Does Science Fiction have an equivalent to Fantasy's LotR as a trend setter?

[JaimeRetief]

Yeah, that is part of why it is better in later readings. How much is a science fiction story about the relevance of the background that the characters are acting against and how much of it is about the characters? In later readings you know what is coming for the characters so the emotional impact isn't as great and more thought can be put into the background.

The story is also about financial shenanigans in relation to how a society has decided to use a technology, in this case cryo-freeze. The commodified contracts in the story is like the bundled bad mortgages from 2008. But the story also showed how a technological mistake could upset the apple-cart. We are having a similar problem now. All of these suburbs designed to be dependent on cars while we run out of oil. SF is not just about the characters. That is what makes it SF. We have to make decisions in the real world about what to do and not do with science and technology.

Too many science teachers make science boring. That is what my high school physics teacher did. But I had learned to mostly ignore teachers by then. Science is not about the teacher.

The story was also interesting in how it gave kids' perspective of adults. There was a little of that in Komarr and A Civil Campaign but Cryoburn partly had a child's POV.

psik

The impact of cryionics on economics and society was nothing new for me, Simak did something very similar in Why Call Them Back From Heaven , however Simak's book was much better than Cryoburn.

I did not care very much for the child POVs, they did not add anything of substance to the plot for me.

 

[JaimeRetief]

This makes sense; but I wonder if that insight is a bit dated. I buy almost all my books as electronic and the size of the book never enters into the equation. Personally, I have discovered that I tend to buy smaller ebooks, than print ones because buying a thin book strikes this slightly frugal person as a waste of good cash, and I don't have the insight when purchasing an ebook, but I do in the bookstore. (Another entity that seems to be heading for a major correction on the less side of the equation. -- They won't die soon but their numbers will be terribly culled.)

The physical size of the book is a good proxy for the length
Font and spacing shenanigans not withstanding the thickness and a glance at a random page can give you a good idea as to the length of the book.

 

[JaimeRetief]

I've never heard that. Is that really the case?

And mundanes seem to love series. Harry Potter, Twilight, the Hunger Games, the Millennium Trilogy (Girl with the Dragon Tatoo, etc.), The Dark Tower, Artemis Fowl, Aubrey-Maturin (Master and Commander, etc.), Sharpe, Flashman, A Song of Ice and Fire...

Yes, for quite some time now.
A number of introductions to anthologies, writer testimonials, and other research into the golden age mention the cents per word nature of the business

The first issue appeared in January 1930, with Bates as editor. Bates aimed for straightforward action-adventure stories, with scientific elements only present to provide minimal plausibility. Clayton paid much better rates than Amazing and Wonder Stories—two cents a word on acceptance, rather than half a cent a word, on publication (or sometimes later)—and consequently Astounding attracted some of the better-known pulp writers, such as Murray Leinster, Victor Rousseau, and Jack Williamson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_Science_Fiction_and_Fact

http://www.therenegadewriter.com/2011/05/05/why-youre-worth-more-than-a-penny-per-word/

A number of the series you pointed out were for juveniles and are genre fiction, YA fantasy, regular fantasy or vampire romance.

 

[Brian G Turner]

A number of introductions to anthologies, writer testimonials, and other research into the golden age mention the cents per word nature of the business

That's only for short stories - that's how they're usually paid for. The same doesn't apply for novels. Advances for novels are usually negotiated in advance, and while a wordcount range can sometimes form a part of the contract, authors have told me that these don't necessarily have to be adhered to (ie, it's fine to write shorter) - and the wordcount certainly doesn't dictate the advance on a novel, or series of novels.

However, pitching a series doesn't necessarily translate into a full contract - Scott Lynch was originally contracted only for the first three books or a projected series, and more recently, Kameron Hurley was contracted for the first two books only of her current trilogy with Angry Robot.

A key difference between SF/F a few decaes ago, and now, is that a much more character-driven and immersive experience is usually desired by readers. Even Dune was too long as a novel to be published in full by the dedicated SF publishers at the time.

