Of
Arcs and Standalones, Part 5: Surprise #5--Mission Impossible:
Standalone Series Stories
This is the eleventh of fifteen posts
dealing with surprising things I learned in the course of writing a science
fiction series.
We've covered series and story arcs and how to establish them
early in the writing process. Now let's talk about the fifth surprise I had
about writing this genre after more than 20 years as a published author: That
stories with Overarching Series that are so dependent on series arcs running
throughout each book in the series just might break an author's ability to
provide standalone series stories.
In
the literary world, "standalone" has two meanings:
1)
A standalone story can refer to a work of fiction that has no relationship with
any other piece of fiction and doesn’t fit into a series. In other words, a
standalone story stands alone without
ties to other books. A standalone story resolves all the plots and subplots
specific to that work within that work.
The story is encapsulated within a single volume.
2)
A standalone story can also mean that readers don't have to read the other
books in the series in order to understand it. That's the definition we're
focusing on here. Based on that definition, a standalone is a book that has all
the story threads tied up logically at the end and the reader isn’t left hanging
on any story or series arc points.
What makes standalone stories nearly impossible to have within an
Overarching Series is, as the name implies, the overarching series arc or arcs.
In previous chapters, we discussed how story arcs are short-term while series
arcs are long-term. The series arc is introduced (but not tied up) in the first
book in a series. That arc is continued in all the middle books, each one
adding something new and critical to that overarching conflict so the stakes
are undeniably raised with every subsequent installment. That series arc is
only resolved in the final book that completes the series. That's what keeps
readers following along from one book to the next. This is acceptable because
the story arc in the individual books
has been resolved, and the reader can leave the story with a sense of closure,
satisfaction, and certainly anticipation for the next book in the series
because you’ve given them something (in the form of series arc plots) to look
forward to for the future.
Mystery writer Luisa Buehler so
eloquently says that a story arc resides within each book, and each book
resides within a series arc. “Think of an umbrella covering characters who are
each holding their own umbrella. For me, it’s important that each book’s story can
stand alone because that’s how the story from the first book can still live in the last book.”
In the past 25 years, I've
written 16 series with only a small handful of stories with no affiliation to
any of my other books. During all that time, my goal as a writer who mainly
writes series verses single titles had always been to offer standalone stories
with each and every installment of a series. That
readers didn't need to read the others in the series to make sense of each
installment--and could even read them out of order!--was a point of pride for
me. Imagine my stunned face when I finished writing the first book of
the Arrow of Time Chronicles and realized that, while most of the story arcs
came to a natural resolution, the series arcs were still hanging out there
unresolved. With a series arc so sprawling and
complicated, installment standalones quickly became a mission impossible. The nature
of the major and minor series arcs I'd devised dictated that those long-term
plot threads became the backbone of every single story in that series. There
was no way those could be resolved in the first, second, or even the third book
in the series (hence the requirement for a fourth and final volume). At the end
of Book 1, the series arcs left behind fiery trails of suspense and dread for
what might happen in the future. That meant I was forced to end the first three
books in the series with something I had avoided almost entirely in the 20
years I'd been writing at that point: Dirty, rotten, unforgiveable cliffhanger
endings! Well, actually not quite that horrifying. At the very least, they
included series arc sequel hooks at the end of all the books in the series
other than the last. But let's talk about cliffhanger endings in general before
we establish that the Overarching Series will almost always include a milder
version of them in the installments.
In case you've been living in a
pocket dimension unconnected to the real world all your life, a cliffhanger is
basically a method in which the main character(s) are left in precarious
situations at the end of a story and the outcome of that situation will
continue to be in doubt until and unless there's another installment. In most
situations, the purpose of this method, naturally, is to leave the reader dying
to know what happens next. In fact, it's thought that the term originated with
Thomas Hardy’s serialized novel, A Pair
of Blue Eyes, in which Hardy left one of the main characters literally
hanging off the edge of a cliff. This led to the archetypal cliffhanger in
Victorian prose and all serial writers began to use it--in many cases, even if
they didn’t quite agree with the theory. One such writer in that time period
rightly disapproved since the use of this suspense violated “all proper
confidence between the author and his reader".
To this day, cliffhangers are
hotly debated subjects. Yes, a cliffhanger is like the epitome of a
page-turner...only it comes at the end of a book, thereby denying the reader
resolution and, as a consequence, mitigating satisfaction with loose ends tying
up. Instead, cliffhangers build stressful anticipation and the opposite of
relief--dread. Most readers and writers cast a disapproving eye on stories with
these endings because it violates the unspoken promise of a proper conclusion
for each story, leaving behind the bitter aftertaste of being cheated.
As an author of Standalone Series
throughout most of my career, all I could see were the disadvantages to
cliffhangers, largely because as a reader myself I wasn't fond of them. It's
frustrating and unfair to force a reader to wait--possibly indefinitely--for
all threads in the story to effectively reach resolution in the next dubious
installment. The publisher might close up shop, postpone the release of a book
in a series, or grow bored or disillusioned with continuing the series, the
author, and/or the genre. The author might become sick or keel over, or get
excited about some other series or story they're working on and never come back.
An example that comes instantly to my mind--that's how memorable the first two
offerings were--is Dean Koontz, who has to this day never finished his
Moonlight Bay Trilogy (Book 1 was published in 1998, Book 2 in 1999). And I'll
never forgive him until he does because those first two books were
mind-blowing…even as I grudgingly understand as an author how hard it is to get
back into a story you haven't visited for countless years. In his case, close
to 25.
