I have been telling my wife for years that published nonfiction works are full of filler not because the authors are dumb but because the publishing companies demand it! Was nice to see this sentiment shared by others even if it is not central to this article.
For a more genre focused word count (because I'm sure a lot of folks are still traumatized by reading "Gatsby" in high school), Louis L'Amour's "Hondo" clocks in at around 54,000 words. And Mr. L'Amour did not skimp on story one iota.
My sci fi novella, The Long Lost War, was a thin book… it was and still remains my most successful book. That being said, some still complained that it was too short (those that expected a longer story… meaning they loved it). It proved to me that if the story is fairly good (minor spelling errors included), then you’ve done something right. I was worried it wouldn’t even get noticed, not generating any sale at all, but… thankfully, I was wrong. I think any length you can write is more than enough for any story you need to tell.
Write a story that's as long as it needs to be. As writers, we know what that is. But it is great that the people wanted more of what you wrote and not less. That's probably the best compliment you could've received!
I'm happy to hear this. My next book (after the one I'm publishing next month) is more stripped down and narrow in scope, so it should fit right in that new sweet spot.
9-11 scenes, 1000 words max per scene, you have a short story. I like the style, and then you can make a bunch of them into a novel length story or more.
Just writing the ending now, I'll review it when I'm finished and release two separate 300 pagers. I've noticed a lot of shorter books doing well, this might just work...
I have written the first book of what will be four books. Epic fantasy, the first book is huge, the second book will be smaller. Third and fourth books will be big.
But I have been long pondering a two year span of the main character’s life that happens before the first book… In which I could write short adventures with him and his companion much like the smaller Conan the barbarian books. I think it would be pretty fun, they would be quick, and readers could enjoy more of the main character if they decided they liked the format and the smaller stories.🤷♂️
Since noticing trad's inclination to inflate page count, I've avoided longer works (knowing too, some indies would bend to the desire to meet that). I can be convinced that it's worth it, but generally don't pick up anything close to 500 pages on my own. I'll be so glad when slim/novellas/etc are given more space and visibility so I can find them easier, because at this point, I'm far more impressed with a succinct and moving story (to BE told so well in such small a space) than something lengthy that was just meh.
I gave up on A Discovery of Witches when, almost 100 pages in, the main character had done little but not check some weird (but apparently significant) book out of the library. It seemed like there was an awful lot of padding that didn’t need to be there.
Newer writers are still fixated on making their books long. I see it in writing groups regularly. They’ve finished what turned out to be a 50K-word novel and now they want to know how to increase the word count. What’s so wrong with shorter novels? (I prefer them.)
"Also, we have among us a group of sickos who read books on their phone. Sometimes they read them on their computers. Why do you hate your eyes, anon?"
Because I can't afford an ereader 😭
Plan on a Boox whenever it's in the budget but might not be for a while.
Around 20 years ago, I remember reading a long interview with Phillip Pullman, author of the Golden Compass, in which he spoke about his disdain for C.S. Lewis and Tolkien's works. He considered Tolkien the worse of the two, because while Lewis was wrestling with important human questions but coming up with answers Pullman didn't like, Tolkien's books were just fluff, superficial maps and imagery. I happen to love both Narnia and the Lord of the Rings, and I mostly rejected his criticism of them.
Many years later when I started seriously writing fantasy, one of the first novels I picked up to learn about the genre was Robert Jordan's "The Eye of the World." I wasn't afraid of a challenge – my favorite novel of all time is the Chinese classic Three Kingdoms – and I heard that it was long, immersive, and loved by millions.
What a disaster of a novel. 800 pages of mindless filler, so bad it nearly killed my love for the whole Fantasy genre. I thought back to how I had rejected Pullman's criticism of traditional fantasy, and started to wonder if he had been right all along.
While I eventually went back to the Wheel of Time (that's another story), I learned from that awful experience that I want fantasy books that are character/story driven and around medium length, like Ender's Game and the Golden Compass. Stuffing a novel with pointless, page-long descriptions of the headscarves women wear in stock rural village #4 really does nothing for your story.