Another reason why series (especially trilogies) are popular with readers is that it allows the readers to become more emotionally invested in the characters. Lack of control of plotting, and inability to keep the story concise, may also play a role in certain longer novels, though.

I would be interested in what you might think of something like Ralph Kern's Endeavour, which I personally found much closer to Poul Anderson and Joe Halderman - ie, short, concise, and much more interested in ideas than lengthy character interpersonal conflicts.

 

[JaimeRetief]

That's only for short stories - that's how they're usually paid for. The same doesn't apply for novels. Advances for novels are usually negotiated in advance, and while a wordcount range can sometimes form a part of the contract, authors have told me that these don't necessarily have to be adhered to (ie, it's fine to write shorter) - and the wordcount certainly doesn't dictate the advance on a novel, or series of novels.

However, pitching a series doesn't necessarily translate into a full contract - Scott Lynch was originally contracted only for the first three books or a projected series, and more recently, Kameron Hurley was contracted for the first two books only of her current trilogy with Angry Robot.

A key difference between SF/F a few decaes ago, and now, is that a much more character-driven and immersive experience is usually desired by readers. Even Dune was too long as a novel to be published in full by the dedicated SF publishers at the time.

Another reason why series (especially trilogies) are popular with readers is that it allows the readers to become more emotionally invested in the characters. Lack of control of plotting, and inability to keep the story concise, may also play a role in certain longer novels, though.

I would be interested in what you might think of something like Ralph Kern's Endeavour, which I personally found much closer to Poul Anderson and Joe Halderman - ie, short, concise, and much more interested in ideas than lengthy character interpersonal conflicts.

Well it is always easier to sell more of the same to an eager audience, sadly.
I would rather have an interesting but short main plot with one or two decent characters and solid but not overbearing world-building than something that turns into a self-contradictory convoluted mess by book ten.
Thank you for the clarification, I had always assumed that the same rules for short stories applied for long fiction, although there is still the difference between novel, novella and novelette, are the advances there independent on word count, or is the advance larger for a full length novel?

I also think that we went far beyond the scope of this discussion, should I make a new thread about the problems of modern publishing and short singles vs. long series?

 

[Ray McCarthy]

should I make a new thread about the problems of modern publishing and short singles vs. long series?

I don't think Brian charges for new threads.

 

[Nerds_feather]

The advance is not based on word count--it's based on: a) an estimate of royalties (as a percentage of estimated sales revenue); b) calculation of the lowest amount they can spend in order to sign the author in question (which goes up if other publishers are also involved in bidding); and c) whatever an agent can squeeze out for his/her client. What publishers want in terms of word count, as it happens, is highly variant from genre to genre. Many agents and publishers won't look at fantasy below 100,000 or 120,000 words because they don't think the market wants that. The average crime fiction manuscript, in a genre that sells far better than SF/F, is on average much shorter.

Also, if an author is contracted for a trilogy, then the publisher determines the advance based on sales estimates for three books--same as if the author is contracted for three standalone books.

...oh, and even if an author doesn't earn out the advance, that doesn't mean the book isn't profitable for the publisher. Royalties are 8-15% of the sales price, and on the low end for the first print run, so if an author is paid $7,000 for an advance and only earns the equivalent $5,000 in royalties, that likely means the book generated $50,000 in revenue, the largest chunk of which goes to the publisher. So yeah--they are making that $2,000 back far more often than one might assume.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I think in 1930s - 1940s the magazines paid per word or something, it wasn't much though.

 

[JaimeRetief]

The advance is not based on word count--it's based on: a) an estimate of royalties (as a percentage of estimated sales revenue); b) calculation of the lowest amount they can spend in order to sign the author in question (which goes up if other publishers are also involved in bidding); and c) whatever an agent can squeeze out for his/her client. What publishers want in terms of word count, as it happens, is highly variant from genre to genre. Many agents and publishers won't look at fantasy below 100,000 or 120,000 words because they don't think the market wants that. The average crime fiction manuscript, in a genre that sells far better than SF/F, is on average much shorter.

