r/writing • u/blubennys • 3d ago
Discussion Two books or combine into one?
A professional editor (developmental) suggested I combine my two books (one a sequel using same main characters) into one book. Editor said traditional publishers rarely take series. But, wow, both are about 95,000 words. I'm afraid I'd lose a lot of character and plot by cutting so much. But I really want to be published. I remember reading that Bonnie Garmus (Lessons in Chemistry) cut 100,000 words. Do I prioritize my dream or acknowledge realities?
12
u/mrwhosaywhatnow 3d ago
This was an editor you hired? Or a publisher’s editor? If the former, that’s just one professionals opinion. Maybe seek out a second or third.
Have you actually tried querying yet? I think if you have two finished books it would be worth it trying to query as is, and seeing what hits you get.
I think cutting your word count by half (not unheard of) is a lot of work. Nobody here can say without reading it all if it’ll be worth it, even then you have to decide it is so as the creator OR a publisher saying, yes we will publish this if you combine it.
8
u/tanyachrs 3d ago
Make the first book workable as a standalone (meaning it resolves satisfactorily). Pitch it as a single book. If you sell it to a publisher and it does well then they'll be glad to have a sequel
1
u/Desperate_Distance57 2d ago
This! Pitch it as a standalone with series/sequel potential. That takes the pressure off of the publisher to commit to more than one book from an untested author but also lets them know there’s more where this came from if their gamble pays off.
You’ll also note when reading nearly any series, the first book almost always feels like a full, complete story by itself but it also leaves the audience wanting more. The subsequent books tend to be less independent unless they are more “bad guy of the week” mystery series which tend to be more episodic.
1
7
u/mooseplainer 3d ago
Given the number of series out there, I find the idea that publishers rarely take series rather dubious. Maybe they meant they’re reticent to take a series pitch from a debut author, which would be understandable.
Do either of the books work as a standalone? If not, I think the editor has a point, you’re essentially trying to sell a 190k novel as a debut. So combining the two books into one and then cutting a lot of the fat into a leaner story might be the way to go.
Honestly, it’s not a bad exercise. A lot of first time writers have a tendency to over write. But it sounds to me like the editor does see the potential of your story, so this isn’t entirely bad news!
3
u/UpbeatAd8193 3d ago
You're onto something here. Publishers love (the possibility of a book working as a) series, but they rarely take on a debuting series, meaning: you'll be signed for one book, but if it performs well they're thrilled to know there are sequel ideas ready to be written.
5
u/This-Patience-6781 2d ago
if a dev editor thinks you can cut ninety thousand words and still have a working book, they are politely telling you your current pacing is mostly filler. combining them doesn't mean just deleting scenes, it means pulling out a blank page and outlining a brand new single narrative arc using only your strongest beats.
3
u/lyubomir-bozhinov 1d ago
I was about to write a comment similar to the one above. Most of the advice here revolves around pitching a series v pitching a standalone novel, but have you considered the possibility that the developmental editor is right? As writers, we are often blind to the misgivings of our work, and maybe what the two books really need is to become one streamlined 150k debut? If the genre is High Fantasy, that's not even a medium-sized book, if you ask me. ;)
8
u/Acceptable_Fox_5560 3d ago
You have to decide this for yourself.
But for the record, the option that “prioritizes your dream” is to cut to one standalone book under 100,000 words.
How bad do you want it? If it’s more work than you want to do, then there’s your answer.
4
u/FlyinLeviathon LET YOUR FIRST DRAFT SUCK 3d ago
Your editor is... not *wrong*, per se, but I would say misrepresenting data.
It's true that publishers want to take as little risk as possible. And unfortunately, standalones are smaller risk than series. So in that way, yes it's rare that publishers take on a series from a debut author, but it still happens. Is it better to sell a standalone? Yes. Does it make it easier? Certainly. Is it impossible to sell a series? No.
I would ignore the publishing side of things and ask yourself which makes for a better story? Do you truly feel as though the story works better as a duology, or if you were to cut out some of the fluff and combine, would the story feel more cohesive? Does it flow better, even if it stings to acknowledge right now? Or are you losing some of the magic that makes your story impactful?
I would make my decision based on that, and look at the feedback through that lens. I could see your editor wanting to make cuts for the story and using the publishing reason to soften the blow. Because combining books *purely* to make it easier for agents seems like a strange choice, when series still do sell (just more rarely). But if it's a structural thing behind a publishing veil, that would make a lot more sense to me.
6
u/MagnusCthulhu 3d ago
Genuinely: why get advice from a professional developmental editor if you're just going to ask a bunch of strangers on the internet if you should listen to them?
Yes. Cut it to one book.
1
3
u/desbest 3d ago
Editor said traditional publishers rarely take series.
