publishing, series, fantasy, an announcement of a personal nature, and a big helping of wtf

[truepenny]

So here is the thing about which I am thinking--and I should note that I am genuinely puzzled. This isn't sarcasm or rhetoric.

One of the things that the unimpressed Publishers Weekly review of Corambis mentioned was that it probably wouldn't make sense if you hadn't read the first three books in the series. Which, you know, is absolutely true, and I don't deny it. What puzzles me is (a.) why anyone needs to be warned about it, and (b.) why the reviewer seemed to feel it was a defect.

This seems to me to be related to one of Ace's marketing decisions that still puzzles me, namely the absolute, vehement refusal to indicate anywhere on any of the books that they are part of a series. I actually asked about it, back when Mélusine was in production, because the series has a name and was never conceived of as anything but a series, and my editor told me that we couldn't put Book One of the Doctrine of Labyrinths on the cover or in the front matter. Marketing wouldn't let us.

She explained their reasoning to me: if a person buys a book and then discovers it's part of a series, they are more likely to buy the other books, whereas if a person picks up a book in a bookstore and sees it's Book Two, they won't buy it. (I think there's a self-defeating flaw in this reasoning, since it assumes that Book One will not be near Book Two on the bookstore shelves, but that's neither here nor there.) Never mind the fact that a person who buys a book only to discover it's Book Two is likely to be an unhappy person, and never mind that, since the damn thing ISN'T LABELED as Book Two, the person has no immediately obvious and easy way of figuring out either which series it's a part of, nor which books in the series come BEFORE it . . . Marketing said, Thou Shalt Not Label The Books Of Thy Series, and lo, the books were not labeled.

And reviewers and readers bitched up one side and down the other about how Mélusine ended and how they should have been told it was Book One of a series and so on and so forth.

But that's not actually my point either, although it's obvious I'm still more than a little bitter about it. My point is that both Ace's marketing department and the PW reviewer seem to think that fantasy series are a bad thing, that it's bad for a writer to build a story from one book to the next. And to that I honestly have nothing more intelligent or articulate to say than, What the fuck?

Two different reasons that this baffles me:

1. It's the fourth book in the series. Why should anyone want to read it without reading the first three? I'm sure this idea got ported over from mystery "series," in which every book is intended to stand alone, but IT DOESN'T APPLY HERE. Fantasy writers do not and have never pretended to write that kind of series. We write stories that are too big for one volume. Completely different.

2. Never mind fandom and what fandom thinks. I understand that "fandom" is not the audience PW is writing for and not the audience that Ace's marketing department is trying to reach. But the evidence is that people who read fantasy want series. They revel in series. Case in point--and I don't think we need to go any farther for examples, although George R. R. Martin can also stand up and testify here--Robert Jordan's overwhelmingly popular and infinitely expanding¹ Wheel of Time series, which have, from the publication of the very first doorstop of a volume, been labeled as part of the Wheel of Time. And publishers want series. They buy series. My four books were bought in two two-book deals, always on the understanding that the books went together. You see it every time you look at Locus. Readers want series. Publishers want series. But apparently, bookstores don't want series--because that, of course, is who Marketing has to sell to: buyers for chain bookstores and their computers.

Other authors, including most recently to my knowledge, Tobias Buckell, have blogged about this and the ugly Catch-22 in which chain bookstore computers can kill an author's career, and I don't want to rehash it now. What I want to say is that it's doing more than that, and worse than that: it's putting a No Man's Land, full of barbed wire and landmines, between the readers on one side and the writers and editors² on the other. In other words, much of the business of publishing is being driven by factors that have nothing to do with what people want to read.

And I wonder--I can't help but wonder--if the attempts to pander to the computers and their apparatchiks actually produce the phenomenon they're allegedly trying to avoid. That is, I wonder if my numbers would be better if my books had been labeled as a series, if people could look at one and TELL it belonged to something larger than itself.

And, yes, this is a very pointedly personal question for me. I haven't been blogging about it, but in fact Ace chose several months ago not to offer me another contract. My numbers aren't "good enough." This feels, in case you were wondering, like the moment in "Hansel and Gretel" when they turn around and realize that, not only have their parents ditched them, but also the birds have eaten their bread crumbs.

I'm hoping that the witch who shows up in my story is Glinda the Good Witch of the South.

---
¹And it's spread to the next generation, too. (I'm a fantasy author. We have trouble with the concept of brevity. Brandon Sanderson, I adore you.) I move that this phenomenon now officially be known as Jordan's Curse.

²I have never met an editor who was not also a passionate reader. I have never met an editor who did not sincerely love the books he or she edited. It's all too possible for the relationship between an author and an editor to feel adversarial, but it shouldn't.

Comments

[stephanieburgis.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to say that I adore the Doctrine of Labyrinths series, and I'm really, really looking forward to whatever you write next, no matter which publisher is the one smart enough to buy it.

[sasha-feather.livejournal.com]

Word. It's also frustrating when the bookstore has multiple copies of the second book in stock, and zero copies of the first. (For instance).