I gave up on Eye of the World without regret. I simply don’t have patience for it and honestly I had to force myself to get through the Lord of the Rings. Now that I’m out of college, I no longer “power through” a book. I simply don’t have the time
Jordan is an acquired taste for sure. His writing was brilliant, but he absolutely LOVED to describe every little detail. I loved his Wheel of Time series but I'll admit there were several points I had to force myself to keep reading, typically when the plot was focused on a character I didn't care for.
I love LotR to bits, but will admit that when re-reading I often start at book 3 (three hunters), skip book 4 (dagorlad & cirith ungol), read book 5 (Rohan & Gondor), skim the first part of book 6 and then devour the epilogue
I really think this what holds Fantasy back. So much filler. I love nice descriptions, but I like how pulpy stuff gives you a shorter, punchier image that actually lights your imagination on fire.
I think its because too many people get into Fantasy expecting to be the next Tolkien or Jordan, while forgetting that Howard and Moorcock were able to make their worlds just as memorable and with a fraction of the word counts.
Also, blatant self promotion since you said you like pulp. Eastern Blood Price, later this year. I'm shooting to have it in Kristin's hands in August and hopefully out the door in time for Christmas.
This is great news. I think shorter novels allow people time to read more. My dark fantasy novella is currently at 50,000 words and will likely tap out at around 55-60k.
This isn't them learning anything new, tbh I'm tired of them skimping on things. No offence, but it is thicker volumes I'd like to see them embrace once more as they've been rejecting and avoiding them for decades.
I've seen them reject well written books more than 100k words in size continuously over the years, so I wouldn't exactly celebrate them going 'slimmer', I don't mind exactly but all the same it seems to me that they're doubling down.
Most of my work from earlier days are thicker and recently has gotten slimmer so it might be that this is good for me, but I wonder about how 'wonderful' this really is. Sorry to be the cynical one, I really did enjoy this essay despite my making 'an ass of myself'.
I just have no hope for Trad Pub, though I really do hope they learn their lesson. I often love being wrong on things like this.
I have been telling my wife for years that published nonfiction works are full of filler not because the authors are dumb but because the publishing companies demand it! Was nice to see this sentiment shared by others even if it is not central to this article.
And here I thought I was just writing Menthol novels, and I was writing slims
Ahead of the trend, as always 💪🏻
For a more genre focused word count (because I'm sure a lot of folks are still traumatized by reading "Gatsby" in high school), Louis L'Amour's "Hondo" clocks in at around 54,000 words. And Mr. L'Amour did not skimp on story one iota.
I get completely lost these days if I try to write anything over 30,000 words. So I'm an ultra-slim novella guy :)
My sci fi novella, The Long Lost War, was a thin book… it was and still remains my most successful book. That being said, some still complained that it was too short (those that expected a longer story… meaning they loved it). It proved to me that if the story is fairly good (minor spelling errors included), then you’ve done something right. I was worried it wouldn’t even get noticed, not generating any sale at all, but… thankfully, I was wrong. I think any length you can write is more than enough for any story you need to tell.
Write a story that's as long as it needs to be. As writers, we know what that is. But it is great that the people wanted more of what you wrote and not less. That's probably the best compliment you could've received!
I'm happy to hear this. My next book (after the one I'm publishing next month) is more stripped down and narrow in scope, so it should fit right in that new sweet spot.
This is why I’m focused on shorter.
9-11 scenes, 1000 words max per scene, you have a short story. I like the style, and then you can make a bunch of them into a novel length story or more.
Just finishing my third book, it's almost 140k, might just split it now into two!
Your readers might thank you for it 🙌🏻
Just writing the ending now, I'll review it when I'm finished and release two separate 300 pagers. I've noticed a lot of shorter books doing well, this might just work...
I have written the first book of what will be four books. Epic fantasy, the first book is huge, the second book will be smaller. Third and fourth books will be big.
But I have been long pondering a two year span of the main character’s life that happens before the first book… In which I could write short adventures with him and his companion much like the smaller Conan the barbarian books. I think it would be pretty fun, they would be quick, and readers could enjoy more of the main character if they decided they liked the format and the smaller stories.🤷♂️
Since noticing trad's inclination to inflate page count, I've avoided longer works (knowing too, some indies would bend to the desire to meet that). I can be convinced that it's worth it, but generally don't pick up anything close to 500 pages on my own. I'll be so glad when slim/novellas/etc are given more space and visibility so I can find them easier, because at this point, I'm far more impressed with a succinct and moving story (to BE told so well in such small a space) than something lengthy that was just meh.
