Pitfalls of writing a sequel?

[jennlindsey]

Hi there,

Long-time lurker, finally posting, and wondering if anyone else has struggled with attempting a sequel to their own novel.

In my situation, the original book was published and well-reviewed, and had just enough of an ambiguous ending to suggest the possibility of a sequel continuing the story. It was a mainstream, non-genre novel, though, so not one that would lend itself to being sold as part of a series the way, say, a science fiction or fantasy novel might.

I've been attempting to write the sequel for several years now (after having published a completely unrelated second novel), and I'm really struggling with questions of how much information from the first book to convey in the second and where to start up the narrative again (directly after the first book ends, or with a gap of more events ensuing in between for backstory that feels fresher, and not so much a rehash). Part of me thinks I should leave a decent book alone and not risk a sequel at all, but my characters ... well, they insist otherwise and won't leave me alone. (I'm sure many of you can relate!)

I've found precious little written in craft books about sequels, and only know of a few literary/mainstream writers as examples (Elizabeth Berg and Mona Simpson come to mind). Does anyone else have experience with the pitfalls and pleasures of (hopefully successfully!) returning to former characters and storylines in their work?

I appreciate your thoughts!

Jenn

[Judg]

No experience, but if you're interested in a literary writer who did sequels, check out Robertson Davies. His Deptford trilogy is his most popular, I believe.

[scarletpeaches]

Just my opinion, but I effing hate sequels and would never write one. I can't tell you how annoying it is picking up a book in a shop or library, only to find out it's the sequel to one they don't have in stock. Or even worse, buying it and not finding out 'til I get home. All very well saying "Read the blurb!" but some book covers aren't clearly marked as part of a series.

[Joe Moore]

Does anyone else have experience with the pitfalls and pleasures of (hopefully successfully!) returning to former characters and storylines in their work? Hey Jenn,
I’m on my 4th thriller in the Cotten Stone series co-written with Lynn Sholes (http://www.lynnsholes.com). I’ve found one of our biggest hurdles is dealing with backstory in subsequent books. You can never assume that the reader of book 4 has read book 1 (or 2). So we approach each as if it were a standalone novel. A reader could pick up #3, enjoy it and not have to read the previous stories. But if they did, they would more fully understand the growth of the character.

As far as pleasures in writing sequels, one is that you know your characters well and don’t have to start from scratch with the main ones that reappear again and again.

When we start each new sequel, the first question we ask ourselves after nailing down the plot is “What else does our MC need to learn?” Good luck.
Joe

[jennlindsey]

Joe, I am curious -- do you ever cross-reference information between novels in your series? I absolutely agree with you that each book needs to be standalone, but I'm not quite sure how to handle the "ripple effect" of events from the first book still impacting the characters in the second (we're talking big stuff, like deaths of loved ones). Do you ever allude to events in previous novels, or do you strive to make the novels *completely* separate entities, if that's even possible? I'm thinking it's probably easier to do with a more plot-driven book, as opposed to fiction with a more introspective, internal bent, but that could be a mighty presumptous assumption on my part.

Thanks, everyone, for your responses so far!

[David I]

Check out Updike's Rabbit books and Richard Ford's Frank Bascombe books--both mainstream/lit-fic writers. (And the Ford novels features the death of a child and the consquent collapse of a marriage--big stuff to carry through.)

The trick that both of them tend to use is alluding to events of the previous book(s) in the same way you might slip in backstory as hints in a book with no prequel. Not much actual rehashing or reiteration. I actually read Ford's Independence Day (the second in his trilogy) before The Sportswriter (the first in the trilogy), and it worked just fine; only when I picked up The Sportswriter did I realize that Independence Day was a sequel.

[job]

The best advice I can come up with is to treat those events in a character's life that were chronicled in the earlier book with no more nor less attention than the events never written about.

Does that fit in any way with what you're mulling over?