This confirms my theory that a smaller group of dedicated readers creates the demand for doorstops, if crime fiction's average word count suddenly went up I doubt that many of the more casual readers will stay on.

What abot novice writers?
And would a 90 page "book" by a famous writer command the same revenue as a 350 or a 900 page one.
And then there is the other side of the length coin, if you charge the price of a full length book for something that is about 100 pages do you think that the reader will be happy to pay that price and not feel cheated?

Also, if an author is contracted for a trilogy, then the publisher determines the advance based on sales estimates for three books--same as if the author is contracted for three standalone books.

...oh, and even if an author doesn't earn out the advance, that doesn't mean the book isn't profitable for the publisher. Royalties are 8-15% of the sales price, and on the low end for the first print run, so if an author is paid $7,000 for an advance and only earns the equivalent $5,000 in royalties, that likely means the book generated $50,000 in revenue, the largest chunk of which goes to the publisher. So yeah--they are making that $2,000 back far more often than one might assume.

What if the author constantly pulls a Martin and expands the trilogy into a hexadecalogy?

 

[J-Sun]

I think in 1930s - 1940s the magazines paid per word or something, it wasn't much though.

Magazines still do pay by the word. Books=not word; mags=word. It ranged from a half-cent to a cent or even two. Today, it's about six. Considering the magazines sold for a dime or quarter or what have you and cost five bucks today with far fewer stories (and, say, milk cost a few cents and costs a few dollars now or whatever index you might use) it actually pays less now than it did then. (Of course, the circulation is a lot lower, too - from several mags, some with circulations of 100K or more, to three or so with a top circulation of something like 25K. (Of course, there are more ezines than you can shake a stick at, but I don't know about the commercial aspects of their readership or pay methods (if any). Print zines make next to nothing off of advertisements, for instance, while apparently almost all money for almost all ezines is via ads - another reason to prefer print. But at least print zines used to have advertising that didn't even feel like it - what SF fan minded ads for the SFBC in their SF mags?)

As I digress even further myself, and see everybody else digressing, I figure the original question "does SF have a LOTR? No" pretty much ends the thread but it's been remarkably lively and interesting in its digressions so, rather than kill it or disperse it, I'd be content to see it continue wandering. But I'm not Brian or a mod or the OP (who was wondering about making new threads) so it's not my call.

-- Interesting late thought - NF mentioned a hypothetical advance of 7K. If you wrote a 150K word novel (which is about 4-500 pages) and were paid by the word, it'd be $9000. Now, that's just your advance - whether you fail to earn that or go skyrocketing past it are different questions. But, still, an advance like that for these doorstops would be in the ballpark of today's piddly magazine word rates or less.

(Of course, all this is for first/early sales. Established big name guys play by different rules in both short and long markets.)

 

[MWagner]

This confirms my theory that a smaller group of dedicated readers creates the demand for doorstops, if crime fiction's average word count suddenly went up I doubt that many of the more casual readers will stay on.

How do you determine if a book is read by dedicated readers or casual readers? And do you mean dedicated to the genre, or a particularly dedicated sub-group within a genre?

My sense is that breakout novels are breakouts because they reach outside the hardcore readers in a genre. So looking at some fantasy debuts of the last 15 years, it's seems doorstoppers aren't at all a barrier to breaking out into broad popularity: Gardens of the Moon - 666 pages; The Name of the Wind - 662 pages; the Blade Itself - 517 pages. And fantasy is maybe the most healthy genre in fiction at the moment, so hard to see how its best-selling books are only read by a small group of dedicated readers. Even in mystery, the biggest selling novels these days are often big books: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - 465 pages; A Wanted Man (Lee Child) - 626 pages. Dan Brown's latest is 461 pages. Stephen King's 11/22/63 clocks in at 849 pages! Huge bestsellers. And books don't get to be bestsellers unless they find a mass audience of casual readers.

