The Problems with Sequels

I recently received a newsletter from an author marketing her upcoming release. The novel was sixth in a series of books, each of which had the same setting and featured a cast of characters that moved throughout the novels, with a new character thrown in on occasion. I loved the first book but wasn’t crazy about the second, so I ignored the remaining sequels. After reading this author’s email, I was glad I did. Why? Because over the course of the series, the author had unraveled her original Happily Ever After (HEA) for the sake of having material to write additional stories.

And that’s the problem with too many sequels.

In the original book I’d read, the main character found the love of her life as she neared middle age. The author took us through the entire romance as it unfolded in a terrific story that I appreciate to this day. At the end, the reader was happy for everyone, and the end should have stayed THE END, but the author either loved the characters so much she wanted to keep revisiting them (it happens) or she wanted to capitalize on the success of the first story, which was later made into a Hallmark movie (that ruined the story) by writing sequels.

Every plot needs conflict, and too often, authors take the easiest route by unraveling what they’d accomplished in their original story to have the characters deal with that same conflict as they once again struggle to obtain…the exact same resolution. A good example of this is the sequel to National Treasure. At the end of the original movie, Ben found the treasure, restored his family’s name, and won the girl. And then someone decided to make a sequel. What happened next? The family’s name had been re-tarnished, Ben and Abigail had broken up, and they had to start all over again. I hated it.

Likewise, as I read the author’s email, I discovered the character in the book I’d liked so much had lost her love in a sequel and was starting over. I deleted the message. For me, a good sequel isn’t one that unravels a hard-earned HEA, but one that continues the original characters’ journeys while focusing on others. 

If an author decides to unravel a character’s journey in one book to write another, they’re either doing it because the original resolution was weak and it needed to be fixed, or they’re doing it because it’s an easy way to find a plot for a subsequent novel. The first shouldn’t have been published and the second isn’t a good excuse to undo what comes down to the reader’s satisfaction of the original HEA. 

Authors, feed your readers. Don’t mess with them and beloved stories for the sake of your convenience.

 _____________________

Photo Credit Unknown. License All Creative Commons

Writing: Point of View

I've been taught to write in a deep point of view, a technique that turns Third Person narrative into internal monologue equal (as much as possible) to that of First Person. It eliminates distance and telling, converting, "She saw a cardinal fly past. So close, she felt the breath of wind against her face," to, "A cardinal flew past her face. So close, a breath of wind brushed her cheek."

Deep POV also has its disadvantages. In eliminating all telling and distance, the reader is inside the character's head all the time, seeing only what is within their field of vision, hearing their thoughts down to the, "Whoa, did that really just happen?" and experiencing only their emotions and reactions. I found it limiting, and I had trouble adjusting to being in a character's head one second and then pulling back and showing the reader how that character reacted the next. Consequently, I pulled back a bit on the technique in my stories.

I know in this post-modern age, deep POV is supposedly a must, but I don't enjoy reading stories written completely in deep POV unless it's First Person. I miss some of the telling, backstory, and narrative that widened the characters' world for me. I'm currently on chapter nine of Out of the Silent Planet, and while an occasional jump from Third to Second to First Person, and learning non-linear details after the fact (he had been walking along a rise for some time. Whoops, time to adjust the mental image) jars me a bit--because I have been taught that it's jarring--I'm thoroughly enjoying the story, just as I've enjoyed other classics over the past few decades.

Deep POV is designed to engage the emotions and senses of the reader in this post-modern world, to give them an almost primal experience while reading. I don't believe that's appropriate for every story written, or appropriate for every reader. I'll read stories written in a deeper POV, but personally, I prefer stories that engage my mind. In this post-modern age, we need to engage our minds more. I know I do.

Voice

The judges chided Siobhan for a lack of it. Writing instructors strive the importance of it, yet so many artists haven't a clue what it means to find and use their voice. I'm no different. I'm a chameleon writer, meaning I change style and tone so that both compliment the story. The writing in one novel is long and flowing. In other, short and to the point. In my opinion, what works for one piece won't work for another. But instructors point a long index finger at my work and command me to use my voice.

Eh? Do you, like, want me to sing my story or what?

I didn't begin to understand what they meant until a friend posted pictures of her daughter's sketches on Facebook. Beneath it, some sweet lady left a comment stating, "Your work is another voice to express yourself.

I read that, and a subject that had been elusive stood in startling clarity before my eyes. This is what our guides wanted, something that expresses us, the individual. Not just an imitation of another person's work, but what we, as artists with unique characteristics, backgrounds, and experiences can bring to the piece. Something that exposes our wants, our hopes, our desires. Our angst. Once found, that voice should be evident in everything we produce.

