SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

There's a discussion going on on another thread about book and series lengths. What do you guys think the reason is for the increasing length of books and series? Are you happy with this? Would you like things longer or shorter?

I think there's a time and a place for a truly epic book but it should be because it's necessary to tell the story. I've also found that a lot of books under 300 pages can get their point across a lot more concisely. I'm not a fan of short stories because it doesn't allow me time to get emotionally attached to the characters.

Here is also a thread for Series: When to Start and When to Stop that Allison started for us awhile ago. There's some good discussion there on how much of a series to read.

A good trilogy is as far as I am prepared to read. Series that continue on ad nauseum lose me after 3 books. I might go back at a later date if the series was exceptional. (I do like a well written short story.) Detective series which can be read as one-offs are different, and over time I probably would get through an entire series. I would be reading other books in between though.

I prefer trilogies, but the tendency does seem to be to write longer series. I don't mind long series if there is multiple points of view and a large intricate world, such at A Song of Ice and Fire and Malazan.

I'm usually a bit irked too when a series is meant to be a trilogy and then suddenly there's another one or two books added. Meanwhile I might be reading the third book thinking this feels like a filler book. I then look up the author and realise there are additional books to be released. I don't usually keep up to date on what most authors pages to note when they say they've increased the size of a series.

With some series (especially urban fantasy) I find I get series fatigue around book 4-6 and will often abandon the series or not read the next book in the series for a long time.

I'm not a short story reader either normally unless it's been recommended to me.

Ok, I'm going to cheat and c&p my previous post...

In SF&F at least, size is often seen as a correlation of quality. Shorter books are less "meaningful", longer books are more "epic" and therefore better.

The disproportionate size and ridiculous success of LotR to the other genre novels of its time (as well as being a story split over a "series") probably plays a large part here, as does the subsequent success of series like the Wheel of Time, the Belgariad, Feist's series, etc.

SF didn't follow that pattern until more recently, instead having standalone "series" like Asimov's and Clarke's, but with the cross-over in readers it was almost inevitable that it proceeded down the same path.

I like long books, long series, short series or stand-alone. As long as I enjoy the book, the length isn't important... except if I want an important number of read books at the end of the year.

Though it's true I am not a fan of short stories because it seems you appreciate more in them a clever idea or twist than a world or characters.

In the case of Ender's game, the novel follows more the highs and lows of Ender while I found the short story lacking. Though maybe the fact I read the novel first played. Still with this serie, except the second, I can't say the rest are up to the first book, so I think in my case I still read more because I want to see what happen to the characters because I care about them, not really because what happen is really interesting. Well one of the books is mostly what seems to be a dumb idea of a character and turns out to be a dumb idea. I can't say I was impressed. Though I still read the rest.

Anyway La Comedie humaine has 91 finished works, was written in the XIXe century and includes short stories and at least a novel with more than 900 pages. So nothing really new now about length of a serie or a book.

I am with Ilona, mostly. I am in a book for the characters and their story. If the story keeps being told well, and the characters stay dear to me, I'll follow them through the endless Dresden files, or the reboots (Lookin' at you, Eddings family) or the sad twists and turns (hey, GRRM).

That said, I do hate feeling like I'm reading filler, and I am very skeptical of any one story that needs 120,000+ words to be told. It's been done, and done well of course, but most of the time I can think back and I know which paragraphs, pages, and whole chapters editor-me would axe.

Since I am firm in my belief that all book series end when I'm tired of them, I don't mind starting books with long series as long as they don't come with such qualifiers as "it really picks up in book [number larger than one]. I will admit to being intimidated by Malazan, which has both huge books and a long series. I do prioritize books I can read in two weeks or less at my slow read-before-bed pace because life is short, and library due dates are (hopefully!) shorter.

Re: short stories, I find they're just so spotty. Some are brilliant, and live in my memory well after the fact. I've come to love characters and worlds that I only stayed with for maybe 10,000 words. But some are bland, conceptual with no purpose, and no characters worth recalling. I guess it's nice that it's over quick, but I tend to prefer full books because there's some meat to grab onto in case one of the important elements is bare bones.

Publishers prefer series, if it's by a proven author- it's as close to a guaranteed audience that you'll get in speculative fiction. I think that ends up with us getting a lot of 'series' that could be just as well told in one or two books.

I am a fan of longer series that maintain their excellence- I stopped reading ASOIAF after the 5th book because it was just getting annoying, but I have a feeling that when all of the books are published it will be a great series. I loved the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever (I think that it was 10 or 11 books), and Frank Herbert's Dune trilogies. But most authors can't keep up that level for very long, and I'd prefer to read a much shorter series without as much filler.