And what do you think these casual readers who hate longer books do? Stop reading? Do sudokus instead?

 

[Mirannan]

A couple of points...

First, IMHO the drive towards doorstops is partly due to the disproportion in perceived value between such books and smaller ones. Everything else being equal, I think most people would be more inclined to buy a 1000-page book for £7.99 than a 150-page one for £6.99. The reason for the cost disparity? Well, I'm not a publisher but it seems to me that the cost of the expensively-printed cover and the binding - and the marketing, I suppose - isn't much less for a small book than a huge one.

Second, again IMHO one of the reasons for today's huge books is the use of computers to write them. Using a pen, or even a typewriter, to write encourages the use of fewer words, for obvious reasons. As a result, many books suffer from a severe lack of editing and a mild case of verbal diarrhoea. Taking Hamilton as an example, personally I liked the Night's Dawn trilogy - but I gritted my teeth every time the phrase "neural nanonics" came up, after a while. It's not even realistic; I really don't think that a society in which such things were in use would keep the full-length phrase for long. It would probably become "neuronics" or something like that, fairly quickly.

As evidence for the last point, witness the infrequent use (at least in the UK) of the full-length word "refrigerator".

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I have to say, I'm genuinely surprised that the topic of book word counts has received as much discussion as this!

 

[Ray McCarthy]

How do you determine if a book is read by dedicated readers or casual readers?

The quantity of same title appearing in Charity shops.
Dedicated readers more likely to keep books.
Larsson, Slaughter, Brown, Cussler, King, McComber ...

 

[Vertigo]

I have to say, I'm genuinely surprised that the topic of book word counts has received as much discussion as this!

Nor is it the first time it's been discussed at such length on the Chrons. Me, I'm sorry, but I like long books and series. I like the much greater immersion they give, I love the opportunity for much great character development. I find many of the 'golden age' short books lack the depth and texture that the longer books give. So, again I'm sorry, but I don't buy long books because that's what the publisher are somehow (I still don't quite understand just how) forcing on me I buy them because I enjoy them. Simple as that. And I was brought up on the short books of the '60s and '70s but I just loved it when, for example, Heinlein started writing longer books like I Will Fear No Evil and Time Enough For Love.

Oh... and I don't really like short stories; you're just getting to know the world and the characters and they're over. I'm always left feeling frustrated and wanting more. So much so that I tend to actively avoid them.

 

[SilentRoamer]

The quantity of same title appearing in Charity shops.
Dedicated readers more likely to keep books.
Larsson, Slaughter, Brown, Cussler, King, McComber ...

Yeah I agree with this - certain authors are all over the charity stores in the UK, clearly read by "casuals" who only read certain authors and read maybe 1-2 books a year at best. Those above and add: Dan Brown, Danielle Steel, James Herbert, Gregory Phillips etc.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

and I don't really like short stories; you're just getting to know the world and the characters and they're over

Well, true, but the kind of short story with wry, comedy, horror etc twist/punchline in last sentence is fun though and very different skill to short Novella. They tend to be shorter short stories. Asimov did some good ones and I just read a bunch of Lloyd Biggle Jr ones.

 

[Vertigo]

I'm not totally against shorts; in fact Asimov's 'Last Question' is without doubt one of my all time favourite shorts. It's just so clever! But I think that's my problem with many short stories; they are more an opportunity to show how clever the author is rather than to truly entertain the reader, or at least this particular reader.

 

[J Riff]

One can argue that reading ten short stories gives you a wider spread of whatever it is that we're talking about. As for the great trendsetter in SF... maybe it is still waiting to be written, maybe even by someone in here. Get busy!

 

[Randy M.]

Re: A Word Concerning the Insufficiency of Short Stories

Phooey.

You may return now to your normally scheduled thread. I will return to reading the anthology I was reading.

Thank you.


Randy M.