Committing a Deadly Sin...

[JustGo]

If there's one thing I've learned about being unpublished, it's that you never, ever try to get started with a series. From what I've read, the average novel has a 1% chance (some estimate less) of getting published, and a 20% chance, if published, of doing well enough to warrant a sequel. While you might get lucky enough to get a multiple-book deal, it's just plain unlikely. So, overall, the chance of getting that sequel published is .2% or less.

Well, I'm writing the sequel anyway.

The original is currently with beta readers (and while the ones who have read it finished in two or three days, most haven't started, so it could be ages). While the main plot is resolved - it starts with a rebellion, and we see whether it succeeds or fails by the end - a lot of characters have unfinished business, it's not a happy ending, and the seeds of even greater chaos have been planted. I feel that it can stand alone, but that it begs a sequel.

Since I'm terrible at getting back into a story I haven't visited in some time (my attempts to revise some of my short stories proved that), I want to get this done while the story, the mood, and the voice I used are all fresh in my head. I'll probably just write the rough draft for now, then wait to see if the original gets published before revising. I'm guessing the process of writing this will take me six or seven months.

So, what do you think? Are my reasons good enough to warrant my heresy? Or should I burn at the stake for thinking of such a thing (or turn back before I go too far)?

[Seaclusion]

Write the sequel. And if the sequel can stand on it's own start querying it.

IMHO
Richard

[Maryn]

One thing about the really good series I've read is that every novel can stand on its own. Sure, it's even better if you read the series in order, but if the one you pluck from the shelves is part of a series and you didn't know that, you can still enjoy it without the backstory and characters' pasts from previous books.

So yeah, hit that sequel, but be certain it can stand alone if it has to. Ideally, it won't, but it will be all the better for being able to.

Maryn, thinking of Ed McBain, John D. MacDonald, Sue Grafton, Donald Hamilton, Robert Parker, Ian Fleming...

[C.bronco]

Do what you gotta do anddon't worry about the odds.


If it were easy, then everyone would do it.

[Clair Dickson]

Besides, writing more makes you a better writer. So you can't go wrong there. Write on! (I'm currently working on book 2 of my PI series while Book 1 is out trying to seduce agents, so take that as my bias. =)

[Shadow_Ferret]

Never tell me the odds.

But it seems to me that nearly every new author in Urban Fantasy started with a series.

[Peachnuts]

Wow love those odds.
I say do it, what have you got to lose?

[Chasing the Horizon]

Even if you don't get the first book published and the sequel doesn't stand alone (or doesn't get published either) it still doesn't mean you're wasting your time writing it. Like Clair said, practice makes you a better writer. And if you get a different book published later that does well, then you might be able to get a deal to publish the series. Easy to make your deadline if the book is already written :)

[rugcat]

But it seems to me that nearly every new author in Urban Fantasy started with a series.I agree.

I have seen the advice given debut authors, "don't pitch or write a series" by almost every professional in the business.

But I think urban fantasy is different. Publishers love series characters, they expect them, and a one shot stand alone uf book is the rare exception.

However, your first book in the series still needs to be basically a standalone. If your first book ends with the mc charging off into battle with the queen of the vamps, it's going to be a lot harder to sell.

[FOTSGreg]

Hey, ask J. A. Konrath about writing a series. He writes that something like his first 5 novels gathered nothing but dust & rejections. Then he hit with the first book in the Jack Daniels series.

Each book in that series stands on its own and maybe that's one of the secrets. A lot of series out there are obviously constructed to be series and you're left high & dry by the end knowing you have to wait for the next book to find out what's going on. And then you're left with the same thing again and again. I hate that kind of writing. It smacks too much of trying to milk the reader of money.

I'm also essentially unpublished (aside from a couple unpaid short stories in the last couple of years and a review article in Wired Magazine #3 or #4), but I'm working on the 5th draft of a book that I know is going to have 1-2 sequels. But each book will wrap up a part of the story line and will stand on its own although it won't complete the entire story arc. The first book will top out around 85-90k words and the next one is likely to be about that as well as the third (if there is a 3rd) so at 170-270 thousand words for the whole story the likelihood of getting that monster published is probably even lower than trying for a first novel that's the start of a series.

In addition, for any book of any length your odds of being published are about the same no matter if it's the start of a series or not these days - ad publishers do like series.

So, I say do what you have to do. Run with it. Try to make each book in the series stand on its own, but don;t try to not write another book in the series if that's what you have to do.

[ArcticFox]

J.K. Rowling...

[Zoombie]

Was an anomaly. No, she didn't cause the planet to explode or the dilithium matrix to require realignment, but she was still something weird that doesn't always happen. In fact, it mostly never happens.

