The Sword and Laser discussion
Are series getting TOO long?
As long as the writing is good and the story is interesting, I'll keep reading a series.
If the quality is there, then number of pages/years isn't an issue for me.
If the quality is there, then number of pages/years isn't an issue for me.
I agree, as long as the story is fresh and doesn't get stale I'll read it.
I think it would be nice if more authors would write stories that are in the same universe but aren't necessarily connected to one another. An example would be Iain M. Banks (Granted I have only read the first two books in his Culture series so I can't fully comment on all the books). They all take place in the same universe but are standalone stories with unique characters so there isn't a feeling of having to commit to reading the entire series to follow a character(s)/group. I found this refreshing after getting burned out with book four of the Wheel of Time.
Discworld by Pratchett is that way. Some characters crossover into the other mini-series but it isn't necessary to read them all in order.
I honestly don't mind if a series is long, so long as the quality keeps up over the years.The thing that causes me to be more hesitant to start a series is if it is an incomplete series. It isn't the page length or the number of books in the series that makes me hesitant though, it's the release schedule of the author. If the series is long like the Dresden Files, which is 13 books and counting, but there is a book released almost annually, then it doesn't bother me.
The problem I have with series like A Song of Ice and Fire and The Dark Tower is the many years between books, it's hard to keep track of what's going on when in the span of several years only a couple books have come out.
If I see that an author tends to take close to three to five years between each book then it takes alot for me to start an incomplete series.
Keep in mind, this is irregardless of the quality of a series. This is just me not being able to remember what was going on in a book I read more than a few years previously.
Mohrravvian wrote: "The Wheel of Time - 14 books - 22 years (1990 - 2012) - 11,000+ pages - (4,000,000+ words!)
The Sword of Truth - 13 books - 17 years (1994 - 2011) - 9,000+ pages
The Dark Tower - 8 books - 30 years (1982 - 2012, counting the most recently released book The Wind Through the Keyhole) - 4,700+ pages
A Song of Ice and Fire - 5 books currently - 16 years (1996 - 2012+) - 5,000+ pages and still going... "
Length isn't the issue. Authors taking five years to write a thousand pages where the plot barely advances, that's the problem. This is how it should be done:
Horizon in the Middle of Nowhere - 10 books continuing - 4 years (2008-2012)
Familiar of Zero - 20 books complete - 7 years (2004-2011)
Shakugan no Shana - 22 books complete - 9 years (2002-2011)
A Certain Magical Index - 24 books complete - 6 years (2004-2010)
A Certain Magical Index: New Testament - 4 books currently - 2 years (2011-2012)
The Guin Saga - 130 books - 30 years (1979-2009)
Brett wrote: "Keep in mind, this is irregardless of the quality of a series. This is just me not being able to remember what was going on in a book I read more than a few years previously."I have the same problem. I had to reread the previous books in ASOIAF because I'd completely forgotten what was going on, and when I started A Dance with Dragons I was totally confused.
Length of the series means nothing to me, but like most, I prefer not to have to wait for years and years for a resolution. I generally prefer interconnected story set in the same universe, but not necessarily tied together by the same plot and/or characters.
Series such as Dresden Files or the Vorkosiverse, which can almost be read as standalone works really capture my attention - I don't have to read them all in the same breath and devote too much time to plot points that aren't likely to be resolved within the space of one book.
Usako wrote: "Discworld by Pratchett is that way. Some characters crossover into the other mini-series but it isn't necessary to read them all in order."
Discworld is refreshing like that. I read the first two Rincewind books then skipped all the way to the first Moist novel without losing much along the way. I think the next one I read was Pyramids. I read most of them completely out of order.
For me it isn't the length of the a series or how long it is between book publishing's (if I forgot what happened, Wikipedia is there to fill me in) but with books like "The Wheel of Time," "A Song of Ice and Fire" and Goodkind's series with "Wizards First Rule" is the number of characters introduced. With Jordan and Hoodlums I got to book 5 before lemming the entire series because I honestly did not care about all the new characters bing introduced. I bought the books for the characters in the the first book and a care about those ones. I don't care or want to waste my time reading about New people and learn to care about them when a character I do care about is in a bind.
with Martin, I found he had too many POVs at the start of his series. with him I didn't care about anyone but Jon and Ayra. in that book there were six other characters to listen to and only more to be added in future books.
