Series, series and more damned series!

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by DuskyRose

Couldn't you just take the first in a series as a stand-alone if you wanted to? After all, I don't think any book can include the whole story of a person, planet or universe anyway. There can certainly be a lot of story-arc in a universe that can be hinted at in a first book that won't make the first story any less complete than a stand-alone.

Yes. I do that a lot. But even that kind of series is pretty rare nowadays. Most of them leave you in the lurch at the end of each book. And if I like HOW an author wrote (but maybe not so much WHAT they wrote), I may have to wait 15 years until I get to try something different from them (if ever).

And why would anyone even try to "include the whole story of a person, planet or universe" in the first place? A project like that would involve more documentation than story-telling. No one or no-where is that interesting.

Basically, it's already covered for me under the term 'Fiction'. I've never needed another term to encompass it all.

So you think the "Mystery" label is unnecessary? The labels aren't really that important, they just help people find the type of stuff they enjoy reading more easily. And to discuss those things more easily. I mean if someone asks me what kind of books I like to read, I assume they're looking for something a bit more specific than "fiction."

[afa]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

But I'll get back to you when I think of any.

Thanks.

Seriously? Two days ago. I didn't like the guy that was offering me the job. And again a couple of months before that. It's quite a regular habit of mine... but so is being broke, so there you go. I've quit multiple jobs on principle alone, too. I believe everyone should do it at least once.

I hate you for actually having an answer to that question. Goody-two-shoes.

Theoretically, though, I assume there was some amount of cash that would have convinced you to change your mind. So the question isn't really "Would you ever turn down money?" but rather "What is the largest amount of money you would have the balls to turn down?" For me, it's probably $250. I'm easy.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The reason I know that most authors are caving to publisher pressure to turn something into a series is because there's almost no true stand-alone books being published in the scifi/fantasy genres. If the authors were left to their own devices, I would expect more of a balance between series and stand-alone... as exists in the other less "speculative" genres.

I don't care much for his books, personally, but China Mieville seems to have made a career of writing (incomprehensible) stand-alones. So there!

Seriously, though, I think you're right. Authors would undoubtedly come up with more stand-alones if they could. But publishers seem to be forcing them into series. I've interacted with a few people close to the industry, and they all agree that when it comes to SF/F, series are in. You have to absolutely floor someone with your skills for stand-alones to have a chance (if you're unknown, that is. I don't know why established authors don't do it, though. Surely, their name has enough cache?).

[afa]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I mean if someone asks me what kind of books I like to read, I assume they're looking for something a bit more specific than "fiction."

I tend to go the other way and vaguely describe them as "e".

[Quake1028]

I'm in the same boat. When I think of all the series/trilogies I'm either already into, or want to get into, it's a bit intimidating.

Currently Reading
A Song of Ice and Fire - Martin
Half-Orc Series - Dalglish *
Paladin Series - Dalglish
Rapp Series - Flynn
Reacher Series - Child
Bosch Series - Connelly
The Dark Tower Series - King
The Hunger Games - Collins *
Millennium Trilogy - Larsson *

Want to Read
Shadowdance Trilogy - Dalglish *
Mistborn Series - Sanderson *
Stormlight Archive Series - Sanderson
Kingkiller Chronicle Series - Rothfuss
Strain Trilogy - Hogan/Del Toro *
The Dresden Files - Butcher
Discworld Series - Pratchett
Wheel of Time - Jordan/Sanderson
Vorkosigan Saga - Bujold

* = all books have been written, to my knowledge

Seems I could go years reading nothing but series books and probably still not be caught up.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by afa

I hate you for actually having an answer to that question. Goody-two-shoes.

Theoretically, though, I assume there was some amount of cash that would have convinced you to change your mind. So the question isn't really "Would you ever turn down money?" but rather "What is the largest amount of money you would have the balls to turn down?" For me, it's probably $250. I'm easy.