I just checked out The Well of Ascension from the library amazed at the size of the book. It's 590 pages, some 250,000 words long, and it's due back at the library in 3 weeks. It's a good book so far, maybe really good, but unless I spend all day reading or pick up speed-reading I'm not going to find out. And it's only the second book of the series! Of course I could buy the book and spend the next half-year reading it, but then how would I ever get to Steven Erickson or Robert Jordan or Steve Donaldson or so many of the other great authors out there. While I'm reading them, somebody's writing another great book I'm going to miss.

I realize this has always been the case, that there's always been so many books and so little time, but the increasing size of the books and the massive lengthening of series is making my paranoid FOMO so much worse.

So what to do? Do I go get the Audible version or go see my psychiatrist?

It depends on the author for me. I thought nothing of reading (and re-reading and re-reading...and re-reading) the Belgariad but I have to force myself to pick up book 2 in Malazan (and i loved book 1!).

But...

I

like

big books and I cannot lie

500 pages mean nothing if the author has a style that keeps me flipping those pages. Belgarath the Sorcerer is 700+ pages and at times it feels too short.

At the same time I started The Meaning of Everything: The Story of the Oxford English Dictionary last night and even at 288 pages I think he's going to lose me. Which is a surprise because I'm his target audience AND I've read (and loved!) him before. But he's not getting me to flip those pages at all.

Bruce wrote: "While I'm reading them, somebody's writing another great book I'm going to miss."

LOL, this is sort of what I go through when faced with the choice of reading a 300-400 page book or one that goes over 600. Usually I end up putting off the longer book because I can read two 300-400 pages books that I will also really like in the same amount of time.

As for the length of a series, I do find myself despairing at times at the diminishing presence of stand-alone books in the SciFi/fantasy genre. Sometimes I just want to get in and out, you know? Trilogies are fine though, like Angela, I get irked when suddenly the author/publisher extends things for additional books. I mean, it's a good thing for the author's bank account but then I feel as though I'm suddenly committed for more than I had originally intended.

Bruce wrote: "I realize this has always been the case, that there's always been so many books and so little time, but the increasing size of the books and the massive lengthening of series is making my paranoid FOMO so much worse.

So what to do? Do I go get the Audible version or go see my psychiatrist?



...And this is why my personal library has already hit SABLE (Stash Acquired Beyond Life Expectancy). I can't imagine NOT finishing whatever it is...plus I NEED to re-read. And SOMEWHERE someone I am going to squee over is currently writing something that's going to make me spend unplanned $$$.

So yeah. That's when I get the bright idea to "just buy the book, I'll read it one day!"

(Note to self: this is almost always a bad idea.)

It all depends on what I want and what the author is capable of writing, of course.

If an idea is intriguing, and it can be explored in a short story, great. If an idea plus a world is great, and it can be developed in a single book, great*. If idea + world + characters + adventures is great, then, sure, give me a Harry Potter or a Vatta's War (Elizabeth Moon).

But in general I'm lucky in that I don't particularly like adventures, quests, politics, intrigue... the elements that lend themselves to lots of pages....

I prefer intelligence, wit, as that which brevity is the soul of....

*I read a lot of first books of planned trilogies and series. I like to see the world built, the characters introduced... but when the adventure starts I lose interest. The series that began with Dragon Slippers had neat world & character bits in all the books but the adventures def. got old and I wish I'd stopped after the first.

I blame The Bible for starting the long book trend :)

Course the Bible has 66 books. And most can be read as stand-alones, iiuc.

"What do you guys think the reason is for the increasing length of books and series? Are you happy with this? Would you like things longer or shorter?"

I thought I'd post something about having no opinion - that it depended on the story and author, but then I thought of something specific when I reread the questions.

I've no idea what the reason is for the increasing length of books and series, but I'm not happy with it. At least when I think of how one specific author had been a favorite, but, over time, that author seemed to become overly wordy. Taking 100s of pages to convey a thought that might have more reasonably taken 5 to 20 pages. And, to heap abuse onto the situation, the author even went back and expanded some previously released books and added lots and lots of words. Well, I suppose the 'abuse' might be more the part wherein the author was in the middle of a scene, ended the book there, then didn't pick up the scene until something like three books later (a star system was being invaded, in the middle of the invasion the book ended). If then. I'm speaking about David Weber. There was a while there wherein I kept thinking I'd not read another book by him, then another book in a series would come out that I had loved reading previously, so I'd get the book, read it, and be disappointed in its length and content - that pattern followed until I'd crossed off all of his series as possible series to continue reading and was left with removing him from my favorite authors list.

