Polls for Our Souls discussion

My question is too long to make a poll, so I hope you'll help me here. As an indie author, I can decide how and when to publish, but I've come to a fork in the road and am not sure which one to take. In February, I'm releasing an omnibus version of my trilogy. Books 1 and 2 are already published, and I was going to publish book 3 concurrently with the omnibus. However...

When I finished writing book 1, it struck me that my trilogy isn't a trilogy at all, but a giant gulp of a standalone, 790 pages and all. It's how I want to present it, and it's how it's meant to be read.

So my question is:
-should I unpublish books 1 and 2 now (which would make book 3 "sad," since it's ready to go but is being forced to wait for the omnibus)?
or
-should I publish book 3 now and then unpublish all three of them on February 5th, when I publish the omnibus?
or
-should I realize my book 3 doesn't have real feelings, and just unpublish books 1 and 2 now and wait for the standalone release in February?

The trilogy will still appear on my GR author page along with the omnibus, of course. But I don't like the idea of both options being available to purchase - especially when the omnibus is priced less than the trilogy books. (It'd be ridiculous to ask readers to pay for 3 separate books when in my mind it's a standalone. Save $!)

Opinions please and thank you!!

You could publish all three of them and the publish the omnibus as most authors do.

Angela wrote: "You could publish all three of them and the publish the omnibus as most authors do."

Thanks Angela. True for box sets, but my case is different, since I'm not packaging them that way. They're in a single book, in 3 parts, not 3 separate books that readers can buy together. So keeping them both up doesn't sit right in my gut.

Well, Stephen King’s The Green Mile exists in separate parts as well as a single stand alone, so I would publish part 3 and the complete stand alone book.

Well I think it depends on the story.

If book 3 works well as it's own book then yes make it a trilogy. More people would be willing to buy a trilogy over a 700+ standalone anyway. The Lord of the Rings was supposed to be a standalone yet it also works as a trilogy

But if you feel book 3 doesn't work as it's own then maybe make it a standalone, you're an artist and you need to tell the story the best way possible

Or perhaps you could just unpublish book 2, combine books 2 and 3 and make it a duology

Quoleena wrote: "Angela wrote: "You could publish all three of them and the publish the omnibus as most authors do."

Thanks Angela. True for box sets, but my case is different, since I'm not packaging them that wa..."

Ahh, okay. I understand. Then I would unpublish books 1 and 2 now and wait for the omnibus in February. I'm sorry I'm not much help.

I have written and self-published books myself so I understand.

Frank wrote: "Well I think it depends on the story.

If book 3 works well as it's own book then yes make it a trilogy. More people would be willing to buy a trilogy over a 700+ standalone anyway. The Lord of the..."

When I think of series like The Hunger Games, the first book has a definitive conclusion, yet with an opening or a something left unresolved for the next book.

In my case, book 1 was never meant to be that way, which is why I realized it's not a true trilogy.

This is hard! But you've definitely given me a perspective to consider, so thank you :)

Susy wrote: "Well, Stephen King’s The Green Mile exists in separate parts as well as a single stand alone, so I would publish part 3 and the complete stand alone book."

That's right! Well, what about publishing book 3 now, and still waiting till February for the omnibus? If not for the fact that I don't see book 1 as a standalone in and of itself, I wouldn't be overthinking this, and the answer would be easy. *sigh*

Quoleena wrote: "That's right! Well, what about publishing book 3 now, and still waiting till February for the omnibus? ..."

Sounds good!

Quoleena, Publish 3 now and don't remove the 3 when you do the omnibus. There are plenty of omnibuses where everything is published in one giant book yet the trilogy is still offered as a trilogy as a precedence.

And the fact that you feel that it's actually one giant book rather than 3 books doesn't matter to your fans who have already gotten books 1 and 2 and are eagerly awaiting book 3. Making them wait even longer is just cruel and unusual and should have any author who does it up in court for breaking the Geneva Convention. Can you tell that I hate, hate, hate waiting for that next book? Especially when the previous book had a cliff hanger (cough, Karen Marie Moning Cough)

The fact that you are feeling guilty about having realized that they should be one giant book is good--it means that you won't do that again, right? But in the mean time--get that last book out there for those salivating fans.

Hi Ann! Honestly, thank you for thinking I have fans who are eagerly awaiting book 3😁. I wish! Since my series is basically unknown, the guilt is the appearance of splitting it up just as a way to make more $. If I thought I had readers on the hook waiting for the 3rd book, I would go ahead and publish it without question.

Even still, it seems I've been overthinking this, and everyone's comments make sense. I was worried readers would have a problem with me doing it that way. Doesn't look like that's the case at all, and some may actually prefer the 3 smaller doses.