I gave up on A Discovery of Witches when, almost 100 pages in, the main character had done little but not check some weird (but apparently significant) book out of the library. It seemed like there was an awful lot of padding that didn’t need to be there.
Newer writers are still fixated on making their books long. I see it in writing groups regularly. They’ve finished what turned out to be a 50K-word novel and now they want to know how to increase the word count. What’s so wrong with shorter novels? (I prefer them.)
omg same! One of the rare cases where the show was better than the book because they cut the filler out
"Also, we have among us a group of sickos who read books on their phone. Sometimes they read them on their computers. Why do you hate your eyes, anon?"
Because I can't afford an ereader 😭
Plan on a Boox whenever it's in the budget but might not be for a while.
Geese, ok. I'll buy an E-reader just stop shaming me like that.
Around 20 years ago, I remember reading a long interview with Phillip Pullman, author of the Golden Compass, in which he spoke about his disdain for C.S. Lewis and Tolkien's works. He considered Tolkien the worse of the two, because while Lewis was wrestling with important human questions but coming up with answers Pullman didn't like, Tolkien's books were just fluff, superficial maps and imagery. I happen to love both Narnia and the Lord of the Rings, and I mostly rejected his criticism of them.
Many years later when I started seriously writing fantasy, one of the first novels I picked up to learn about the genre was Robert Jordan's "The Eye of the World." I wasn't afraid of a challenge – my favorite novel of all time is the Chinese classic Three Kingdoms – and I heard that it was long, immersive, and loved by millions.
What a disaster of a novel. 800 pages of mindless filler, so bad it nearly killed my love for the whole Fantasy genre. I thought back to how I had rejected Pullman's criticism of traditional fantasy, and started to wonder if he had been right all along.
While I eventually went back to the Wheel of Time (that's another story), I learned from that awful experience that I want fantasy books that are character/story driven and around medium length, like Ender's Game and the Golden Compass. Stuffing a novel with pointless, page-long descriptions of the headscarves women wear in stock rural village #4 really does nothing for your story.
I gave up on Eye of the World without regret. I simply don’t have patience for it and honestly I had to force myself to get through the Lord of the Rings. Now that I’m out of college, I no longer “power through” a book. I simply don’t have the time
Jordan is an acquired taste for sure. His writing was brilliant, but he absolutely LOVED to describe every little detail. I loved his Wheel of Time series but I'll admit there were several points I had to force myself to keep reading, typically when the plot was focused on a character I didn't care for.
I love LotR to bits, but will admit that when re-reading I often start at book 3 (three hunters), skip book 4 (dagorlad & cirith ungol), read book 5 (Rohan & Gondor), skim the first part of book 6 and then devour the epilogue
I really think this what holds Fantasy back. So much filler. I love nice descriptions, but I like how pulpy stuff gives you a shorter, punchier image that actually lights your imagination on fire.
I think its because too many people get into Fantasy expecting to be the next Tolkien or Jordan, while forgetting that Howard and Moorcock were able to make their worlds just as memorable and with a fraction of the word counts.
Also, blatant self promotion since you said you like pulp. Eastern Blood Price, later this year. I'm shooting to have it in Kristin's hands in August and hopefully out the door in time for Christmas.
This is great news. I think shorter novels allow people time to read more. My dark fantasy novella is currently at 50,000 words and will likely tap out at around 55-60k.
This isn't them learning anything new, tbh I'm tired of them skimping on things. No offence, but it is thicker volumes I'd like to see them embrace once more as they've been rejecting and avoiding them for decades.
I've seen them reject well written books more than 100k words in size continuously over the years, so I wouldn't exactly celebrate them going 'slimmer', I don't mind exactly but all the same it seems to me that they're doubling down.
Most of my work from earlier days are thicker and recently has gotten slimmer so it might be that this is good for me, but I wonder about how 'wonderful' this really is. Sorry to be the cynical one, I really did enjoy this essay despite my making 'an ass of myself'.
I just have no hope for Trad Pub, though I really do hope they learn their lesson. I often love being wrong on things like this.