Would you try episodic fiction if it had a clear end point?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by MartyTX

Way back in 2000, before I even knew about eBooks, Stephen King wrote "Riding the Bullet". It was a novella that King planned to release in installments, and only online. If I remember correctly, it was going to cost around $2.50 for a "key" to unlock the book. There was quite a bit of confusion and furor when some readers couldn't get the book unlocked. After a while, Amazon/King released free copies.

I jumped on the free version and read it on my PC. Did NOT like waiting for installments! Decided to wait until all the "puzzle pieces" had been released and finished the book in one easy reading. Good short story; nothing really special except for the unique delivery method.

In a nutshell: I like books in a series. King's "Bill Hodges Trilogy" was very good, and each book was standalone. However, I no longer have the memory for episodic fiction. Watching "Seinfeld" reruns is "episodic" enough for me!

I think you're confusing Riding The Bullet with The Plant. Riding The Bullet was always published as a single novella, though there was the issue with the encryption and it was later released for free.

The Plant was being written in installments and released online only and was never completed.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by E.M.DuBois

I think I’m missing quite a bit of the conversation because I don’t understand the difference between “Episodic” fiction and a “series.” I know it’s probably a pain to do, but could someone point out the definitions/differences to me? With the exception of comic books, it seems like everyone’s talking about the same thing. Because I seem people talking about combining and others comparing that to complete series, like the Dark Tower, which would be way too long to combine into a single novel (physically, I mean, but completely doable as an e-book.) Is “Episodic” fiction like when someone publishes installments that could better be labelled as “Chapters” and combined into a book?

The confusion is due to me not explaining, because I really didn't understand the formats and differentiations myself. Sorry for that.

I don't tend to read series and have only just started because:
a: I have so many of them and
b: I recently tried a book from the self promotion forum that was advertised as an episode of a larger cycle

I don't mind an open-ended series where each book tells a complete story following a set of characters (the Sherlock Holmes stories or most of TV before The X-Files).

But I would not be willing to try an episodic story (there is a single overarching struggle and each book builds on the last) unless I knew there was going to be some sort of conclusion (The Lord of the Rings, f'rinstance).

The book in the self promotions section sounded like it would be right up my alley. But I only bought it after the author confirmed that he would be wrapping it up at book six. So then I started wondering if these authors would be better served if they clearly labelled these stories as '1 (of 6)' from the get go.

Like many members here, I also read comics. But even there I for the most part avoided on-going superhero stories in favor of mini-series that had a definite ending.

I'll read 100 Bullets, that ended at issue 100, but have avoided The Walking Dead (which seems like something I would enjoy) as it just seems to shamble on forever (pardon the pun).

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

The confusion is due to me not explaining, because I really didn't understand the formats and differentiations myself. Sorry for that.

I don't tend to read series and have only just started because:
a: I have so many of them and
b: I recently tried a book from the self promotion forum that was advertised as an episode of a larger cycle

I don't mind an open-ended series where each book tells a complete story following a set of characters (the Sherlock Holmes stories or most of TV before The X-Files).

But I would not be willing to try an episodic story (there is a single overarching struggle and each book builds on the last) unless I knew there was going to be some sort of conclusion (The Lord of the Rings, f'rinstance).

The book in the self promotions section sounded like it would be right up my alley. But I only bought it after the author confirmed that he would be wrapping it up at book six. So then I started wondering if these authors would be better served if they clearly labelled these stories as '1 (of 6)' from the get go.

Like many members here, I also read comics. But even there I for the most part avoided on-going superhero stories in favor of mini-series that had a definite ending.

I'll read 100 Bullets, that ended at issue 100, but have avoided The Walking Dead (which seems like something I would enjoy) as it just seems to shamble on forever (pardon the pun).

Even when authors CLEARLY state it's a serial with x parts, the reviews are less than kind. When they DON'T state it, they are seriously less than kind.

It's hard for the author to specify, however, because of the confusion between series and serial installments. Some authors list their entire "series" and it can be mistaken for "installments."

Serial installments has picked up popularity with authors. I see more of it now than ever before and even came across a trad publisher that put out a book in two installments. Ilona Andrews has done installment releases across several blogs on at least two books (in the Innkeeper series). If I recall correctly, they released a chapter each week on a different blog. You could click around and read the entire book for free--or wait for it to be self-published like I did and pay for it.

