That difficult middle novel.

Because I’m really dumb, I decided a trilogy wasn’t enough for me and I came up with the crazy idea that a series of five would be better. I’m still a little unclear as to why that would be a good idea, but now I’m more than halfway through it, at least, doesn’t sounds quite so horrific and scary. What it did do was increase the number of middle-novels I had to write which poses a few extra problems, so it’s nice to hear that the very middle one didn’t bore people at least! While SFX preferred book 3 to 2, Elitist Book Reviews were the other way around and could barely have loved book 2 more – which meant I was a little nervous about what they’d make of it. I may do a longer post about middle novels later, but I should probably sort my thoughts on the subject first since I think Lou Anders wants to do an extended interview on the subject.

You can read that here but it’s great to note that they thought the last chapter alone would have been worth the cover price, but I suggest you read the rest first, it’ll make a bit more sense…

12 thoughts on “That difficult middle novel.

    1. well hopefully it will be! There was a lot of non-action stuff that needed to happen in book 3 so I can see it might not be as easy to work though. Still intended to have some redeeming features however!

    1. well hopefully it will be! There was a lot of non-action stuff that needed to happen in book 3 so I can see it might not be as easy to work though. Still intended to have some redeeming features however!

  1. Middle book syndrome

    What I like about your books, apart from the story (obviously), is that everything you write seems necessary to the story. Throw away comments that the plot hinges on, off-hand comments that define characters. you get what I mean.

    To me this implies that you have given the story an astonishing amount of thought. It shows, in a good way.

    If you think it’s five books then it’s five books. I for one, and my mate who borrows books, am looking forward to the rest of the story.

    1. Re: Middle book syndrome

      Excellent, I’m glad to hear it! Everything is meant to be part of a wider picture, in the way that you don’t notice off-hand details in a real-world novel but they add to the overall image, but it really bugs some people!

      And yes, five books is right. I’m glad that one of the first things Jo did was to pin me down on the number of books it was going to be, tell me to trim it down to the smallest number possible for the story and generally tell me to have an idea for the plot of each. The ideas were one-line ones, just to remind myself of which bit of the plot it involved, but it did make me stick to a plan that I think a few more successful fantasy writers could happily have been forced into!

  2. Middle book syndrome

    What I like about your books, apart from the story (obviously), is that everything you write seems necessary to the story. Throw away comments that the plot hinges on, off-hand comments that define characters. you get what I mean.

    To me this implies that you have given the story an astonishing amount of thought. It shows, in a good way.

    If you think it’s five books then it’s five books. I for one, and my mate who borrows books, am looking forward to the rest of the story.

    1. Re: Middle book syndrome

      Excellent, I’m glad to hear it! Everything is meant to be part of a wider picture, in the way that you don’t notice off-hand details in a real-world novel but they add to the overall image, but it really bugs some people!

      And yes, five books is right. I’m glad that one of the first things Jo did was to pin me down on the number of books it was going to be, tell me to trim it down to the smallest number possible for the story and generally tell me to have an idea for the plot of each. The ideas were one-line ones, just to remind myself of which bit of the plot it involved, but it did make me stick to a plan that I think a few more successful fantasy writers could happily have been forced into!

Leave a Reply