Splitting a Manuscript

[ColGray]

I'm just about done with the 1st draft of a sequel and it's 200k words and prob needs another 15k. I know i write long and then edit way back but I'm pondering the possibility of splitting the MS in half rather than cutting half the words. Have people done this before? What are important considerations? What are important questions to ask myself?

Narratively, I think I have necessary components. I have a climax in Act 2 i can stretch and deepen into the final climax of the first book. Things that got rushed in the Act 3 could be stretched out as well and turning some rising actions into act climax events wouldn't be too challenging. That I can see where to stretch and pull feels like an indicator that I should stretch and pull.

Conversely, I can tighten and contract. I've spread the narrative widely to create these conditions and it may be that the overall story and plot are meandering and that I can eliminate some sections. I'm certain there's an Act 2 sag--there almost always is! My first full MS was nearly 200k words at first draft, and now sits at 109k--but that is mainly bc the target is trad publishing and it would be a debut. A lot of stuff got cut.

I'm eager to hear other's experiences with the struggle!

 

[msstice]

(Not published. Not even beta read). I split my WIP into two books by taking out an arc and moving it to the next book. It was major surgery. I largely rewrote the story after the cut point, including the ending. Apparently I revise quite heavily. I like the story after I took out the arc: it gave me more space to develop book 1 and gives book 2 more space too.

If the story is in a mature form I suspect that it is hard to do well. Alternatively, if it is easy to do, the bit taken out wasn't pulling its weight in the first place.

 

[HareBrain]

What are important considerations?

I'd say the main one is whether you can end the first half in such a way that the reader will feel like they've read a complete story (even if they know they haven't really because there are sequels). If not, then I think you'll lose many readers even if they know they can go straight to the next book, because it will feel like they've been sold half a story.

I have a 190k WIP (not yet SPed) that breaks perfectly at the 80k mark. The two halves even have different narrators and their own titles. But in the end I decided not to split them when I do SP, even though it makes practical and financial sense to do so, because the first half does not feel at all standalone.

The Lord of the Rings gets away with it, but I think that's because although Tolkien envisaged it as one volume, he had already divided it into six internal books, and each had their own sense of closure. But I have read published books where it seemed clear that the first volume had simply been chopped from a much longer story, and it annoyed me.

 

[ColGray]

I'd say the main one is whether you can end the first half in such a way that the reader will feel like they've read a complete story

I feel like that is correct question.

The break point upends the narrative but, as currently written, its good stakes but i'm not sure the arc works. The characters solve a mystery, but do so by stepping into a trap and the 4 POV's are split apart, so it becomes the jumping off point for struggle, stakes and reunification and not an end in-and-of itself.

It's multi-POV with 4 main POVs--and, apologies, I'm thinking out loud here.

POV	Starting State	Middle Climax Change	End Climax Change
1 - E	Recovering adrenaline junkie struggling with peaceful boredom	severely injured with permanent injuries	Rediscovery herself post injury / solving problems without violence
2 - R	Exploring new freedom while deceiving their closest friends	Lies found out, fails at task in spectacular, public fashion	Killed
3 - M	Growing up and feeling safe for the first time in her life	Trapped in pocket dimension	Escapes, but struggling with being bad at something
4 - Rh	Grieving poorly, day to day, hiding	Thrust into overall leadership	Accepts leadership, but has it yanked from her

The stakes probably work and conclude an arc and establish a new normal, but I need to think about the arc and whether there is enough arc to split the first half.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I have cut 10 or 20K words at an editor's request, but nothing like what you are contemplating. My experience was that it helped to tighten the prose, was beneficial to the pacing, and was nowhere near so difficult as I had anticipated. Compared to cutting out half the words . . . well, it isn't even a useful comparison, I don't think.

I have also divided books in two (or three) because I, myself, felt it needed to be done. Again, it wasn't a hard decision to make. All these books were ultimately trad published by an important US SFF imprint, so I would say that dividing the books did them no harm.

But perhaps you are struggling with this because the particular story you are writing needs to be told complete in one volume at 200+ words—and maybe intuitively you know that. If you are contemplating these steps in order to meet an arbitrary word count to make the book(s) more saleable, rather than because you perceive faults that would be fixed by cutting or dividing, then I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle. The only good reason I can think of for doing something so dramatic is because it will make the story more readable. Doing it because you wish to please a hypothetical agent or editor is not, in my opinion, a good reason. (Especially because very long books by debut writers do get selected for publication by trad publishers.)

Your goal in revising, cutting, dividing, etc. should always be what might the book better. Of course there is also room for some sort of compromise, if you approach an editor's request with an open mind and a determination to approach the problem creatively. But here there is no editor making the request. There is no one, apparently, who has read the book and felt it would actually be improved by either of these steps. You are trying to meet a condition that hasn't even been set. (And remember, what really sells a book is an intriguing idea and cast of characters set forth in a compelling way. If that is what you ultimately submit, that will be far, far more important that word count.)

So my advice would be to write the book, write it as well as you are able, and to your own highest standards. Trust your own instincts. Then send it out and see what happens. The right publishing house might adore it at whatever length it turns out to be. Or, if they don't, they might still like it enough to offer you a contract plus the guidance you want.

 

[ColGray]

I appreciate it, Teresa. That's really thoughtful and helpful. Thank you.

I read your comment earlier and have been thinking on it overnight. While, "How publishable is this ms" is a question in the back of my mind, I'm comfortable saying the motivation behind considering a split is to make the best book. To date, no one's read it and the preceding book is still in the query mines, so I'm not too focused in that direction.

I'm, uh, verbose. I often write my way into a scene and then edit it down to get in late and leave early. This MS's preceding book was 200k at first draft complete and I edited it down to 110k--and that book is materially, objectively better, tighter and more focused at the lower word count. But, ultimately, i know that book is a single story and one overall arc.

I'm way less certain with this book. There's sag in this book--obv, as it's unedited. There's stuff I found in the back half that I love and weaving those threads in sooner will serve the story much better. But foundationally I keep asking myself: is this one one arc or two? Is a midpoint climax that kills one character, severely wounds another and separates a third from the rest of the group actually better and more impactful as an ending climax? As this is a sequel and in a series, I'm also wondering which best serves the macro story.

But your core point is the well taken: finish it and write the best book I can, and then trust my instincts.

 

[Laura R Hepworth]

I agree with Teresa. Finish your book first and then figure out from there if splitting it is actually what's best for the book or not. If you can't split it in a way that isn't jarring and won't make readers mad because there's not enough of a resolution in part one while still knowing it's not really over yet, then don't split it. Just get it into the best form you can and go from there. Also, depending on whether you're going trad or indie with it makes a difference too. Trad publishing is more conscious about cutting word count back because of printing costs (though very long books do still get published), but, while printing costs will still go up because of page count, it's not as big an issue with indie. I know indieauthors with 300k+ word count books and they're doing quite well (especially in Kindle Unlimited). Trust your instincts and don't sacrifice quality of storytelling based on hypothetical issues that might come up with it. Deal with any of those issues if and when they actually do come along.