I am sure it helped with publicity as several blogs participated, but I avoided all mention or discussion of the books because I wanted to read a book, not installments. To each their own!

[E.M.DuBois]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

The confusion is due to me not explaining, because I really didn't understand the formats and differentiations myself. Sorry for that...

...The book in the self promotions section sounded like it would be right up my alley. But I only bought it after the author confirmed that he would be wrapping it up at book six. So then I started wondering if these authors would be better served if they clearly labelled these stories as '1 (of 6)' from the get go...

...I'll read 100 Bullets, that ended at issue 100, but have avoided The Walking Dead (which seems like something I would enjoy) as it just seems to shamble on forever (pardon the pun).

Neither did I. But it’s been explained for my by a few other members, and so I’m caught up. It’s all good.

For me, I don’t mind knowing when a series would end. Harry Potter was easy because in the story Hagrid pointed out he’d go there for 7 years, and since it is a series about Wizarding school, the reader could guess there would be seven books. In the Pendragon Journals, Bobby has to save the 10 realms of Halla from Saint Dane, one by one, so the guess would be there’d be 10 books (where there were.) I started reading right about when book eight came out, and waited and waited and waited with excitement for the last two. I read them as they came out, and personally I feel that anticipation made not only the wait, but the reading itself more worthwhile. I was eight when I read the first Artemis Fowl (at the time there were only two published) and finally read the final when I was 20. I grew up with The Series of Unfortunate Events. I liked the wait, and not always knowing when it would end (Though with Snicket’s work, a child could guess that since there were thirteen chapters in each, there would be thirteen novels, especially since the theme was unluckiness, and 13 is an unlucky number.) Then there’re sets like The Last Dragon Chronicles by Chris D’Lacey, which never hinted and when it would end (book seven) and, unless you shifted through them one by one and looked at the “Also by the author” page, did not even know what the order of the series was. Same with the Twilight Saga (I gag to even bring that up.) You don’t know which one comes directly after the saga’s namesake.

Sidetrack: I, personally, agree with you on TWD. While I still enjoy it, it does seem to just keep going, and going, and going... And I also enjoyed the pun, so you’re forgiven. On that note, my family thinks Once Upon a Time should have ended after a certain season, and refuse to watch anymore because they share your same opinion. My fiancé and I still watch, though. My point is that some people might see an ending, and may be satisfied with a certain story, and other may want more. Some people love the original Star Wars Trilogy, and then you have a sea of fans who wanted more, and George Lucas let them have at it and create the rest of the universe. I guess it’s just a personal preference about how deeply the reader wants to invest themselves.

[Roos]

Would you try episodic fiction if it had a clear end point?

Nope, been bitten to much by series seriously over-stretching.
My personal favourite book, 'Dune' by Frank Herbert, and then he dies before finishing the whole story.
And no, i have read, but do not like the expansion on the original by other writers, it does not feel the same.
The Trilogy 'The wheel of Time' that did not stay a trilogy and then he died before finishing it.
Ah well you get what i mean.
Series like many M-SF (Kris Longknife, Honor Harrington and such) are different in that each book tells a separate part of the story, they are better read as series, but pick just one and it still is a nice read, and a complete tale.
They do not let you hang at the end, the sub plot is round and complete.
I have seen some authors try to push selling stories by the chapter, no way, get back to me when it is whole and complete.
As i proofread for a writer, lemme tell you that minds change, changes need to be written to fit, and that just does not work when you already have pushed chapters out.

So a resounding Nope from me.

[ZodWallop]

I feel like Dune and Star Wars are both series that were pushed beyond their planned scope by fan reaction. Dune was fine as a stand alone novel and is only tarnished by all the sequels.

Star Wars is the same. A fantastic first movie, a good sequel, a not good sequel and then the rest.

I've never been that kind of a fan. I like nerd things like Dune and comic books. But I can respect things as individual works without feeling the need for an endless series of sequels and add ons.

[DiapDealer]

I'm not a believer in the idea that bad sequels can "tarnish" earlier great works. Good is good. Similar to how I don't understand people who say a movie adaptation "ruined" their favorite book. A later failure cannot go back in time and spoil your original/initial enjoyment of something.

