• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

AAAARRGGGHHH!!! (Or "Enough with the trilogies already!!!")

Stop it, stop it, STOP IT!!!

Could someone please assemble all the heads of publishing for the various companies, lock them in a room with a nest of really angry hornets, and tell them they can only come out when they acknowledge that not every fantasy story has to be a multi-book epic!!! Sometimes I really, really want to buy a new book--one new book--read it and be done.

So, please, help me out. Tell me what good fantasy novels you've read that are complete, standalone, single novels. Not "the first of a series." Not even "Oh, it's part of a series but it stands alone enough that you don't have to read the whole thing." One book. Alone. By itself. One.

Thanks.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I hate multiple-books series and long-running series since the local store either never stocks the first book of the series or they never stock the rest of the series. I passed on several of the book series when they first came out because I could never find the first book in the series. I usually wait until they are packaged together and offered from the Science Fiction Book Club or wait to find them at the local thrift stores.
 

I could be off base here, but I think some stories were written to be just one book, but due to popularity, they decided to make a sequel, or series.
 

dreaded_beast said:
I could be off base here, but I think some stories were written to be just one book, but due to popularity, they decided to make a sequel, or series.

I'm sure that's true, in some cases. Still doesn't help me find standalone books, though.

Anyone? Any suggestions at all?
 

Vote with your dollar, Mouse. Call me a big stinking hack of a writer -- I try to write stuff that stands alone reasonably well, but if somebody says, "We'll buy it, and we want this to be a series," my reply is a firm "Gotcha. I'll have Book Two on your desk in six months." It sells. Just like mystery readers like for their favorite detective character to come back in subsequent books and romance readers have a formulaic plot that they expect and want when they pick up a romance novel.

Fantasy readers like trilogies. They like to get invested. That's just the way it goes. Your second paragraph sort of undercuts your first one -- if there were a ton of great standalone fantasy books out there, they'd certainly be published. No publisher is going to look at a great standalone book and say "No, it's not part of a trilogy." Anyone who believes that to be the case is, to put it mildly, not tapped into the realities of the publishing world.

But, since you did ask, I enjoyed "American Gods" a great deal, and I believe that Jo Walton's "King's ____" was originally supposed to be a single book, but was broken into two books because of its length. In this case, you could modify your point to "Why don't fantasy writers write things shorter?", which is a different question, but a perfectly valid one. Again, the likely answer is, "Because, for better or for worse, the average reader likes big fat fantasies, and those are what sell."
 

Mouseferatu said:
So, please, help me out. Tell me what good fantasy novels you've read that are complete, standalone, single novels. Not "the first of a series." Not even "Oh, it's part of a series but it stands alone enough that you don't have to read the whole thing." One book. Alone. By itself. One.

Thanks.

Beowulf.
It's not a novel, but who cares. It's only one, and it's great.
 

"Finder" -- could be part of a series, but I never found any others in it.

And to ask for further clarification, we should really differentiate between:

1) Written as one book, but split up because of length -- Some Zelazny fantasy stuff, as well as Jo Walton's and many others'...
2) Written as a standalone book but spawned sequels because it sold extremely well and there was public demand for a sequel -- Modessit's Recluse Series, or Kushner's Swordspoint, as well as many others...
3) Intended as a trilogy right off that bat...
 
Last edited:


takyris said:
Vote with your dollar, Mouse. Call me a big stinking hack of a writer -- I try to write stuff that stands alone reasonably well, but if somebody says, "We'll buy it, and we want this to be a series," my reply is a firm "Gotcha. I'll have Book Two on your desk in six months." It sells. Just like mystery readers like for their favorite detective character to come back in subsequent books and romance readers have a formulaic plot that they expect and want when they pick up a romance novel.

Fantasy readers like trilogies. They like to get invested. That's just the way it goes. Your second paragraph sort of undercuts your first one -- if there were a ton of great standalone fantasy books out there, they'd certainly be published. No publisher is going to look at a great standalone book and say "No, it's not part of a trilogy." Anyone who believes that to be the case is, to put it mildly, not tapped into the realities of the publishing world.

But, since you did ask, I enjoyed "American Gods" a great deal, and I believe that Jo Walton's "King's ____" was originally supposed to be a single book, but was broken into two books because of its length. In this case, you could modify your point to "Why don't fantasy writers write things shorter?", which is a different question, but a perfectly valid one. Again, the likely answer is, "Because, for better or for worse, the average reader likes big fat fantasies, and those are what sell."

Believe me, I know the realities of publishing. But I also know that I'm far from the only person who sometimes wants a single book. In fact, I can't think of a single fantasy reader I know who doesn't sometimes want standalone stuff. (Yes, that's anecdotal evidence at best. But I find it unlikely that everyone I know is somehow an aberration.)

I've written both stand-alone novels and novels that were meant to be part of a series, so it's not as though I don't understand the appeal of both. But that's just it--there's an appeal to both. And my standalones? Sure, if a publisher said "I'll buy this, but only if you write a sequel," I'd do it. But honestly, I strongly prefer not to. The standalones I've written were written that way for a reason.

I'm not claiming that publishers shouldn't publish books in a series. Just that they shouldn't publish only books in a series.

It's also a Catch-22 for writers trying to break into the field, since most companies/agents tell you "Don't try to sell a series at first. Start with a single novel."
 

'Monolith', by some guy whose name my googlefu does not reveal. It's the story of one man, who survives against all odds in a battle with the oppressive church of the land, and an ancient race that holds the secret of that religion. Quite cool, and if there's a sequel I don't know how it was managed. It's not a book that needs a sequel.

'Perdido Street Station' and 'The Scar', by China Mieville. They're set in the same world, they share a very tenuous link, but the link is not necessary to enjoy the books. It might be interesting to read The Scar first, actually, as it doesn't really give anything away, and there's a nostalgia element that readers of PSS might scoff at. Haven't read 'The Iron Council' yet, so I don't know if it feeds off the plots in the 'first' two.

'The Redemption Of Athelas', by David and Leigh Eddings. Not the fourteenth book about Belgarion, for a change. Quite definitely a stand-alone, and as I read Eddings for the characterisation, it entertained me valiantly.

Terry Pratchett... some of his work, at least. Probably best to steer clear without an expert navigator.

'The Hunting Of The Snark', Lewis Carroll. Very short, but very full of meaning, imaginary or otherwise, and it's hard to find something more densely imaginative. I recommend an annotated version with the original illustrations. Plus there's a musical on CD, which is cool.

'Gulliver's Travels'. An Important Book, even today.

'The Hobbit'. The foundation of modern fantasy, even moreso than LotR.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top