Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
be bad.

Lynn

On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 7:15:38 PM UTC, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
> of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
> with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
> be bad.
>
> Lynn
One of my favourite series is David Drake's RCN (Mundy/Leary) series, which tails off, partly because Drake seemed to have tired of or exhausted the possibilities of the main cast, and partly because Drake has retired from the business of writing novels due to ill health. I am not going to think any less of it because it does not end with all of the loose ends tied up. It does help that Drake declared (and I think succeeded) that every book in the series was written to be enjoyable as a stand-alone novel.

Throughout the series we are reminded that start travel is risky, espcially star travel on the edge, impelled by military considerations, exploration, or sheer competitiveness. A few of the characters reflect that, given the life that they have chosen, the chances of them surviving long enough to worry about tapering off to a graceful retirement are not high. I sometimes consider that perhaps one day the RCN Princess Cecile lifted off from Cinnaber, transitioned to its high drive... and was simply never seen again.

On 11/27/2023 1:30 PM, Andrew McDowell wrote:
> On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 7:15:38 PM UTC, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
>> of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
>> with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
>> be bad.
>>
>> Lynn
> One of my favourite series is David Drake's RCN (Mundy/Leary) series, which tails off, partly because Drake seemed to have tired of or exhausted the possibilities of the main cast, and partly because Drake has retired from the business of writing novels due to ill health. I am not going to think any less of it because it does not end with all of the loose ends tied up. It does help that Drake declared (and I think succeeded) that every book in the series was written to be enjoyable as a stand-alone novel.
>
> Throughout the series we are reminded that start travel is risky, espcially star travel on the edge, impelled by military considerations, exploration, or sheer competitiveness. A few of the characters reflect that, given the life that they have chosen, the chances of them surviving long enough to worry about tapering off to a graceful retirement are not high. I sometimes consider that perhaps one day the RCN Princess Cecile lifted off from Cinnaber, transitioned to its high drive... and was simply never seen again.

I like that. I have the last two of the RCN series in my SBR.

Lynn

On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 12:15:38 PM UTC-7, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?

I tend to say YES.

Actually, though, it depends on the type of series. If the series
is episodic in nature, wherein it is composed of parts that are
complete in themselves, then completion is less of an issue.

Thus, the television series Star Trak was good, even though
it ended after a short third season.

Or the Barsoom novels and the Tarzan novels of Edgar Rice
Burroughs. The first three Barsoom novels, and the first
four Tarzan novels told a complete story - but after that,
the remaining books were episodic, continuing on with the
same characters.

But when a series is constructed to tell a single story over
a number of volumes, and it ends in the middle, this does
cast a cloud over the reader's enjoyment.

I mean, how does a typical story go?

First, we get introduced to the characters - so that they
seem like nice people we should care about.

Then they face a problem! We feel sorry for them.

They respond to the problem, and we are thrilled by the
events of that struggle.

And finally, they achieve victory, and we celebrate.

If the author passes away before the story reaches the
point of closure, then reading the story is an incomplete
experience. Of course, going along for the ride in the earlier
parts has to have been enjoyable, or the reader would have put the
story down long before the end could be reached! But one of the
main goals of reading a story can't be achieved.

I do think therefore that it's kind of irresponsible - and a bit
greedy too - for authors to write 12-book story arcs that are intended
as duodecalogies, rather than a trilogy with episodic successors.

Of course, LotR was really a *hexalogy*, as the anniversary paperback
edition reminded us. But _he_ wrote the whole thing on spec in advance.

John Savard

On Monday, 27 November 2023 at 19:15:38 UTC, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
> of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
> with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
> be bad.

A series can have more than one author, though
it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
books have been published quite recently.

I quite liked Eoin Colfer's _And Another Thing..._,
which picks up from _The Hitchhiker's Guide to
the Galaxy_. I understand it to be a new original
work. (New as in 2009.)