You can't unring the bell. Dune's (the original) quality is the same whether someone read it before there were sequels or after.

I'm never disappointed that I read something I really enjoyed--even if it runs off the rails later or never gets finished (and I don't continue reading things I'm not really enjoying).

I prefer that a series I'm enjoying come to a logical conclusion before it gets stale (and I'm not likely to start a series by an unknown author who hasn't proven they're capable of finishing a story and publishing installments in a timely manner), but I don't stress overly about it. I'll still take a great--but unfinished--start to a series over a mediocre standalone (or a finished, but bad, series) any day of the week.

But I do look for standalones, or completed series', too. I've many different reading moods.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm not a believer in the idea that bad sequels can "tarnish" earlier great works. Good is good. Similar to how I don't understand people who say a movie adaptation "ruined" their favorite book. A later failure cannot go back in time and spoil your original/initial enjoyment of something.

You can't unring the bell. Dune's (the original) quality is the same whether someone read it before there were sequels or after.

I'm never disappointed that I read something I really enjoyed--even if it runs off the rails later or never gets finished.

Sorry, even though I said it, I do agree with you. I also don't like people bitching about remakes. The original is always there (unless the original was made by George Lucas).

I just meant that someone looking at Star Wars now will see it as a whole media empire, making it harder to understand just what a landmark the original flick is. Same for the novel Dune.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I just meant that someone looking at Star Wars now will see it as a whole media empire, making it harder to understand just what a landmark the original flick is. Same for the novel Dune.

That's certainly true.

But that's just the way things are. Except for a very few universally iconic works, the younger generations rarely see "the big deal" we try to make of our youthful favorites.

Even some great stories often need to be read/seen (for the first time) in very specific contexts to to leave a lasting impression. I'm a firm believer many books/movies that have gone on to become "favorites" of mine had as much to do with when, where, and at what particular age, I first experienced them as it did with the quality of the work. But I digress.

[Roos]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's certainly true.

But that's just the way things are. Except for a very few universally iconic works, the younger generations rarely see "the big deal" we try to make of our youthful favorites.

First of all, i do agree with sequels or movies not ruining the original, and from Dune, i love the first one, like the two follow-ups, tastes differ.
My son after reading Dune (after I had been nagging about it to him for years) "What's so special about it, that's been done a thousand times"
Sigh, after, indeed, after..
It's a bit of a shame Movies, Anime and Comics kinda ruin the 'sense of wonder' I experienced when first reading a lot of those masterpieces.

[Tarana]

I will read a serialized story that is in a sci fi or mystery magazine. Usually the magazine has all parts of the full story before they start printing it. For individually published ones, I won't buy them again until they are a complete book. I got burned on one serial where you had to pay to get each one. The final story required you to buy the book. So 99 cents for 7 parts then $8.00 for the book. When they released the book, all the previous stuff was then offered free. Never again.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Tarana

...So 99 cents for 7 parts then $8.00 for the book. When they released the book, all the previous stuff was then offered free. Never again.

Ouch! I hope the reviews on Amazon reflect that. Even after the fact, business practices like that would keep me from trying that author.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Anabella

A little bit annoying to wait for the next book, no? I wouldn't go for it. Because of the same reason don't like tv series, can't stand when you have to wait until NEXT YEAR for a new season.

Why does it matter whether there's a new season next year or not? The overwhelming majority of TV series are standalone. Those that are an ongoing story from one season to the next (such as "Game of Thrones") are very much the exception. I watch a TV series for what it is, not for whether or not there'll be another season the next year.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Why does it matter whether there's a new season next year or not? The overwhelming majority of TV series are standalone. Those that are an ongoing story from one season to the next (such as "Game of Thrones") are very much the exception. I watch a TV series for what it is, not for whether or not there'll be another season the next year.

You have obviously never watched NCIS. They leave nearly every season on a massive cliffhanger. Only one was understandable because a certain actor was having health problems and not sure if his doctors were going to let him come back.

Maybe you have better series but here especially on broadcast TV, there is nearly always a cliff hanger.

[HarryT]

The fact that there are examples of TV shows that do end seasons in cliff-hangers does not alter the validity of my statement, which is that the overwhelming majority of series do not do so.