My book, TRANSPARENT, doesn't have a sequel currently.
I have noticed a few instances where my book has been referred to as a series because I happened to sell two books. But that's not the case. The second book HarperTeen bought from me is an "option." It could be a sequel to TRANSPARENT, but it might not be one, too. It might be something totally different. And guess what?
I'm okay with that.
I wrote the book to be a complete story. Of course there could be more story after, just as there could be more story before. That's the thing about stories—they never really end. You pick a good starting spot and a good ending spot, but if your characters are solid there will always be more to tell.
So where do you stop on the sequel train? Or do you even get on in the first place? I don't really know. You see, I'm not completely against writing a sequel either. It could go either way in my mind. It's not as if this is my only idea for a novel. I, uh, tend to have a wealth of ideas, so maybe I am the ideal writer to go the "Killer Standalone" route. But at the same time, there is definitely more to explore in TRANSPARENT's world, more for Fiona to learn and discover. I guess I'm lucky my publisher will just tell me if I'm writing one or not, heh.
But overall, I think sometimes we get attached to the idea of writing a series (At least I know I was violently attached to it at one point). We want to stay with the characters we love and know just as much as we hope readers will. Though sometimes it's better to leave a reader wanting just a little more than you gave, instead of giving more than they ever wanted.
I don't know, I'm kind of digging the standalones these days. I think YA could use a few more. I wouldn't mind being in that category.
i agree! there's wayyyy to many series these days, and honestly, half of them don't even need to be series. YA really does need some excellent standalones, IMO.
ReplyDeleteI've always loved stand-alones (or series where each book is about a different character, like the Bayern books) and I agree that YA/MG could use a few more right now.
ReplyDeleteSince I've started writing seriously I haven't felt compelled towards a series at all. I guess for me once a character's story is told I'm ready to move on someone else.
Its so refreshing to read a stand alone book.
ReplyDeleteEee gads, hope this doesn't get me in trouble. BUT I think sometimes when a published author has several books out, the books get longer and longer. Publishers do not cut unecessary scenes because hey its (example) JK Rowling, she could write in pig latin and people will still buy it. When really, the story would be just as good or better without dragging it out for more.
One strong stand alone is better than a mediocre trilogy.
Just my opinion. :)
Jen
What you need to think of is the law of diminishing returns. What the fans want is to see the same film all over again as if they’d never seen the first one which is why so many sequels are exactly that, a rerun of the first picture. Now Scooby Doo might have been able to keep that up for forty years but the fact is most sequels are never a patch on the first outing unless they take the story in a radically different direction, a perfect example being Ridley Scott’s Alien followed by James Cameron’s Aliens and then look what happened to the franchise.
ReplyDeleteI’ve only written one sequel and the irony is in the first book I kill off my hero whereas in the sequel I leave things open-ended with no intention of writing a third part. How twisted is that?
If you don’t write a sequel then your fans have that option. I’m not sure how many writers of fan fiction went onto have successful careers as writers in their own rights but a few must have surely.
Some stories do come to a natural conclusion. Who in their right mind would think of writing Of Mice and Men II?
When writing, I work better if I'm thinking in terms of a series. I enjoy the storytelling options available when crafting a planned series.
ReplyDeleteAs a reader, I find it much easier to get invested in the story and characters if I know that the book I'm reading isn't the only story there is about them.
Standalones are very rare these day and I wish there were more. Yes, a story can keep continuing, but that doesn't mean it has too. Sometimes the sequel or book #4 out of 6 starts to ruin the series for me to the point I don't like book 1 as much as I did at first because I feel like the story is being stretched out more than it needs to be. I use to start series with the absolute intent of finishing them no matter what, but now I just read every book as if it were a standalone and make the decision when I'm done if I want to continue.
ReplyDeleteSometimes the best feeling is that possibility of what could happen if the story continues and not what actually does when it's written.
This is always an issue for me when I'm in the bookstore searching for a new read. I always WANT a standalone, because that means I don't have to wait YEARS to know what happens.
ReplyDeleteBUT...
when I'm done with standalones I always wish that they were part of a series, because I wish there was more.
Ultimately, (i just decided) I think I end up enjoying series more, because I spend YEARS with that series rather than days. Thus I feel more connected and involved int he story.
FACE ME ALONE, YOU COWARDLY, SHELF-HOGGING, YOUNG-ADULT COLLECTION OF FLUFF! The stand alone said to the series.
ReplyDeleteCOMPLETELY agree! How cool that you can get the chance to do a standalone book! I like standalones. Series are hard for me to read (exceptions of course...Harry Potter!) and I can't imagine writing one. I'm always ready to move on to new worlds, new people.
ReplyDeleteI love standalone books. In fact, if I know a book is part of a series I'm always more hesitant to read it. But that could be because I'm impatient and don't have the best memory to wait for the next book and keep the excitement and love that I had for the first book alive.
ReplyDeleteAs someone frequently asked for book recommendations by teens, may I vote for a standalone? It is so frustrating to look at my library shelves and see tons of books 2 and 3 but no books 1 or standalones. I end up putting a few things on hold for them, but what they really want is a killer book they can take home TODAY.
ReplyDeletePlease, write the killer book.
My co-author and I are already writing a series, and so I became determined to write one-shots, since I'm up to my eyeballs in sequels just from our series.
