How Do You Write a Two-Part Series???

Well, here's an interesting little question. I spoke to my agent the other day about my latest project. She gave me the normal soft-soap about how she loved this bit and really enjoyed that bit...and then came the moment I was braced for, the BUT. It was BUT- 'I think this needs quite a lot of work to bring it up to its full potential'.

'What kind of work?' I asked. The answer boggled my mind rather. She says she thinks this is not one book, but two. She reckons it should be changed into a duology. There is a distinct break in the middle of the novel where I would normally just have put PART TWO, but in Agent Lady's mind this should be the cliff-hanger ending of novel one. She also said that she'd recently spoken to my editor, and he'd mentioned that their Sales Director (who I recently met and who was very enthusiastic about my stuff) had been asking if I'd ever considered writing a series or sequel.

I hadn't (I find finishing ONE book hard enough). But I was intrigued by the idea and I said that if the publisher was interested in helping me develop the novel into a two-parter then I was onboard.To be honest though, thinking about it now makes me feel rather sick. I need some opinions.

What does everyone think about two-part series? What does everyone think about cliff-hanging endings to novels? I know of several people here who are working on series of their own, so what are the particular challenges of spreading a story over two books and making each one a worthwhile read? Should each book have its own self-contained story arcs, as well as the primary arc that encompasses the two books? HELP!

Gillhoughly:

Well, I get that. And I do think it could be fun. I'm incredibly anal about organisation (I keep bibles for everything I write and have yet to make a serious continuity error, knock on wood) so that's not really a problem. And I was really having to hold back in the first part of the story because there's a lot of interesting tales to tell about the protagonist's early life.

The problem really is this - I HATE cliffhanger endings myself. I think each novel of a series should, at the very least, offer some sort of resolution to its individual conflicts, if not to the larger questions (as in Garth Nix's 'Abhorsen Trilogy' where the middle volume, 'Lirael' ends with world still in danger, and the reader still thinking several characters key have perished - but both the main characters are safe for the moment and have discovered who they are and their connection to each other). But my agent seemed really insistent that the novel naturally breaks at that point and it MUST be the end point of the first volume.

How does this seem to you? After being kidnapped away from her father, ambushed and beaten up, the heroine is badly injured and a captive of her enemies. We've just found out who the Big Villain is (which was a major question in the first part of the story) and the reason why all Hell broke loose in the heroine's world and she was kidnapped etc. The Big Villain has asked the heroine to join him in his attempt at over-throwing the government, and she's tempted against her will because he is actually right on a lot of points (and the reader feels this too). She refuses reluctantly because she believes it is the only thing she can do. He makes it clear that he intends to change her mind and that he'll keep her safe until she does. Then he walks out and leaves her bubbling with conflict.

We don't know where the heroine's friends or her father are (or if they're alive), or what her mysterious flashbacks are about, or what she is capable of. We don't know what decision she's going to make. She's still in danger from the insane son of the Big Villain.

Is this just too much of a cliff-hanger? It would probably drive ME nuts, but I don't know about anyone else...

Ooh - and here's a question you can probably answer: just how much effort do you need to put into making the second volume understandable to someone who hasn't read the first?

kpmcneil22 said:

My wife says that I'm getting crotchety, but I am not a fan of any series of any length in which the novels are not stand-alone. I don't mind following characters over a series, but I don't want to be left hanging when I reach the end of any one novel. I feel like I paid good money for a story and I want a complete one and that the cliff-hanger ending is just a way to get me to spend more money to find out what happens. So, it might just be me, but if I knew it wasn't stand-alone, I wouldn't buy it.

An example: I used to buy and enjoy Terry Brooks' Shannara novels. Each of his earlier novels was a stand-alone even though the same world, etc appeared in all the books. These days, he spreads one story over three novels. I would get the same story, but it would cost me three times as much (financially, effort, and time). I no longer buy or read Terry Brooks.

Spreading your story over two novels might be the way to go, but as a reader, I would appreciate a satisfying conclusion at the end of book one.

Obviously, this is just one reader's opinion. Wow, I do sound crotchety.

Good luck!
Kevin

Click to expand...

See, that's a little like I feel. I prefer stories where there's SOME kind of resolution (for instance, the Temeraire Books by Naomi Novak, or the Lyonesse books by Jack Vance). On the other hand, there is a LOT more story that I could tell about this character if I had an extra book to do it in. I would get a chance to develop her relationships with two key characters. And it would also mean that each individual book would be shorter (normally I top out at about 70-80,000, which dictates a higher cover price on YA books - these ones might individually be 50,000, meaning a lower price and therefore a more attractive book for YAs). Plus, it just sounds like fun...

PeeDee said:

Personally, I like duologies. Timothy Zahn did a really godo Star Wars one, and I thought it was wonderful. I have no preference that they be self-contained or dependant on each other.

It's like reading a really massive book...except that they're devided comfortably into two. It makes it easier to read. You know?

So, I think that's pretty damned cool.

Click to expand...

You don't come across two-parters that often though, do you? More often it's trilogies. I can only think of one other YA duology, which is Tamora Pierce's 'Trickster's Choice' books. Most others are not true series, but book followed by sequel when the first one was successful. Hmmm... Thanks PeeDee.

PeeDee said:

You really don't come on them too often. I had to think about it and go look at my bookshelves before Tim Zahn's duology occured to me.

I think the common thing is, when you expand into a second book, you keep expanding into a trilogy.

Why, I don't know. I wouldn't mind more two-part series...

Click to expand...

