Sci-Fi, fantasy and speculative Indie Authors Review discussion

I'm putting this here because I'm looking at my current work, and it's definitely coming in on the short side. It's aimed at the adventure/pulp market and at this rate I'm expecting it to come in around 40-45,000 words.

For those who don't know, Doc Vandal's a fast-paced pulp-style adventure in a somewhat similar vein to Doc Savage but a little further out from reality.

So, I'm wondering what people think I should call it - novel, short novel, novella?

I'm currently leaning toward "short novel" on the grounds that it's planned as the first of a series of modern pulp adventures.

I'm not so sure - "short novel" sounds a bit negative to me, as if not quite the real thing somehow (that could even be, for all I know, why the word "novella" was ever coined in the first place).

Or don't label it at all? If the word count/page count is there folks can make up their own mind. Def not short novel, I agree it sounds negative

I agree with Ava. Don't label it. Some novels (usually literary ) are 40,000 words anyway. And short novel sounds like you're talking your book down or implying that the reader will not be getting value for money.

Thanks, my own tastes are more towards the feeling that the word novella = "don't buy me." But that may be my own personal reading prejudices talking.

It's odd, too; I don't dislike the length but it's not something I normally look for when buying fiction. I'm perfectly happy to read them, and I have no issues with the story length, but I don't like that name at all.

Well I gotta say Dave I have two Novella's and they sell Lol. Tho they are priced to sell at only 99c but they do sell quite well

Oh I'm not denying it. I just know that I don't like buying them. I'd rather read a short novel. But that's entirely a personal thing.

I've passed on freebies just because they were advertised as novellas.

I guess like the pashmina / scarf thing lol

Probably...

I'm writing this one short mostly because it's natural for the subgenre.

I sometimes think as the page number is there that there's no point in labelling things, I've seen some put as a novella and has less than 10K words.

I also might try Createspace with this one. See if having a print edition helps.

Why not, all mine r with them, don't get a lot of sales but still better to have than not plus I have them for just plain old me on a shelf in living room lol

I habitually seem to write to 70,000 words, which to me is 'a book'
But being fantasy when everyone writes 450,000 blockbusters I'm probably doing short stories :-)

Lol - good point Jim! Though really unless a book needs 450,000 words a lot of it seems to be filler. I'd much rather read a well written, well paced and plotted 70,000 word book that carried no extra weight - even if I get to the end and lament that there isn't more! ;)

I average 80,000-120,000 words. I think if Ive really got something else to say after that there's going to be a book 2.

Yes, 120,000 is a good length, you can lose yourself in it but it's not so long you forget what the beginning was about :-)

I confess I've avoided the Game of Thrones

The problem is, after chewing my way through that amount of book, his writing style would rub off on me :-(

Game of thrones and like length epics are brilliant for when you want to lose sight of the rest if the universe for a while. Don't think Grorge R R Martin's style would rub off on me but I know what you mean; I have to be working in a completely different genre if In reading any Marion Zimmer Bradley - especially the mists of Avalon or the firebrand.

Have to admit, I don't think I've ever got to the end of a book and felt cheated because of the length. Finale, conclusion, grand reveal, character melt down and finding out you need to read the next six books before maybe getting an answer - definitely cheated. But never length.

Some personal preference must come into it. Some people won't read anything longer than 300 pages and some won't read anything shorter. This had always seemed a weird way
to choose what you're going to read, to me.

A book which gives you a world you can immerse yourself in and get lost in is probably the peak of the Fantasy (and SF) writer's art :-)

I suppose that if this works, 400,000 words is better that 40,000 words, but there again, six of seven books with stories from that same setting at 70,000 to 120,000 are probably better again, they've got a chance of being more tightly edited and plotted

Agreed on both points.

Yes about half of them. I'm slowly collecting the others. They're not perfect but it's a fabulous world. Think Thendara House and Hawkmistress! are my favorites.

Shanna wrote: "The television series is so well done that you can follow it there, but I wouldn't have wanted to miss reading the originals. ..."

I gave up on TV about six years ago now, and didn't watch it much before that.

No though I think I've got Sharra's Exile and Exile's song in a 'bumper' edition. I'm actually quite pleased they're bringing all of the Darkover series out in ebook and you can pick up all the short stories and novellas written in the universe too. And the ones written by other authors, not just MZB.

Shanna wrote: "Most television is cack and I prefer reading, but once in a while, there is an exception. Game of Thrones is cinematic and well worth the effort."

