Rant: Are Books Too Long?

Colin Dunstan · 10-16-2004, 07:15 AM

This guy is arguing that many books are just way too long. To support his critique he mentions:

- Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time
- Tad Williams’ Otherland
- Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn
- Rowland's Harry Potter
- Neal Stephenson's The Baroque Cycle

These are all books I personally love! (Well except for Wheel of Time that I eventually stopped reading.) Is this guy insane? What about character development? What about the pure joy of knowing that there is just another novel building on top of a wonderful story? What is wrong about a long book if it is well written and not boring? Perhaps this guy should go back to Kindergarten and read Mickey Mouse books for a change.

hacker · 10-16-2004, 09:55 AM

As I've been saying for a few years now... this new "Gimme Generation", a generation of people bred on "instant gratification", knows no bounds.

They want access to everything, within seconds, without any excuses. Pathetic.

Chaos · 10-16-2004, 09:56 PM

No way! I love long books. If they're enjoyable, I pour through them for hours, and only sleep and eat. A few years ago when I read the 4th Harry Potter, I read it in about 20 hours. Of course around 6 or 7 of that was sleeping.

I just couldn't put the damn thing down!

Unregistered · 10-19-2004, 03:49 PM

If the book is a great one - then it cannot be too long. All the Harry Potter ones seem to finish too soon even the Order of the Phoenix! However even though Bill Clinton's Book is mainly interesting it definitely goes on fat too long. So I suppose it depends on how well the bookis written - IMHO Bill Clinton's book is not well written, but that is not necessarily a bad thing - but not written well enough to keep you enthralled.

fiQQer · 10-19-2004, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

If the book is a great one - then it cannot be too long. All the Harry Potter ones seem to finish too soon even the Order of the Phoenix! However even though Bill Clinton's Book is mainly interesting it definitely goes on far too long. So I suppose it depends on how well the book is written - IMHO Bill Clinton's book is not well written, but that is not necessarily a bad thing - but not written well enough to keep you enthralled.

fiQQer

Steven Lyle Jordan · 10-09-2006, 03:47 PM

Yes, Virginia, books CAN be too long.

I've read a few books in the last few years that I honestly felt were padded with a lot of unneccessary character material that did not advance the story, nor make the characters or action more interesting or understandable. For this reason, I never finished Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars series (got through Red Mars, skimmed Green Mars, lost interest 100 pages into Blue Mars. Sorry, Kim.), and I have a few other books that, once I finished, could barely remember what-all I'd read.

Obviously, you want detail, you want character development, you want background, you don't want any holes. But there is such a thing as too much exposition, too many character details or historical anecdotes, that do not advance the story. I may enjoy a Star Trek novel about Picard battling a Norsican, but I don't need to be interrupted by a half-chapter on how he first learned to pick out his favorite saddle and take care of it with Sythian leather balm.

Unless, of course, the balm reacts unfavorably with the Norsican's skin when Picard drops the saddle on his head...

Novels don't have to be long to be good. Brevity and concise writing can be as entertaining as exposition.

Dick Tracy · 10-09-2006, 05:11 PM

Agree with hacker Chaos and Steve.

One can always subscribe to executive book synopsis services if reading is not enjoyable.

Pride Of Lions · 10-09-2006, 05:13 PM

It's a definite skill that most writers don't utilize enough, knowing how to scale back on the stream-of-consciousness the call their "inspiration" and boil it down to only the necessary words in the correct order.

NatCh · 10-09-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pride Of Lions

...boil it down to only the necessary words in the correct order.

Careful there, Pride Of Lions, down that road lies ... (shudder) Hemmingway.

ath · 10-10-2006, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I've read a few books in the last few years that I honestly felt were padded with a lot of unneccessary character material that did not advance the story, nor make the characters or action more interesting or understandable.

