How many novels until you get a good one?

gettingby said:

So, how may novels do you have to write before you get a good one?

Click to expand...

How many pieces of string does it take to reach the moon? One, if it's long enough.

Question: what made your first novel unpublishable? Is it because you don't think it's good enough to be published or because you couldn't get someone to publish it? Or perhaps something else? I'm only asking because getting published isn't always about quality. Lots of low quality writing gets published all the time.

How many novels before you get good one? This is subjective and varies depending on who is answering it. It's also dependent on how interested the author is in getting that first novel published. Editing and revisions can fix most problems. And perseverance helps too.

As you've noted, writing gets better the more you do it. Regardless of the length. If you're looking to write novels but aren't sure you have what it takes, just start increasing the length of your shorts until they're novella length and so on. That way, you'll get the feel for it without feeling like you're wasting an entire year.

There is no number. Just write and learn until you get it.

My first is being published, so it does happen. However, I also spent years writing it, including a full year where I quit my job and lived in a shack in the woods to work on it full time (the woods where the story was set--I was really into it lol).

Your first book will get published eventually if you have a premise that has any possibility of being marketable and you put enough time into learning everything you need to sell it, from how to write well to how to write a good query letter.

Some people use the rule of thumb that you need to write 500K words before you're any good.

Mileage will vary.

Some people are publishable on their first novel. Others can write twenty, and still be unpublishable.

It boils down to how long it takes for the writing to be good, let alone average. Does it show, instead of tell? Does it have voice? Does it masterfully use interior monologue? Is easy to read? Has it been scrubbed of useless adverbs and other bad habits? Is it full of fascinating characters, in fascinating predicaments? Does it make the reader wonder what's gonna happen next on the first paragraph, and then keep the reader engaged all the way to that last page? If writing 'rules' are broken, is it apparent why, or are 'rules' being broken out of apparent laziness/rebellion/ignorance? Has it been written with clarity? Has it been written with a love, respect, and regard for the reader?

I think it has a lot to do with how early the author submits her or himself to critique, and how well that author can absorb the critique. Very few people can write a publishable novel in a vacuum. A lot more can fix that first novel into a publishable state, if they take critique.

Katharine Tree said:

I think it has a lot to do with how early the author submits her or himself to critique, and how well that author can absorb the critique. Very few people can write a publishable novel in a vacuum. A lot more can fix that first novel into a publishable state, if they take critique.

Click to expand...

This. A million times this.

Sometimes a first novel gets picked up immediately. Sometimes it's the fifth. Sometimes several mediocre novels are published, but the next one is the one that takes off. Like a rock band that plays in dives for ten years and then gets "overnight success," it is a target that shifts all the time.

Don't worry about it. Just write. Rinse. Repeat.

Between rewrites and sequels, I believe I've written 16 books. I've only made serious attempts to get published with two of them (and one of those was way too early, in hindsight).

I've only finished four separate first books in series, though (not counting rewrites).

Don't let the number of unpublished books discourage you. Many writers produce book after book before they finally get published. For many, the desire to write novels comes before they have the talent to do those stories justice.

With enough hard work, though, it's certainly possible to get published. And even if you don't get published, you'll know that you're well ahead of the vast majority of what gets self-published.

My first novel wasn't much good. The total rewrite of that novel was better. The second novel was better than either of those. The third novel was better than the second.

About this point I seemed to have hit a plateau So, fourth and fifth books, I don't know.

Are any of them "good"? I don't know that either. I haven't had luck selling the third and fourth; they don't seem to get past the query stage. My betas liked them. I don't know what that means.

All this to say, if you keep writing novels, you will probably get better at it, at least up to a point. I don't know if this means they will be publishable.

But if you don't want to write novels, then there's no reason you have to.

gettingby said:

I wrote a novel many, many years ago. Like I said, it wasn't too bad, but I am glad it was never published. At the time, it was the best I could do. It got some interest, but nothing came of it. I write so much better now.

I worked my novel every day for the better part of a year. And I wasn't working on anything else at the time. I'm just not sure I could do that again and maybe again and again. I also don't want to give up on short stories.

I hear what you are saying about making my stories longer, but I'm not sure that will really work. One of my strength is structure when it comes to short stories. It's kind of a weird strength to have, especially since I don't plan or outline, but something I am doing there works well. I don't want to lose that. I also don't want to write something that will be a hard sell like a novella or a short story over 5,000 words. I think if I am to try a novel again, it will have to be its own thing with it's own approach.