Publishers won't publish the second book in the series, unless the first one was commercially successful, as in making a profit. So you better make sure your first book is self-contained. The reader shouldn't have to read the second book, in order for the first one to make sense.
Also you should NOT combine both books into one., as a typical novel ranges around 80,000-120,000 words.
2
u/FlyinLeviathon LET YOUR FIRST DRAFT SUCK 3d ago
This is sorta true - usually, publishers won't even buy your book if it's clearly a series, unless they buy the whole series (or at least the first few, depending). Which happens, people sell whole series every day. Even debuts, though this is of course more rare.
In that case, even if book 1 doesn't do well, they've already bought the whole thing and will therefore publish the whole thing. I guess if it tanks too badly, they'll buy their way out of the contract for the rest of them, but honestly by the time sales figures for book 1 have dropped, you've already delivered book 2 and have gotten some of your advance on all three, so they'll just as likely stick it out.
Your advice to make sure book 1 is self-contained is solid, because this is the safest approach. It's also the safest for the publisher, because if they buy book 1 they're under no obligation to buy a book 2 that doesn't exist, but if your book does happen to sell well, they'll be thrilled to publish a sequel.
1
u/Arch_Studios_Hq 3d ago
I would say seek another professional opinion. Combined 190k is tough to market for a debut but that doesn't necessarily mean combine. Your first book may need to work better on its own terms with a true conclusion and the sequel be a proper sequel. These are very different things.
Another question to ask the editor yourself are they saying to combine because the books can't work on their own as well or because series are simply harder to sell? These are two entirely different problems. If the first book doesn't have a good resolution by itself, it's an artistic problem not a length problem.
And yes, Garmus did manage to cut her first book down to 100k, but she did so gradually over years while working with both agent and editor. No one is suggesting you accomplish this in one revision. Don't gut your story just because someone told you so do remember debuts have to earn their way into series.
1
u/schvanckque 2d ago
There's no way any of us could give a meaningful answer without having read your manuscript. Both points are fair; nearly 200k words is longer than most publishers will want to touch, but the point about publishers not wanting to take on a debut series is also true. I think the actual answer is that cohesion in your story matters more than either of those things, and if the two together make a more complete and compelling singular novel than the individual parts would, then you should do that...but how would we know? Assuming this is somebody you hired personally, then there's nothing to say you have to follow their advice if you're strongly opposed, but I would usually expect a professional editor to be familiar with the craft and process, so you might want to seek a second opinion if that's the case.
1
u/Macakqz 2d ago
Am I the only one who thinks 100k words in not that much?
1
u/Neurotopian_ 2d ago
100k words is fine as a length for a draft before edits. It’ll probably edit down to 90k if a publisher gets hold of it.
In this situation though if the developmental editor told them to combine the two 95k books into one, they’re probably trying to explain that the first book isn’t a complete story by itself. They’ll probably need to rework it to tell 1 coherent story.
And I agree it’s not that hard to cut content once you take a little time away and get some perspective.
1
u/Macakqz 2d ago edited 2d ago
No, I am saying I never thought that 100k words is too much for a book. Like, my chapters sometimes have over 10k words because they have to. I never understood why people split shit up in mini chatpers today. I tell stories in small arc for example. A simple duel/encounter between 2 high-profile characters in my book is 5k words alone. That would be 5% of someone's book, for example. But I guess people today either can't write something interesting or the pace is faster because readers get bored quickly. Who knows. I have a sub plot that currently has 40k words lol. My story is not going to be a single book ofc but I don't see how I can split it up in smaller pieces then 300k words, lets say. Generally when I see someone here on sub talking about word count it always seems odd to me. People talk about 100k as good for a novel but Game of Thrones is close to 300k. Storm of swords over 400k. That's for me a healthy length for a novel. War and Peace over 500k. Karamazovs 350k. Just to name a few. But editors today say its horror to have long novels lol.
1
u/OutrunTheForeverYeet 1d ago
I don't think it is. I'm in the process of writing now. The first half of the book is floating around 88000 words. I suspect it will end up around 150k.
1
u/Macakqz 1d ago
Mine is going toward 500k and I am truly mindful of space and time for each scene. If I describe something with a lot of words or give it special attention, then there is a reason for it. I am not really wordy for no reason. But I also write it like a classic, mostly not giving two fucks about "modern" rules.
1
u/OutrunTheForeverYeet 1d ago
The story I am writing is not really a series. At least, when I sat down and seriously set the story into a real structure, I did not do so with any intention for it to be. However, that structure has four distinct sections. So, I am writing it in four volumes. If each volume ends up being book-length, then i guess that's what it will be.
