Saturday 13 June 2015

Serial Killers: A series versus a one-off book?


As you probably all know, Diamonds & Dust, which was rejected out of hand by my ex-agent as ''not remotely publishable'' and subsequently went on not only to be published, but to be up for the CWA Historical Dagger, the Walter Scott Prize, the Folio Society Prize, and score 60+ reviews on Amazon, is now developing offspring.

It wasn't meant to. Seriously. Grateful as I was to Crooked Cat Books, I didn't envisage trotting out the two Victorian detectives Stride and Cully again. But like lily pond paintings by Monet and Haydn String Quartets, once started, it seemed logical to keep going.

Thus the sequel, Honour & Obey, which was published last November, and Death & Dominion which will appear this November. I have also started writing Murder & Mayhem which will be the fourth outing for Stride & Cully.

There are those writers who regard a series as a bit of a ''cop-out'': after all, you've got your characters already written for you. To them I would say: writing a series is MUCH harder than producing a one-off text. And I know what I'm talking about: this is my second series of books. (The Spy Girl series for Usborne was the first)

The main problem is that, unless you started with the idea of writing a series, and few authors do, they just tend to evolve, you are stuck with whatever you wrote in the first one. You cannot radically alter the appearance nor personality of the main character/s without readers going ''What the ...?'' After all, it was how they were in book 1 that will keep them reading books 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. You can and must develop the main characters, but in essence, they have to bear some resemblance to how they were in the beginning.

Then there is the problem of keeping the plot momentum going. I find book 2 is usually the easiest, as it seems to evolve naturally out of the first one. Book 3, however, is far more problematic. New areas have to be introduced to keep the reader interested. Some fundamental shifting of perspective must take place, or else book 3 becomes merely a watered down version of the previous two. Actually, book 3 is usually the pivotal one upon which the rest of the series rests. If you cannot pull it off successfully, it is best to admit defeat and pretend you only meant to write two in the first place.

By book 4, the pitfall is over-confidence. You have run the gauntlet of three books. You feel the surge of expertise as fingers hit keyboard. This, after the previous three, will be a doddle to write. You have your characters, you know how the story arc works. Sometimes this attitude pays off: I still think Dead Man Talking, the fourth Spy Girl book, is the best plotted. However, beware: book 4 can so easily wander off into alien territory, or become a repetition of book 3 with added lacklustre.

I have never got further than book 5 (and Usborne turned it down) so I cannot speak from experience, but I can say from avidly reading crime series, that some writers manage to sustain plot, characters and reader interest beyond book 5, but many more don't. The trouble with series is that publishers LOVE them. They are easy to market, and each book sells on the back of the previous ones. Thus the temptation to go on churning them out year after year, when by rights the whole thing should have been allowed to quietly slink off and hide in a dark corner after the fifth one.

I have been told, though, that the ''real money'' comes from a 5 book series, which means most other writers will have been told this too. I can't see myself getting as far as a fifth book right now. Mind, I never thought I'd get as far as a third. In the meantime, I plot on with book 4, crossing my fingers, hoping that it will avoid the ubiquitous plotholes and that I can pull it off successfully yet again.

So what's your experience? Do you prefer a series? Or a one off novel. If you are a writer, have you ever tackled a series, or does the prospect fill you with horror? Do share your thoughts....

25 comments:

  1. What a question! And it has to be ... It depends! As a reader, I think some series are wonderful and I devour every one (I can't wait for the next Jane Smiley to come out in paperback) while others seem to fizzle out.

    And as a writer - I didn't set out to do a series of travel books. And deliberately broke the chain this year when I didn't write about Malaysia. So who knows when I'll write next ... I've 'thiings' lurking (will tell more when I'm clearer) but I only ever write what feels right at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Funny ho you 'never set out to' write a series..you confirm my suspicions...they do creep up on one!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I too had no intention of writing a series, but when I got to the end of No Stranger to Death there seemed to be a lot more about to happen to my characters so I decided to continue. The challenge to make it more than a rerun of Book 1 is huge, although that worry is balanced by the comforting thought that I'd done it once so I could do it again. However, the Scottish Borders, where the books are set, is such a safe place that I couldn't possibly have the same (non-police) main character stumble upon yet another murder. What I've decided to do is take one of my policemen and give him another case elsewhere in the region. That way I'll get the best of both worlds: I can call it a series but Book 3 will deal with different characters, settings and issues. Or is that cheating?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No such thing as cheating. No such thing as rules! Go girl!

      Delete
    2. I may write in a different genre, but had the same thing happen. The story wound up stalling out on me as I was working through it. When I stopped and actually looked at why it was stalling it was because I was trying to cover too much ground for a single book. There were two distinct story arcs included.

      I broke out the second, figuring that would be the end of it, and the dagnab story took into its dear little storybook hands to explode on me. Now, I'm wrapping up book 3 out of a 5 book series, and there are spin offs trying to bubble up to take the limelight. (I'm managing to keep the lid on those for the time being... want to finish one before I get bogged into the next.)

      Delete
    3. Didn't cover this, but it is a good point. Sometimes better to do a series of shorter books rather than try to cram it all in... Donna Tartt comes to mind...

      Delete
  4. Such a good post and I agree with what you say about book 3 - currently starting work on it (the Psychic Surveys series) and whereas book 2 developed organically out of book 1, I suspect in book 3 there's going to have to be something besides plot to keep readers interested, a rift between the team perhaps that seems as thought it can't be mended - still mulling it over but there has to be something 'else' to take it onto book 4. Having said that, after this I'm going to write a standalone - the readers might not want a break but the writers often do! Thanks, Carol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think standalone ones work AFTER a series is established ..as you say, readers like what you write, so will read anything else. I'm not sure how you keep on writing standalone novels and attract the same readership...

