product, assuming the author didn't intend it in that way. How an author intends a book to come out and how a person like me may interpret it can be very different, and unless I know for sure about the author's intent, I'll focus that criticism on the book, not on the author, and then I'll just walk away. And using the words "money grab" to describe that book is fair game without making assumptions (or having knowledge) about the intentions of the author. So there certainly is a difference between calling a book a money grab and calling the author a money grabber (which I have never done in this thread) The difference has been clearly stated more than once now

Actually it hasn't, but it's certainly been clearly stated now. Thank you for taking the time to do that. I promise, I don't look for ways to be offended.

This is the third time you have attributed words and meanings to me that just weren't there.

The conclusion I drew from your words was obviously not the one you intended, but until you posted the above explanation, I had no idea you weren't blaming the authors for having written books as money-grabs. Because that's what your words seemed to be saying.

But...'nuff said. Clearly. No hard feelings, I hope.
 

NeuroFizz

The grad students did it
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
9,493
Reaction score
4,283
Location
Coastal North Carolina
Everything is cool. And it does bring up an important point, and it's one that we have problems with in the Share Your Work section over and over again (so I'm very sensitive to it)--a criticism of a book is not a criticism of the author as long as the provider of the crit makes it clear the comment is about the book. A reviewer can say a book has a misogynistic theme, or a racist theme, but that doesn't mean the reviewer is calling the author a misogynist or a racist.

But there is another reason why I was adamant in expressing my opinion, and it was good that Beth was as well. At the time I entered this thread to post this note, there were 36 replies and 974 views. If any of these people, particularly from the large group of viewers, are writing with a multi-volume novel format, we can hope they recall the two sides of this discussion when they plan out how they will finish each book in that series. Of course, they can choose any way they wish to construct that finish, but now they can do so with two very different opinions about how the ending may be viewed and accepted by readers.

As for hard feelings, of course none. What goes on in a thread stays in that thread, and I can get in a heated discussion with a colleague to the point one of both of us have steam coming out our ears, but outside of that thread, I'm back to, "let's have a beer and help each other achieve our writing goals."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.