Problem is that to watch it I'd have to pay for Sky, which means it's cheaper to buy the books. Being rural our chances of watching it on-line are pretty much nil

Remember no TV so DVDs I want on my desk top, which palls after a while.
But I'd rather write fantasy than watch it :-)

I say let the story tell itself. If it's short and technically falls into the novella category, so be it. Just for God's sake don't pad it to fit some perceived Goldilocks zone!

And, the novella has a very long and venerable history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novella#...

A Clockwork Orange
Animal Farm
Breakfast at Tiffany's
Of Mice and Men
A Christmas Carol
The Time Machine
Heart of Darkness

...etc. There's no shame in a novella!

J.A. wrote: "Game of thrones and like length epics are brilliant for when you want to lose sight of the rest if the universe for a while..."

Or for when you want to wallow in the excesses of the author's egotism...Did I say that aloud? Oops! ];P

I found out some years ago that I'm not really an enthusiastic short-story writer. I like to write complex stories, and that requires novel length. My novel is about 95,000 words, without any part of it padded out just for length, and I'm shooting for that in the novel I'm currently working on.

Ken wrote: "I found out some years ago that I'm not really an enthusiastic short-story writer..."

I was the same way for a long time. I'm also not much of a short story reader. I like a lot of Philip K. Dick's short stories, but he was always able to write so dense with ideas that some of his short stories feel like full novels. Kurt Vonnegut was another who really could write short stories well. But the vast majority of short stories I've read don't work for me.

However, I've started to be able to write them lately. (Which is quite a different thing than being able to write them well...who am I to say whether I have succeeded in that regard? Authors do not possess the ability of honest self-critique.)

What broke me through the wall was two things: 1) reading some short stories by Alastair Reynolds, and realizing that they can actually be tools to help an author with world creation...pick one tiny slice of the world you're writing about in longer more complex stories and focus on it exclusively and succinctly; and 2) practice.

My first attempt at a short story in a particular world I am developing quickly turned into a novelette...then a novella. I published it as that. My second attempt turned into a novelette (still in editing). My third attempt was right at the maximum word count for a short story by Nebula Award standards, coming in at 7,480 words. My fourth attempt was under 3,000 words.

It's difficult because there's always the temptation of complexity creep. You really have to know the full story right from the beginning and stick to the important things. Data dump as little as possible and only where it fleshes out the plot, or maybe fleshes out some of the world you'll deal with later, but only in small measures and only if you have space. Character, conflict, action, obstacle, resolution.

There you go, advice from a total noob.

I did spend much of my early career writing short stories and got a few published in the smaller magazines. I currently have some of those, plus a new one, self-published in a collection at Amazon. I also have two novellas on sale there in another collection. But I much prefer to write novels. I won't say I'll never write another short story; sometimes they just come to you, and it would be a shame to ignore it. A short Horror story came to me that way, and I wrote it and got it published, even though I dislike the Horror genre. But I just prefer, both reading and writing, the complexity of full-length novels.

I like writing short stories, both as an exercise in skill itself (as you say, Micah, translating a complex idea in a limited number of words is good for the literary muscles) and also as short breaks for when my WIP needs a bit of distance and perspective in order for me to get it right. If you want to really hone skills in getting complex ideas into disciplined word count flash fiction, six word stories or even poetry teach you a lot. ( though admittedly it will be a cold day in hell before I try to publish any of my poetry!)

Is George R R Martin on more of an ego trip than your average epic fantasy writer? Not sure and don't really have a dog in this fight. He's not an author whose books I know Ill have to reread on a yearly basis. On the other hand it seems to me that Robert Jordan and Terry Goodkind ( the latter of whom writes entire books in the middle of the sword of truth series that have NOTHING to do with the tenuous over reaching story arc) are more contenders for the egotism run riot on a page crown. IMO. I guess it's entirely subjective to the reader.

GRRM, Robert Jordan, Terry Goodkind, Tad Williams...I put them all in the same category. I was kind of joking when I said egotism, but wasn't in the implication that they all pad their work with a LOT of needless plot extending sidetracks that ultimately serve no other purpose than to make their works longer and (to this reader) more tedious.

Peter F. Hamilton did some of that as well in his Night's Dawn trilogy.

Some readers won't mind. But I'm firm in my belief that had GRRM not so egregiously drawn out GoT it would have been a far more effective body of work...and may actually have been finished by now. I'm almost certain at this point that he will not live long enough to complete it.