TL;DR - too many characters stagnate a book. Too many characters force series to run on past their prime. keep it 5 and under (POVs per book).
R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt books have been going on for almost 24 years and over 20 books.
As long as the series is actually working towards an ending, then i'm OK with the length (IE, Robert Jordan made sure that the series would be ended after his death, Fred Saberhagen Book of Swords had a definate ending, even after 10 years or so) but if there's no end in sight (i'm looking at you, Orson Scott Card) then it's pretty depressing to devote time and effort to a series that goes on and on with no resolution. A series should be a longer form of books, after all, with its own beginning, middle, (and this is important) and end. Robert J Sawyer had this problem with his TV show based on Flashforward and now for his next show he's pushing for a complete ending to the series. tl;dr: Series need to have endings
FYI: Sword of Truth is only really 11 books over 13 years. Debt of Bones and The Omen Machine are set in the same world, and feature some of the same characters, but are not part of the main main storyline.
I don't mind a series where the characters carry over from book to book. You see this a lot in mysteries by the likes of Harlen Coben, Janet Evanovich, and Elmore Leonard. I don't mind these because the stories are self-contained per volume. Yes, a story might re-use some plot points from an earlier novel, but pretty much you can pick up a book in the middle series and not have to read the previous 15 volumes. I'm really starting to dislike these series comprised of 1000-page tomes that don't have at least some resemblance of a self-contained story, and yes, I'm looking at you, George R R Martin. I love the television show Game of Thrones and I enjoyed reading the (first) book, but when I finished A Clash of Kings I felt like I'd been cheated. I had just read 800 pages of a book that had no real beginning and no end.
Series come in a variety though...Known Trilogy: The author goes in planning to tell a story that is so epic that it spans three (or more) books. I'd lump in Harry Potter here too after the first because Rowlings has said that she knew where she wanted to go in Book 7 and so spent a lot of books 2-6 laying foundation work with their stories.
I think these work best, though, when each book can stand on it's own merits with a firm beginning, middle and end. Short of that knowing that it's no more than a Trilogy can help.
The Serial: When a writer just has a set of characters that ~works~. They are interesting and are written so there is always room for some kind of conflict between them even as novel external conflicts crop up. Think about a good television series with each episode as a stand alone novel.
These work best when reading them in order helps but each novel is a solid novel on it's own and do not require you to re-read them to know what's up. Of course it's hard to carry over ~too~ much complexity from earlier books here. You dont' want to re-read pages and pages of WHY the Heroine hates the Hero's Android Sidekick. It's there, it's a quirk, back to the story, please.
The Never Ending Series: Nothing is resolved, ever. Resolving it means that the story ends so around (End of book - 10 pages) the author throws in a new twist to keep the heroes from finding resolution forcing them onto another adventure.
I don't think these ever work....
Kevin wrote: "R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt books have been going on for almost 24 years and over 20 books."I think the reason his books are still good as he has trilogy arcs rather than 20 books without an end. Each 3(ish) books begin and conclude with a problem that they solve. He also sticks to the same characters and doesn't keep adding more and more characters (GRR Martin-itis as I call it).
The books retain focus and also retain their origins by keeping true to its root Characters.
My big problem with the big series (malazan for one) is that they introduce new characters either too soon or focus on them rather than the old characters. If I don't care about the ones introduced in the last part of the book before new ones are introduced (Malazan was like this for me) I have a hard time staying interested (I ended up lemming Malazan).
If I have to read 300 pages before I get back to my facourite characters, I will either skip ahead to those characters and then lem the book anyways (Wheel of Time, Song of Ice and Fire, Goodkind).
I have to say that after I read up to book four of the Wheel of Time, I felt more invested v. driven to keep reading. Granted some of sub-plots were interesting, but there are entire books in the series in which I cannot remember the specific details. The over arching premise had me interested and I felt that if I skipped one of the books I might miss something interesting or important.
Comments will mirror those above. If I have been kidnapped by the world, or the lore of the world, the characters, etc, I will want to read more. Unfortunately, when this happens I get that raging sense of entitlement that Neil Gaiman refers to in the famous(here at least) and oft quoted, "GRRM is not your Bitch."