Yes, I'm sure there's a number that would make me look the other way, but I'm guessing it's a little higher than $250. For instance, sitting in a windowless cubicle for 8-10 hours a day is going to cost an employer more money than is cost-effective for them.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

So you think the "Mystery" label is unnecessary? The labels aren't really that important, they just help people find the type of stuff they enjoy reading more easily. And to discuss those things more easily. I mean if someone asks me what kind of books I like to read, I assume they're looking for something a bit more specific than "fiction."

No, I mean I think the term 'Speculative' is unnecessary if "Fiction" does the job.

If asked what I like to read, I start with "I like to read Fiction." Then if they ask "What kind" I can give specifics, narrowed down to "Mysteries - Police prodedual" or "Paranormal - Romance" or what ever I'm into at the moment if they happen to be that interested.

So far, 'Speculative' just seems like a fancy word for 'Fiction' to me.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by DuskyRose

But as I asked in the post above. Why couldn't the first book in a series be taken as a stand-alone if you chose, as long as it's a complete story? Can't you just pick up the first, read it and walk away?

One great example for me would be the Mercedes Lackey series Collegium Chronicles. All of the major story arcs are only going to be tied into the final book. All of the items tied up in books 1 & 2 are not made clear as to why they are important or as to their meaning. The characters were only reacting to situations...sooooo....you have to read the last book to get any type of satisfaction in the trilogy, period. It's rather annoying because this is the first time she's done this.

I've been really unhappy with this series - and since she's with an Agency6 pub I paid $14 for the ebook form of book 2. When the final book is released I'm buying a used HB for a couple of dollars. She turned me into a lost sale...and I usually buy everything of hers.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

One great example for me would be the Mercedes Lackey series Collegium Chronicles. All of the major story arcs are only going to be tied into the final book. All of the items tied up in books 1 & 2 are not made clear as to why they are important or as to their meaning. The characters were only reacting to situations...sooooo....you have to read the last book to get any type of satisfaction in the trilogy, period. It's rather annoying because this is the first time she's done this. .

Oh, I've agreed from the start about Installment series being incredibly annoying. Don't like them in pro-published books, don't like them in fanfic. Which is why I like reviews that mention that the book just stops, or there's a cliff hanger.

But I haven't noticed many of these, or I'm just good at avoiding them. There are a few series I've started that had decent first books in a series, and I just discovered I wasn't interested in anything more in that universe even knowing there was anther book. But I felt they were complete stories all in themselves, beginning, middle and end. The characters and universe just weren't my thing.

And I'm also careful not to start a book that's in the middle of a series. I realize that so much of the story may be in the main story-arc that it may not feel complete even if it's a full story. But the first books haven't seem to have that problem.

Or as I say, I'm just really good at avoiding them.

[DiapDealer]

So far, 'Speculative' just seems like a fancy word for 'Fiction' to me.

Well if you just don't LIKE the term or the distiction, that's perfectly understandable. But you led me to believe that you didn't know WHAT it was. Surely it's not hard to differentiate between fiction that has elements of the "fantastic" about it, and fiction that doesn't?

[afa]

Originally Posted by DuskyRose

So far, 'Speculative' just seems like a fancy word for 'Fiction' to me.

Not really. Your John Grishams, Dan Browns, Michael Crichtons, Dean Koontzs (?) et. al. wouldn't qualify as Spec-Fic. Well, maybe Koontz would.

The Wiki quote you mentioned earlier seems right to me, i.e. Speculative Fiction constitutes the more 'fantastical' genres of fiction.

Fiction by itself is not a genre. It's... well, I don't know how to describe it, except that anything which isn't 'real' is fiction. Basically, all books can be classified as either Fiction or Non-fiction, which is rather vague. So when you say, "I read fiction," that doesn't tell me much, because I assume you read fiction for leisure.