I've wondered about the idea of a series and the great overreaching story arcs.
When you think about it, whilst you might be involved in some big long term project, there can be big chunks of your time when you're doing something else. A cop might be investigating some big case which takes years, but he'll still get called in to do other stuff, rather than being left to sit in the office staring at the wall for months before the next thing happens.
What I'm trying to say is that a 'Series', if it's like life, will follow the character through the period. Some of the books will be about the big plot, others will go off on side issues, get married, have kids, you know the sort of thing :-)

Totally agree, Jim. It was just annoying with the sword of truth series that whole books of 350 pages appeared wherein none of the recognisable MCs appeared until the last 25 pages and the plot had only the most tenuous link to the constructed world of that series. I suppose if they'd been sold as companion novels or 'Sword of Truth stories' rather than billed as the next installment and by the way you do need to read those last 25 pages or you'll miss something major when an actual installment comes out, I'd have been less annoyed. I do like series but I think that most of them need to set an expiration date.

And you're right, a massive progect should leave windows of time for other things.

I can see your point, Jim, but then there's also the argument that books are not real life. We don't really want to read about every charcter's three meals a day, going to the loo, doing their laundry and all that. IMO, any sidetracking in long works need to be done working on subplots that support the main plot line. Otherwise it just becomes a never ending soap opera, minus the cheesy organ music.

Case in point: Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy (and don't get me wrong, in the end I loved that series, despite things like this) begins with a space battle that leaves the 'main' character stranded in space....

...I was reading along for ages when I suddenly realized this 'main' character had been totally missing from the story. When the character does reappear--more than 3/4 the way through book 2--she's treated as such a minor character that I literally had to go back to the beginning of book one confirm who she was. Baffling.

As for GRRM, the whole dragon lady arch is rise-to-power/fall-from-power, rinse and reapeat. It was obvious to me that he has a fixed idea of when she's going to finally arrive on the mainland (I only read the first 3 books, so if something happened after that, I don't know about it...not that I care, I'm done with that series), and that GRRM is just casually inventing stuff to delay her arrival until the predetermined point. It all became rather pointless to me.

I think there has to be some reason for a huge series to be a huge series. If you just arbitrarily decide "I'm going to write a really long series," then I probably am not interested in reading it. Form follows function. Or in this case, length follows story. If you've got a really large, complex overarching story with a lot of intertwinning subplots involving a lot of characters, then a long work is warranted. But that doesn't mean authors should pad stuff out to their hearts content for the sake of bigger word count.

I confess I've avoided GRRM because it is so huge. Thirty years ago I'd probably have bought it, even now you can get special offers etc and I could have the first five or so paperbacks for £20 which would once have tempted me.

I can see where Micah and J.A. are coming from, and I think that the difference may be down to sheer bulk of the book. If a book is 200,000 words plus then the side trails and suchlike should be within the book itself, not a separate book
I can also feel the pain about buying a 'side read' because the last 25 pages are vital to the main plot.

I wonder at some of this, are these people such big names their editors don't pick them up on it? Or is it mechandising encouraged by the publisher?

I've got some books planned. Partly they're a 'duel' between the good guy and the bad guy, but in one book they're effectively on the same side because a third party has upset them both, and in another book the 'good guy' is going to have problems that the bad guy didn't cause.
They've never met, may never meet (artistically I think it's better that they don't) and ideally each book will be stand alone so you don't have to read all of them
Obviously I hope you will :-)

BUT, and I think it's an important BUT, each book is less than 90,000 words.

See that all sounds doable and more importantly, fun! So I think you're on to something there Jim.

Some big name authors ( and Terry Goodkind is one of the guilty ones) have 'do not edit' clauses written into their contracts. Basically if the publisher wants them, they don't get to dictate suggestions about the book. Which seems idiotic to me as working with an editor or even a beta reader usually results in a much better book!

Absolutely, the relationship between author and editor can be very close and productive

Micah wrote: "I say let the story tell itself. If it's short and technically falls into the novella category, so be it. Just for God's sake don't pad it to fit some perceived Goldilocks zone!

And, the novella h..."

Excellent list of examples! As has been said here already, I don't think length matters so much as what it accomplishes. If you artifically inflate or pad a story, then the extra pages make it harder to get through and less enjoyable. The reader will know. As long as you're not asking for 20 bucks for 20 pages, I think you'll be fine.

I have a few short "books" myself out and that's just how it is. If I waited until I had a bunch more to fill a page limit than it'd be 10 years before I could publish any of them. And if I forced them to be longer I wouldn't be telling the same story.

And 40K words is still considered a "novel" so no shame in it. Hell, I think a lot of best selling series are a series of shorter books. As long as each feels like a complete story and you're not teasing the reader, I say go for it! :)

I tend to write doorstoppers, and have always been a fan of epic sagas, complex overarching plots and intertwined stories. I average about 100,000 words (some more, [the thickest has been 130,000 words], others less [the smallest was 79,000 words]. This is after editing and taking out filler when I get on an inspired roll. I'm trying to embrace ebooks, as my poor novels hurts trees!

