Monday Musing: Sequels and Series

A question I have been asked often after I mention that I’m writing a book is what will happen in the sequel. I am in two very distinct minds about this issue as I both love and loath sequels. As we are soon to be in 2014, the sequel to 2013, this seemed like a good time to talk, vaguely and without resolution, about Sequels and Series.

To me there the two things are different. And I don’t particularly like sequels.
By and large a sequel is a copy of an original idea that largely repeats those story beats but choses to subvert existing expectations to keep it interesting. I’m not saying that sequels are bad. I own a whole heap of them. Silence of the Lambs is a very good sequel to Red Dragon, though I confess to still liking RD more. Silence follows largely the same formula as Dragon, but with added Lector.

This is a difficult topic to write about because some of my favourite books are parts of series, yet I would class them as sequels. I don’t think I necessarily agree that because one particular thing becomes popular that it should lead to it being repeated. I have, I think, three of the sequels to Blade Runner, which is a whole heap of weird because it’s part sequel to Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep, largely a sequel to the movie that had little and less to do with the book, and also a sequel to a movie that had its ending changed. Weird. And I don’t think those books were necessary.

This is in opposition to my feelings about Series which tend to have one large story deliberately told over a number of books. George RR Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series is an example of this that I’m enjoying. I like long sprawling narratives that were designed to tie in to each other. The Lord of the Rings is a series not sequels.

I’ve spoken before about enjoying Ben Aaronovitch’s Rivers of London books. These books are definitely sequels, taking the parameters of the original and stamping that template of the subsequent books. The same can be said for Malcolm Price’s Aberystwyth books.

Joe Ambercrombie had a series in the First Law Trilogy and that was followed by a number of sequels set in the same world with overlapping characters. In this instance the first sequel Best Served Cold is my favourite book he has written. (I’m currently reading Red Country.)

Actually, I don’t really know what my point is here. I guess, based on the question as to whether there will be a sequel to my book (there won’t) is that there is interest in creating something that will breed further narratives, people want to visit a world and see it expand. This is both a desire from an audience, a financial consideration of people buying the next book because it’s the next book. I have Aaronovitch’s Broken Homes pre-ordered in paperback. I don’t even know what it’s about. So I’m not passing judgement.

I think maybe it’s odd that there is an assumption or expectation that something cannot exist in and of itself, there it must breed further stories. If there are more stories to tell then this is great and exciting. Yet if it is just cashing in on something that worked, I’m more reluctant to become engaged.

And to blur my already muddy thoughts on the matter, yes, I have an idea for a series of books.

 

I’ve not even scratched the surface of my book collection, and have no idea what I would class Iain M. Banks Culture books as. What are your favourite sequels or series? What next book of a story are you looking forward to? Do you wish there was a sequel to your favourite book – what is that book?

I’d like to hear your thoughts.

– Andrew

 

Monday Musing: The Real World

Hello,

Welcome to the accidentally Tuesday Monday Musing.

I’ve been thinking about reality, and the reality of fiction. What makes a world real to a reader? It’s something that I’m constantly thinking about in my writing at the moment, and have been thinking about other works of fiction and the worlds that they created.

I’ve recently finished reading Flashman’s Lady, which like the rest of the series deftly mixes historical fact with fiction. George MacDonald Fraser researched fact and built his fiction around it. It’s a staggering feat to me. I utterly believe the world he is writing. It’s a beautifully believable world. If you’ve not read any of the Flashman Papers I heartily recommend them.

I’m currently reading Storm Front by Jim Butcher because I’m on a bit of an Urban Magic kick at the moment, having recently enjoyed Ben Aaronovitch’s River of London series. Storm Front is set in a modern-day Chicago and layers on levels of fantasy, mythology and magic. Which is what got me thinking about this topic, as I realised I totally bought his world, but can’t pinpoint the moment that I did.

Fictional worlds like Middle Earth, Westeros and The Discworld all feel like real places, brilliantly realised on the page. The Time Traveler’s Wife works around nonsense science that you believe as being a problem Henry suffers from.

In film, the world of Star Wars originally caught imagination because it presented its world as lived in and used, we were seeing the parts of the world that people like us would live in, we were seeing our lives mirrored in this galaxy far, far away. (which is why I think the prequels feel so cold to those of us that grew up with the original trilogy. Suddenly we’re in palaces and government buildings. Nothing is really as relatable to us in those films).

I’ve recently finished playing Bioshock Inifinte and my god there was a world that I believed I was in. From the opening level that allows you to explore the floating world of Columbia at your own pace before all the fighting starts allows you to feel at home and familiar with it. This is expanded later when you are joined by Elizabeth who has never seen the world before, her fascination with the world and it’s citizens is constantly refreshing and continuously brings you into LOOKING at the world, not just pass through it.

I love all these world, and so many more. As I create a version of the world we are familiar with I keep having to ask myself does that make sense? Will a reader understand the technology, am I being too vague, too specific, am I skewing things just enough to get the desired effect?

I believe that the key to this is to set out the rules of the world, that certain things exist or can happen and why, and stick to it. There’s nothing worse than a fiction that presents rules and then bends/breaks them for a quick payoff that feels hollow or undeserved. I’m reminded of a designer of panic rooms discussing David Fincher’s film Panic Room, stating that what he was grateful for was the world of panic rooms was established as being unbreakable, that no one could force their way into the room, and that this was maintained as an absolute in the film.

Rules are not always made to be broken.

I feel that my test-readers have been given a mini quiz when they are done reading. I desperately want my world to feel real, lived in, complete and for it to make sense. I hope it does, so far I nothing seems to have really caused any discomfort to my gallant guinea pigs.

Creating a believable new reality is the power of the fiction writer.

– Andrew