Oh - back to 'no idea'. Money. Like, say, Dickens wrote some classic beloved novels - but most of them were originally serialized in magazines - because that's the way authors (to a certain extent) were being paid at the time. And many of the 'Golden Age' authors, like Asimov and the like, operated in an age when Science Fiction (or speculative fiction), mystery, and horror was more popular in short story magazine form (or, more exactly, that was where the money was for authors). And then, somewhere along the way, more success was found in book length works and so more authors spent more time writing and producing longer works - like how Asimov turned Foundation, which had originally been a short story, into a short novel, then into a series (whether or not Asimov specifically expanded Foundation because of this issue is not actually known by me).

At least that is my understanding about the dynamics in operation.

Like how there was a revival of the shorter form relatively recently because of ebooks - both because shorter works can be released as their own separately published work easier in digital format; and more specifically because of, again, money - because of how authors were getting paid specifically by Amazon (separate a book into smaller chunks, sell them separately, get paid by Amazon more than if just sold everything as one book). But then Amazon changed payment for works in the Kindle Unlimited program and so the market shifted again.

I think Jen is 100% correct on why series are getting longer (yes I do think they are getting longer). Follow the money. Authors also spend a significant effort lately creating their worlds, it is much quicker and easier to create a new story in your already created world than to invent an entirely new one.

Do I like this? It depends. Right now I would love for Brent Weeks' Black Prism series to go on forever even though Angela's, comment I find I get series fatigue around book 4-6 is also spot on for me.

Red Rising's three books was perfect. I wanted more but not really.

I have read through book 13 of the Dresden Files and have enjoyed them all. The wheel of time should have stopped after 6. Sanderson's plan for the Way of Kings is frightening and probably should be curtailed.

So my short answer is that the series I enjoy should be 3-6 books with very limited exceptions.

As my husband likes to say, back for more cash.

There's actually a book with that title that I've read - I'm Back for More Cash: A Tony Kornheiser Collection

My favorite series, the Vorkosigan Saga, is up to something like 20 novels and novellas.

Very early on in the series, the author decided to write an unrelated fantasy novel. She tried to sell it to Baen (the Vorkosigan publisher) and failed, then tried to sell it to basically every other publisher, and failed. In the end, she managed to sell it to Baen only by agreeing to write more Vorkosigan books. The fantasy novel in question turned out to be a flop (and her only flop).

She described this process as "educational".

So I can understand why an author would continue a series forever and ever, especially when there's no guarantee she'll make a single penny by doing anything else.

That said, I don't mind in the slightest that there are 20 Vorkosigan books. Within those 20 books, she never dragged out a storyline longer than she should have, the quality has remained high, and she spanned a remarkable number of subgenres including space opera, military, mystery and romance. I don't think I've heard anybody argue that the Vorkosigan series has grown stale in any way. Instead, the stories have grown richer as the characters continue to be developed.

So I have no problem with a very long series that's done right, even if money is a major motivating factor.

if it's fillet mignon there's no such thing as too much or too many. if it's poop.... a tiny bit goes a long way.

Cheryl wrote: "*I read a lot of first books of planned trilogies and series. I like to see the world built, the characters introduced... but when the adventure starts I lose interest. The series that began with Dragon Slippers had neat world & character bits in all the books but the adventures def. got old and I wish I'd stopped after the first. "

Based on this and other comments you've made, I think you might actually enjoy reading the background worldbuilding info for RPGs. I've found that I quite enjoy those, and there are so many diverse settings and worlds to explore. (Curiously, I don't like playing PnP RPGs. But I really like the milieu books.)

I've read quite a few superhero ones, such as Mutants & Masterminds: Freedom City - 2nd Edition and it has long been rumored that Joss Whedon based Firefly on the Traveller RPG he played while in high school in Britain, and with titles such as "Cowboys vs Xenomorphs" as well as the multi-star system, it's easy to see the connection.

You might want to give those a try.

MrsJoseph wrote: "500 pages mean nothing if the author has a style that keeps me flipping those pages. Belgarath the Sorcerer is 700+ pages and at times it feels too short."

Yep. I just read the 700-page Bookburners and consumed it as if it were a book and I the fire, yet I struggled to get through the much shorter Gateway.