What I'm saying is -- only some life-changing events fell within the timeframe of the earlier work. You, as the author, know those events best and probably have a tendancy to see them as important. But the protagonist will be affected by the many unrecorded events which fell before and after the earlier book.

We get to leave stuff out.

I am reminded of Sayers' Murder Must Advertise. At this point in Sayers' series, Peter has met and fallen in love with Harriet. But Peter, like every character, lives 90% of his life off-stage.
In MMA, Harriet's existence is given a mere glancing, two-line mention.
Sayers doesn't talk about the Harriet part of Peter's life, because that's not the story being told.

If your character has already explored the feelings and decisions of Book One, you may not necessarily want to chase rabbits down those particular holes again.


Hmmmm ... not really useful, is this?

I'm doing a second WIP in the same place and with the same institututions and minor characters as the earlier book. Not a series really. Just the same universe.

[jennlindsey]

The trick that both of them tend to use is alluding to events of the previous book(s) in the same way you might slip in backstory as hints in a book with no prequel. Not much actual rehashing or reiteration.

Whew! I feel better hearing those examples, because that's exactly what my gut instinct is telling me to do ... Every time I write full scenes of rehash, they're so boring and plodding I wind up cutting them. I think I'm going to have to just trust my potential reader more, and trust that sometimes a simple, factual mention of a previous event will work just fine, even thought the temptation is to go, "But ... but ... that event was worth 200 pages of exploration before! I have to at least give it a *scene* now!"

[Joe Moore]

Joe, I am curious -- do you ever cross-reference information between novels in your series?Absolutely. We do it quite often. But we handle it just like David Isaak suggested by treating events in a previous book as if it were just another backstory element.

[bluemoonscribe]

I'm writing a three book series. I outlined all three books before I started, sketching out what events should happen where. Of course, this is going to change as you write, but it's nice to have a "map."

I finished the first, got an agent and it goes to auction on Monday. (Cross your fingers and light your candles, please.) I am half-way through the first draft of the second book. I picked up the characters where I saw them next. I needed to let enough time elapse between the two plots to let some elements realistically develope.

I have a wonderful beta who smacks me when I use the "Exposition Hammer" and overtell details of what happened in the previous book. Most readers just need a quick gentle reminder of the "rules" for your book (especially if it's scifi or fantasy) and the basic character connections.
My Beta, Brandi, also helps me explain important details through new events or information. For instance, my main character gets fired in the first book. So in the second book, I describe the chaos that ensued at the MC's workplace after she left and the subsequent firing of MC's former supervisor. It introduces old information in a way that still interesting.

I think Nora Roberts always does a nice job of reintroducing information in the first three chapters of her "trilogy" books. You might take a look at those. Good luck!

[jennlindsey]

I finished the first, got an agent and it goes to auction on Monday. (Cross your fingers and light your candles, please.)

Oh, wow, how thrilling/excruciating! Fingers dutifully crossed!

[jennlindsey]

The best advice I can come up with is to treat those events in a character's life that were chronicled in the earlier book with no more nor less attention than the events never written about.

Does that fit in any way with what you're mulling over?

What I'm saying is -- only some life-changing events fell within the timeframe of the earlier work. You, as the author, know those events best and probably have a tendancy to see them as important. But the protagonist will be affected by the many unrecorded events which fell before and after the earlier book.



Your last paragraph makes such a good point. It reminds me that the sequels which delight me as a reader are the very ones which, like Mona Simpson's The Lost Father, take a familiar character into totally new territory. Territory that makes sense given everything that's come and gone before, but still fundamentally new. (In The Lost Father, for example, the MC is consumed by her search for a father she has never known. Builds perfectly upon the preceeding novel, Anywhere But Here, which detailed her life with her unpredictable single mother, but doesn't feel like a tedious update in the least. I always wondered why, but your suggestion above helped me figure it out: It feels fresh because *nowhere* in ABH do you hear a word about her father, so reading about him in TLF feels like a brand-new narrative, even if the character is familiar. In fact, there are so many new people and places I forgot I was reading a sequel at all.)