The three possible vague and fuzzy books in my series all stand on their own. In fact, the third one is so vague and fuzzy that I'm pretty sure its not even an idea in my mind yet.

[Priene]

the average novel has a 1% chance (some estimate less) of getting published, and a 20% chance, if published, of doing well enough to warrant a sequel.

Take this from a Statistics graduate: stop sweating about odds. You're scaring yourself about something you don't understand properly. You can only apprortion a probability like this if the sample set is homogenous, which in this case means if every manuscript is written with an equal level of expertise. They're not. There is no average novel*. A bad novel won't get published. A good novel will. Neither has the probability you've given.

Learn how to write a good novel. That's all there is.


* On second thoughts, there is an average novel. If you ranked all known manuscripts from worst to best, the one that stood in the middle could be called the average. It would probably be an extremely bad MS and far from publishable, because the distribution of MSs is skewed heavily towards the bad. Like I said, write a good one.

[bpmann]

J.K. Rowling...

Or Janet Evanovich, as a more realistic example.

[Mumut]

My first book published is definitely the first of a series. The MC has made it back from a terrifying ordeal but in the end paragraphs realises she will have to go back. The second book is that trip back to help her friends. It stands alone but it helps to read the first one first. So I sent the first enquiry to publishers and the third one took it on and took on the second one when it was written. Maybe I succeeded by not having an agent. And I didn't know it was supposed to be hard.

If I were you I'd write, learn then, if ou are still not published, look back at your first work then and re-write as necessary..

[loquax]

Can I play the devil's advocate a moment? If you main goal is to get published, the best option might be to write something else. Sure, if neither novel gets published it won't be wasted because you're still writing. But you're not writing anything new. If you keep the same characters and the same world, you won't experience the same level of growth than if you started something completely fresh.

Obviously, DA. But just throwig that out there.

[Deccydiva]

The Jilly Cooper novels starting with "Riders" do stand alone but each one has references to characters or situations which take centre stage in others. It is not really a series, some are contemporous where the MCs from another novel have cameo, or less important roles in another with the same elements of plot. Mine is roughly following that idea; I can write another novel from an entirely different viewpoint which relates to the current story but can stand alone as well.
I will write the next one; who knows, it may be accepted before the original one! Or not at all... :Shrug:

[SLThomas]

Write the sequel. And if the sequel can stand on it's own start querying it.

IMHO
Richard


Yup.

[Jimmyboy1]

If this site were only populated with people worried about the odds, there's be no one here.

[Phaeal]

There's a difference between a series in which the individual novels can stand alone and a series in which there is actually one overarching story arc. In my experience, most detective series are in the former camp, most SF/F in the second. Some urban fantasies are in the first camp, due to their similarity to detective series. The Harry Potter novels are in the second camp.

What you describe, JustGo, sounds more second than first camp to me, hence more dependent on the success of the first book. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't knock out that first draft or at least a detailed outline. That puts you ahead of the game if the first book hits and you're asked about the next book.

To me, the only contraindication would be if some unrelated novel is calling to you more urgently.

[tehuti88]

I'd say just write the series, especially since you seem so invested in it, but that's coming from somebody not looking to get published. If that's what you're more interested in I'd have to echo this:

If you main goal is to get published, the best option might be to write something else. Sure, if neither novel gets published it won't be wasted because you're still writing.

But I wouldn't totally agree with this:

But you're not writing anything new. If you keep the same characters and the same world, you won't experience the same level of growth than if you started something completely fresh.

In some cases that's certainly true, but as pretty much exclusively a series writer, I've grown a WHOLE lot more than I think I would have trying to write standalone stories. Same characters/same world doesn't necessarily mean static or stale, at least if you have new things to keep doing with them. Plus there are different kinds of growth when it comes to writing. I learned that I can actually carry a long story through to completion, for example, and I've learned many ways to learn new things about old characters. You have to stretch yourself to make the old things fresh and interesting, and you can't get that writing new characters and new worlds every time.

Granted, writing standalone stories has its own set of challenges. I find it too hard to do that myself. If I tried it, that would be another type of growth.

[IceCreamEmpress]

It isn't the best strategic move. But if it's what you want to do, to heck with the strategy and go for it!

[josephwise]

They way I look at it, a great book has a 100% chance of being published. In which case, there'd be no reason to not write a sequel.

[DeleyanLee]

Or Janet Evanovich, as a more realistic example.

Who published Romance for many years before moving to Mystery with Stephanie Plum. ;)

However, there is Jacqueline Carey with her Kushiel series, Wen Spencer with her Ukiah Oregon and Tinker series (different publishers), or Tamara Siler Jones with her Dubric series.