In article <851fea24-f882-4ac0-80ff-08a4b44b3ea4n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>
>A series can have more than one author, though
>it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
>series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
>of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
>Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
>Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
>books have been published quite recently.
>

New Doc Savage books are still credited to Kenneth
Robeson, though there is no longer any effort
to conceal the true author. As far as I am aware,
new Tom Swift, Nancy Drew & Hardy Boys books are
still done under the classic house names, though
side projects like comics seem to get more real
credits.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 11/27/2023 1:15 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?  Many authors are guilty
> of this, John Ringo is definitely this.  Of course, show business goes
> with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
> be bad.
>
> Lynn

Somebody else reminded me of David Gerrold, how could I forget. Great
series (Chtorr) with a severe cliffhanger and no book in almost 30 years
now.

Lynn

On 27/11/2023 13.15, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?

Absolutely not. One example that comes to mind is the Vorkosiverse.
It only had eight volumes when I first read it, and it was great
even then. I still thought that it was great when I thought that
LMB was done with it. Since that time, she's added _Cryoburn_,
_Ivan's Alliance_, and _Gentleman Jolie_. These additions didn't
make the first part retroactively suck.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be.

In article <uk4sb2$a15l$1@dont-email.me>,
Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 27/11/2023 13.15, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?
>
>Absolutely not. One example that comes to mind is the Vorkosiverse.
>It only had eight volumes when I first read it, and it was great
>even then. I still thought that it was great when I thought that
>LMB was done with it. Since that time, she's added _Cryoburn_,
>_Ivan's Alliance_, and _Gentleman Jolie_. These additions didn't
>make the first part retroactively suck.

I think it's important to distinguish between proper series, each
book of which works as a stand-alone, and abominations, in which
one is buying fragments of a story with no guarantee (in fact,
good odds against) of an actual resolution.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) writes:
>In article <851fea24-f882-4ac0-80ff-08a4b44b3ea4n@googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>A series can have more than one author, though
>>it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
>>series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
>>of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
>>Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
>>Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
>>books have been published quite recently.
>>
>
>New Doc Savage books are still credited to Kenneth
>Robeson, though there is no longer any effort
>to conceal the true author. As far as I am aware,
>new Tom Swift, Nancy Drew & Hardy Boys books are
>still done under the classic house names, though
>side projects like comics seem to get more real
>credits.

The Mack Bolan series is now up to #631. Right up Lynn's alley.

Looks like it's had about 60 authors.

There are still new books being published in
_The Destroyer_ series (Remo Williams), and
the original authors have been deceased since 2015.

OBSF: One of the original Remo authors (Warren Murphy)
co-wrote the modern arthurian adventure _The Forever King_.

On Tuesday, 28 November 2023 at 00:45:03 UTC, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Monday, 27 November 2023 at 19:15:38 UTC, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
> > of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
> > with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
> > be bad.
> A series can have more than one author, though
> it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
> series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
> of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
> Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
> Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
> books have been published quite recently.
>
> I quite liked Eoin Colfer's _And Another Thing..._,
> which picks up from _The Hitchhiker's Guide to
> the Galaxy_. I understand it to be a new original
> work. (New as in 2009.)

I meant to mention cases where a publisher
and not an author cuts a series off. If that leaves
an author considering finishing their story
in another way for little or no payment, it's quite
reasonable that they postpone that.

On 11/28/2023 9:13 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) writes:
>> In article <851fea24-f882-4ac0-80ff-08a4b44b3ea4n@googlegroups.com>,
>> Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> A series can have more than one author, though
>>> it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
>>> series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
>>> of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
>>> Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
>>> Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
>>> books have been published quite recently.
>>>
>>
>> New Doc Savage books are still credited to Kenneth
>> Robeson, though there is no longer any effort
>> to conceal the true author. As far as I am aware,
>> new Tom Swift, Nancy Drew & Hardy Boys books are
>> still done under the classic house names, though
>> side projects like comics seem to get more real
>> credits.
>
> The Mack Bolan series is now up to #631. Right up Lynn's alley.
>
> Looks like it's had about 60 authors.
>
> There are still new books being published in
> _The Destroyer_ series (Remo Williams), and
> the original authors have been deceased since 2015.
>
> OBSF: One of the original Remo authors (Warren Murphy)
> co-wrote the modern arthurian adventure _The Forever King_.

No more long series for me. I've got 60 more English Perry Rhodans to
reread in dead tree versions and another 1,200 English epubs. I am
overwhelmed. My SBR is overfull.