I've noted the same thing ... First books on various computer topics began to reach 900-page levels without really having to, and then novels began to swell in the same manner. (Elizabeth George is rather too verbose for my taste, and Hamilton's 'Pandora's Star' I got kind of lost in somewhere in the middle and never cared to finish.) Elizabeth George knows how to write, though -- but some younger authors I suspect have not learnt the art of revising and cutting.

I've also put this down to publisher demand -- for some reason they find it simpler to sell voluminous books, and won't ask for literary liposuction. A bit like the insistence in Victorian times that all novels should come in three volumes -- or the libraries (or perhaps it was the customers) wouldn't even consider buying them. Looks like we're back at the 3-volume novel size, but all in one cover.

ultim8fury · 10-10-2006, 03:45 AM

Quote:

These are all books I personally love! (Well except for Wheel of Time that I eventually stopped reading.)

Everyone I know, stopped reading the wheel of time. 11 books that are reminiscent of a grand master chess game. (Far too long and very little action).

Wheel should have concluded a few books back

Goodkind should also wrap up the Sword of truth series pretty soon as they have also been going just a touch too long.

on the other hand

Trudi Canavans books are all too short excellent writing style and content but I want to read more.

Robin Hobb seems to judge the length of her series to perfection.

In conclusion my post has gone on too long and no longer even holds my own interest so I shall quit before even making a valid point.

Alexander Turcic · 10-10-2006, 05:08 AM

When a piece of fiction is generally good, I don't mind a long text (on the contrary, I get sad when a book approaches its end).

But I do everything to avoid bloated non-fiction, including reference books. The more lengthy they are, the more wordy they tend to be, and the harder it becomes to absorb the essence of the content.

da_jane · 10-10-2006, 09:20 AM

NO! I think that the length of a book is dependent upon the story told. Whether a reader thinks a book is too long is dependent upon the skill of a storyteller. I read Kushiel's Dart when it first came out and was enthralled. That sucker was 900 pages long (?) but I didn't regret a moment spent with it.

Leaping Gnome · 10-10-2006, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pride Of Lions

It's a definite skill that most writers don't utilize enough, knowing how to scale back on the stream-of-consciousness the call their "inspiration" and boil it down to only the necessary words in the correct order.

I thought that is partly what an editor is for?

I love long books as long as there is enough story to keep it going (see: the opposite of WoT).

Steven Lyle Jordan · 10-10-2006, 10:28 PM

I don't remember which it was, but one publisher I contacted a year ago would only accept novels of "between 300,000 and 600,000 words." I thought that was simply outrageous. And as editors don't seem to be paring books down much, you have to believe publishers are selling books by the word.

10-16-2004, 07:15 AM	#1
Colin Dunstan Is papyrophobic! Posts: 1,926 Karma: 1009999 Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: USA Device: Dell Axim	Rant: Are Books Too Long? This guy is arguing that many books are just way too long. To support his critique he mentions: - Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time - Tad Williams’ Otherland - Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn - Rowland's Harry Potter - Neal Stephenson's The Baroque Cycle These are all books I personally love! (Well except for Wheel of Time that I eventually stopped reading.) Is this guy insane? What about character development? What about the pure joy of knowing that there is just another novel building on top of a wonderful story? What is wrong about a long book if it is well written and not boring? Perhaps this guy should go back to Kindergarten and read Mickey Mouse books for a change.

10-19-2004, 03:49 PM	#4
Unregistered Nameless Being	Are books too Long If the book is a great one - then it cannot be too long. All the Harry Potter ones seem to finish too soon even the Order of the Phoenix! However even though Bill Clinton's Book is mainly interesting it definitely goes on fat too long. So I suppose it depends on how well the bookis written - IMHO Bill Clinton's book is not well written, but that is not necessarily a bad thing - but not written well enough to keep you enthralled.