If i put hours of my time and imagination into reading a book series, if i have become genuinely interested in the series, I want to feel like the questions i have are being answered, and that plots are being resolved. As long as there is resolution, I don't care if there are 10 books in a series, or 100 books.
An example I'd offer (if needed at this point) would be regarding Dance with Dragons. I have it loaded up on my e-reader, but i haven't tucked in to it yet. I have heard many complaints about the food porn in there. I don't care if GRRM spends an entire book having characters swapping recipes during a battle or court politics scene, as long as he finishes what he started (fingers crossed) and the characters i have come to enjoy are resolved. 7 books or 15 books, i don't really mind. I am invested in the series. As long as things move towards an end.
I am not entirely sure what to think of instances where the author dies, but leaves copious notes behind, and then another author steps in to finish (Re: Brandon Sanderson finishing off the WOT series). In this regard i feel it falls into a case-by-case basis. For the WOT, Sanderson has been doing a pretty good job. The opposite of this is Eoin Colfer's butchery of the Hitchhiker's Guide, "And Another Thing...". Could a different author have done a better job? Possibly. In a slight defence of Colfer, I don't believe he had much to go on (a couple chapters and some scene sketches if my memory serves), and blame should be heaped upon the publishers trying to follow the WOT finale success?
Lots of rambling there for something that comes down to personal interest and time investment.
As long as the series does not drag on forever and answers some questions now and then I am happy. There are some series that I have given up on because they start dragging as the author gets bogged down. Other series I want more of even if it means there are 20+ books in a series/universe. Series like Dresden, Malazan a few.
The only series I read was The Sword of Truth and it was ok, cause all the books were released when I decided to read them but I guess it depends on how the books were written - I mean, if the books all ended with a dramatic cliffhanger, I probably wouldn't be patient enough to keep waiting for the next one.A good series can be long, but when the individual volumes are interesting and appealing, you keep following it cause you want to discover more and not cause you're almost forced to do it, when the books end in a "to be continued" way.
André
If I truly love the world the author has created I want them to continue telling stories of it as long as they can. Sometimes this can lead to some less than stellar later books and a loss of cohesion but if done well it can keep you immersed in a world that you don't want to leave. One of my favorite series is The Dresden Files and it is planned to be 23 novels and many short stories and of the 13 novels I've read it hasn't lost any charm.
I think the Dune prequels are getting way too long, filled with absolutely nothing.
I also tend to have problems with very long series because they don't tend to have endings. Six books for me tends to be a good limit, otherwise things seem to dragged out too much.I am planning on five or six books for the series I am writing, depending on how long I make the individual books and if I decide to drop a couple of plot lines.
Limiting the number of POVs, keeping the core set of characters, having each book resolve something (leaving some long term plot elements open, but the immediate ones resolved). Those are the things I think make a series work for me.
I love ongoing series except for the concern that the author may die without the series ever being finished. The first fantasy series other than LOTR that I ever read was The Sleeping Dragon of the Guardians of the Flame series by Joel Rosenberg. That was in the early 80's and over the next 20+ years Rosenberg put out a new book now and then but never really made any headway into resolving the series or any of the major plot threads he'd started. Then he died suddenly and unexpectedly a year or two ago so the series will never likely be finished. This nearly happened with with Robert Jordan except he knew he was dying and did as much work as he could on writing the end and leaving notes and an outline from which Brandon Sanderson is now finishing.
I worry about George R.R. Martin. He's in his 60's now and looks like a heart attack waiting to happen. Given how slow his writing pace was already its going to be a miracle if he finishes SOIAF given all the other things he's got going now like the TV series.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I gave up on WoT because the series just got so boring around book 9 I couldn't force myself to continue.Feist's Riftwar Saga is a long series I'm happy with. It's been around 30 years and 29 books so far so an average of 1 a year. There have been some not so great points but overall I still love it as much as I did after first reading Magician. It's sad that it's ending soon but it is time.
I like the Recluce books to a large extent. There are only a few direct sequels among the books set in that universe, but they're all so interrelated.