I agree, J.D. It all comes down to what the story requires/accomplishes.

I write horror, and my first book was about 60k words. My second came out to be around 100k after revision, if I remember right (haven't looked at either in a long time, since I've buried them deep in my trunk). The Safe, my third novel, clocks out somewhere around 125k, which I feel is a nice comfortable length for a horror novel. Enough for a reader to sink his/her teeth into, but not so long that it has time to drag.

I finished the first draft of my fourth a couple weeks back, and it's 180k, so pretty big. I'm quite happy with it.

For me it depends on the story. I hate using either label, novella seems to understand the story and book doesn't mean much. If I'm writing a sci-fi soap opera genre my world building takes time so it's hard to capture it in a novella. I have a book called Gemini which is in prerelease right now and it was written as 5 books of about 20K per book, but the first 2 books were a little boring due to the world building so I decided to combine it into one novel of about 100k words. We'll see if it works.

My other series is more technical and the scene is future Earth so I didn't need to world build and I got into the story better. That series is 'right now' 2 books with a potential 3 rd. But then again, even though I've got good reviews, I still feel the first book is a little slow so I'm considering combining the two books and adding a bunch of story and publishing it with "Revisited" in the title.

I guess I'm saying I don't have a clue. I write until the story is done and I often change the format depending on how the story comes out.

This is quite interesting. My novels range from 80-100k words and I have one novella of 23k words. But I also have a prequel for my series listed as a short story of 15k words, which gets little to no attention. I am wondering if the designation of short story is why it is passed up. I wonder if people would be more inclined to read my 'novelette' than a short story?

I think at 15,000 words you could reasonably call it a novella. I'm no sure about the word novelette - it wouldn't put me off but I know others it would.

I'm curious how the market may be changing in the digital age. When I started out, 1989, a novella was doomed. I wrote two. No one touched them. Too big for periodicals, and too small for a book. Sure, Connie Willis can publish a novella, but not mortals. I have a sense that this may be changing. Certainly self-published ebooks it's a non-issue. Are the economics even worse against POD novellas than novels? To get $0 royalties in a brick and mortar store for a 58k MG book, I would have had to price it half-again what the pros do.

I've actually never heard of the category 'short novel' before. Sounds like a bit of a cop-out for people who are afraid of a novella, which surely 40,000 words is. If it's not a novella, it's a novel. Of Mice and Men's original cover claims it's a 'novel'. It's less than 30,000 words.

I don't think it depends on the story. I think readers have a right to understand, at a glance, what they're getting. If I see 'novella' I would expect a book between 20 and 50K words. As Micah pointed out, would you really be upset if you received a novella of the quality in that list? As long as it was clearly communicated that it was a novella, I'd be satisfied.

Good topic because I've nearly finished one. I'm aiming at 30K. I'll be happy to call it a novella.

Shanna wrote: "My time travel series is all novella length books. I sell most days on Amazon. It's just starting to get distributed wider through Smashwords so I haven't had a report on that yet."

I'll be interested to hear the results when you do.

If we're talking ebooks, it doesn't matter if you call it a novel, a novella or a piece of cheese. The page count is displayed on the website where you buy the book.

Ah, but page counts can be manipulated--deliberately or not. For POD books there's a marked incentive to print on big pages with small print. Granted, you don't want to push that too far, but when you're looking at a 45cent profit margin, an extra twenty pages makes a dent! The Heron is His Vigilance is 220k words, but I got them onto about 400 pages so I could keep the cost under $20. It's probably longer than a 600 page mass market book.

Eugene wrote: "Ah, but page counts can be manipulated--deliberately or not. For POD books there's a marked incentive to print on big pages with small print. Granted, you don't want to push that too far, but when ..."

True. Even though the size of the font can be changed on a kindle, the pages count is estimated by the font size used in the uploaded version. My first book originally had over three hundred pages listed, but the second, which was longer, came in at under two fifty. The difference was just that the first was uploaded with eleven point font and the second with ten. I've since reuploaded the first book to match the others. They really should list the number of locations on an eBook.

I didnae ken that. Sounds like KDP and the others need to fix their software. In the writerly world, word count seems to be the accepted standard, perhaps they should show that. Interesting to see that POD essentially makes it impossible to sell a very long book, whereas in conventional publishing the trends seems to be for ever-longer ones. This game is all very fluid, isn't it?