Series - what to expect in later books

[kais]

I'm struggling a little with the second book in a series, and would love to have a discussion. What do you look for in a second book in a series (or third, or fourth), when the story line is a larger arc? Do you expect full blown character introductions again? How much backstory from the previous books do you want/need, and how best do you like that delivered? Do you expect subsequent books to be written so they can be picked up and just read with no previous knowledge, or do you prefer to spend the books developing new information?

[Vreeah]

Hm, unless you want each book to work as a standalone, I wouldn't do the character introductions again. If you have new beta readers for a subsequent book, though, I'd recommend preparing some separate summaries on characters and plots so that the new readers have an idea of what's going on.

The most I'd expect from a sequel are descriptions on anything that changed. Perhaps a large event that's still lingering in a character mind, or a big change in appearance. A callback to the end of the previous book.

Standalone books are nice, and can be described as such between friends, but I think fans of the series would appreciate being able to proceed straight into the next part of the story without reading through the same starting descriptions.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Vreeah

[tobar14]

It all depends on how long the series is. If its a trilogy, book 2 better be pretty beefy. If it is 14 books long then I would expect it to be pretty slow, kinda like how a TV show's first episode is a full story all on its own with a buildup and a climax to get you hooked, and the second episode is kinda where the real story starts. Maybe TV shows aren't the greatest example. 

1 Full story

2 Build up

3 Build up

4 Build up/Small Climax

5 Build up

6 Build up

7 Build up/Small Climax

8 Build up

9 Build up

10 Build up/Small Climax

11 Build up

12 Climax

13 Climax

14 Climax

I bet you can guess what series I am referencing 

[Robinski]

I want familiar characters to still be awesome, but I want new stuff to happen to challenge them. I don't want anyone to be KIDNAPPED, because that sh1t is hackeneyed out the wazoo. I want expansion of their world, but the stakes don't need to be bigger, however I have to, have to, have to care about what they are doing, as do they (which I'm not feeling in ASD, as you will have gathered).

Furthermore, there should be a new and interesting character (check!), and I probably want more depth to the 'mythos'. Oh, and NO Christmas episodes please, and definitely NO weddings, because they are generally boring and predictable. Only Frazier dealt with wedding episodes to my satisfcation and entertainment.

[kais]

40 minutes ago, Robinski said:

I have to, have to, have to care about what they are doing, as do they (which I'm not feeling in ASD, as you will have gathered)

One of the reasons I asked this question then is because of this. I'm in a strange place with this forum, as you guys read half of AFD. You're both new readers and old readers. I think that people who read all book one would be completely engaged with the reasons for planet-searching in book two. I have not, therefore, spent any real time in book two with the reasonings for why they are doing this, other than some cursory discussion. So I really don't know how much to put in, because book one spent the entirety of the book building those reasons, and retracing some of those steps seems like rehash, instead of moving the plot forward. Ugh.

New character, check. Mythos, double check. Duly noted about the holiday and wedding episodes. Those, uh, weren't really even considered, but in the off chance the series ever becomes a television sitcom, I'll remember this.

 

Thank you, everyone, for the feedback! 

[Mandamon]

Do you have all of ASD written?  I often find my stories have major problems until I do the first rewrite.  Then I realize what I meant to say and can accentuate those aspects and take away from the parts that don't go anywhere.  I've found I'm sort of in between an outliner and a pantser.  If you haven't put the last period on the conclusion, that might be where some of the indecision on reasonings come from.  I'm guessing there's an "ATD" coming later, so you have plenty of time for M and Ne to develop a relationship.  Maybe it ends up not working out here.  Maybe it does.  Maybe they move on...  Dunno.  I think what you did with Ch 3 is reaching to that goal, but might need a few more chapters written before you know what they're really doing.

Then you can have the TV sitcom...

 

[neongrey]

The problem of the middle book pretty much always comes down to plot. If you've got people reading that far, they're already interested in knowing what happens to your characters and that is probably more than half the battle. The trick here is that we're now at a point where what happens to your characters needs to be compelling.

Second books are tricky (eg, a continuous story broken up into three books, but longer series has this apply too), and in a different way from standalones within a series(eg, babysitter's club, to pick the most facile of options). Very recently I read a book, second of three, where I definitely walked away feeling a) that I liked it quite a bit but b ) it was very definitely a middle book.

So what starts off is the big question, and, I think, the one that differentiates these different needs: do you expect the reader to have familiarity with the characters, concepts, and plot that you're dealing with? When all is said and done, is the expectation that people will be reading your multiple books as a single unit, or will they pick one out?

