How Long Do You Think a Sci-fi Novel Should Be?

[DNSB]

For me, the perfect length is as long as the author needs to tell the story without adding unnecessary wordage. I suspect everyone has read at least one book where the comment about Edward Bulwer-Lytton's Paul Clifford leaving the reader feeling on a first name basis with every raindrop after the first pages felt applicable.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by nabsltd

The problem there, though, is that cutting it to the proper length of quality writing would result in a book that consisted of nothing but covers, title page, and copyright page.

Hard to sell something like that even at $0.50 in the bargain bin.

[Sats]

Originally Posted by JWT

I know there are many outstanding science fiction novels that run to 500 pages or more, and plenty of readers love immersing themselves in those worlds. Personally, I find myself gravitating towards shorter, tighter novels of around 225 to 300 pages that get to the point without sacrificing the story.

I admit, I mostly read Fantasy and Serialized/web fiction these days. That being said, it it really a novel if it is under 250k words (about 800 pages?) I call that more of a "brochure" :P If the book/flow is decent, I usually prefer more book...

Originally Posted by JWT

When you’re choosing a new sci-fi novel, do you have a preferred length? Does a very long book make you more or less likely to buy it, or does the page count not matter if the story is good?

When I buy a new book, the length only matters if it is really short, like under 100k words. Not like I can force author to make longer books or to combine several books in series into one. I do prefer series though, like Honorverse and Wheel of Time, to hopefully get more book.

Originally Posted by JWT

Does your answer change depending on whether you’re reading on a Kindle or reading a paperback? For example, I sometimes wonder whether people are happier tackling a 500-page novel on a Kindle than they would be carrying around the same book in paperback.

Hardcover over paperback, usually, and not really? For books I like (mostly Brandon Sanderson these days) that have physical equivalent, I have hardcover for home reading and epub for phone anyway.

[theducks]

I prefer 350-500.
But tell a good tale with what it take and don't pad to meet some word count goal.

[nana77]

To me, if your purpose is to write a novel (as if that would be your meaning, just while you've posted before in the writers' corner), I'd stuck on the others' reccomandations that a novel has to be as long as it needs to be, no cuts nor lengthenings.
Personally, there are some short novels (25 pages) that struck me, and I still recall of those, as an impressed image; some others or a collection of shorts thought can land to no-serious plottings.
I like the challenge a long narrative takes, including the "boring" moments, that - imho - can be fit to give it a cadence.
Thought that the difference between a low rythm part, and a page fulfilled because the authors wasn't to know what to write to prolong the pages: it doesn't "fluttery" hides to the reader.

[Readirect]

Novel length used to be a big deal, back when the only way to get published was through a publishing house AND that was (mostly) because of the costs involved for longer works; (mostly) not because of reader concerns.

In this age of indie publishing, it doesn't really matter except (of course) you go through a traditional publisher.

Rule of Thumb: Find a popular first-time novel -- published in the way you intend to get published -- and keep yours within plus/minus 25% of that.

[nana77]

Originally Posted by Readirect

Rule of Thumb: Find a popular first-time novel -- published in the way you intend to get published -- and keep yours within plus/minus 25% of that.

wtf eh.