I’m currently working on the sequel to BLOOD WILL TELL, and waiting for feedback on MAGE STORM, which I hope will be the first of a series. Therefore, I’ve been thinking about series and some of the problems of series and sequels.
First, I identify four different kinds of series, which have different issues.
- The multi-volume story: This kind is (unfortunately, to my way of thinking) particularly common in fantasy. It’s the story that isn’t complete (framed by the recognition of a problem and the resolution of that problem) until you read the whole series. Probably the most famous of these is LORD OF THE RINGS. The individual volumes do not come out to be stories (by the definition given above). You have to read all three before the problem recognized in volume one (THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING) is resolved in volume three (THE RETURN OF THE KING). Other examples are David Eddings’ THE BELGARIAD and THE MALLOREAN. And, probably the biggest of all time, Robert Jordan’s WHEEL OF TIME. These series can be great fun when all the volumes are out–and extremely frustrating when the reader has to wait a year or more between installment. Also, speaking personally, THE WHEEL OF TIME demonstrated that there is a limit to the number of volumes I’m willing to read before I get some resolution.
- The multi-arc series: This is perhaps the tightest form of series and needs the most organization on the part of the writer. Each book in this kind of series has its own completed story, but is also part of a larger story arc that unites all of the books in the series. HARRY POTTER is probably the best example of this. Each book has a separate problem, but also advances the overall story. For example, in HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS, Harry and his friends have to figure out what and where the chamber is, what’s in it, who’s opened it, and ultimately defeat both the monster and its master. That’s a story. But, there are also things in that book which don’t directly advance that quest, but have to do with the larger story of Harry’s struggle against Lord Voldemort.
- The protagonist-centered series. There are a lot of examples of this, but one of the simplest is any mystery series that centers around a particular detective. That protagonist is all these series have in common. It doesn’t matter–or matters very little–what order you read the books in. They’re all different, and usually distinct, adventures of the protagonist. Sometimes, it’s a setting or fantasy world, that’s featured instead of a main character.
- The stories-that-build-on-each-other series: (Okay, that’s a long and awkward name for it.) This is the series in which each book is a complete story in its own right. There is no overarching conflict that unifies all the books. But the stories do build on each other so that there is a preferred reading order. Patricia Briggs’s MERCY THOMPSON series, Lois McMaster Bujold’s Vorkosigan saga, and John Flanagan’s RANGER’S APPRENTICE are all examples of this.
As for me, my series tend to fall in that last category. It’s probably not an accident that this is also the kind of series I like to read most. Though, if I ever get back to it, THE SHAMAN’S CURSE is more of the second type, with an overarching conflict unifying the three (or possibly four) stories in the series.
I’ll be back on Wednesday with more thoughts on the problems with writing series.
Meanwhile, new chapters of FIRE AND EARTH and BLOOD WILL TELL are available on wattpad. Both stories are also available in their entirety on Amazon and elsewhere e-books are sold.
Meredith Mansfield, Author 