Poll: Do you LOVE or HATE serialized ebooks?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

That means that Smashwords wouldn't publish, let's see...Lord of the Rings, Wheel of Time, the Shannara series, the Chronicles of Narnia, Burroughs' Tarzan and John Carter series, Conan...

Oh, puleeeeeeeze. You can play with semantics to call a series of novels "chapters in a serial" if you like, but you know damn well that isn't the intended meaning of "serial" in literature in general and in this thread in particular. Stop beating that straw man.

[BillSmithBooks]

A few more to consider:

The Dark Tower.

1001 Arabian Nights. The Greek and Roman myths. Gilgamesh.

The Bible -- I mean, really, each book of the Bible is nothing if not a serialized story telling the history of mankind.

Come on, really, you can't seriously be thinking of banning Aladdin and Zeus!!

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

Come on, really, you can't seriously be thinking of banning Aladdin and Zeus!!

I can't take your argument seriously. I sincerely hope that you don't.

[BillSmithBooks]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Oh, puleeeeeeeze. You can play with semantics to call a series of novels "chapters in a serial" if you like, but you know damn well that isn't the intended meaning of "serial" in literature in general and in this thread in particular. Stop beating that straw man.

But the point I am making is that the history of literature is composed largely of serialized literature.

Dickens was able to make a living only because he wrote his stories as serials that were later collected into complete works...but people ate them up chapter by chapter, just as people have been enthralled for centuries by the 1001 Arabian Nights...the same as people gathered around their digital campfire every week for the past six years to follow the adventures of a group of castaways on a deserted island. The same as I followed the Great War on J. Michael Straczynski's epic Babylon 5 for five years. The same as kids have camped out at their newstand for 50 years to get the latest issue of Batman or Spider-Man (okay, 35-40 years for the Marvel set)...or the latest Harry Potter. Or the Spiderwyk Crhronicles...which are exceedlingly short books, I might add.

I'm not saying that YOU have to embrace serialized storytelling...but I'm really, really, really offended that some people are trying to deny ME my right to choose that work on Smashwords.

Now, this is Mark's company, he can do whatever he wants...but I think choosing to eliminate this type of storytelling is a serious disservice to his customers (and opens the door to someone else coming along to scoop up that market).

Smashwords has all along been established as an open community for authors where merit mattered most: Let the audience decide what is good, get out of the way in the relationship between author and readers, and have the best works rise to the top.

Except for you folks who want to write serialized novellas. Off the bus, all you lot.

It's really out of tune with the corporate spirit that Mark has done such an admirable job of fostering since he opened the company.

EVERY Smashwords book has a "wordcount" listing.

I can see an alternative to this: Break up works by wordcount in how they are categorized, for example.

But don't flat out ban them.

Needless to say, the debate is not over...or would that be a violation of the new TOS?

[Logseman]

Argumentum ad absurdum. But he's got a point. I.E serials are the way in which TV series and comics are monetized properly. They were monetized in the 19th century for books too, but different reasons brought a certain decay to the genre. However, it's rising now, and it's best enjoyed if read lineally, which is the kind of reading that our single-screen slow transitioning readers best allows us to perform.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I'm not saying that YOU have to embrace serialized storytelling...but I'm really, really, really offended that some people are trying to deny ME my right to choose that work on Smashwords.

...

It's really out of tune with the corporate spirit that Mark has done such an admirable job of fostering since he opened the company.

He asked people if they would be willing to buy books chopped into short serials. The people responding are overwhelmingly saying "no." That is

1.) not "denying your right" to anything-- we are not obligated to buy something we don't want so that you can have it

and

2.) the very heart of the "corporate spirit"-- a business determines what it's customers want, and if it finds that most customers don't want it (i.e. they won't make money off it) they won't offer it. A business is a business, not a charity.