My sequel, of course, is not quite there yet. To say the least!

But everyone's suggestions have crystallized a few things for me:

1. the inherent wisdom of leaving a gap between when one's previous book ended and the sequel begins ... both for new developments and fresh backstory (how's that for a contradiction in terms?) to percolate, and to get some aesthetic "breathing room" as an author;

and:

2. the distinct possibility of using a minor character from book 1 to narrate book 2 (he's most likely winding up married to/partnered with the original MC, so not a horrific stretch, and besides, he won't shut up with his protests that he got short shrift last time around and wants to be the major player this round!). The temptation with a sequel is to return to my comfortable, esay voice from before, but I think a fresh voice might increase the chances of this book elevating itself above what at time feels like a self-indulgent update into the realm of a singular novel.

Whew! That's a lot of epiphany for a lunch break!

Truly appreciate all your comments/suggestions ...

[Prawn]

I have written a trilogy. They feature the same character, but the problem faced by the character in each is different. I found that necessary backstory from previous books was not that hard to integrate, and I loved being able to revisit the characters and see how they changed. Each book had its own climax, with some loose threads that led to the next book. I think that each book is richer for being part of a trilogy. The characters and events have more resonance. A conflict I could not detail in book one I could flesh out in book two. I started two other books involving different characters, but went back to the sequels because they were so much more rewarding to write.

One tricky part was I needed two or three sets of beta readers.

I wanted those who had read book one ot give their opinion on book two.
I needed a set that had NOT read book one to give me their feedback about backstory.

That being said, if book I doesn't sell, it is much more unlikely that a suquel will sell. Since you've already sold book one, think about something devilsh that can happen to those characters, and start writing!

[Nateskate]

Lol. I'm no expert. My story is a fantasy series, which differs, because I'm assuming your first story was a stand alone?

But it's just like life, Bridget Jones and all. It doesn't require a whole lot of backstory, but it does require a new story that's interesting. The more you can make the second one stand alone, the better.

In Epic Fantasy, this has been the most difficult thing for me, is in that any info dumps ruin the pacing. And so, I'm trying to master interjecting them small bits at a time in the context of the story. Create a scene where a new person enters the picture who brings up something out of the past.

[Rosie_81]

I don't mind read sequels but writing them? No way. I vowed never to write a sequel to any of my books. I prefer new characters, new stories every time as it keeps the imagination alive.

[Philip64]

It's worth thinking about this from a career point-of-view, as well as a creative one.

My experience in a nutshell:

- It is a bad idea to write a sequel, or even use the same main character(s) before your first book has hit the shops and you know how it has done. If the book is a success, readers will want more of the same and so will both the retailers and the publisher. By writing a sequel (provided you have a story, of course) you will be reducing everybody's risk, including your own.
If the first book is not a success, writing a sequel is professional suicide, even if you get into print. The principal market for all sequels is to be found among fans of the original.

- It sounds like your original book was some time ago; so you know how it did. You have an unrelated title in between. If the second title did less well than the first (which is so often the case) bringing back characters from your more successful first title may be a smart move. If book two did better than book one, then it's a tougher call and one you can probably make purely on the basis of your own enthusiasm for the idea. However, in this case, there is a danger that you will seem to be going backwards.

Sorry to sound mercenary, but this is how publishers think these days. So you may as well bear their perspective in mind.

[astonwest]

You can never assume that the reader of book 4 has read book 1 (or 2). So we approach each as if it were a standalone novel. A reader could pick up #3, enjoy it and not have to read the previous stories. But if they did, they would more fully understand the growth of the character.That's how I attempt to write other books in a series as well...sometimes it works better than others.

[Prawn]

- It is a bad idea to write a sequel, or even use the same main character(s) before your first book has hit the shops and you know how it has done. If the book is a success, readers will want more of the same and so will both the retailers and the publisher.