If it's continuous, then please absolutely do not spend more than the minimum amount of time recapping. If not, you need to devote more space to it.

From there, assuming continuity, the needs I would look at are twofold: a) does the book itself have its own plot that stands on its own strengths? Being weaker here isn't a death sentence, but it is the primary cause of middle book syndrome. This is because everything is being subjuncted to the needs of b ) does the book further the over-arching plot? I mean the reason this one's more important is because if the answer here is 'no' then you absolutely must rework until it does. Or you're working on a series of standalones.

Now, b ) in middle books is very frequently a lot of sliding things into position. It's Frodo getting nearly to Mordor, and so on and so forth. It's important stuff and it's stuff that can't be neglected or skipped over, so the task is mostly concealing that this is what's going on. Note too that as often it's not physically moving into position, it's emotionally, or in terms of knowledge or etc, etc. The alternative, of course, is for everything to all go to hell (see: The Empire Strikes Back)-- and this is frequently more satisfying, though not all plots permit this. And it often sacrifies the conclusion to some extent...

So. The answer, as far as I have to say, is plot. It's plot.

[Eagle of the Forest Path]

For me, it comes down to the standalone question. This could go two ways: either you expect that anyone who picks up the second book has already read the first, or you want people to be able to enjoy the second book on it's own. (I know I'm being captain obvious here, and also rephrasing your own question, but the point I'm trying to make is that IMO it's a choice you have to make, there's no hard and fast rule)

If volume 2 can't function as a standalone because is has too steep a learning curve or the readers are missing essential plot points that come from volume 1, you risk losing a lot of prospective readers that pick up ASD first.

The flip side of the coin is that if you have to re-exposition a lot for new readers you risk slowing things down too much for your veteran readers. The ideal is of course to find a balance in the amount of exposition to please both groups, but I imagine that takes a fair amount of skill and effort.

Personally I don't much mind steep learning curves, but I also tend to always start with the first book in a series. (Not much help, am I? ...Sorry.)

For character introductions, IMO they should be present, but they don't need to be anywhere near as extensive as in the first volume. (BTW I joined R.Ex. when you were 11 chapters into AFD, so I don't have any idea how extensive your introductions actually were.) Character intros can also be a way to give the backstory/recap of volume 1: "Hey, char.A, I saw char.B is crewing the port-side ion-cannon. She's still in shock from her boyfriend being eaten by a giant mutant space-lobster! Should she really be handling heavy artillery right now?" (I am fully aware of how awful this is, but I hope it does get my point across)

Edited August 31, 2016 by Eagle of the Forest Path
grammar correction

[Robinski]

9 hours ago, kaisa said:

I think that people who read all book one would be completely engaged with the reasons for planet-searching in book two. I have not, therefore, spent any real time in book two with the reasonings for why they are doing this, other than some cursory discussion. So I really don't know how much to put in, because book one spent the entirety of the book building those reasons, and retracing some of those steps seems like rehash, instead of moving the plot forward. Ugh

I guess what I didn't do was answer the $64,000 question. I think your challenge, from my pov, is to include something for the new readers that is not an extended rehash of why they are searching for the planet ("Previously on 24..."), but almost a Twitter pitch encapsulating all the necessities. See? Easy. I feel there must be scope within some early bust up or heartfelt moment for this to come out. "Darn it, Em, we're only looking for the stupid planet because..." - "If it wasn't for your tarnation obsession with finding Ard, we could be sipping coco on Neek." - "Huh, well you can go home if you want, I have  to find Ard, you know I need..."

I think this would be enough for me. There must be a central kernel that can be conveyed directly and succinctly. What combination of them want to find it? Are their reasons the same? Why are they different?

[kais]

7 hours ago, Robinski said:

I think this would be enough for me

Breakthrough! I know just the place for this. Awesome!

 

Thank you, everyone. It looks like there is no real consensus on second books, so I think I shall imply 'do what I like'. That makes my life easier, too.

@Mandamon I do indeed have the whole thing written. We're lurking around version four here on the forum, about to flip to version five when I finish this next write through. I actually promised it to my editor today for first read through. Heh. The M/Ne relationship is critical to the first arc of this book and was planned from the beginning. I struggle with how blatant to make the early interactions, but I think I'm in a groove now, and right around the book halfway point they have a very serious interlude, which has always been there. I like the edit suggestions I've been getting here thus far. I think bringing out the tension in stronger ways, earlier, will help that final scene have more, erm, heat. 

[Mandamon]

Looking forward to it!