Lynn

On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 3:23:58 PM UTC-5, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Tuesday, 28 November 2023 at 00:45:03 UTC, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> > On Monday, 27 November 2023 at 19:15:38 UTC, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> > > Does a series have to be complete to be good ? Many authors are guilty
> > > of this, John Ringo is definitely this. Of course, show business goes
> > > with the "always leave them hanging" phrase so incomplete series may not
> > > be bad.
> > A series can have more than one author, though
> > it isn't fashionable. I wonder if any commercial
> > series with "house name" pseudonym still exists...
> > of course there's the formula of "Very Famous
> > Author collaborating With Cheaper Author Who
> > Has Done Almost All The Writing". New James Bond
> > books have been published quite recently.
> >
> > I quite liked Eoin Colfer's _And Another Thing..._,
> > which picks up from _The Hitchhiker's Guide to
> > the Galaxy_. I understand it to be a new original
> > work. (New as in 2009.)
> I meant to mention cases where a publisher
> and not an author cuts a series off. If that leaves
> an author considering finishing their story
> in another way for little or no payment, it's quite
> reasonable that they postpone that.

This happens more frequently in TV series.
Even ones with closed end plots, and a known
number of seasons at the start, are frequently
cancelled mid-run.

pt

James Nicoll wrote:

>I think it's important to distinguish between proper series, each
>book of which works as a stand-alone, and abominations, in which
>one is buying fragments of a story with no guarantee (in fact,
>good odds against) of an actual resolution.

Sure. Another good example of the former is the Culture series. Not
only are the books loosely coupled, but for the most part the books can
be read in any order without too much problem. Few if any character
appear in multiple books.

The closest to a sequel really was Look to Windward, which built on the
events of Consider Phlebas but was set well after it. In fact I read
those in reverse order and didn't suffer for it.

The Hydrogen Sonata made a brief mention of Excession, and if one
hadn't read the latter that part might a bit unclear, but it the main
idea was still clear.

Brian

James Nicoll wrote:

>I think it's important to distinguish between proper series, each
>book of which works as a stand-alone, and abominations, in which
>one is buying fragments of a story with no guarantee (in fact,
>good odds against) of an actual resolution.

Sure. Another good example of the former is the Culture series. Not
only are the books loosely coupled, but for the most part the books can
be read in any order without too much problem. Few if any character
appear in multiple books.

The closest to a sequel really was Look to Windward, which built on the
events of Consider Phlebas but was set well after it. In fact I read
those in reverse order and didn't suffer for it.

The Hydrogen Sonata made a brief mention of Excession, and if one
hadn't read the latter that part might a bit unclear, but it the main
idea was still clear.

Brian

On 2023-11-27, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?

You want to wait until _Perry Rhodan_ is finished??

More seriously, from TV shows where the season-based production
penalizes any longer term story arcs, I've come to the conclusion
that often enough the journey *is* the destination.

David Gerrold's unfinished _War Against the Chtorr_ series is very
good, despite being another case where the author knew how to begin
the story, but apparently not how to end it.

Some series are just designed to be open-ended. Laurell K. Hamilton's
_Anita Blake_ series wasn't going anywhere particular when I stopped
reading.

I thought I knew what John Norman had planned for a final _Gor_
novel (fb boivbhfyl gur erghea bs Cn-Xhe, jubfr qrngu unq bayl orra
vasreerq ng gur raq bs gur svefg abiry naq jubfr obql unq abg orra
sbhaq), but I guess we're long past the point where this would have
made sense or where he actually would have wanted to stop.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On Wednesday, November 29, 2023 at 8:41:47 PM UTC+11, Default User wrote:
> James Nicoll wrote:
>
> >I think it's important to distinguish between proper series, each
> >book of which works as a stand-alone, and abominations, in which
> >one is buying fragments of a story with no guarantee (in fact,
> >good odds against) of an actual resolution.

Good odds against? You must be reading different series to me. Except for Rothfuss and Martin, who will never finish their respective series, pretty much every single-story series I've started has finished.