Few readers want to wait a year
or more to find out the conclusion of a story, if it even is in the next book
in that series since most series are at least three books long and frequently
many more. Let's face it, most readers will probably have forgotten what
happened in the original story and, if the time lag is a long one, they may no
longer even have that book to refer back to. Also consider that a cliffhanger
might, and frequently does, present a situation in which the reader is so
desperately anticipating the sequel, the delivery may be a disappointment and
can’t possibly live up to what it was building toward.
Long
story short, cliffhangers suck. A lot of people believe they can never be
justified because they come instilled with disrespect and unfairness--and authors
lead the pack of in terms of feeling swindled. Speculative fiction writer
Margaret L. Carter says, “I feel upset, sometimes to the point of outrage, when
a novel in a series ends on a cliffhanger. With the long time span that usually
intervenes between the publications of successive books, that trick doesn’t seem
fair to the reader. Sometimes, of course, this happens because of the
publisher’s choice, and the author has no control. I think it’s important that
each book come to some sort of satisfactory conclusion, a logical resting place
for characters and readers, even if the overall arc continues with unresolved
problems and mysteries.”
Clearly, story arc satisfaction
is critical in each and every story, even if the series arc resolutions are
forthcoming (or never see the light of day, as we've seen happens). For the
most part, a milder form of a cliffhanger ending--series arc sequel hooks--are
part and parcel to most Overarching Series.
For most of my writing career,
the cons of employing anything even vaguely resembling cliffhangers provided
all the viable reasons I needed to avoid them completely. Ending three of the
four installments in my Arrow of Time Chronicles on series arc sequel hooks was
the only way the story could be told. I now understand J.R.R. Tolkien's
quandary with The Lord of the Rings.
He intended it to be a single volume of over a thousand pages, but that would
have been too expensive and readership would have been limited (considering the
war taking place at that time). The publisher split the tome into three volumes
against the author's wishes. Tolkien called the whole thing a "fudge
thought necessary for publication". Do you know he intended The Silmarillion to also be part of The Lord of the Rings? Can you imagine
if both stories had been published as a whole instead of divided into two
separate works? You want to talk about massive! Would it have been as popular
if it'd been offered to readers the way the author wanted? I'm not so sure for
a variety of reasons best left to another debate.
In many ways, times have changed
from when Tolkien faced this dilemma. These days readers love and even expect to have future follow-ups to an
epic story. That's common. It's actually ideal. But times haven't changed so much
that publishing houses are willing to publish books that are so big, they're no
longer affordable or even interesting to most readers (unless your last name is
Martin or Gabaldon, that is). Massive 400-500 page volumes are intimidating to
the majority of readers, especially in the last few years when attention spans
have shrunk so much that it seems many can't handle even a 200-word back cover
blurb in one sitting anymore.
We've covered the very compelling
disadvantages to cliffhanger endings, but there are advantages--at the very
least--to the less offensive series arc sequel hooks. Paranormal author Dyanne
Davis said that she does end each of her books with a version of a cliffhanger,
which she knows a lot of readers hate. She never viewed it as unfair.
"Considering that I’m also a reader, I don’t mind. I will scream, curse
the author…and wait hungrily for the next book." Obviously, the writer who
leaves his story on a cliffhanger ending hopes readers will eagerly come back
for the next installment, which promises to solve the dire situation the
previous story was left in.
Author Joanne Hall added, “In
terms of reader fairness, it’s perfectly fair to string them along until
they’re tearing their hair out and begging on their knees to know what happens
at the end of the last book. It’s not
fair to let them down with a feeble ending, or leave important issues
completely unresolved. It is okay to leave them a little sad, and to leave a
few things hanging, especially if you’re planning future books.” I believe this
is the core reason why most authors are fine with leaving installments with
series arc sequel hooks and avoiding cliffhanger endings altogether.
I can't even deny that I just
finished reading an Overarching Series with a hybrids of cliffhanger endings in
all but the last installment. Each of the first four volumes was more exciting
than the last. I finished one and immediately started the next because I
absolutely could not put it down. When I got to the final in the series, the
resolutions matched what they'd been building toward with just enough of a
twist to make my joy complete. Right after I finished, I went looking for other
offerings from the same author and found not only was there another 5-book spin-off
and a prequel, but that the author had two other series not connected to these
two. I bought all of them in one fell swoop. You can't deny that is exactly what you want a series to do to
readers. For that reason, I have to say that this "pro" of writing
and reading an Overarching Series is so monumentally compelling, it may drown
out the very many cons.
Next
week, we'll talk about ways readers combat the disadvantages of cliffhanger or series arc sequel hook endings,
make the most of their advantages, along with discussing the role publication
dates of installments play in selling series books.
Happy writing!
Based
on Writing the Overarching Series (or How I Sent a Clumsy Girl into Outer Space): 3D Fiction Fundamentals Collection by Karen S. Wiesner (release date TBA)
https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/writing-reference-titles.html
http://www.writers-exchange.com/3d-fiction-fundamentals-series/
Karen Wiesner is an award-winning,
multi-genre author of over 140 titles and 16 series, including the romantic science fiction series,
ARROW OF TIME CHRONICLES
https://www.writers-exchange.com/arrow-of-time-chronicles/
https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/arrow-of-time-chronicles.html
http://www.facebook.com/KarenWiesnerAuthor
Posts