      Delete
  5. What a great post, Carol. I recently asked my young adult Facebook followers this exact question and they all opted for a series. As a reader, I agree. Getting involved in the evolving life of a character is wonderful. I read YA so devoured Cassandra Clare's Mortal Instruments series (8 in total!) and I'm waiting for book four of Sarah Maas's latest series.

    When I wrote my first YA book it developed a life of its own and I now have book two at editing stage, and book three at plotting. I've thoroughly enjoyed developing my characters over several books.

    I'm also extremely excited about your series, so please keep um coming x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. will do. I've been asked so often to write another book about my sulky teen heroine of Jigsaw Pieces...which backs up your experience.

      Delete
  6. Couldn't agree more. Shaman's Drum was meant to be a stand-alone but books 3 (and 4) are now in the pipeline. Readers demand, we supply.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I see the series as providing the commitment I require from a lover. The long term security of familiarity but with enough excitement to keep me on my toes. Whereas a one-off is a bit like a one night stand...great at the time but over far too quickly and not always leaving you with a sense of fulfilment.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a reader, I can get drawn into a good series by the main protagonist(s). However, I tend to have a few series on the go, in that I keep liking different styles. But I suppose that means that I can jump ship, when I get bored.

    Maybe that applies to my writing too. Debut novel - a mystery - has two sequels in the pipeline. I am plotting a series of three mysteries set in North Wales. And there is more, so I can't see there being a 4th or 5th. Chop & change seems to be my life... about to move house too.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Very interesting post Carol and I do love a series but it takes quite a bit of commitment from a reader especially when there are so many other books out there to distract you. Having said that I am on W of Sue Graftons Alphabet series and haven't flagged yet!!

    Mine was always going to be a series but of only 3 - no plans beyond that though I've made mistakes here in that in my opinion you do need to start at the beginning and read them through rather than jump in half way - years ago I guess it would have been just one big blockbuster rather than a series.

    ReplyDelete
  10. We-e-el, now... The first book in my current series was bought by the publisher before it was finished, and I was asked then if it could be the first of a series. I said yes, of course, because I read crime/mystery series and loved them, but to be honest I didn't expect to get further than two books, if that. Now, 15 books in, I'm stuck with it. I'm contracted to do 2 books a year and I no longer have the energy to do something else as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TWO books a year? Amazeballs! I had to produce one every 18 months for Usborne. Couldn't possibly do 2 a year. When do you get out into the real world?

      Delete
  11. As a reader I think 5 books in a series is a bit much - unless I really love it. As a writer, I don't know why no-one sees the downside of the idea of a series. It's fine if you've got a supportive indie publisher, or are trad pubbed, or are a self-pub who's really nailed it, but if you're just an average seller it's so restricting. Unless they're real standalones, like yours, the sales for book number two will be limited to those who've bought and enjoyed the first one enough to want to carry on reading about those characters, whereas if you write a lone novel you could pick up new readers from anywhere. I think I need to write a post about this, too!! (I write 2 book a year, too, btw, and have no other life :^D)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I take my hat off to to you and Lesley! and I do see that they can be restricting..BUT they must sell well as the bookshops are full of them... maybe a different story if you self-pub..though with the amount of work you (and I) do, I think we'd hack it.

      Delete
  12. Great post, Carol. When I wrote The House at Zaronza, I never envisaged taking it further. Now, I am thinking of another 2, possibly 3, although that won't take me to the magic 5. I think writing a series is a double-edged sword. You get the impression that some authors rest on their laurels and that the later books in the series are distinctly inferior. I won't name any names. But I'm sure it's difficult to keep up the momentum. Good luck, anyway. I'm looking forward to your nos. 3 & 4.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Janet Evanovitch and Donna leon. would be my names.

      Delete
  13. I think if the characters are well-established, it is hard to let them go.

    My first novel was most definitely a stand-alone (though it started out just as a personal project). I've had an idea for a possible sequel to my second one, but that's still very much at the concept stage. The editor of my third one (just released) told me that she'd like to see the same characters come back in another book, so who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I really enjoyed your 2 Stride & Cully books so am glad to hear #3 is on its way. Whichever direction you choose - just keep writing! :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great Blog and I totally agree with how you are interpreting books 1-5. I'm at that point right now, writing Book #3 in a thriller series. What I've done to try to change it and not regurgitate book 1 & 2 is use characters from the previous books that did not have a lot of "air time" and give them some. I also move the setting somewhere different. Book 1 was in Tibet, Book 2 was in Egypt and now Book 3 is in Alaska. BUT, it's so hard. I'm so nervous like you said that this is "the pivotal book" and hope I do it justice, but I find myself stalled on chapter 5. I think I just need to try to spit it out and clean and fix later. Great blog. And for the record - the only authors that think series are cop-outs are the ones that CAN'T DO a series, so they mock. A series requires a ton more work than a stand-alone. It has to stand the test of time. Keep going, you sound like you can do it if you just keep trying!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for dropping by Elyse.... I have just decided to change my detectives for Book 4...but still keeping the same time and style.... thus widening the possibility of running it as a longer series...

      Delete

So here's your chance! Talk to me. Comments will be visible after moderation.