Siobhan is a wonderful singer. I hope she finds her voice, her way of expressing herself, instead of parroting others. I hope the same for myself. Understanding is half the battle.

Writers Curriculum

I've followed Jack Cavanaugh's new blog, WORD FORGE, since its advent a few weeks ago (link on the sidebar). The posts are informative and thoughtful, and his writing proves he has the ability and right to teach the craft to others. However, I wasn't thrilled about today's post, but only because Mr. Cavanaugh told the truth. You may want to read it before continuing.

There are several things I wish I'd known before jumping into the pursuit of publishing. It's not to say I wouldn't have reached for that star anyway, but I (hope) I would have been just a might bit more careful in doing so to avoid getting scorched. The focus of Mr. Cavanaugh's post is one of those important revelations. That publishing is one-part book and three-parts sales it is another.

Wouldn't it be great if a curriculum existed to guide new writers? The objective would be clear: To keep new authors from making huge mistakes before they land a contract AND ensure they know this boat may not land soon. Below that on the syllabus, in four levels, one would find additional objectives. Tasks should be completed before moving to the next level, and all should be completed before the big pitch. I.E. (these are off the top of my head, so don't shoot me):

First Level:

• The secret Jack Cavanaugh wrote about
• Basic story structure--Yes, there is one
• Basic writing/publishing definitions
• Common errors for new writers ("speaker tags," she said adroitly; head hopping)
• Books to read before moving to the Second Level
• Why hoping an agent will love your story so much, they'll ignore the writing is a bad idea
• Why You Should Watch What You Say on Loops and Comments!

Second Level:

• Joining a writers group/organization
• Don't break the rules--For Now
• Learning to recognize telling
• Genre definitions
• Category vs Title
• Writing query letters
• Why you can't send unsolicited queries
• Why a writers' conference
• Pitching at conferences and what to avoid

Third Level

• Deeper POV
• You're still telling!
• Defining audience
• Researching your target market
• Researching your target publisher publisher
• Why you should have know the previous before starting your novel
• How to pitch
• Query letters--What you thought you knew

Fourth Level

• Polishing the manuscript
• One Sheets
• Networking
• The Big Pitch

Yes, I know. All that information is out there, and Mr. Cavanaugh seems determined to teach it to others, as do the good folks at Novel Journey and Seekerville. But having it compiled in one easy-to-read list would be helpful. Each section could include an End-of-Level questionnaire to help the writer determine if they're ready to advance. I.E.:

• Are you concerned about obtaining a copyright? Return to the First Level Start
• Are you stressing over your title? Return to First Level Start
• Underline the telling in this passage: Adolf heard the soldiers running down the corridor. He tested the window. It wouldn't open. Then he remembered the trap door. Can't? Return to Second Level Start

I'm sure it's out there somewhere. But I'm also certain that, in the dream-filled rush to be published (after all, I HAVE A GREAT STORY IDEA!) new authors will ignore it, and continue to send unsolicited queries or toss pitches to the wrong agent and editor at conferences.

But then again, learning these aspects may very well be an integral part of a writer's journey. As I once heard a young, legally blind man say, "There is no strength where there is no struggle."

And our stories thrive on struggles.

Endings

While my stories have a strong romantic element (guys, watch The Terminator before you roll your eyes), technically I write Women's Fiction, not Romance. Why? Because I like the freedom Women's Fiction offers.

With Inspirational Romance, the hero and heroine must meet in the opening scene or thereabout. They must have conflict. Eventually, they must fall in love, and at the end, either have an engagement or a wedding.

I like to mess with characters' lives, so that simply won't work for me.

On page 102 of Plot & Structure, James Scott Bell tells us there are three types of endings. In essence, the main character either wins, loses or the ending is open (he calls it ambiguous.) I can't find the source, but I thought Mr. Bell also said something along the lines that the main character can:

a) win the goal and gain moral ground
b) lose the goal but gain moral ground
c) lose the goal and lose moral grain
d) lose the goal but gain moral ground

If he didn't, it sounds good. And it's what I like about Women's Fiction. I have all those options at my disposal. In one of my stories, the couple doesn't end up together, but there's a possibility they may someday (ambiguous). In other, I made a surprising twist that I couldn't have achieved with the technical requirements of Romance. In another, the couple is together, but it's unclear for how long. And the reader is okay with those given the context of the story.

There isn't anything wrong with Romance. Considering the times we live in, it's great to get lost in a novel that promises a happy ending. But as a writer, I love to explore the possibilities--while still ending my stories on a touching note.