Sequels vs. Parts

[Mike Donoghue]

I’m not sure how to ask this. What determines a story being divided into multiple parts versus being kept as one complete book? I’m referring to a central conflict that has its three-act structure broken into multiple books rather than a ‘series’ of self-contained stories. For instance, what determines if a 150,000 word novel is published as two 75,000 word books? Or, a 300,000 word book as two, three, etc.?

Can any story be divided at its midpoint into two books? Is it word length that decides a story having multiple books? Is it having a sufficient cliffhanger somewhere to stop each book at even though the central conflict hasn’t been resolved?

I think of all the book series out there where it’s one new adventure for the characters after another, but how many books simply get divided into multiple parts to create a 'series'?

 

[Flaviosky]

I got here with my 150k+ lousy-written story and the first thing I got was "Man, that's too much for a new writer", so I had to split it.

That said, every book (or volume) must work on its own, so if you stick to the three-arc structure, so every tome must have its story flow like that. The climax of the final book obviously is the climax of the whole series, but it also must work as the climax of the book as a standalone.

Can any story be divided at its midpoint into two books?

Yes, it is possible. You can get to divide your story depending on important milestones achieved, be it in the main plot, a sub-plot or even an event in a charcter arc.

Is it word length that decides a story having multiple books?

I was told that you have to gain a reputation first to have editors allow longer books.

Is it having a sufficient cliffhanger somewhere to stop each book at even though the central conflict hasn’t been resolved?

Like I said above, there are milestones somewhere that can serve as a divider. Whether the main conflict isn't resolves, sure there are other important ones that can serve that purpose

 

[Mike Donoghue]

I got here with my 150k+ lousy-written story and the first thing I got was "Man, that's too much for a new writer", so I had to split it.

That said, every book (or volume) must work on its own, so if you stick to the three-arc structure, so every tome must have its story flow like that. The climax of the final book obviously is the climax of the whole series, but it also must work as the climax of the book as a standalone.


Yes, it is possible. You can get to divide your story depending on important milestones achieved, be it in the main plot, a sub-plot or even an event in a charcter arc.


I was told that you have to gain a reputation first to have editors allow longer books.


Like I said above, there are milestones somewhere that can serve as a divider. Whether the main conflict isn't resolves, sure there are other important ones that can serve that purpose

Thanks for the reply. Question regarding the bolded: did that solve the length issue? Does just cutting a book in half solve the problem of a 'long' story? Or, does your story being 150k mean the story itself is too long regardless of being split?

 

[msstice]

I’m referring to a central conflict that has its three-act structure broken into multiple books

I find this problematic. If the reason to break up the story is because publishers will balk at taking on a new author with such a long work, I think it will be worse if this is split. Has the second part not been written? I can see an established author pulling this off but imagine it will be a harder sell for a new author.

Perhaps the best way is to cut down the words.

 

[Mike Donoghue]

I find this problematic. If the reason to break up the story is because publishers will balk at taking on a new author with such a long work, I think it will be worse if this is split. Has the second part not been written? I can see an established author pulling this off but imagine it will be a harder sell for a new author.

Perhaps the best way is to cut down the words.

I'm referring to fully-written stories that get broken up.

 

[Flaviosky]

Question regarding the bolded: did that solve the length issue?

Actually, yes. The first tome ends up with 92k words and it allowed me to dwell deeper into certain things on the rewrite. I already have the layout of the other 2 parts and they should come about the same length.

Does just cutting a book in half solve the problem of a 'long' story?

It may work if you do it right. The first book must have its own structure and be able to wrap things up at the same time than laying the rest of the story to unfold on the second book. I still have to write the beginning of the second book in a way it works for both readers coming from book 1 and someone who would pick book 2 as it is, and it doesn't look easy XD.

Or, does your story being 150k mean the story itself is too long regardless of being split?

What I was told is that the story is as long as it needs to be. Some chrons in here have stories regarding generations, even centuries.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Is it having a sufficient cliffhanger somewhere to stop each book at even though the central conflict hasn’t been resolved?

No and no. Do not end a book on a cliff hanger and do not not end a book without resolving its central conflict. Do either of these and, as a reader, I will feel cheated and believe the only intent was to force me to buy another book. A book needs to tell a complete story.

the story is as long as it needs to be.

Yes, a story is as long as it needs to be, but, also, should be no longer than it needs to be. I feel a lot of the longer books that I have read would have benefitted from a tighter edit. The solution to a too long story is to cut unimportant parts, not to retain them and split into multiple books.

 

[Mike Donoghue]

No and no. Do not end a book on a cliff hanger and do not not end a book without resolving its central conflict. Do either of these and, as a reader, I will feel cheated and believe the only intent was to force me to buy another book. A book needs to tell a complete story.


Yes, a story is as long as it needs to be, but, also, should be no longer than it needs to be. I feel a lot of the longer books that I have read would have benefitted from a tighter edit. The solution to a too long story is to cut unimportant parts, not to retain them and split into multiple books.

Thanks for the reply. How does a story like Lord of the Rings apply where at the end of each book (until Return of the King) the central conflict isn't resolved?

 

[Wayne Mack]

The primary conflict presented in a book needs to be resolved by the end of the book. There may be a background arc that develops across multiple novels, but it would not be the central plot to any of them.

It has been decades since I have read Lord of the Rings, so I will leave it to others to comment on the plot structure of the books. In the Harry Potter series, one can observe that each book was largely stand alone. Each book told a story that was resolved by the end of the book. The mystery of who Voldemorte was and his growing influence were background to the stories.