The Problem with Big Fantasy Epics
Are fans of massive fantasy epics losing patience with the delays between books? And are the resolutions of those actually finished poorly received?
Delays between volumes of fantasy epics are nothing new. The first volume in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, The Gunslinger, was released in 1982, the final volume of the main series was released in 2004. King's near-brush with death was the catalyst for him quickly finishing the final three volumes. Certain elements weren't well received, such as King including himself in the final two volumes, and the ending was greeted with a certain amount of dissatisfaction by a lot of fans.
With large multi-book epics, there are generally two ways of doing it. They can either be one massive tale told over multiple books like Jordan's The Wheel of Time and Martin's A Song of Ice & Fire, or be broken down into smaller sub-series, such as Feist's Riftwar Cycle and Abercrombie's First Law universe. Lynch's Gentlemen Bastards sequence is a series of generally standalone books that tell a larger tale, and Gemmell's Drenai books are a series of standalone novels that were written out of chronological order, and are generally standalone, but are linked.
The problem with the sprawling epic is that the books can take a long time to write. The Wheel of Time's first book of 14 (excluding prequel A New Spring) came out in 1990, and author's death meant that another author had the largely thankless task of writing what became the final three books which came out in 2013. The books initially came out every year, but this later became every two years, and fan frustration mounted with the growing number of point of views slowing the pace, and the perception that less was happening in each book. This peaked with Crossroads of Twilight, a complaint being that very little happened despite the length of the book. The following volume was better received, the last one fully written by Jordan.
A Song of Ice & Fire has drawn ire from fans due to not only the long wait between books (three published since 2000 and no date yet for the penultimate volume). And again, some readers felt the previous two books weren't as good as the initial three volumes.
The final Wheel of Time volume met with a mixed reception, some feeling a lot happened that Jordan wouldn't have written, and that the ending was quite abrupt, with little learned about the post-battle fates of the survivors, or even an emotional pay-off.
A Song of Ice & Fire is still two volumes away from ending (though at least the TV series ends next year) so we've no way of knowing if the ending will be worth the decades-long duration of the series.
In my opinion, the problem with one big story being told across so many volumes is that the transition from the "2nd act" to the "3rd and final act" is that there's usually a bit of a slowdown as the plotlines manoeuvre the characters towards the climax. When this transition lasts a two or three large novels, there can be a feeling that 'nothing's happening' or that the author has lost control of the story.
Increasingly, fantasy fans are expressing wariness towards starting a series that is not finished or nearing completion. A selling point of Rothfuss' Kingkiller Chronicles was that the trilogy was essentially a very large novel, that it was pretty much done (barring editing) and that fans burned by other series not finishing or not nearing completion could start book one in the knowledge that books two and three would be out a year apart.
That didn't quite work out, the claim that volumes two and three were pretty much done and would be out a year apart was 'optimistic' to say the least. Book two came out four years after book one, and book three's completion and release is looking uncertain.
Lynch's Gentlemen Bastard series has also seen a lengthy delay between releases, but the generally standalone nature of the books in addition to the author's publicly announced personal problems has garnered him more support and understanding.
Another way of structuring fantasy series is to break the story into smaller series, that tell a complete story but can also build up towards a greater whole.
An example is Fiest's Riftwar books. Leaving aside the perceived decline in quality later in the series, the mini-arcs work quite well. The series is comprised of a number of trilogies, duologies and a quartet that largely tell their own story over many decades while still telling one big story. The final volume also shows an improvement in quality over many of its preceding volumes, and succeeds in wrapping the story up. An advantage of this piecemeal approach is that readers don't have to wait decades for resolution. His first book came out in 1982, the final book came out thirty-one years later; had the series been one big long story rather than multiple smaller arcs, the expectations for the finale would have been too high to meet. As it is, one can read the first trilogy and still get closure.
Abercrombie's First Law universe is broken down into a trilogy, three standalones (and a volume of short stories), with another trilogy due out soon. An advantage of this approach is fans aren't waiting decades for a story to be finished.
In years past, fans may have been willing to wait years or never for a story to end, but now there's more of a feeling of impatience, of discontent with large delays, especially if they prove indefinite.
But what can authors do? Many authors have full-time jobs and so are limited. Should authors finish the series before releasing the first volume? But who will write a multi-book volume, taking the chance it may never find a publisher?
Should writers temper their ambitions and stick to shorter series' that won't take as long to write? It should be noted the Wheel of Time was originally meant to be six volumes, and likewise Martin underestimated the length of A Song of Ice & Fire. And if the books sell well (which these books have), publishers will be happy to keep them going.
My own preference as a writer is to break my plots down into smaller arcs, so I can give resolutions either in the same book or after a couple of books, telling a larger story over multiple trilogies etc. That way, if I never finish the whole big plot, readers are still getting closure.