Honestly it really depends on the series. Like many here, I enjoy returning to familiar places & seeing familiar faces in the books I read. Some of my favorite authors (Mercedes Lackey, Raymond Feist, & Marion Zimmer Bradley, for example) have written many books in the same world(s), using many of the same characters. On the other hand, I stopped reading WoT at Book 7 for two big reasons: I had to take notes to keep the story & characters straight, & I became convinced that, much like Frank Herbert, Robert Jordan would die before he ever finished the series.I think the biggest difference is that the former authors told finite stories within the world they had created, with no series exceeding three books (okay, four if you insist on splitting Magician in two), while Jordan just couldn't seem to make his story go anywhere.
I, too, am worried about George R. R. Martin. I do feel like his books are still going somewhere, even if his canvas is so huge that it's kinda unwieldy.
P.S. Hate the Goodkind novels. In my opinion, the man recycled the same plot for every book in that series...seriously, couldn't there have been one where the two main characters stayed together? Sheesh!
I think it's series dependent, for instance, I did tire of the Wheel of Time series after the third book or so, but David Weber's Honor Harrington series has captivated me for the first 11 books. That said, I have very little interest in the spin off novels in the same universe.I suspect there's something else happening there though, as there's nothing that will turn me off a series faster than the protagonist that's full of self hate trope. For instance Lord Foul's Bane lost me in the first few chapters. By all accounts a great series, but I hated the main character and couldn't go on.
Just to reassure a few people, I do believe that GRRM has completed his story outlines for the next few books. And to un-reassure them, he is probably changing them in order to make them more TV friendly and follow the plot lines that have changed in the HBO series.I prefer series with stand alone books set in the same world, like Discworld, and Sharon Shinn's books, but I think Terry Brooks does a great job with his series set in a series and how they all came together.
For me, it depends where the series is when I first discover it. I find it very hard to get the motivation to read a series that already stands at 10 books or more when I first pick up one of the volumes.However, I can cheerfully continue reading a series that has passed the 10 books mark, simply because I was onboard from much earlier in the publishing schedule.
That said, I tend to prefer stand-alone tales set within an author's existing milieu rather than multi-volume, single-tale stories. The works of Iain M Banks and China Miéville are particular favourites of mine for much this reason.
Most of the time I will only start on a series, or sub series if I know it is complete. WOT is an exception to that rule in that I read book 1 without knowing much about them. After I found it was an incomplete series, I stopped and never proceeded to book 2. Like most of the other people here, books that are all self contained but in the same universe I can read as I go. Honor Harrington, Dresden Files or Anita Blake for example.
I think I already said this on another thread, but my feelings are thus:-If an author consistently returns to the same characters and settings in their books, but tells new stories, whether short stories, stand-alone novels or novel series, that can be fine. I loved the old Conan and Fafhrd and Grey Mouser stories, and I loved Raymond E. Feist's Midkemia work for over a dozen books. I might still turn away from the books for different reasons though. I dropped the Drizzt books pretty early because I found myself hating almost all the heroes, while I dropped Sword of Truth after book 4 because I was tired of every villain being a one-dimensional monster and got sick of the constant descriptions of gang-rape.
-If an author has a definitive, over-arching plot for their series (e.g., defeat the Dark Lord), then the longer they stretch out the resolution of that plot, the more likely I am to lem the rest of the series. This process is accelerated if whole new ensembles of characters and settings are introduced solely for the purpose of drawing out the plot.
Joe wrote: heh, don't read A Song of Ice and Fire then!
I agree with Ian and Rob that it's different for serials vs. just long stories.Provided that the stories stay good I'll happily follow a serial for a long time because each story has a resolution. I can stop reading or the author can stop writing them at any point, and that's fine.
If it's a long story the author has to pull the trigger and finish the plots and character arcs that they set up within a couple of books, or I'll get bored. That's clearly just me, though, because these long series are so successful.
It occurs to me that long book series are like long-running TV series, and maybe we should think of them more that way. We are used to TV shows having multiple writers or being cancelled before the conclusion. A long series is certainly an absolutely huge commitment for one author to carry.
Stuart wrote: "It occurs to me that long book series are like long-running TV series, and maybe we should think of them more that way. We are used to TV shows having multiple writers or being cancelled before the conclusion. A long series is certainly an absolutely huge commitment for one author to carry. "Yes, it almost never happens that any one writer makes a significant contribution to a TV series. I think the record is J. Michael Straczynski, who wrote 92 of the 110 episodes of Babylon 5 including a run of 59 consecutive episodes.