You keep trying to redefine a serial to mean "any novel that has any form of sequel, ever" and "any episode of a TV series." I don't know why you want that straw man, but it continues to be not true. A "serial" as in discussion in this thread/poll is a small segment of a much longer work that will, in the end, be collected into a single volume. Novels in a series of novels and episodes in a TV series are intended to always remain as individual novels and as individual episodes, not to be collected into a single thousands-page tome or dozens-hours video at the end, so they are not the same thing and nobody (but you) is trying to claim that they are.

(And, FWIW, modern comic story arcs are now collected into single volumes which many people wait for rather than read the issues as they come out each month. Two examples out of many here and here.)

[nomesque]

To do paid serials well, Smashwords would need (in my VERY humble opinion ) to rework their site. I can see why Mark's unenthusiastic, from that angle.

On the other hand - I can see that there's a potential for a great service here.

Mark, my darling, keep in mind that wandering onto a forum mostly made up of people who read ebooks, to ask about serials, is a bit like going to a fishing forum to ask about revoking fishing rights. Well, it's not completely analogous, but you get my point, right? If you went to the forums at webfictionguide.com and asked the same question, you'd get an overwhelming vote FOR serials, I think.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Logseman

Argumentum ad absurdum. But he's got a point. I.E serials are the way in which TV series and comics are monetized properly.

There are many series (especially premium cable ones) where people wait for the DVD season box sets for watching it-- and many comics where story arcs are bound in individual volumes that people wait for (as I mentioned in my previous thread.)

[DaringNovelist]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

He asked people if they would be willing to buy books chopped into short serials. The people responding are overwhelmingly saying "no."

He asked that in the context of gathering information about what people WOULD be interested in. Attacking people for stating that they would like it in more traditional circumstances is not helpful to the conversation.

I see a lot of people here making blanket statements about "serials" as if all serials were the one chapter at a time kind. Well that's not actually what most serials have been historically, and educating people about what a serial really is is a GOOD thing.

Camille

[BillSmithBooks]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

He asked people if they would be willing to buy books chopped into short serials. The people responding are overwhelmingly saying "no." That is

1.) not "denying your right" to anything-- we are not obligated to buy something we don't want so that you can have it

and

2.) the very heart of the "corporate spirit"-- a business determines what it's customers want, and if it finds that most customers don't want it (i.e. they won't make money off it) they won't offer it. A business is a business, not a charity.

But the point is, as per Mark Coker's original comments -- he has been considering a BAN on serialized fiction on Smashwords. I'm deeply concerned that a mere 88 votes are going to give him the wrong impression of where the market truly lies.

Not only that, many authors are doing well for themselves selling and distributing serialized and short fiction:
* Mike Stackpole's short story Apps on the ITunes store
* Scott Sigler's podcast serializations that built tremendous attention for his novels, so much so that he got a book contract and became a best-selling author on the strength of his podcasts and promotion of said serialized work
* Phil Foglio Girl Genius comic, which is originally published as strips on his website and then sold in collected editions.

Here are three success stories that prove my point without bothering to do any research.

I am making a spirited argument, perhaps a wee bit dramatic but not actually factually incorrect, that has so far withstood the few counterarguments against it.

No one is arguing that you MUST buy serialized fiction. I would never advocate an obligation on the part of others to buy what they don't want.

I am arguing against such works being prohibited by Smashwords, which is what Mark has said is on the table at this point, or the tyranny of the majority (or vocal minority) drowning out what may turn out to be a sizeable market.

Indeed, I very much doubt serialized fiction would turn out to be "charity" publishing...quite the opposite, in the long term.

I am merely arguing that I believe it is very much against Smashwords' long-term interests to prohibit such works, which have proven to be exceptionally popular as evidenced by the literary history of, well, ALL OF HISTORY.

NY Times Best-selling Author Mike Stackpole has on various episodes of his Dragon Page Cover to Cover podcast argued that he believes we may see a new golden age of serialized and short-term fiction because the nature of reading on a screen, often done while commuting or "in between" other activities, very much lends itself to that form.

If there's someone who is right far more often than he is wrong when it comes to the publishing business, it is Stackpole.

You know, in the long run, if Smashwords does ban these works, it is not such a big deal. Someone else will come along and do it right and profit. It's the American way.