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

YES.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Thank you. Believe me, I appreciate your saying so.

[renesears.livejournal.com]

Totally agree. And I assumed from the start that Melusine was book one of a series, but a) I am a genre reader, and b) I came to the series when there were already three books out. It was pretty easy to figure out that it was a series. (But I did have to consult ye old internet to figure out which order to get them in, so I guess numbers would have been helpful.)

[robling-t.livejournal.com]

I would strongly suspect that this has a lot to do with what's actually going on here -- they're telegraphing that they have no intent of keeping the first book around long enough for the third to sit beside it on the shelves...

[sovay]

I haven't been blogging about it, but in fact Ace chose several months ago not to offer me another contract.

Ace's marketing department is composed of idiots.

Let me know where to find your books next, because I am going to want them.

[clarentine]

Oh, bugger. There has got to be a better model for this publishing thing.

[clarentine]

Yes, definitely.

[libskrat]

You will keep writing. You will keep selling your writing. I believe this.

[veejane.livejournal.com]

I picked up a Holly Black novel from the library last year, just because I'd never read anything of hers, and discovered when I'd got it home it was third in a series. Nowhere on the dustjacket, in the acknowledgements, or anywhere else was it labeled as such, and I double-checked, because 10 pages in, the story wasn't making any sense to me. (It was McElderry, not Ace, although who knows one of them might own the other.)

If I'd purchased it, I would have returned it unread. I'm... not sure how this benefits bookstores? I don't even like series books all that much, but if I'm buying a series book, I'd better damned well know it at the cash register.

(Also I have a crazy whereby all the books have to match, so on the occasions that I do buy series, I want to buy them all in the same shape, size, and general interior and exterior design.)

[casacorona.livejournal.com]

Let me try to answer a little bit of it.

1. Books do not stay on the shelves of bookstores very long. Eight weeks, usually, unless the book is selling unusually well. So thinking that the first three books of the series will be there along with the new fourth book for a reader to buy is not realistic.

2. We'd like for someone who sees book two or three or four, and is intrigued by it, to purchase it and read it and enjoy it. And then go looking for the earlier books in the series to fill in the mysteries they didn't get. So each book of the series should be sufficiently grounded in itself, and have enough self-contained plot, to be a satisfying read for someone coming on it first.

3. There's plenty of evidence that readers just won't buy a book that says "book three of the XXX series" on the cover, unless they have already read books one and two. Even if they'd like it. Even if it's self contained. And if they won't buy it, then how can we get them to read it and special order books one and two?

4. And this is key: Selling books only to people who bought and enjoyed the previous books in a series is the road to the sales death spiral. In successful series, each book is an entry point.

OK, yes, there are great honking exceptions to this. Jordan. Tolkien. Martin. But they are exceptions that surprise everyone. On the other hand, look at Novik. Look at Brust. Look at Butcher. Look at Harris and Kenyon. Look at Meyer. Even Harry Potter can be entered at any point -- there's enough back story, and each book has a self-contained plot as well as the over-arching one.

I know that it makes a writer feel like she's repeating the same thing over and over. But the new reader hasn't read it before, and the trick is to embed a little something new for the reader who's seen it before.

Anyway, that's what it looks like from this side of the sales reports and marketing meetings.

[mcurry.livejournal.com]

I've really never understood the idea of not clearly revealing on the cover (or at least on the inside of the cover) that a book is part of a series. Readers whose preferences tend away from series (like me) aren't going to want to buy the remaining books just because they've been tricked into buying one random part of a continuing story, and readers who do prefer series aren't as likely to pick it up because they can't tell it's a series, so it seems like a lose-lose proposition. I also find it hard to believe that the buyers for the big chains are actually being fooled often enough for it to matter.

Sorry that you're currently orphaned. I hope that changes soon!

[scribblemoose]

More reasons why I lost all ambition to ever become a published author.

The fantasy-series-marketing 'logic' is simply ridiculous. It's a bit of a cliche, for which I apologise, but what of Lord of the Rings? That is, if I'm not mistaken, a series name for three sequential fantasy books. This is the work which all publishers wish to rediscover. It's supposedly our template. (Of course there's a host of reasons why that's not a good idea, but bear with me.) Well-written fantasy stories are by their very nature often detailed, progressive and complex. Very often they require detailed world-building which takes up space (and which readers love to wallow in if done well) and an epic quality which all but defines the genre.

Short version: ACE are asshats and it makes me very sad that they might have put anyone off reading Doctrine of the Labyrinths with their idiotic 'policies'. I hope next time you get a publisher that fucking deserves you. And a marketing department that deserves your sales.

Corambis is my Easter treat for myself and I can't wait to read it, by the way!

[stotangirl.livejournal.com]

You are, really, an amazing author. I've loved everything I've read of yours, and I'm another person who will keep reading your work, whichever publisher puts it out.

[imayb1.livejournal.com]

I'm an avid reader and up until recently, I worked in a book store. I must say, it's very frustrating to try to look up book series and figure out which titles go when if the store computer makes no record of series! I never understood this. If you look at Library Thing, readers love to tag, label, number, and classify series. Why haven't book store databases caught on?

