Good points. Seems to me, though, especially when comparing one-offs (or "stand-alones) against "having to remember" something from the past, you're talking about sagas, not series.
For example, the only thing common to the 46 novels in my Blackwell Ops series is the company name. (They all work for Blackwell Ops.) The protagonists, teams, assignments and outcomes all vary widely. But in the Wes Crowley (western) or Journey Home (SF) sagas, although each novel stands alone it also builds on the past.
Closer to the genre you're talking about, my Stern Talbot PI series novels all feature the same protagonist and one other character dominates each novel, but all the other characters, jobs, etc. are different.
This was fascinating. I believe your points are true across many genres. ( okay, maybe not romance, but I digress.) I realized after reviewing my all time favorite reads, that I too am in your 1% of readers. Short stories, novellas and single novels make up 96% of my top books. Thank you for the insights.
Off the top of my head I think Jurassic Park is a good example. Mucker and Apache series by Burroughs. Also the first two Sackett books about Barnabas are a duology even though they are part of the larger saga
I, too, like short stories, though my favorite length is the novella. I think that the latter is the perfect scale for stories in my favorite genre, the mystery. It requires the writer to keep the story moving, and it avoids the mushy middle in which a writer pads the story with excessive detail in order to put off the final revelation of the killer.
I do like series, though not exclusively. However, I dislike it when the writer stuffs the narrative with thickets of details about the detective's personal life and abundant traumas. Just tell the story. I prefer 'tecs like Perry Mason and Charlie Chan, who are real heroes and not damaged trauma victims for whom our sympathies are continually sought. Their stories put the focus on the victim and suspects, and they emphasize logic, motives, and action. Emotion is, of course, a driving force behind actions, so such stories have a very good balance of the important elements of fiction, in my view.
I'm a fan of standalones. They seem to pack more punch, probably because they have to -- there's no followup book that will salvage things if you make a misstep. Funny thing -- in the sci-fi genre, I think of one of my all-time faves as a standalone, even though the author later wrote several books in the series. "Ender's Game." Unparalleled, in my mind (although it's probably one of those timing things -- I read it in my impressionable teens).
Your description of the "anything could happen" suspense got me thinking, though. I wonder if one could write a series where you establish early on that even the protagonist could die? It would be weird, to be sure, but I wonder if someone could pull it off in a way that didn't completely offend their audience? I suppose your other commenter's Blackwell Ops series does it in the simplest way: the series isn't built around the protagonist of the story, it's related to the institution they work for. So they *could* die...
Excellent points. I think the writer F. Paul Wilson dealt with this issue well. He wrote his long standing series about an urban mercenary called 'Repairman Jack' who slowly starts taking on more and more weird 'X Files' like assignments, until in the end of the series, he is battling the very demonic embodiment of chaos. He wrote several stand alone books that do not feature this character but they blend into the Repairman Jack universe. So if you read those stand alone novels, they offer context to what is going on in the RJ series. He called this idea; 'The Secret History of the World.' It is an inspiration to my own writing and how if you look closely, everything is fully interconnected and related in some way.
Good points. Seems to me, though, especially when comparing one-offs (or "stand-alones) against "having to remember" something from the past, you're talking about sagas, not series.
For example, the only thing common to the 46 novels in my Blackwell Ops series is the company name. (They all work for Blackwell Ops.) The protagonists, teams, assignments and outcomes all vary widely. But in the Wes Crowley (western) or Journey Home (SF) sagas, although each novel stands alone it also builds on the past.
Closer to the genre you're talking about, my Stern Talbot PI series novels all feature the same protagonist and one other character dominates each novel, but all the other characters, jobs, etc. are different.
This was fascinating. I believe your points are true across many genres. ( okay, maybe not romance, but I digress.) I realized after reviewing my all time favorite reads, that I too am in your 1% of readers. Short stories, novellas and single novels make up 96% of my top books. Thank you for the insights.
I’ll look forward to your release!
I'm in the 1% with you Big Philly.
Give me short stories and standalones any time.
I’m a big stand alone guy too. I also appreciate the incredibly rare duolagy
Off the top of my head I think Jurassic Park is a good example. Mucker and Apache series by Burroughs. Also the first two Sackett books about Barnabas are a duology even though they are part of the larger saga
Outlaw Josey Wales is a fantastic duology too
I, too, like short stories, though my favorite length is the novella. I think that the latter is the perfect scale for stories in my favorite genre, the mystery. It requires the writer to keep the story moving, and it avoids the mushy middle in which a writer pads the story with excessive detail in order to put off the final revelation of the killer.
I do like series, though not exclusively. However, I dislike it when the writer stuffs the narrative with thickets of details about the detective's personal life and abundant traumas. Just tell the story. I prefer 'tecs like Perry Mason and Charlie Chan, who are real heroes and not damaged trauma victims for whom our sympathies are continually sought. Their stories put the focus on the victim and suspects, and they emphasize logic, motives, and action. Emotion is, of course, a driving force behind actions, so such stories have a very good balance of the important elements of fiction, in my view.
I'm a fan of standalones. They seem to pack more punch, probably because they have to -- there's no followup book that will salvage things if you make a misstep. Funny thing -- in the sci-fi genre, I think of one of my all-time faves as a standalone, even though the author later wrote several books in the series. "Ender's Game." Unparalleled, in my mind (although it's probably one of those timing things -- I read it in my impressionable teens).
Your description of the "anything could happen" suspense got me thinking, though. I wonder if one could write a series where you establish early on that even the protagonist could die? It would be weird, to be sure, but I wonder if someone could pull it off in a way that didn't completely offend their audience? I suppose your other commenter's Blackwell Ops series does it in the simplest way: the series isn't built around the protagonist of the story, it's related to the institution they work for. So they *could* die...
Excellent points. I think the writer F. Paul Wilson dealt with this issue well. He wrote his long standing series about an urban mercenary called 'Repairman Jack' who slowly starts taking on more and more weird 'X Files' like assignments, until in the end of the series, he is battling the very demonic embodiment of chaos. He wrote several stand alone books that do not feature this character but they blend into the Repairman Jack universe. So if you read those stand alone novels, they offer context to what is going on in the RJ series. He called this idea; 'The Secret History of the World.' It is an inspiration to my own writing and how if you look closely, everything is fully interconnected and related in some way.