1
u/Macakqz 1d ago edited 1d ago
I kind of like my characters so much that I planned for them to have great adventures. So I am now building a complex world to allow that. And I want them to bring some real change or value to their world and do actions that made a difference locally and globally. Also, I refuse to use cheap tricks while doing so. I could be like George Martin and stack vague shit all over the place and dead ends, but it's not my style. I solved those problems with detailed backstories on my characters. On the other hand this racks up the word count. I am not going to be one of those who say: "but some say there are even lizard man once you travel far beyond the Misty mountains". No, fuck that. Lets go there, lets meet these lizard men, or let's have one of their kind cross out path. I like exploring my world with my characters. I like the diversity of a land I am making. I dont really care about writing 50 novels with a shitload of different characters. That's why I decided to invest my time in a good trilogy or two, where everything happens in the same place (planet). This is why I predict over 500k words in novel only. I will also write more about my words in some other works, like an appendix to the book.
1
u/Character-Role-600 1d ago
Sorry but no one is reading 500,000 words.
1
u/Macakqz 1d ago
How long is Song of Ice and Fire again?
1
u/Character-Role-600 1d ago
You’re saying your book is going to be the next game of thrones?
1
u/Macakqz 1d ago
Your claim is no one is going to read 500k words story. Mine is that people already do it, and I gave an example. Need more of those? Also, I don't care if my book is going to be next The Song of Ice and Fire.
1
1
u/frozenanchore 22h ago
100k per book is standard. 190k combined is a doorstop editors will flinch at. i cut 40k from my last tutorial rewrite and the thing was better for it. kill your darlings
1
u/Macakqz 20h ago
I don't think those editors ever wrote a book worth our time. There is a saying: "Those who can write, write; those who can't, teach writing." If editors flinch at 190k words, they are not worth their salt. Sometimes a story requires a lot of words to be whole. What would they say today if someone handed them the manuscript of War and Peace, for example? Maybe the best book ever written. Around 450k words in this masterpiece.
I am not against editing. I am against molds in literature, just to point that out. The exact same thing happened after the success of LotR. Editors and publishers wanted to repeat that, so they forced writers to write bad copies of it.1
1
u/Neurotopian_ 2d ago
Publishers indeed want a complete story for a debut novel. Usually if a developmental editor is telling you to combine two books into one, it’s because they don’t feel there are two distinct narrative arcs and sufficiently meaty plots to fill separate books. In the editor’s opinion, the first book hasn’t told a satisfying, complete story in its entirety. Perhaps you spend most of the first book introducing characters and lore or you end on a cliffhanger.
Whether the editor is correct, nobody here can tell you without reading the material. But I’d suggest doing a reverse outline (where you write down the narrative beats of each chapter) to see if each book has a distinct story. Is there a clear narrative arc with rising action and a climax where the protagonist(s) learns and changes internally, and as a result of their growth, takes action that changes their world/ circumstances externally? In a romance, the internal growth could be learning to overcome some sort of trauma and the external change could be HEA/ HFN with their partner. In an adventure the growth might be in combat or magic that enables completion of a quest or rescue. In a mystery, it’s gaining info that solves the central question. If you don’t have two distinct stories for your two books, then it makes sense to combine them for a debut.
I have taught genre fiction as a continuing ed class a few times and when I read manuscripts I notice many students want to write a trilogy. They often fill “book one” with worldbuilding and backstories. Tbh, most of that is best cut, put in a series encyclopedia, then introduced when it becomes relevant to the plot.
Like your developmental editor, I usually point out that it’ll be more appealing to agents and publishers to convert the trilogy arc into a tight standalone. In response, they cite epic fantasy like ASOIAF. But the differences are significant: (1) that isn’t a debut, (2) it was published decades ago, (3) by an experienced TV writer, and (4) it’s a heavily-researched, immersive episodic narrative.
98% of genre fiction relies on a compelling, book-length arc to keep readers turning pages. GRRM’s ASOIAF and similar epics promise a different pleasure: Readers want to spend time in the carefully-crafted world, sometimes reading only a chapter per day for months, and it’s still entertaining because each section has an episodic arc like TV writing. If you believe that fits your work (and FTR I don’t recommend attempting it for a debut, as you’re less likely to get published), you need to assess: are each of my chapters good enough to be published as a short story in my genre (eg, Clarkesworld for sci-fi)?
1
u/Jebus-Xmas 22h ago
Editors rarely take series? This was a professional you paid? Have you submitted your work to any others?
29
u/Draconatra 3d ago
Was the advice to combine purely on the basis of publishers rarely taking series? Or were there structural elements that they suggested would be more effective if reduced/combined? Does the first book stand on its own, or does it require the second for there to be a complete arc? (Obviously the sequel may extend a larger arc, but I am asking if the first book feels incomplete alone.)