As far as your original question goes, I like to be 'warned' about a series because (as you pointed out) readers like series. If I see a book two on the shelf and it looks interesting, it's quite likely I'll buy book one. In a manner of speaking, yes, I'm less inclined to buy book two, but I'd still be a sales statistic.

I think the reviewer phrased the lack of stand-aloneness as a defect out of sheer tradition. One of the things I adore about your writing is that with each new book, you don't attempt to rehash and recap everything that came before into the first chapter. For a lot of series I read, I can almost skip the first chapter of the new book as a waste of time. I already know what came before. I would rather be able to jump right into the story's continuation.

[shana.livejournal.com]

As a librarian, I take that as a cue to buy it if I've got the earlier books, and a warning that if I don't I may get complaints from patrons. (In your case, I knew to buy the earlier books, and Corambis is sitting in the 'buy as soon as we get book money' cart.)

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

So, in fact, what publishing wants (if I'm understanding you correctly) are series on the mystery "series" model, with recurring characters but self-contained plots (more of the same, only different!)--or installments on a plot coupon type overarching narrative (like Harry Potter, with each novel being one year at school and with progressively escalating end bosses)--not series on the Tolkien/Jordan model, in which each novel continues and connects to and builds on the previous novel, telling one inextricably integrated story from Book One to Book N.

I don't know why I feel so saddened and betrayed by this. Not by you, Beth. Not your fault.

[mcurry.livejournal.com]

I think it's great if books in a series can stand on their own, so someone can enter the series at any point and enjoy it, and I can certainly see that it's better for the longevity of a series if new readers don't need to always start with the very first book. What doesn't make sense to me is this idea that some people in marketing have that readers sometimes need to be tricked into entering a series in the middle, while others seem happy enough to let the readers actually make an informed decision.

To use Jim Butcher as an example, despite the fact that in his Dresden Files series the books are somewhat self-contained, the latest mass-market reissue of Storm Front clearly says "Book One of the Dresden Files" (as did the very first mass-market edition years ago), and the newer volumes say "A Novel of the Dresden Files," which at least clues the buyer in to the idea that it's part of a series, even if it doesn't say which book in the series it might be (though there is a listing of the books in order on an inner page). For his Codex Alera series, each book is clearly labeled as "Book x of The Codex Alera." In both cases, this labeling started before Jim was an NYT-bestselling author, and obviously more and more new readers chose to get involved in each series as it went along, despite knowing that it was, in fact, a series.

[mamculuna.livejournal.com]

The shelves are full of labeled series of fantasy books. As a reader, I definitely prefer it. I don't mind something like Bujold's The Hallowed Hunt standing alone--it is the third book of the Chalion series, but the plot is not continued from book to book. But accidentally reading part of Martin's ASOIAF series out of order would make me furious. After it made me thoroughly confused. The same with your series.

[wl551.livejournal.com]

I always wondered why they didn't print series numbers on books sometimes. I purposefully look for books in a series. Top of my head: C.S. Friedman, Carol Berg... both their series, (that I have), are clearly indicated on all three novels. To pick up a book, get it home and find it is a part of a series sends me through the roof. I hate that. It's a complete turn off.

Aside: I'm pretty sure you will be snapped up right quick by someone else. You have a strong and loyal fanbase and the pubcos have to know that. ;)

[casacorona.livejournal.com]

It's not actually what publishing -wants-. Publishing wants the big surprise bestseller.

But it is what the industry knows how to sell. Remember that 'publishing' isn't just the publishing house. It's also the bookstores. If the bookstores would/could keep backlist in stock, then the problem would not be so acute.

Most of us are trying like hell to be the exceptions. To push our books out so that the first of a series does so well that it does stay on the shelf long enough for the second to be published. But that's hard. The other way is easy.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

That's a hell of a mixed message for an author. I'm just saying.

[starlady38.livejournal.com]

Speaking from my own experience of Naomi Novik and countless other fantasy series, once I decide a series seems worth checking out (usually by hearing about or seeing a book in the middle of the series) I hunt down a copy of the first book and start from the beginning. I guess some people can start mid-series, but I'm certainly not one of them, and I'd be willing to bet that most Meyer and Potter fans don't start mid-way either.

And if the chain bookstores (at least the ones by me) aren't going to carry any books by Sarah Monette, or Elizabeth Bear, or by many other authors I like a lot, I guess I don't see the point of deferring to their buyers' sensibilities, especially since they're probably going to go bankrupt anyway. Amazon + independent stores + blogs seem like the way of the future from my perspective.

[casacorona.livejournal.com]

Jim's books were selling really well before they were NYTimes bestsellers. In that case, marketing clearly saw the series ID as an asset.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say "Oh, it's the first book in a series. I won't buy it till they're all out." So many more times than I've ever heard someone say they were so annoyed at a book turning out to be the first of a series.

It always makes me want to grab them and shake them and tell them to just buy the freaking book and sit on it if they must, because if they wait for book three they'll never find book one again.