And I can name quite a few trilogies that, on reading the third volume, should have STAYED as duologies. I think the nice thing about this idea is that it's not doing a second book for the sake of it. It's trying to make the story better and more complete by expanding into two volumes. But I have some concerns - as I mentioned above, just how much effort and time goes into making the second volume understandable to someone who hasn't read the first? Does this really distort the sort of writing you do? How hard is it?

PeeDee said:

That is the big trick, yeah. I guess you can write the first book like a complete novel for which you have ideas for a sequel....and then go away for awhile, come back, and write a second novel for which you have ideas for a prequel, if you see what I mean. You can watch Star Wars, Episode IV without seeing episode III, and vice versa.

Click to expand...

Oh, my God - don't bring Star Wars into this! I'm freaking out enough already...

I'd suppose, at the very least, it means re-introducing every character a second time and trying to unobtrusively explain anything about them that can't be deduced from context. Maybe (to introduce a very controversial concept) I could do a prologue for the second volume, which would basically be the first chapter of the first volume. That first chapter explains almost everything you need to know about the heroine and her father, and their relationship is the most important one in the book. With a bit of tweaking...yes, I bet that could work.

PeeDee said:

Honestly, this isn't something to freak out about. I think maybe it's something to take a long walk and scribble out some stream-of-consciousness notes, but I think this is something to be excited about. I don't know about you, but I love to stretch my writerly self. Think of it as a challenge.

My Star Wars example still stands. You dont' need to know anything about where Darth Vader came from in order to appreciate Darth Vader the cool bad guy. You just appreciate him all the more if you know where he came from.

You don't need to have read The Hobbit to appreciate that Bilbo got the ring, and gave it away.

I guess that's all I can think to advise...treat it like that.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the words of encouragement. I can but try.

Of course, next week my agent might get back to me and say that actually the publisher doesn't want any such thing and that we're keeping it as a single volume. Which will be a bit like being offered Black Forest Gateau and getting chocolate mousse, but still...it's chocolate, right?

PeeDee said:

now that's optimism.

Click to expand...

Well, about as close as can I get to it at 9:30 on a Sunday night with work the next day.

moblues said:

If there is a distinct break, then stop there and flesh the first part out. Do the same with the second part. I may be mistaken, but what I've gleaned from this post is that the heavy lifting has already been done.

It seems to me that your are at an advantage as opposed to a disadvantage. Are my wires crossed? Am I missing something?




Mike

Click to expand...

I'm scared because I've never done anything other than a standalone story before. I've never come up with an idea I thought I could split successfully, I've never planned one, I thought I might never do one. I'm like a virgin in an adult emporium. Yes, the heavy lifting HAS been done (nice image) but I know nothing about how to turn what was originally conceived as a single story into two worthwhile and understandable volumes. Well, without sending potential readers crazy with a) too much explaining, b) not enough explaining, c) an outrageous cliff-hanger ending, d) an ending that is not cliff-hanging enough, e) As You Know Bob...

And the list of possible horrors goes on!

MidnightMuse said:

I wish I had your problem. Seriously. Every time I write a new story, the dang thing turns into a series. I can't help myself.

I work up the main plot, add in lots of little issues that come up, get solved, all the while the main plot works toward the resolution. But within those subplots are little dangling pieces that -- though resolved -- can re-up later on. Plus the characters themselves are going to be growing and changing throughout the series. No one remains stagnent. Much to my chagrine and possible undoing, I've written a complete series of 7 individual, stand alone stories, each ending around 120k. Can do crap WITH it, so I'm writing something new now, but sure enough it's going to be something that can turn into a series. Just can't NOT do that.

Click to expand...

I wish I had YOUR problem. Standaloneitus is a terrible disease for a fantasy writer to suffer from...

PeeDee said:

I would much prefer a few more fantasy writers with standaloneitus than "endless series I can't find an ending to, so I'll add a few more thousand pages to it"-eitus...

Click to expand...

Ah, that terrible, terrible disease. Commonly known, of course, as 'Jordanitus' (ducks as six million Robert Jordan fans throw shoes).

moblues said:

It seems to me that you are being told that you have two stories that they like. Two stories. Treat the first half where you are being told to cut it as the first story. Then, when they want the second half, rewrite it as if it were a second stand-alone.
Mike

Click to expand...

Well, that's the thing. They may see it as two stories, but at the moment I don't. There are no separate plot arcs, there's no chronological pause in the story, and there's no resolution at the midpoint. It's just a story that, at about midway through, blows up big-time (because the heroine has finally had enough). It's trying to figure out how to change that one story into two worthwhile ones, and understanding the challenges of working that way, that have me asking for advice.

Gillhoughly said:

Check those writers, their example will show it better than anything told to you here. The Caine books are very good with cliffhanging, but each one is self-contained. They're also dang good reads.

Just write your books, tell your story, and sell two books at a higher advance price, then start the next book. It can take a year or more between signing the contract and seeing the book in a store. You have to keep writing so your head doesn't explode.

Click to expand...

I have read series books which end in cliff-hangers before, including some of those which have been mentioned on this thread. The point is that I don't personally enjoy them very much. That isn't necessarily because they're not well done. It's just because I don't enjoy cliff-hangers.

I know I don't have as much experience as you, Gillhoughy, but I am aware that it can take a while between signing and seeing the book in a shop - it's taken over two years before in my case. This potential two-parter is actually my fourth book. I fully intend to keep writing once I've finished it (I've been scribbling continuously since the age of five, so I doubt I'm going to stop now), but first I have to figure out how to turn THIS book into a two-part series and that's what I need advice on.