It's like saying, "I listen to music." Well, sure, but what? Speculative fiction is slightly (slightly) more specific. Much like saying, "I listen to Rock." Sure, it's still a vague term, since Rock has dozens of sub-genres (alternative, metal, soft, indie, grunge, gothic, etc.) and many of the sub-genres have sub-sub-genres (heavy metal, thrash metal, alternative metal, nu-metal, rap-metal, etc.). But at least "Rock" gives me *some* inkling that you like a certain kind of music, as opposed to others (Rap, R&B, Jazz, etc.).

Like with any category, the descriptions are never perfect. But it helps to get the message across as it tells the listener *something* about what kind of books you read. Humans tend to like grouping things.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Well if you just don't LIKE the term, that's perfectly understandable. But you led me to believe that you didn't know what it MEANT. Surely it's not hard to differentiate between fiction that has elements of the "fantastic" about it, and fiction that doesn't?

I didn't know what it meant. That's why I asked and I've looked it up in various places so I can try to see what kind of books you're seeing a problem with. Same reason I had to look up "Steampunk" recently because I wasn't sure exactly what that was.

So far, it seems to cover everything "Fiction" covers. So I don't see any difference between it and "Fiction" from what I've seen here so far.

I haven't see where the 'Fantastic' part comes in to separate those stories from others.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by afa

Fiction by itself is not a genre. It's... well, I don't know how to describe it, except that anything which isn't 'real' is fiction. Basically, all books can be classified as either Fiction or Non-fiction, which is rather vague. So when you say, "I read fiction," that doesn't tell me much, because I assume you read fiction for leisure.

Except there are a lot of people who never read fiction. They only read research, science and biographies and such for pleasure.

(Which I didn't quote well, but talking about the fact that you assume I read "Fiction" and that's what I"m responding to.)

I hang out at a on-line book swap, and see them there quite a bit. Once you say you read "Fiction" or your bookshelf (for trade) has only "Fiction", then that saves a lot of time right there, because they won't be interested at all.

Originally Posted by afa

But at least "Rock" gives me *some* inkling that you like a certain kind of music, as opposed to others (Rap, R&B, Jazz, etc.).

Like with any category, the descriptions are never perfect. But it helps to get the message across as it tells the listener *something* about what kind of books you read. Humans tend to like grouping things.

Sure, but "Speculative" still doesn't mean anything to me yet, other than it covers the same stories that "Fiction" does.

It's how the stories group separately from all the others that I'm still not catching.

[anamardoll]

I don't really understand what "speculative" adds, either. Maybe DuskyRose and I are missing the brain neuron path that makes that make sense. Seems like all fiction is "speculative" to me: What if Russians nuked America? What if society fetishized teenage pregnancy? What if a magic school existed and a kid with glasses attended there? Etc. (Deathlands, Bumped, Harry Potter.)

I'm not much for the "let's write one book, and stretch it into three" thing lately. I've read a lot of YA that's fallen into that category, including The Maze Runner. Then again, I've also loved a lot of good YA trilogies lately, including The Hunger Games.

So seems like this should be less a rant on series as a rant on bad writing. Just my two cents.

[anamardoll]

Ah, Wikipedia says:

Speculative fiction is an umbrella term encompassing the more fantastical fiction genres, specifically science fiction, fantasy, horror, supernatural fiction, superhero fiction, utopian and dystopian fiction, apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction, and alternate history in literature as well as related static, motion, and virtual arts.

Um. So... that would be everything I read. NON-speculative fiction is basically now just Cozy Mysteries and Tom Clancy thrillers, no?

Well, and Jane Austen, if you took the zombies out, I guess.

But Atwood, Marquez, and Rushdie are apparently speculative. So as an "umbrella" term it encompasses more than it keeps out. Huh.

[DiapDealer]

I haven't see where the 'Fantastic' part comes in to separate those stories from others.

Oh c'mon.... you don't see a distinction between Peter Pan, Lord of the Rings, Planet of the Apes, Sookie Stackhouse and American Gods when compared to the likes of say; Huck Finn, Patterson's 'Alex Cross' novels, Blood Meridian, and Lee Child's Jack Reacher novels?

I think you guys are getting a bit too hung up on the literal definition of the term "speculation."