> Sure. Another good example of the former is the Culture series. Not
> only are the books loosely coupled, but for the most part the books can
> be read in any order without too much problem. Few if any character
> appear in multiple books.
>
> The closest to a sequel really was Look to Windward, which built on the
> events of Consider Phlebas but was set well after it. In fact I read
> those in reverse order and didn't suffer for it.
>
> The Hydrogen Sonata made a brief mention of Excession, and if one
> hadn't read the latter that part might a bit unclear, but it the main
> idea was still clear.

Not to mention the very last word, literally, of "Surface Detail".

-Moriarty

On 11/29/2023 3:50 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2023-11-27, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Does a series have to be complete to be good ?
>
> You want to wait until _Perry Rhodan_ is finished??
>
> More seriously, from TV shows where the season-based production
> penalizes any longer term story arcs, I've come to the conclusion
> that often enough the journey *is* the destination.
>
> David Gerrold's unfinished _War Against the Chtorr_ series is very
> good, despite being another case where the author knew how to begin
> the story, but apparently not how to end it.
>
> Some series are just designed to be open-ended. Laurell K. Hamilton's
> _Anita Blake_ series wasn't going anywhere particular when I stopped
> reading.
>
> I thought I knew what John Norman had planned for a final _Gor_
> novel (fb boivbhfyl gur erghea bs Cn-Xhe, jubfr qrngu unq bayl orra
> vasreerq ng gur raq bs gur svefg abiry naq jubfr obql unq abg orra
> sbhaq), but I guess we're long past the point where this would have
> made sense or where he actually would have wanted to stop.

+1 on all accounts. Yes, the journey is the destination in many series.

The problem with the Chtorr is that David Gerrold kept on teasing us
with excerpts from book five. I am convinced that his son will publish
whatever he finds when Gerrold passes on. Of course, Gerrold could just
publish a novella finishing the chtorraforming of Earth and all the
humans die rapidly.

Lynn

James Nicoll wrote:

>I think it's important to distinguish between proper series, each
>book of which works as a stand-alone, and abominations, in which
>one is buying fragments of a story with no guarantee (in fact,
>good odds against) of an actual resolution.

Sure. Another good example of the former is the Culture series. Not
only are the books loosely coupled, but for the most part the books can
be read in any order without too much problem. Few if any character
appear in multiple books.

The closest to a sequel really was Look to Windward, which built on the
events of Consider Phlebas but was set well after it. In fact I read
those in reverse order and didn't suffer for it.

The Hydrogen Sonata made a brief mention of Excession, and if one
hadn't read the latter that part might a bit unclear, but it the main
idea was still clear.

Brian

Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Thursday, 30 November 2023 at 15:22:46 UTC, Jack Bohn wrote:
>
> > It would seem Future History is the epitome of an open-ended series.
> Not always. <https://www.sffworld.com/2019/06/a-clash-of-cymbals-by-james-blish/>
>
> And various stories set near to the end of the world
> or of the universe. ...If that isn't a spoiler.
>
> Imagine a series of Arthur C. Clarke stories about
> the computer company employees who are in
> "The Nine Billion Names of God".

Oooo, yeah, _Glide Path_-like hijinx amongst the early IT crowd Would it subsume "Dial F for Frankenstein"? (Or, depending on which was written first, would the "Dial series" subsume it?) So, with the ultimate and penultimate stores, he writes backwards from there, like Laumer's Retief stories?

--
-Jack

On 2023-11-30, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem with the Chtorr is that David Gerrold kept on teasing us
> with excerpts from book five. I am convinced that his son will publish
> whatever he finds when Gerrold passes on. Of course, Gerrold could just
> publish a novella finishing the chtorraforming of Earth and all the
> humans die rapidly.

But book five was no longer supposed to be the final one. At the
end of book four there is an interview with Gerrold where he says
the series will have at least seven books.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On 12/1/2023 11:18 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2023-11-30, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The problem with the Chtorr is that David Gerrold kept on teasing us
>> with excerpts from book five. I am convinced that his son will publish
>> whatever he finds when Gerrold passes on. Of course, Gerrold could just
>> publish a novella finishing the chtorraforming of Earth and all the
>> humans die rapidly.
>
> But book five was no longer supposed to be the final one. At the
> end of book four there is an interview with Gerrold where he says
> the series will have at least seven books.
>
Apparently he failed math as 4 is less than 7. :P

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.