Click to expand...

If you have a system that works, then run with it. Don't feel like you have to write a novel if you don't want too. I think you'll find that when you do decide to write another novel, your writing will be a great deal stronger because of the short stories you write.

Katharine Tree said:

I think it has a lot to do with how early the author submits her or himself to critique, and how well that author can absorb the critique. Very few people can write a publishable novel in a vacuum. A lot more can fix that first novel into a publishable state, if they take critique.

Click to expand...

This. And how much they're willing to rethink, rework, revise and polish.

Even so, I don't think there's a set answer for how many novels one must write before they get something that's "good enough." I don't think my first completed novel, the one I'm shopping now, sucks. Does that mean it's going to get published? I don't know. That's what I'm trying to find out. Does that mean it couldn't be better in ways I can't even imagine? I'm nearly certain it could be.

I'm pretty sure if I'd finished one of the novels I started when I was in my 20s, or even 30s, it would have been awful. But that was a different world (I was writing in a vacuum, since I had no access to crit groups and there was no internet to help me find any), and I was a different person (less experienced in reading, writing, and simply in living).

Access to feedback and advice from other writers has been enormously helpful.

I think being a volume writer who isn't an obsessive perfectionist helps new writers too. I know people who have written and revised 2-3 novels in the time it's taken me to write, rewrite, revise, polish this one. I've gotten really, really attached to my characters and their world and I want them to be just right so they're the ones that get me out there. The thought of setting this book aside and coming up with a completely new set of characters with a completely new set of problems and spending the next 2-3 years perfecting it (and rinse, repeat until one finds a home) makes my palms sweat.

Some of it is that I'm no longer young. I don't have time to write and trunk 10 novels, especially if I want to have a reasonably long career after the first one gets published.

Heck, even admitting that I'm not young and I wasted half my life not being serious enough about writing makes me sweat, because of all those people my age or younger I'm meeting now who who dug in and figured out how to balance their school, work, relationships, depression and so on and still have time to spend hours each day writing make me feel like such an imposter. I never had that kind of focus when I was younger, and I never had that kind of faith in myself.

I wonder if I do now.

Roxxsmom said:

I'm pretty sure if I'd finished one of the novels I started when I was in my 20s, or even 30s, it would have been awful. But that was a different world (I was writing in a vacuum, since I had no access to crit groups and there was no internet to help me find any), and I was a different person (less experienced in reading, writing, and simply in living).

Access to feedback and advice from other writers has been enormously helpful.

I think being a volume writer who isn't an obsessive perfectionist helps new writers too.

Click to expand...

Reassuring to hear this as I'm slogging through the first major rewrite of my first full length novel.

I've found beginnings of novels I'd forgotten about that I wrote 10-20 yrs ago, and, whilst I still warm to the ideas that started them, they are truly terrible. Probably partly why I always stopped after a page or two. That and lack of maturity and self discipline.

Now I'm learning so much (thank you internet!) I feel like I can push my wip to a decent standard. I know that it will probably be weaker than my next projects, but it can get demoralizing to think that first novels are always the worst. Sometimes I wonder whether to scrap it and start something new to apply everything I've already learned, but I can't bring myself to do it. Good to hear there is hope, even for first works.

Back to the original post. I say if short stories are what keep you excited, then go for it. Who's to say that magazine submissions or an anthology couldn't get you started in the business? Then, as has been said, when something you do want to put the hours into comes along, your skills will be all the more able to do it justice.

I don't know. Writing is fun for me and I like challenges.

I'm still working on the first and I've learned so much these last couple of years, way more I think if I'd kept changing WIPs. I can tell my next books will be much easier to write.

There's always another book to learn from and another writing skill to improve. At some point, I hope, something will stick. But for now, all my skills could be better.

I don't think there's a magic number. Everyone's going to have a different experience. I think it all really depends on how much work you put in and how persistent you are. Oh, and feedback is always important.

I've written about ten and still nothing, so...

42.

mccardey said:

42.

Click to expand...

The first one might work. The last one might not.

caw

Many writer get extremely rich and famous from the first novel. Far more writers could write ten thousand novels, and never write one worth reading.

Not only is there no magic number, there is no number at all that matters. Some who write have more talent than any one person should have and some who write have no talent at all.

Jamesaritchie said:

some who write have no talent at all.

Click to expand...

Crap. I'm doomed.

caw