While I try not to associate length with quality, in general I find that shorter works are better. The two recent examples notwithstanding. Exceptions that prove the rule, perhaps.

Last year I finally read both The Island of Dr. Moreau and I Am Legend which I think are under 200 pages each, yet I could not for the life of me think of what anyone could add to them. At twice the length they'd likely be terrible books.

When I read Pushing Ice I thought it could easily have been split up into a trilogy. It would have been half the story since so much of what made that great was the level of suspense that he maintained throughout.

Another thing I'm not a fan of right now is how physically large some books are being made. Joe Abercrombie and James S.A. Corey are two examples. They dominate the shelves totally out of proportion to their actual length.

This would have been highly appealing to me when I was 20, however.

Sarah Anne wrote: "When I read Pushing Ice I thought it could easily have been split up into a trilogy. It would have been half the story since so much of what made that great was the level of suspense t..."

That's how I felt about Seveneves. That's one of the few (maybe only) book I've ever thought, "This should be longer." And that sucker's 900 pages! Too many ideas are too underdeveloped, though.

I'm okay with a series being as long as the saga can go on. I am not a fan of books that are padded out so they make a nice thick hardcover to justify the $24.95 price next to a thinner, leaner, and meaner story. Tell me the story as efficiently as you can, because my TBR pile is endless already!

I love series, and I love standalones. For me, it's about the story. I don't care how long a book is, if it's good.

Mind you, as far as I'm concerned, a really good book could just go on for ever!

I'm in agreement that if the quality is good and I'm invested in the characters, I could keep reading forever.

From a publishing standpoint, I think it's all about money. I've been feeling burned out on series in recent years because I've run across many where it seems the quality was sacrificed for sake of a potentially more lucrative format.

Even though I read quickly, I still find that I'm more reluctant to start longer books. It's not even that they take me much longer to finish, but there's just more lag time in between books because of some psychological aspect that prevents me from starting the new book.

Sarah Anne wrote: "Another thing I'm not a fan of right now is how physically large some books are being made.
YES. For me, it isn't practical to take big books out of the house because I walk everywhere. I need a smaller book that won't make my bag too heavy.

Stephanie wrote: "Sarah Anne wrote: "Another thing I'm not a fan of right now is how physically large some books are being made.
YES. For me, it isn't practical to take big books out of the house because I walk everywhere. I need a smaller book that won't make my bag too heavy. "

This is why Jesus invented ebooks. :)

Trike wrote: "This is why Jesus invented ebooks. :)

Haha, good point. I need to make getting a case for my tablet a higher priority. (I cannot be trusted to take it out of the house without one.)

Trike wrote: "This is why Jesus invented ebooks. :) "

Amen and hallelujah ;)

Depends on what kind of series it is.

"Book chopped into volumes for convenience in publishing" should really be less than seven volumes because a story that large is too big to be taken in.

"Bunch of books with complete stories in the same world" can go on much longer, but one hopes they end before the inspiration does.

I don't mind how many pages or books as long as they are engaging to read, and in case of series, not full with filler books.

However I do have preference on a series set in the same world that is divided into several mini series or trilogies or whatever. examples: Robin Hobb, Raymond E. Feist, and Discworld (with its individual but connected arcs). therefore my commitment to finish a (mini/sub) series is shorter and when binging I still have a reading pitstop and read another book in between.

An example of a long series full with fillers: Naomi Novik's Temeraire series.

I also like a loosely connected trilogy such as Bujold's World of Five Gods. After the first book, The Curse of Chalion, I do not have to immediate read Paladin of Souls

Trike wrote: "MrsJoseph wrote: "500 pages mean nothing if the author has a style that keeps me flipping those pages. Belgarath the Sorcerer is 700+ pages and at times it feels too short."

Yep. I just read the 7..."

Stop adding to my TBR!!!

LOL! But seriously, Bookburners looks good but I was initially taken aback by its title.

Stephanie wrote: "Trike wrote: "This is why Jesus invented ebooks. :)

Haha, good point. I need to make getting a case for my tablet a higher priority. (I cannot be trusted to take it out of the house without one.)"

Me, either! In fact, I must have covers for any portable electronic device - no matter where I use it. So, I want to encourage you to grab a cover and quick!

Hubby is always poo-pooing my rush to buy cases and covers. Finally, I had to tell him, "Know thyself. I will destroy this thing within 10-12 hours without a case. Now leave me alone or buy the new one I'll need tomorrow."