Delays between volumes of fantasy epics are nothing new. The first volume in Stephen King's Dark Tower series, The Gunslinger, was released in 1982, the final volume of the main series was released in 2004. King's near-brush with death was the catalyst for him quickly finishing the final three volumes. Certain elements weren't well received, such as King including himself in the final two volumes, and the ending was greeted with a certain amount of dissatisfaction by a lot of fans.
With large multi-book epics, there are generally two ways of doing it. They can either be one massive tale told over multiple books like Jordan's The Wheel of Time and Martin's A Song of Ice & Fire, or be broken down into smaller sub-series, such as Feist's Riftwar Cycle and Abercrombie's First Law universe. Lynch's Gentlemen Bastards sequence is a series of generally standalone books that tell a larger tale, and Gemmell's Drenai books are a series of standalone novels that were written out of chronological order, and are generally standalone, but are linked.
The problem with the sprawling epic is that the books can take a long time to write. The Wheel of Time's first book of 14 (excluding prequel A New Spring) came out in 1990, and author's death meant that another author had the largely thankless task of writing what became the final three books which came out in 2013. The books initially came out every year, but this later became every two years, and fan frustration mounted with the growing number of point of views slowing the pace, and the perception that less was happening in each book. This peaked with Crossroads of Twilight, a complaint being that very little happened despite the length of the book. The following volume was better received, the last one fully written by Jordan.
A Song of Ice & Fire has drawn ire from fans due to not only the long wait between books (three published since 2000 and no date yet for the penultimate volume). And again, some readers felt the previous two books weren't as good as the initial three volumes.
The final Wheel of Time volume met with a mixed reception, some feeling a lot happened that Jordan wouldn't have written, and that the ending was quite abrupt, with little learned about the post-battle fates of the survivors, or even an emotional pay-off.
A Song of Ice & Fire is still two volumes away from ending (though at least the TV series ends next year) so we've no way of knowing if the ending will be worth the decades-long duration of the series.
In my opinion, the problem with one big story being told across so many volumes is that the transition from the "2nd act" to the "3rd and final act" is that there's usually a bit of a slowdown as the plotlines manoeuvre the characters towards the climax. When this transition lasts a two or three large novels, there can be a feeling that 'nothing's happening' or that the author has lost control of the story.
Increasingly, fantasy fans are expressing wariness towards starting a series that is not finished or nearing completion. A selling point of Rothfuss' Kingkiller Chronicles was that the trilogy was essentially a very large novel, that it was pretty much done (barring editing) and that fans burned by other series not finishing or not nearing completion could start book one in the knowledge that books two and three would be out a year apart.
That didn't quite work out, the claim that volumes two and three were pretty much done and would be out a year apart was 'optimistic' to say the least. Book two came out four years after book one, and book three's completion and release is looking uncertain.
Lynch's Gentlemen Bastard series has also seen a lengthy delay between releases, but the generally standalone nature of the books in addition to the author's publicly announced personal problems has garnered him more support and understanding.
Another way of structuring fantasy series is to break the story into smaller series, that tell a complete story but can also build up towards a greater whole.
An example is Fiest's Riftwar books. Leaving aside the perceived decline in quality later in the series, the mini-arcs work quite well. The series is comprised of a number of trilogies, duologies and a quartet that largely tell their own story over many decades while still telling one big story. The final volume also shows an improvement in quality over many of its preceding volumes, and succeeds in wrapping the story up. An advantage of this piecemeal approach is that readers don't have to wait decades for resolution. His first book came out in 1982, the final book came out thirty-one years later; had the series been one big long story rather than multiple smaller arcs, the expectations for the finale would have been too high to meet. As it is, one can read the first trilogy and still get closure.
Abercrombie's First Law universe is broken down into a trilogy, three standalones (and a volume of short stories), with another trilogy due out soon. An advantage of this approach is fans aren't waiting decades for a story to be finished.
In years past, fans may have been willing to wait years or never for a story to end, but now there's more of a feeling of impatience, of discontent with large delays, especially if they prove indefinite.
But what can authors do? Many authors have full-time jobs and so are limited. Should authors finish the series before releasing the first volume? But who will write a multi-book volume, taking the chance it may never find a publisher?
Should writers temper their ambitions and stick to shorter series' that won't take as long to write? It should be noted the Wheel of Time was originally meant to be six volumes, and likewise Martin underestimated the length of A Song of Ice & Fire. And if the books sell well (which these books have), publishers will be happy to keep them going.
My own preference as a writer is to break my plots down into smaller arcs, so I can give resolutions either in the same book or after a couple of books, telling a larger story over multiple trilogies etc. That way, if I never finish the whole big plot, readers are still getting closure.
No comments have been added yet.