10-09-2006, 03:47 PM	#6
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Yes, Virginia, books CAN be too long. I've read a few books in the last few years that I honestly felt were padded with a lot of unneccessary character material that did not advance the story, nor make the characters or action more interesting or understandable. For this reason, I never finished Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars series (got through Red Mars, skimmed Green Mars, lost interest 100 pages into Blue Mars. Sorry, Kim.), and I have a few other books that, once I finished, could barely remember what-all I'd read. Obviously, you want detail, you want character development, you want background, you don't want any holes. But there is such a thing as too much exposition, too many character details or historical anecdotes, that do not advance the story. I may enjoy a Star Trek novel about Picard battling a Norsican, but I don't need to be interrupted by a half-chapter on how he first learned to pick out his favorite saddle and take care of it with Sythian leather balm. Unless, of course, the balm reacts unfavorably with the Norsican's skin when Picard drops the saddle on his head... Novels don't have to be long to be good. Brevity and concise writing can be as entertaining as exposition. Last edited by Steven Lyle Jordan; 10-09-2006 at 03:55 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
iPad How long before books are sold DRM-free?	jibril	Apple Devices	11	05-15-2010 04:41 AM
A small rant about pdf books	charlieperry	News	37	10-15-2008 12:42 AM
Scanned books - a rant	FuzzyGamer	Sony Reader	31	04-01-2008 03:39 PM
The case for novellas versus long books	Alexander Turcic	Lounge	38	02-17-2008 06:56 PM
Howard Hendrix rant against cc free e-books	Liviu_5	News	3	04-14-2007 10:49 AM

10-16-2004, 09:55 AM	#2
hacker Technology Mercenary Posts: 617 Karma: 2561 Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: East Lyme, CT Device: Direct Neural Implant	As I've been saying for a few years now... this new "Gimme Generation", a generation of people bred on "instant gratification", knows no bounds. They want access to everything, within seconds, without any excuses. Pathetic.

10-16-2004, 09:56 PM	#3
Chaos Evangelist Posts: 418 Karma: 281 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canada Device: Assorted older devices	No way! I love long books. If they're enjoyable, I pour through them for hours, and only sleep and eat. A few years ago when I read the 4th Harry Potter, I read it in about 20 hours. Of course around 6 or 7 of that was sleeping. I just couldn't put the damn thing down!

10-09-2006, 05:11 PM	#7
Dick Tracy Detective Posts: 109 Karma: 4455 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: California Device: Palm TX	Agree with hacker Chaos and Steve. One can always subscribe to executive book synopsis services if reading is not enjoyable.

10-09-2006, 05:13 PM	#8
Pride Of Lions just kinda geeky Posts: 381 Karma: 30 Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Oakland, California Device: iPhone	It's a definite skill that most writers don't utilize enough, knowing how to scale back on the stream-of-consciousness the call their "inspiration" and boil it down to only the necessary words in the correct order.

10-10-2006, 05:08 AM	#12
Alexander Turcic Fully Converged Posts: 18,163 Karma: 14021202 Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Switzerland Device: Too many to count here.	When a piece of fiction is generally good, I don't mind a long text (on the contrary, I get sad when a book approaches its end). But I do everything to avoid bloated non-fiction, including reference books. The more lengthy they are, the more wordy they tend to be, and the harder it becomes to absorb the essence of the content.

10-10-2006, 09:20 AM	#13
da_jane Evangelist Posts: 405 Karma: 692 Join Date: Sep 2006 Device: Samsung Galaxy Note 3 \| Kindle Paperwhite \| iPad Mini	NO! I think that the length of a book is dependent upon the story told. Whether a reader thinks a book is too long is dependent upon the skill of a storyteller. I read Kushiel's Dart when it first came out and was enthralled. That sucker was 900 pages long (?) but I didn't regret a moment spent with it.

10-10-2006, 10:28 PM	#15
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	I don't remember which it was, but one publisher I contacted a year ago would only accept novels of "between 300,000 and 600,000 words." I thought that was simply outrageous. And as editors don't seem to be paring books down much, you have to believe publishers are selling books by the word.

Advert

Advert