Series--thrill or threat?

[sartorias]

Over at the Tor.com site, Jane Lindskold talks about series and stand-alones. The nice thing is, she doesn't sneer. I've taken to avoiding the sneer posts. Most of the time they just slang fat fantasy altogether (lumping it all together) or point to one or two examples that the poster didn't like, and again assuming they are All The Same. Life's

Comments

[danceswithwaves]

So I'm commenting again, but I think it's an interesting topic, and something my back-brain has been thinking about recently.

Even within the roman fleuve type of series, I break it down into two more categories: an epic series and a non-epic series. (Serialized series are inherently non-epic.) This is a somewhat subjective definition with grey areas, but my basic definition is that an epic series is generally at least three books (often more), generally has more character POVs (and has at least 2 POVs, normally 3 or more), and has a world mind-set where the characters often cross countries and are fighting to save at least their country, if not the world. In order to be epic, a series must have two, if not all, of these things.

I think the world mind-set is the most important part to that. And I mean that the book as a whole cares more about the pattern of characters' lives than what the characters think or how they act individually. This is not saying that epic characters are allowed to be bland, just that the story doesn't care about them so much as Mr. Smith instead of Mr. Black.

And I think that people who prefer epic series and those who prefer non-epic series are different reader groups that may overlap. The former prefers plot while the latter prefers character (and that is a gross generalization).

Most of the time I find it easy to categorize series into one or the other, and didn't have a list to follow until now. But my system was dented a bit with Inda and the following books because they had all the signs of an epic story, except they cared about the characters. So when I explain the story I tend to say 'it's an epic story with a personal feel,' or something along those lines. And when I say that, people seem to know what I mean, so I do think that my personal definition of epic is not so far off from what other people have in their minds.

[sartorias]

I think I know where you're coming from. My own perception of epic goes back to reading the Eldar Eddas and Beowulf and so on. Those tales did have characterization, but in such tiny bits, buried under obscure cultural clues and custom. Then along came Dunsany and the quest tales and many called those epic, which kind of blurred the definition for me.

I tend to avoid the term now, because I don't quite trust it. By some definitions, Gormenghast is epic--and in others' view, it's anti-epic. Eddison is sometimes seen as epic, others say no. Ditto about Tolkien. That's a quest tale, and it draws on bits of the northern epics, but to me, it has a strong focus on character, like you mention. So I think of those as broad or big canvas fantasy, though that's an unsatisfactory term, too. But these big stories get divided up into volumes, and sometimes they have totally unsatisfactory endings, a la Two Towers because of the exigencies of publishing.

Maybe it's better if they all come out at once? I remember talking to people who were immensely frustrated waiting between volume two and three of LOTR.

I dunno, speculation only.

[danceswithwaves]

I think... I think the time between books matters more for roman fleuve stories than for serialization stories. Because you're left hanging more. So I guess then it would be better if they all came out at once.

But if you asked me if I'd rather wait for a new series four years and have the full series or get a new book every year and have to wait, I think it would depend on if I knew the author or not. If I know the author I'd probably say have a book every year, but if I didn't know the author I'd probably say I'd wait.

[sartorias]

*nod*

I don't know what I'd say. I've loved discovering series once they all came out, but if I get into a series that's in the middle of appearing, I have NO self control about waiting until the last volume is out!

[tooticky]

Reading this, it's just occurred to me that this is the opposite side of the fence from the writer's dead-line from hell that we were discussing previously. Readers want their fixes. They can wait a year, but I think if they crave the story, waiting any longer makes people grumpy and less interested.
This must be where the pressure for hard, sharp dead-lines with a possibly successful series must come from.

[marycatelli]

I am very glad that I got all three of Tolkien's out of the library at once.