I just hate to see Smashwords make a decision that has very negative repercussions when, to me at least, a less drastic and much more satisfactory solution exists: categorize by word count.

I was very much looking at putting my catalogue on Smashwords and it includes some serialized fiction. I'd hate to have to walk away from a company that has otherwise very much impressed me with its approach.

[BillSmithBooks]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

A "serial" as in discussion in this thread/poll is a small segment of a much longer work that will, in the end, be collected into a single volume. Novels in a series of novels and episodes in a TV series are intended to always remain as individual novels and as individual episodes, not to be collected into a single thousands-page tome or dozens-hours video at the end, so they are not the same thing and nobody (but you) is trying to claim that they are.

I've seen many episodes of Buffy, Angel, Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica that make absolutely no sense at all outside of the context of the larger story. Thus, they are not "intended to always remain as individual novels and as individual episodes."

Originally Posted by ardeegee

(And, FWIW, modern comic story arcs are now collected into single volumes which many people wait for rather than read the issues as they come out each month. Two examples out of many here and here.)

But this is arguing that that the collected graphic novel is the only proper way to enjoy the story.

Which it clearly is not since they were all published originally as individual issues.


So which is it that is being argued for? Stories that are "intended to always remain as individual novels and as individual episodes" or "modern comic story arcs are now collected into single volumes"?

My point is simple: You don't like them, that's fine. Peace, read what you want.

But I like them...lots of people like them. Don't ban them.

[DaringNovelist]

Oh, geeze, teach me to read carefully! I missed that they were considering banning serialized novels.

And reading the first post more carefully, I can see why people were angry, at least about the concept of paying for a pig in a poke.

HOWEVER, if somebody offers a novel for a buck a chapter, and it's a hundred chapters, it's not like you can't figure out that it isn't what you like after the very first chapter. The length is listed on every story on Smashwords, and there are plenty of bad short stories - so any time you pay a buck for something 5000 words or so, you are taking a gamble.

If you actually got "tricked" into buying a dozen chapters that way.... Um. Why did you keep buying them if you didn't like them?

I can support clarifying and setting rules - especially in terms of people knowing exactly what they're getting - that would go along with their other rules about certain non-fiction restrictions that keep out the pure hucksters.

But other than proper labelling, how is selling something as a serial worse than any other bad writing that gets posted on Smashwords? There isn't an editorial board. The first thing you buy is a gamble. If you don't like the first, you don't buy the rest.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I've seen many episodes of Buffy, Angel, Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica that make absolutely no sense at all outside of the context of the larger story. Thus, they are not "intended to always remain as individual novels and as individual episodes."

Look-- pull out a DVD of Buffy, Angel, Babylon 5, or Battlestar Galactica. Are all the episodes of the season edited into one giant episode, with no closing credits and opening credits in between? Or are they packaged as individual episodes, each with opening credits, "previously on" segments (for some of them) and closing credits for each one?

I'll wait while you look through your DVDs...

See? They are still presented as individual episodes-- exactly like I said.

With a serial novel, however, when it is finished, the whole thing is consolidated into a single novel in the end. You are comparing apples and Nevada.

[DaringNovelist]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

With a serial novel, however, when it is finished, the whole thing is consolidated into a single novel in the end. You are comparing apples and Nevada.

But should serial novels that DO have distinct episodes even when packaged into a whole be banned? Even if they are like BUFFY or other tv shows and can't fully stand alone either?

You're pushing a very narrow definition here, that doesn't cover the cases in question.

Camille

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by DaringNovelist

But should serial novels that DO have distinct episodes even when packaged into a whole be banned? Even if they are like BUFFY or other tv shows and can't fully stand alone either?

No-- I see no reason for them to be "banned." And a "serial novel with distinct episodes" has an alternate name-- it is called a "short story collection."

You're pushing a very narrow definition here, that doesn't cover the cases in question.

Yes, I am pushing a definition of serial that fits what this thread is about, and not one so outrageously broad that anything that ever has any sort of sequel suddenly is called a "serial."