Thanks everyone for helping me decide what to do! 😁

It really depends on the story, in my mind. Connie Willis published a supposed duology with her books Blackout and All Clear, but the way they were released, book #1 just STOPPED in mid-story, and book #2 picked up literally right where it left off. I think her publisher said "Connie, we can't publish one single book of this length, so we have to split it," but no one did any kind of work to make it seem like a two-parter. That made me madder than having to wait for part #2! So I would say, if you need to publish it in three manageable lengths, do the work to make it seem more like a three-parter and less like someone took a hatchet to a big book and threw out the parts one at a time, and your readers will be happy.

Also, lots of people would prefer the more manageable books and wouldn't buy an omnibus version, while others love having it in one big book, so I think it won't matter. Someone will be happy either way.

Some people like buying multiple copies of the same book, so they might like the three separate volumes and the omnibus version. Personally, I would just buy the omnibus, but the decision is totally your own to make! Good luck!

Melliott wrote: "It really depends on the story, in my mind. Connie Willis published a supposed duology with her books Blackout and All Clear, but the way they were released, book #1 just STOPPED in mid-story, and ..."

Wowsers! It's nothing like that. Book 1 wraps up its purpose (coming of age, fantastical discoveries in the MC's home town) and segues to book 2 (a completely different discovery in another location). But no major questions are answered in book 1, because the MC doesn't even know what those questions could be yet.

I think my being hesitant was because I've heard of complaints about certain authors doing serial releases of what should've just been a single book. Even though mine isn't like that, I still wanted to stay far away from it. I couldn't come up with enough books similar to my trilogy/omnibus flow beyond LOTR really, but that's in its own league!

Abbie wrote: "Some people like buying multiple copies of the same book, so they might like the three separate volumes and the omnibus version. Personally, I would just buy the omnibus, but the decision is totall..."

Thanks for giving your perspective, Abbie! You guys have all convinced me to relax and keep both versions.

On the other hand (the breaking books up) I have one author that I slogged through 9 books to reach the end of the story. The over-arcing story line was broken into 3 trilogies. The problem is--each single book was about 450-500 pages long--and each trilogy should have been a single book. Yep, I read 4500 pages to reach the end of the story. However, it was a tremendously interesting series and featured creatures from Chinese mythology. And my Chinese mythology was almost nonexistent until I read that series. I had to go out and read about the gods and demons and creatures that were mentioned in the series because they were so fascinating and different from European mythology.

Ann aka Iftcan wrote: "On the other hand (the breaking books up) I have one author that I slogged through 9 books to reach the end of the story. The over-arcing story line was broken into 3 trilogies. The problem is--eac..."

4500 pages! That might be longer than King's The Dark Tower series. What's it called? My mother in law might love it. I'd want to check it out too.

If your trilogy is a single stand-alone story, you should make it a single publication regardless its length. After taking a long and hard look at your writing in a couple other of your books, I suggest you hire a professional editor for future publications, including this one. Ask the editor to focus on substantive edits especially for the book in question here in this thread. That will cut at least a couple hundred of pages.

Reynar wrote: "If you're trilogy is a single stand-alone story, you should make it a stand-alone story regardless its length. After taking a long and hard look at your writing in a couple other of your books, I s..."

Actually, the story has already experienced a 250-page chopping session. I don't tend to get attached to my sentences and have no problems deleting paragraphs and scenes altogether. "Too many words!" "Too long!" "Don't need that scene at all!" are some of the things I say during the editing rounds.

Quoleena wrote: "Reynar wrote: "If you're trilogy is a single stand-alone story, you should make it a stand-alone story regardless its length. After taking a long and hard look at your writing in a couple other of ..."
Which is great and something every writer needs to do, but no writer can fully and properly edit their own work, not even if that writer is a professional editor (which very few are as writing and editing are very different crafts that require many years for someone to reach a professional level in either).

Indie authors and small pubs should not treat their books to less treatment than those which get traditionally published. If they do, they're doing a disservice to themselves, the book they worked so hard to create, and (most importantly) the readers.

Reynar wrote: "Indie authors and small pubs should not treat their books to less treatment than those which get traditionally published. If they do, they're doing a disservice to themselves, the book they worked so hard to create, and (most importantly) the readers."

You're preaching to the choir ;)

I kind of feel like you should publish book 3 now and then publish the omnibus too later but keep 1, 2, and 3 up as well..

Kristen wrote: "I kind of feel like you should publish book 3 now and then publish the omnibus too later but keep 1, 2, and 3 up as well.."

Thanks Kristen! I've decided to do just that.