Sunday, August 4, 2013

Does Size Matter? (Sorry All You Sex Fiends-We're Talking #Books)

Size is a factor in my life at the moment. I'm working on book three in the Cass Elliot crime series and while not tapping at the keyboard, am stumbling upon opinions about book length.

The general consensus I've heard through authors on Twitter is that shorter is better, regardless of genre. That attention spans are shrinking and readers want shorter books. That you can churn out more books if you use fewer words and thus hit the bestseller lists faster.

I've watched these conversations with morbid fascination, but I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

Let's start with the premise that everyone (readers and writers) wants a well-written book. Beyond that, I think writers are looking for an absolute that doesn't exist. I also think we're asking the wrong question. Instead, I'd like to know:


 
Does one size fit all?

 



From a reader's perspective, the answer has to be "no". Otherwise, either James Patterson or Stephen King would be out of a job. Based on bookstore shelf space and bestseller lists, both authors, who write books of very different lengths and complexity, are doing a booming business. And if you think King gets away with writing huge tomes due only to his superstar status, check out bestsellers The Passage and The Twelve by Justin Cronin. They weigh in at 900 and 600 pages, respectively.

The answer also has to be "no" from an author's perspective, or the bestseller lists would be loaded with books of roughly the same length.


My two cents? I think each author has a sweet spot that works for them. I also think that sweet spot might change as the author changes genre, moves between the series they write, or as their writing matures. Readers might also have a sweet spot, or expectations, particularly as they get to know an author.

As a reader, I gravitate toward books in a series. And I'm a little Pavlovian about those books. When I open a Charlie Parker novel by John Connolly, I expect a read that's at least 450-500 pages. His plots are complex and some story lines weave through several books. I love that sense of anticipation between books, wondering if Parker will finally deal with the Travelling Man, or if the Collector will show up in the next novel.

When I read an Artemis Fowl novel by Eoin Colfer? I'm expecting 350-400 pages. These books are a lighter read, aimed for a teen or young adult audience. They're well-written, make me laugh, and I can't wait to open the next book in the series.

Regardless of book length, isn't achieving that level of engagement with our readers the reason we write?

But I'm just one voice. Reader, writer, or both: Do all the readers in your life demand books of a certain length? Do you judge a book by its heft? Do you feel cheated if you spend $20 to $30 for an anorexic hardback, or victorious if you pick up a doorstop for under a fiver?

photo credit: Smarter's photos via photopin cc photo credit: Derek K. Miller via photopin cc

14 comments:

  1. I am seeing no advantage as a writer in writing longer books. I think quality DOES matter, but I'm able to get away with a shorter book becuase I'm not charging as much as the "big names" and I venture to say my books have good quality, i.e. they deliver the experience readers are looking for, and in the case of my latest book, Unsound (and thank you for awesome blurbage on that!) I feel I made up for shortness with the additional photo gallery, a "value" that's innovative and enhances the story. I tend to feel "done" at around 300-350 pages and efforts to pad length just begin to feel like that, padding.
    As an indie, I think SPEED and QUALITY are more important than length. Being able to churn out three to four top quality books a year is how to succeed in the new economy, without having to have a second "real job" which I'm still clinging to, BTW.
    Aloha, Toby Author of the Lei Crime Series

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your two cents, Toby! From reading (and really enjoying) UNSOUND, you really do pack a lot into a tight, suspenseful space!

      Delete
  2. I write books from 10k to 110k, and I read books from a 2k to 150k... If you can give me a beginning, a middle, and an end, that's all that matters. Personally I loathe filling 'word count' by adding non-interesting info to the book. If you've said all that needs to be said, write, "The end".

    I think of it this way, if we can watch a two-hour movie and get everything out of it, then if a sixty-thousand-word novel does the same thing, so be it.

    Good luck!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Amen, Carmen. I've fallen in love with short books and long books and books that are all lengths in between. And you know what? It's not the length that captures me, it's the content. The story.

      Thanks for stopping by and chiming in.

      Delete
  3. Seems to me, length is entirely dependent on the story - start the story where it starts and finish where it finishes and don't repeat - say it once and get on with it. If you follow those rules you'll have the perfect number of pages for your book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Darlene, and I think you're right. I've seen some interesting conversations on twitter today about how the publishing industry doesn't want to risk too much with a new writer's work, so the shorter, the better. A little sad, I think.

      Delete
  4. All the manuscripts I've finished so far seem to fall around the 60,000 word area naturally, so this hasn't been a huge problem for me.

    Ironically, my short stories tend to run long ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like you've found your sweet spot for novels, Mark. If it works for you and your readers, more power!

      Delete
  5. From the writing perspective, the book is as long as it needs to be to tell the story. As a reader size matters (for me) in the purchase decision. When the book is extending beyond 600 pages I am more likely to consider a physical book over ebook.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Kenneth-it's interesting that you'd want a longer book in physical form. Why is that?

      I would think the opposite would be true for me, but honestly, I don't know. Some of my favorite books are serious doorstops and I love holding them while I read. Haven't tried any of them on my e-reader, but I'll have to do so. Thanks for stopping by.

      Delete
  6. To me it all depends on the book. If it's one I love, I don't want it to end-period. There is a a "perfect" size for each book, but the determining factors fall on the side of the writer not the audience as I see it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you, Christina. If I love a book (or a series of books) I don't want it to end. Ariana Franklin (pen name) wrote the Mistress of the Art of Death books, and she died after only completing four in the series. After learning of her death, I quite selfishly hoped that her family or her publishers would find someone else to carry on with the story...

      Delete
  7. I love long books. If I'm into a story I never want it to end. The Book Thief, The Stand, Deathly Hallows--I could have kept reading for 100 more pages.

    I just finished my first novel, a YA mystery, and after editing netted out at 109k words. I was then STRONGLY advised to get under 100k. Impossible! And then I (painstakingly) did it. I got down to 99,951 words but I swear to you I can cut no more.

    Great article. I too don't quite understand the obsession with shorter books--a great story is a great story--but as an unknown writer, I don't want to hurt my chances of finding an agent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sometimes cutting words works and makes for a better book, and it sounds like you're comfortable with 99,951 words (nice job, by the way!). Maybe 90,000 to 110,000 is your sweet spot.

      Once you find an agent who understands your style, that 100,000 mark might not be so important. All the best to you in your search for that agent!

      Delete