Andrew O.
asked
Mark Lawrence:
Pardon the flattery, but the content you share gives exceptional insight into the thoughts and opinions of a successful writer few others have offered. Thank you. With that out of the way, what novel structures do you see as emerging as a dominant force in the coming years? With so many books being released as duologies and trilogies, might we see a return to stand alone novels? I miss a good stand alone read.
Mark Lawrence
Hooray for kindly hyperbole!
Trilogies are a kind of mutually beneficial (on average) arrangement between publishers and authors.
On the one hand from the author's side, world building requires a lot of real-estate on the page and a lot of mental energy. So having taken the effort to create a reality, populate it with places and people and problems, garnish with a magic system and a history ... most of them like the idea of having their protagonists play in it for a while rather than abandoning it "nearly new" after one book.
Most authors (& many readers) will start to tire of a setting after a number of books - that number depending on the individual.
Publishers, like film makers, and really all business people everywhere, like to minimise risk. When something works they want more of it. They want Fast and Furious 7, they want to remake Robin Hood etc. So, they want the author locked into more if the first book flies - but they don't want to tie themselves forever to something that flops. And 3 is the magic number that works for everyone.
So, in short, given my very limited insights, I think the trilogy is going to be with us for quite a while, and that we won't start seeing loads of stand-alones. In fact many older books that people think are stand-alones are just wildly popular book 1's in series that went on to be far less popular. Think, The Wizard of Oz (book 1: 400,000 ratings, book 2: 20,000 ratings)
Trilogies are a kind of mutually beneficial (on average) arrangement between publishers and authors.
On the one hand from the author's side, world building requires a lot of real-estate on the page and a lot of mental energy. So having taken the effort to create a reality, populate it with places and people and problems, garnish with a magic system and a history ... most of them like the idea of having their protagonists play in it for a while rather than abandoning it "nearly new" after one book.
Most authors (& many readers) will start to tire of a setting after a number of books - that number depending on the individual.
Publishers, like film makers, and really all business people everywhere, like to minimise risk. When something works they want more of it. They want Fast and Furious 7, they want to remake Robin Hood etc. So, they want the author locked into more if the first book flies - but they don't want to tie themselves forever to something that flops. And 3 is the magic number that works for everyone.
So, in short, given my very limited insights, I think the trilogy is going to be with us for quite a while, and that we won't start seeing loads of stand-alones. In fact many older books that people think are stand-alones are just wildly popular book 1's in series that went on to be far less popular. Think, The Wizard of Oz (book 1: 400,000 ratings, book 2: 20,000 ratings)
More Answered Questions
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more