I think Rob makes really good points. The Vorkosigan Saga (serials) can happily go on as long as it needs to because each book is a self-contained story. Harry Potter is fine at 7 books because that's how JKR planned it and everything is wrapped up by the end.And then there's our dear GRRM. It's not that ASOIAF is too long, it's that it's been going in fucking circles for almost 2000 pages now, and I have no confidence that it's ever going to come to a satisfying conclusion.
At least (most) long-running TV shows wrap things up at the end of every season, just in case.
Yes, the fantasy series are getting ridiculously long...I know I won't go back reading Wheel of Time series for a long long time. It's absurdly long and it seems to account every single step of every single character in its narration. It is particularly after WoT, I started to be wary of long and unfinished series.
When I choose a series, I prefer trilogies if each book looks around 800 to 1000 pages. My only regular reading time is my one-hour commute everyday and it's really hard to keep up with a series, each book 1000+ pages long, 10+ published and rest keeps coming.
Mohrravvian wrote: "I know this is similar to Marz's "Anyone else tired of series?" thread, but I thought it different enough to warrant its own discussion. What I'm wondering is, are fantasy / scifi series getting ..."
Star Wars and Star Trek should be in there as an example, but I tend to agree with veronica in S&L ep4 no I don't think the are too long, if authors can put out the stories and people are willing to buy them, then that is fine.
A whole hearted YES! I started most of these series when they were BEGUN!(you know, before wikipedia) And I quit reading them long ago because I was frustrated with the lack of conclusion after years of waiting. I, too, am at the point where I will not read an incomplete story. As others have stated, I will read those that are self-contained stories - a la Honor Harrington. But, then, I do not care for soap operas either.
I do feel some guilt at this, as it really puts new authors in a toe hold. If they have a story that should be told in a trilogy or whatever - how do they sell the second if the first does not sell?
I believe a series should continue as long as the author needed to tell his/her story. It might take 3 books or 20 books; as long as I believe that author needed it, that is his/her prerogative and I respect that. But lately I feel this is used as a marketing strategy by the publishers, and not as a creative choice by the author. And this strategy causes story arcs that can be told in one or two chapters get turned into 1000+ page books just to strech out the story even longer and make readers buy more books to finish the series. And this is never o.k. This insults readers' intelligence. I believe writers who do this never deserve a second chance however talented they might be.
Yes, they are getting too long. I once promised myself I wouldn't start anymore incomplete series, but I've broken that promise.
Rob wrote: "The Never Ending Series: Nothing is resolved, ever. Resolving it means that the story ends so around (End of book - 10 pages) the author throws in a new twist to keep the heroes from finding resolution forcing them onto another adventure."
I'd slot the Sword of Truth series into this category, minus the first book which actually wrapped things up nicely. Every book I read afterwards mentioned something towards the end that made you need to go onto the next book. The trouble with this was twofold. Firstly, it never felt like a long series that was going somewhere; it felt like each book told a new, though, as folk have mentioned, extremely recycled tale; so there wasn't a great sense that you were reading one epic piece of work with a definite direction. The second thing is that each new book got gradually worse in quality, and because none of them after the first had much resolution in the ending, the stink of the later books drifted right back up the line to the ones I'm sure I enjoyed when I first read them.
This could have been solved simply by properly resolving each novel, then adding the new twist that sets off the beginning of the next book at...I don't know, how about the beginning of the next book! I think it shows a lack of faith in your audience if you try to tease them towards sequels in this way. I read the second book in the series because I really liked the first and wanted more. That's what should sell a book sequel, not "and then they lived happily ever aft...oh no, the land was hit by a meteor and now they have to separate in order to misery misery read the next book please that is all".
That said, I will happily consume a lengthy series if it continues to keep my attention. I really loved Katherine Kerr's Deverry Cycle, for example, and David Eddings' Belgarath books too.
I dont see what the problem is here, if you dont like reading a series that you feel "HAS GONE ON TO LONG" then stop reading it. After all you don't have to part with your money. If you feel it is a marketing ploy, or you are being coned, and you still buy then who is the fool?