This is great advice. jenlindsey is in a good spot since her first book has already sold.

I began writing my sequel knowing that it was very probable that my first book might not sell. I knew that I needed to write a few more books to practice my craft. At the time, my thinking was even if the first books didn't sell, writing those books would teach me a lot. I thought book five or eight or ten might be good enough to publish, but to my surprise, when I sent out my first book, people were interested in it.

I will begin writing my fourth book in the next couple of months, and the question for me is should the fourth book be the fourth in my series or something completely different? Luckily for me, I hope to have an answer on that pretty soon. If my agent can sell book one, I'll continue with the series, otherwise, I might write something else entirely.

Can a 40 year old man write chick lit?

[Judg]

Can a 40 year old man write chick lit?
Nah. Too old.

[DeleyanLee]

EVERY book, regardless of stand alone or series, has backstory. In a sequel, the previous book is just more backstory. Treat it exactly the same in the sequel as you would in the first book. That way readers, both old and new, won't be bored by the rehash (because even new readers can tell rehash).

As to where to start the sequel, start it like you would any other novel--where the story starts. Sequel or no, it still has to have complete story arcs and tell it's own part of the story.

So my main suggestion is: stop thinking "sequel" and start thinking "story".

Hope that helps.

[amber_grosjean]

I wrote a sequal after so many people asked me to after the first book came out. It is a stand-alone with a few references to the first book. I basically re-introduced some of the important information in the story, some through flashbacks or remembering, and some just through dialogue or plain out telling the information through narration. It hasn't been published yet and if it doesn't get that far, I at least can let those people get a personal copy (if I choose lol).

For me, it was rather hard as well because I didn't really know where to begin the second story since it was slightly different from the first, so I ended up fast-forwarding a little giving a couple year gap between the 2 stories, filling in the backstory throughout the rest of the book. It turned out being a lot of fun!

Amber

[KTC]

Nah. Too old.



ppppppppppphhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttt! lol


I love the Robertson Davies trilogy. It's a great example of a well done sequel series. You can pick up any of the books and read it stand alone. That's the most important element of the sequel. They all have to be stand alone if they are good. I echo what others here have said about incorporating past book elements as backstory in the current book.

[Bufty]

What are the characters trying to tell you? I'd listen and see what happens.

I'm only begging the question here, but just because one uses the same characters, one doesn't have to tie it all into the previous book, surely.

There are bound to be folk who pick up the second book and haven't read the first one -no?





but my characters ... well, they insist otherwise and won't leave me alone. (I'm sure many of you can relate!)

[Perle_Rare]

From a reader's standpoint, I started out as a big fan of Jean M. Auel's Earth's Children (Clan of the Cave Bear) series. By the 3rd book, however, I was sick and tired of having the back story explained. As the main character travels and meets new people, she goes through her entire life story which, as a reader, I've lived along with her in previous novels. I stuck with the series and I plodded through to the 5th book to see if I was missing anything but the amount of "new" events happening and new information was next to nil. MC meets a bunch of new people and tells her life story yet again and sometimes more than once per book...

I say, if the backstory is required for the current events, then some backstory might be included although not necessarily as exposition. But to re-hash everything in each subsequent book is too much. If your sequel is really tightly linked to the first book, I've seen some writers adding a prologue that explains "all that has occurred in the past" so the new reader can jump in and have some clue what's happened. The prologue can also serve as a refresher for a fan who read the first book a few years earlier.

My 2cc worth...

[seun]

Just my opinion, but I effing hate sequels and would never write one. I can't tell you how annoying it is picking up a book in a shop or library, only to find out it's the sequel to one they don't have in stock. Or even worse, buying it and not finding out 'til I get home. All very well saying "Read the blurb!" but some book covers aren't clearly marked as part of a series.

Hello. My name is Luke and I write sequels. :D

To be honest, I just see them as a development of the story in the first book. If there's going to be a sequel, I know when I start the first one.