Golden Silence. :-D

The only thing that really matters to me is that I get the feeling the story is moving forward toward a satisfactory conclusion, and is NOT just a meandering, unending unraveling of events (they go here, do this, then go there, do that...blah, blah, blah).

There can be fluff and filler as long as the main story, world creation, and the writing is good enough to propel me through the extraneous stuff.

Example #1: Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn "Trilogy" (which I read in paperback, published as SIX big books). Tons of extraneous babbling about extraneous stuff, side tracks, and exposition. But the world building and main plot was good enough to keep me plowing through it. And, since when I read the books the entire story had been finished, I at least knew that it was eventually going to be wrapped up.

Example #2: GRRM's A Song of Fire and Ice (aka GoT) ... has he even committed to a set number of books? I read the first three and gave up because, though I liked his world creation and mostly liked his writing style, it was clear that 80% of the story was superfluous either because it led to the ultimate death of main characters (and thereby negated all they had done as being significant), or was just characters wandering around until the author was ready to throw them into the actual story. It was clear GRRM had no intention of bringing this story to any kind of a conclusion in the foreseeable future. Rubbish.

Example #3: Tad Williams's ... well, that probably said enough right there. ];P

... My favorite format so far is the one used by Banks and Reynolds for their Culture and Revelation Space universes: Stand alone books set in the same universe. This lets you explore the world creation from various POVs and not have to be worn down by following the same old characters. It promotes story telling rather than soap opera serialism.

Basically, I need to feel that there is a point to the storytelling other than "You loved it before so I'm giving you more of the same."

MrsJoseph wrote: "But seriously, Bookburners looks good but I was initially taken aback by its title."

If it helps, "Bookburners" is what others call them, and they hate the name. (Sort of like calling the police "pigs".) Especially because they don't actually burn the books. They just store them in a library/vault similar to the warehouse in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

I've broken two Kindles since 2011 - both bent to breaking point in my pocket.

I never "broke" a Kindle... but I did drop my old Paperwhite in the bath, causing it to short out for several months until it dried out. A cover wouldn't have fixed that.

I must have dropped my Paperwhite on the ground two dozen times, but that never did anything but scuff the back and edges. I found it remarkably durable. They tried to sell me a fancy cover when I bought my Voyage, but I don't want to add bulk when I'm already overpaying for a thinner, lighter device. The Paperwhites are so much cheaper that I'd sooner buy a Paperwhite with no cover than an expensive model with a cover, and just live with the risk of breaking it.

David wrote: "I never "broke" a Kindle... but I did drop my old Paperwhite in the bath, causing it to short out for several months until it dried out. A cover wouldn't have fixed that.

I must have dropped my Pa..."

Sounds like you could make use of a retractable dog leash!

http://boingboing.net/2013/05/03/8-ye...

I always buy the cheapest Kindle available, for that reason David.

Allison wrote: "Sounds like you could make use of a retractable dog leash!

http://boingboing.net/2013/05/03/8-ye... "

That is absolutely brilliant.

I have a cover for my Paperwhite but not for my 7" Fire. At $35 on Prime Day it's almost a disposable. FYI - My previous Fire broke when the charging connector stopped working - also something that a cover would not prevent from happening.

David wrote: "I never "broke" a Kindle... but I did drop my old Paperwhite in the bath, causing it to short out for several months until it dried out. A cover wouldn't have fixed that.

I must have dropped my Paperwhite on the ground two dozen times..."

I think the real issue here is the undiagnosed muscular or neurological problem you have. Please do not handle babies or puppies.

I'm laughing at this conversation but we have gotten a bit off topic. Could we please get back to how we feel about the trend towards fat books and long series?

Trike wrote: "David wrote: "I never "broke" a Kindle... but I did drop my old Paperwhite in the bath, causing it to short out for several months until it dried out. A cover wouldn't have fixed that.

I must have..."

I'm terrified of holding babies. When somebody tries to hand me a baby, I'm privately thinking, "are you out of your mind?" :)

(I'm not actually that clumsy, though; my Kindles just get around a lot).

I keep my old Kindle at home and read on my phone when out and about. It's so sleek, I just couldn't bear the thought of bulking it up with a cover. So I bought the insurance. With the built-in battery it's going to die in two years anyway, so I'll enjoy it the way it's made to be enjoyed. Nekkid!

Sarah Anne wrote: "I'm laughing at this conversation but we have gotten a bit off topic. Could we please get back to how we feel about the trend towards fat books and long series?"

I want a book with a small spine and a loooooooooong series.

(do do do do do! do do do do DO do!) *trumpets*