ReplyDeleteThen I started writing this book (dubbed "Rising" right now) and I got to about 100,000 words and realized I still had too much story to tell, and it wasn't going to FIT in one book. So now Rising1 is done and I'm prepping Rising2 so I can start writing that this week. BUT THAT WILL BE IT.
I like having a story with an ending and a beginning and knowing when I'm satisfied with where it leaves off.
I totally agree! It feels as though there are more sequels than are necessary in the YA world these days, like some stories get dragged out with unnecessary angst and filler just to hit that three book word count.
ReplyDeleteFunny thing is, it seems all the standalone books are the ones I wish had sequels. Standalones make for stronger characters and more compelling stories, I think, so while they give us great resolution, we can't help but want more.
Children ask me for sequels, so on the last three books I've labelled them Book One! Now I HAVE to do something about it. :0)
ReplyDeleteI'm like Laura. I keep /trying/ to write standalones, but I always end up with more story than will fit in one book. And I know it's not just me being excessively wordy with my writing, either - it's that way more happens between point A and point B than I'd originally anticipated when I write the first words.
ReplyDeleteYour post made me think of Robin McKinley, a YA author who is vehmently anti-sequel. She swears she's never written a sequel and she never intends to. One could argue she's done pretty well for herself despite (because of?) this.
I think a writer should let the story tell him/her whether there needs to be a sequel or not.
ReplyDeleteMy first book was a stand-alone and always will be.
I'm 50k into the WIP that I'm pantsing my way through and I know, intuitively, that there's more coming. So I imagine there will be a sequel for that.
I'm going to wait and see. :)
I do think there are too many sequels/series in YA/MG than there needs to be, there definately needs to more standalones to balance it out. It's starting to get really tricky picking a good book to read for bookclub without them turning into a series!
ReplyDeleteAnd Seabrooke, even Robin McKinley who has sworn off sequels/series, is writting a sequel to her latest book Pegasus! I'm just wondering how much pressure she was under to write it!
Melissa
I enjoy both sequels and standalones. I'm kind of like you, though-- I have so many new ideas, I might be in the standalone circle. Many of my new ideas work great as standalones, and it's nice to read and write books that are complete just as they are.
ReplyDeletekllamp - McKinley repeatedly emphasizes on her blog that Pegasus II is not a sequel; she gets pretty defensive when someone tries to imply that it is. She keeps saying it's just all one story that she eventually had to decide to hack in half because she needed her paycheque and the publishers didn't want to have to publish a tome. But, I suppose, I guess that's what a proper, functional series/sequel is, isn't it? Just all one story sliced into digestable pieces. (Have you read Pegasus I? I haven't, but I gather that the point she decided to chop it off at is a bit of a frustrating cliffhanger for readers...)
ReplyDeleteOh, so your publisher gets to decide? That's interesting. Do all options work that way? And what about a companion novel? In a way I could see that technically satisfying either request ("sequel" or "not a sequel"). :P
ReplyDeleteI say do what feels right to you. You can always write a sequel or a companion novel after something else comes out too.
ReplyDeleteI like both stand-alones and series books. Mostly, I just like it when authors I love to read their books keep writing, cause I want more from them!
P.S. I'm sure I've said this before, but I LOVE that picture of you. And love your shoes!!!
ReplyDeleteOh, YES to more standalones! Or at least series composed of standalone companion novels rather than one story stretched over several installments. I hate cliffhanger/unresolved endings -- they tend to make me get annoyed at the author rather than want to pick up the next book, haha.
ReplyDeleteSeabrooke - I have read Pegasus, read it as part of my book club last month, and quite enjoyed it. All of us in our book club did agree that the story felt like it could have been condensed, so there may have been an opportunity that it could have been a stand alone novel. Having said that though, I don't know what the whole arc of the story is, how much of it is left to tell. I will, however, be looking forward to reading the rest of the story in Pegasus II.
ReplyDeleteI haven't had the opportunity to read any of her other books yet, so I really can't compare Pegasus with what she has written previously. I think that is something that I will definately do in the near future though!
Melissa
AH, YES. I love a sequel every now and again, but there are so many series where I'll never read the sequels.And I'm totally okay with that. I am a HUGE fan of the standalone. HUGE.
ReplyDeletekllamp - I heard that about the rambling story in Pegasus, too, though that is a bit her style. The Hero and The Crown is her best-known work, and was good, but I highly recommend Sunshine (ignore the fact that it has vampires - these are proper vampires, not YA vampires), which is perhaps one of my top-5 favourite books right now. It's the one she gets asked most often if she's ever going to write a sequel for. (Her answer has always been no, of course.)
ReplyDeleteI would love to see more stand alones. And I was going to bring up Robin McKinley too, because she has a ton of great stand alones. So Natalie, I applaude the fact that your book is a stand alone.
ReplyDeleteI'm a fan of the companion book. Look at Graceling and Fire by Kristin Cashore. Fire isn't a sequel to Graceling. Instead it is a companion book set in the same world. So both essentially are stand alones.
I love series...es?
ReplyDeleteBut... I'll also watch the same movie seven times in a row.
Seabrooke - Thanks for the recommendations. I think I will definately have to check out Sunshine now!
ReplyDeleteMelissa
I agree. :) All the WiPs I have are standalone books. I'm not against sequels at all but I prefer to write a standalone.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all...love your blog. 2nd: I love that you want to be in the stand alone group. I think YA could use more stand alone. Series seem too author interchangeable (if that makes sense)
ReplyDelete