Depending on your genre, it's totally possible to start off with a series as your first sale--the trick is catching attention so it survives longer than 2-3 books.

And from the experience with my friends, getting offered a multiple book contract right out of the gate is standard. It's far less common to get a one-book deal with most NYC publishers.

Have fun with your sequel.

[Prawn]

I have written four books in a series. The mistake I made was making the second book too closely related the the first. If book 1 didn't sell, book 2 didn't sell. Books 3 and 4 were more stand alone and could be subbed on their own, even if the other books didn't sell. Eventually I went back and combined books one and two (90K +90 now = 123k).

[wrinkles]

The way I would edit your post.

Take this from a Statistics graduate: stop sweating about odds. You're scaring yourself about something you don't understand properly. You can only apprortion a probability like this if the sample set is homogenous, which in this case means if every manuscript is written with an equal level of expertise. They're not. There is no average novel*. A bad novel probably won't get published. A good novel perhaps will. Neither has the probability you've given.

Learn how to write a good novel. In a perfect world, That's all there is.


* On second thoughts, there is an average novel. If you ranked all known manuscripts from worst to best, the one that stood in the middle could be called the average. It would probably be an extremely bad MS and far from publishable, because the distribution of MSs is skewed heavily towards the bad. Like I said, write a good one.

[JustGo]

Wow, I certainly didn't expect this much support. Thank you all - I'm definitely going through with it now.

Can I play the devil's advocate a moment? If you main goal is to get published, the best option might be to write something else. Sure, if neither novel gets published it won't be wasted because you're still writing. But you're not writing anything new. If you keep the same characters and the same world, you won't experience the same level of growth than if you started something completely fresh.


I'd say that you're partly right about all of that. However, I am introducing several new characters (I certainly killed off enough at the end of the last one) and a very different plotline that should be able to stand alone here, though, so I don't believe it will be quite as atrophying as you're saying. Following the general idea behind advice others have posted:

I have written four books in a series. The mistake I made was making the second book too closely related the the first. If book 1 didn't sell, book 2 didn't sell. Books 3 and 4 were more stand alone and could be subbed on their own, even if the other books didn't sell.


There's a difference between a series in which the individual novels can stand alone and a series in which there is actually one overarching story arc. In my experience, most detective series are in the former camp, most SF/F in the second. Some urban fantasies are in the first camp, due to their similarity to detective series. The Harry Potter novels are in the second camp.

What you describe, JustGo, sounds more second than first camp to me, hence more dependent on the success of the first book. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't knock out that first draft or at least a detailed outline.

I'll try hard to make this stand alone despite the story arc running through it all, so that a reader can pick up any one book and get through it without feeling completely lost, but enjoy it more if they have read the earlier books.


And from the experience with my friends, getting offered a multiple book contract right out of the gate is standard. It's far less common to get a one-book deal with most NYC publishers.


That's just plain good to hear!

[Telstar]

I dont care a shit about the odds.
If your work is good, being it a part of a series wont make it worse but better :)

[bpmann]

Who published Romance for many years before moving to Mystery with Stephanie Plum. ;)



Yup... I remembered that right after I posted. I was hoping nobody would notice. :Ssh:

[Varthikes]

I'm currently working on a science fiction series. I finished the first book and am now 3/4 done with the second. And, I have the third and fourth outlined, and an idea for a fifth.

The fourth and fifth are stand-alones. And, the first could if it needed to, though it ends on a sinister note with the bad guys beginning to plan something nasty. The first three novels can easily be compared to the original three Star Wars films in terms of how they connect.

I also have a number of novelettes set in the same series that are able to stand alone.

But, in each story, I show something new about my characters, their world, or their Universe.

[Priene]

The way I would edit your post.

Edit me as you will. Everything's statistical, but I wasn't posting an article in an academic journal, I was making a point.

[ccarver30]

If you want to write it, write it. I would never think that far ahead and care about if book 2 etc would get PUBLISHED. Get back to basics as to WHY you write... is it really to get published??? :(

[RJK]

With a large enough sample, everything will fit a bell curve. The quality of manuscripts, the quality of published novels, the length of published novels, the quality of our writing, I could go on and on.

It's the world we live in.

[jessicaorr]

Or Janet Evanovich, as a more realistic example.

Or Brian Jacques to continue in the YA vein, from J.K. Rowling. I haven't read many of his Mossflower/Redwall books that really required previous reading in the genre. It helps, but it isn't essential. Still, his books aren't written chronologically, they're more like books all set in the same world. I suppose that helps quite a bit.

I say write it. You've got an idea, go with it. See where it leads.

[wrinkles]

Edit me as you will. Everything's statistical, but I wasn't posting an article in an academic journal, I was making a point.

Me too.