[spacejock2]

There are sequels and there are series books. If I'm going to buy a book with planned sequels I won't do so until the whole lot are available.

Series books, on the other hand, can be read out of order, started halfway, read as singles ... think of them as self-contained episodes. You can still have long-term character development, and you don't have to recap Everything That Went Before at the start of each book (Please, Don't!)

Think of Terry Pratchett's Discworld books as an example of series books. You can dip into any of them without reading the others.

As a writer who is just over 1/4 of the way through a series (three in print, one coming out next year, writing book five now) I can tell you that coming up with fresh situations and ideas is the tough part. Readers expect your major characters to have a decent slab of the plot to themselves, but those characters can't keep doing the same things book in/book out. Also, they expect major characters to survive each book, so your cliffhangers tend to be low-wall-hangers.

[job]

, they expect major characters to survive each book, so your cliffhangers tend to be low-wall-hangers.

heh heh

[Robyn]

Personally for myself... i love series. I have 2 going at the moment and may have more. I just love the continuation of a thought, plot that can be read throughout more than one book. Then again, I love to read series as well.

[jennlindsey]

One tricky part was I needed two or three sets of beta readers.

I wanted those who had read book one ot give their opinion on book two.
I needed a set that had NOT read book one to give me their feedback about backstory.



I'm finding the exact same issue! This book is actually the first one for which I've contemplated hiring an independent editor, just because it's a tricky point in my career and I want to make absolutely certain it functions as a standalone book.



- It sounds like your original book was some time ago; so you know how it did. You have an unrelated title in between. If the second title did less well than the first (which is so often the case) bringing back characters from your more successful first title may be a smart move.

That's *exactly* what happened in my case. I actually contemplated doing the sequel to fulfill the second book in my contract, but felt that I didn't want to pigeonhole myself as a "one-trick pony" with those characters, and wrote an unrelated novel instead.

I'm almost embarassed to admit how long ago the successful debut was, however! Hopefully that won't count against me *too* badly.


Can a 40 year old man write chick lit?

Not a chit lit fan normally, but I'm intrigued at the thought!


So my main suggestion is: stop thinking "sequel" and start thinking "story".



That's getting written on a sticky note and placed atop my monitor screen! Excellent reminder!

[L M Ashton]

There are sequels and there are series books. If I'm going to buy a book with planned sequels I won't do so until the whole lot are available.

Series books, on the other hand, can be read out of order, started halfway, read as singles ... think of them as self-contained episodes. You can still have long-term character development, and you don't have to recap Everything That Went Before at the start of each book (Please, Don't!)

Think of Terry Pratchett's Discworld books as an example of series books. You can dip into any of them without reading the others.Yup.

I won't write sequel books - I'm not fond of reading them, so why would I write them? But I definitely will and do write series.

[spacejock2]

I didn't want to pigeonhole myself as a "one-trick pony" with those characters, and wrote an unrelated novel instead.

I've signed up for the one trick pony ride, myself. I've hitched my career to a right pair of characters, and I'll keep writing more books in the same series until the public reacts. Either with indifference, in which case I'll try harder, or with accolades and recognition, in which case I'll still try harder.

I promised myself I'll stop when the plot ideas start to feel stale or repetitive, though.

[Stuart Clark]

I'm working on the second in a series which is a stand alone story but of course there are references back to the first book.

When I need to make those referrals, I try and limit it to a paragraph. For example, in the first book I had a crime that looked like an open and shut case and the police department swept it under the carpet. My detective character believes there is more to it than that though. In the second book he's investigating something totally different but at the same crime scene and can't help but think that the two are connected. I get the backstory covered by having the character explain to a new sidekick what went on before - which he manages to do in a paragraph.

I think that's a neat tactic too. Where possible, have characters cover the backstory rather than having an omniscient narrator spell it out.
Just my two cents.;)