Rasnac wrote: "I believe a series should continue as long as the author needed to tell his/her story. It might take 3 books or 20 books; as long as I believe that author needed it, that is his/her prerogative and..."I agree with what rasnac said here the author should be allowed as long as he/she feels it takes to tell the story and we should respect that.
I do however believe in quitting while your ahead and while the storyline of something is good and people are enjoying it still, sometimes maybe due to marketing ploys something is spun out and spun out until the story becomes weak and people have lost interest in it I dont believe that that is the way to go with books series or television series.
I'd agree with the general sentiment that quality will always trump length. But I think people have to remember that these authors are writing as fast as they are able. The creative process is not something that can or should be rushed. As a writer I feel kinship with authors like Stephen King. Because like him, I write multiple stories at once and write when a particular story demands to be written.
With that said, I will never touch the Wheel of Time. Sounds like an exercise in misery even starting it at this point.
lol, Scott!Saranar wrote: "I dont see what the problem is here, if you dont like reading a series that you feel "HAS GONE ON TO LONG" then stop reading it. After all you don't have to part with your money. If you feel it is a marketing ploy, or you are being coned, and you still buy then who is the fool?"
The problem comes when the good book doesn't resolve properly, and then following books fail to impress. You keep buying for a while because you are hoping for the series to get back on form, or at least just give you that resolution you've been waiting for. Without it, it removes something from the books you enjoyed. I gave up on the Sword of Truth series eventually, and I feel really sad that a series I loved to begin with became one I hate. I wouldn't read another Goodkind book again, since I've lost all respect for him as an author.
Here's the thing - an author and a reader share the reading experience. When it takes 20 years for an author to finish a story, I, as his reader, feel as though he were taking advantage of me and getting rich at my expense. These stories seem to wander aimlessly in the middle and never come to a conclusion and appear to extend solely to sell more books and get more advances. Kinda like Lost did in the middle seasons . . .
just my .02!
Scott wrote: "Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss..."Are replies getting too long?
Sonja wrote: "Kinda like Lost did in the middle seasons . . . "I agree. Lost is a perfect example of something that was artificially extended because it became popular. It was never meant to be more than a few series long, and I wish I could have seen the series the way it was originally intended. I wonder how things would have played out.
I really think Piers Anthony's Xanth is getting way too long. It has been published since 1977 and on wikipedia it has listed 36 or far, but 2 more coming out in the next two years. This then means that he has on average written about a book a year in the Xanth universe since 1977.
The Sword and Laser
Books mentioned in this topic
Fool Moon (other topics)Darkspell (other topics)
Lord Foul's Bane (other topics)
Magician (other topics)
Magician (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Kevin Hearne (other topics)Katharine Kerr (other topics)
Jim Butcher (other topics)
Piers Anthony (other topics)
David Weber (other topics)
More...
What I'm wondering is, are fantasy / scifi series getting to be TOO long? I have some examples here:
The Wheel of Time - 14 books - 22 years (1990 - 2012) - 11,000+ pages - (4,000,000+ words!)
The Sword of Truth - 13 books - 17 years (1994 - 2011) - 9,000+ pages
The Dark Tower - 8 books - 30 years (1982 - 2012, counting the most recently released book The Wind Through the Keyhole) - 4,700+ pages
A Song of Ice and Fire - 5 books currently - 16 years (1996 - 2012+) - 5,000+ pages and still going...
I really enjoy a well developed, detailed and complete fantasy or scifi world. The depth of the world definitely lends credence to the story. But, is there a point where its just overkill? J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings was only 1,100 or so pages when it was all said and done... 1,500 if you count the Hobbit. And he was able to tell, arguably, one of the greatest stories ever, and one which launched an entire genre of storytelling.
Both Robert Jordan and George RR Martin even started their series as trilogies, but they grew considerably out of proportion in both time scale and story length. I find myself avoiding any series that are still in the incomplete stage because of this trend. Do I really want to wait 20 years to see how it ends? Will I even care in 20 years?
Do we really need or want stories to be 5,000 - 10,000 pages long, spanning 20+ years of releases? Why such a trend towards giant stories of indeterminate length? Is this a good trend?