3 ms·

This is OBVIOUSLY my 2 cents... Re: 1. I think this is a different thing. If you want to tell a bunch of stories that are linked, that's fine. If you want to t

This is OBVIOUSLY my 2 cents... Re: 1. I think this is a different thing. If you want to tell a bunch of stories that are linked, that's fine. If you want to tell one giant story then at least have a plan. There's no indication that Jordan had "a plan". (I think this is the point the great-grandparent is making)

seanflyon 12y ago
> I think that if the author hasn't managed to enclose a proper story in 500-1000 pages, there is probably something that is off. I think there are 2 different complaints here depending on how you interpret "proper": A) It takes too long to get to a conclusion of a series long plot. B) The series long plot is bad because the author did not plan ahead and just cobbled it together after the fact. masklinn gave a good response to A.
jamie_ca 12y ago
I seem to recall when the first book came out, that it was planned as a trilogy. After the second book, it was going to be a double trilogy. I don't think Jordan's overall plan reached his final 12-book estimate until book 8 or 9, and Sanderson couldn't even fit the final material he picked up into two books, so it hit 13 by the end. Now, there's nothing wrong with that in general. Sometimes you write an outline, and in the process of penning down a quarter of the story and fleshing out the characters and setting you come up with more and more ideas. There's two ways out of that: either you let the story get control of the writing, resulting in a historical-feeling narrative with no clear overall plot, or you take the time to edit and revise what you have into smaller, self-contained stories. I vastly prefer the latter, especially if there _are_ hints to an overarching plot. 13-book meanderings like Wheel of Time don't do it for me these days, but Dresden Files (15 books and ~20 short stories) or the Honor Harrington series (13 books, plus 18 spinoff short stories or novels)? I will chain-read those like crack, and still feel satisfied almost regardless of where they stop.

seanflyon 12y ago

> I think that if the author hasn't managed to enclose a proper story in 500-1000 pages, there is probably something that is off. I think there are 2 different complaints here depending on how you interpret "proper": A) It takes too long to get to a conclusion of a series long plot. B) The series long plot is bad because the author did not plan ahead and just cobbled it together after the fact. masklinn gave a good response to A.

jamie_ca 12y ago

I seem to recall when the first book came out, that it was planned as a trilogy. After the second book, it was going to be a double trilogy. I don't think Jordan's overall plan reached his final 12-book estimate until book 8 or 9, and Sanderson couldn't even fit the final material he picked up into two books, so it hit 13 by the end. Now, there's nothing wrong with that in general. Sometimes you write an outline, and in the process of penning down a quarter of the story and fleshing out the characters and setting you come up with more and more ideas. There's two ways out of that: either you let the story get control of the writing, resulting in a historical-feeling narrative with no clear overall plot, or you take the time to edit and revise what you have into smaller, self-contained stories. I vastly prefer the latter, especially if there _are_ hints to an overarching plot. 13-book meanderings like Wheel of Time don't do it for me these days, but Dresden Files (15 books and ~20 short stories) or the Honor Harrington series (13 books, plus 18 spinoff short stories or novels)? I will chain-read those like crack, and still feel satisfied almost regardless of where they stop.