8.3.11

The Really, Really, Very Cool Epic - Book XVII

I was scrolling through the latest audiobook offerings from audible.com today and it occurred to me that several of the novels I encountered were automatically off my list of possibles.

Strangely the brick wall had nothing to do with style, subject, genre or author.

The single negative aspect of these books was the number next to the title.

It's not that I have anything against a book series. It's just that they have become more and more ubiquitous over time. And unless you get in on the ground floor with book one, you will have a lot of catching up to do. If I want to purchase a free-standing novel, enjoy the story and move on, I should have that option.


blew my twelve-year old mind


Series are nothing new, I suppose. My first series was Lord of the Rings. My second Shannara. Then came Clan of the Cave Bear, Xanth, Dune, Pern, Kushiel, Foundation and Elric. I love them all.


my first experience with the future



Odd is responsible for my love of Koontz



King is a twisted, twisted master


Later I discovered Ender, Dark Tower, Wheel of Time, Odd Thomas, Worthing, Warbreaker, G.R.R. Martin and more. Right now I'm digging the future of Peter F. Hamilton. (Phew!) I even read the first two "Dead" books from Harris... um, but if you ask me about that later, I will deny it vehemently. Do yourself a large favor and just watch True Blood.

vampire porn at its best


For my 9-year old son, it's Diary of a Whimpy Kid. For my 11-year old daughter, it's 39 Clues.




yes, they like to read


My point is I'm open to a decent series of stories. When done well a long series can provide a much deeper story experience.

But my other point is that those single shots - Jonathan Franzen's Freedom is a good recent read - have become more rare.


this one pretty much blew my mind... so good


So what's a writer to do?

Do we write with a series in mind?

Do we formulate a story that can extend itself, that has the legs to become six books, or fourteen, or twenty-six (referencing Sue Grafton's alphabet books there.)

I'm a genre high-concept writer, where the series like to live. I'm not a literary writer.

The easy answer is, "Stay true to yourself." Ugh... that's not advice, that's a dismissal.

What do you read? More series or more stand-alones? What would you like to see more of?

I'll probably just keep writing whatever comes to mind and hoping it's a successful creation.

Thanks for reading, off to write!

Cheers,

Casey

2 comments:

  1. I prefer stand alones ,mainly because i dont want to miss out on the story if i skip a book.. I think you should write what naturally comes to you.. Keep writing..

    ReplyDelete
  2. I prefer - am possibly addicted to - series and very long works in multiple parts. Especially with audiobooks.

    when I listened to my first Laurie King "Mary Russell/Sherlock Holmes" novel, I was hooked, and thrilled that there were 11 more books in the series to listen to. More than 150 hours of brilliant writing and equally brilliant narration.

    Then I discovered Laurie King's "Kate Martinelli" series. Another 5 books, 50 hours, etc., etc.

    Then I listened to Chris Cleave's "Incendiary." As much as I wanted it to go on forever (it's a brilliant book, and an equally brilliant audiobook narration), I knew that "the end" was the end. After only 8 1/2 hours.

    So, "what's a writer to do?" Just write the book. If it's meant to be a series, you'll know by the end of book 1. It will either demand a follow-up. or not. Planned series are inevitably anemic, TV-series fair.

    ReplyDelete

This is where you come in...