So on the recent Top 5 Wednesday post, the topic was “Books that Intimidate Me” and I think it’s safe to say that ‘bricks of books’ made almost everyone’s list in some form or another. A couple pieces of discussion here and there also had several people agreeing on the fact that the long-windedness doesn’t seem entirely necessary.
So there’s a couple things up for discussion today.
1.) Do (primarily fantasy) writers feel like if they don’t write a novel of at least 500 pages, they’re not doing it right?
2.) Do ‘big name authors’ abuse their status to keep their novels just as they wrote them, instead of letting editors do their job and whittle them down into a tighter book?
3.) Do most readers actually salivate at the longer word count when it comes to science fiction and fantasy?
Here’s my take:
1.) Probably, because you look at all the ‘well-known’ fantasy books out there, and you encounter ridiculous page lengths. However, you run into the ‘did you really read it?’ issue. Do people who proclaim to be huge fans of the Game of Thrones books, the Lord of the Rings books, Neal Stephenson (maybe Science Fiction’s King of the Garrulous Writers) books, actually read every page in all of those books? If they do, are they people who just like longer novels across the board or is it something about THOSE writers/series that drag them in?
2.) Uhm, yes. I mean, I can’t say I know for definite, but there’s definitely some garrulous writers that seem to abuse their god-like writing status because who would dare question their “Works of Greatness” when the adoring masses love them.
2a.) I think a lot of people have writers that hit “Must-buy” status in their minds, and they don’t stop to consider if the books ARE actually going to be any good, and just automatically snatch them up. I also think a lot of readers feel like they MUST say that they’ve read, collect, or love certain novels just because they’re in a genre. I don’t know how many times readers have came to me for Stephen King recommendations, even though I practically shout it from the rooftops that I am NOT a Stephen King fan. They assume that since I like horror, I must be a King fan, I think.
For the record:
Stephen King is a good writer, but I do not think Stephen King is a great writer. 
3.) According to the informal results I catalogued in my head from Top 5 Wednesday: NOPE. Mostpeople see a massive word count, eep, and step away. How much of this “Thick novels are AWESOME!”comes from the same people that lie through their teeth about reading some of the classics?
For your edification, here are a couple sites I found that address word count / page length for the various genres.
Writer’s Digest – Word Count for Novels and Children’s Books
The Write Practice – Word Count
It seems like even for fantasy around 100,000 words (400 pages) is the ‘accepted’, but then you have people like George R.R. Martin. His smallest book in Game of Thrones is the first one, and that’s near 300,000 words. The longest is over 400,000. If you’ve read those books, be honest, in YOUR opinion, do they need to be that big? (I’m just curious. I’ve never managed to get through the first chapter of the first one.)
Now, just so you don’t think me a heathen that only reads short books… let’s be clear…
I’ve read (all page lengths according to Goodreads):
It by Stephen King – 1093 pages
Kushiel’s Dart by Jacqueline Carey – 1015 pages
Swan Song by Robert McCammon – 956 pages
The Sum of All Fears by Tom Clancy – 928 pages
Seveneves by Neal Stephenson – 881 pages
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J.K. Rowling – 870 pages
The Shelters of Stone by Jean M. Auel – 800 pages
The Plains of Passage by Jean M. Auel – 784 pages
From the Corner of His Eye by Dean Koontz – 768 pages
The Passage by Justin Cronin – 766 pages
……just to name a few. I have no problem tackling some of the longer books, and indeed, one of my favorite series has a ridiculous word count per book. HOWEVER, the amount of times that I actually felt that the word count was necessary differs drastically.
IT? No. Kushiel’s Dart? Yes. Swan Song? Yes. Sum of All Fears? No. Seveneves? No. HP and the OotP? No. Shelters of Stone? No. Plains of Passage? Yes. From the Corner? No. The Passage? Yes. So, obviously, sometimes the word count works and it’s necessary. But the majority of the time? At least in my opinion: Not. so. much.
I’ve said my piece, now say yours!
1.) Do (primarily fantasy) writers feel like if they don’t write a novel of at least 500 pages, they’re not doing it right?
2.) Do ‘big name authors’ abuse their status to keep their novels just as they wrote them, instead of letting editors do their job and whittle them down into a tighter book?
3.) Do most readers actually salivate at the longer word count when it comes to science fiction and fantasy?
Talk to Me!
Lilyn
1 and 3) This is one reason I avoid a great deal of contemporary fantasy: epic-length fantasy novels are either bloated or epics, and I only want to read so many epics, particularly heroic fantasy epics!
That said, a lot of us follow series, which are in some respects VERY long books, particular when they revolve around a certain character(s). So why quibble at just one long volume?
2) And yes, I think some writers pad. Connie Willis took a lot of flack over Blackout/All Clear, as an example you’ve not mentioned. While I understand her reasons for writing it as she did, c’mon, there are times I almost died of boredom in there.
I decided to put these matters to the test by looking to see what fat fiction books are on my “read in the last few years” shelves. Here’s the results:
– several later Iain M. Banks novels, which while fun could have used trimming.
– Deborah Harkness’s “A Discovery of Witches,” which was long enough that I’ve bought the even longer second novel but haven’t got up the energy to read it.
-Daniel O’Malley’s “The Rook,” which I reviewed on my blog and loved despite its info dumps, but I fear what the sequel will be like.
– Tim Powers, “The Stress of Her Regard” and “Hide Me Among the Graves.” Tim does great historical color, but “Stress” suffers from the Sidonia problem (trying to unite too many chronologically disparate events into one narrative). So My recommendation for these volumes is lukewarm.
– And the aforementioned Connie Willis novels. We know you can write more succinctly, Connie.
Maybe for a subsequent post, you might want to consider asking people for their favorite SHORT novels (though drawing the line between a novel and novella/long short story is a real problem).
As usual, you’re a great particpator! Thanks! And yes that’s a good idea. I’ll look around to see if there’s even a semi- agreed upon guideline somewhere. I know for me the cut off is 150 pages, but honestly anything under 30 is akin to “flash fiction”.
1) Yes, it does seem like that sometimes. After all, the Lord of the Rings trilogy was written as one humongous book, and if Tolkien did it, so should everyone else, right?
2) Sometimes they clearly do. For example, some the turgid books of Asimov, Heinlein, and Philip K Dick toward the end of their careers. But moviemakers are guilty of a similar phenomenon, although in their case they’re motivated by simple greed not hubris. Splitting the final Harry Potter book into two movies was somewhat justified. But not Hunger Games. Not Divergent. They want to pick our pockets, nothing more and nothing less..
3) No, no, no. As the years go by (I’m an old fart) I have less patience for loooong books. I had David Brin’s 900 page Existence on my TBR pile for years without ever overcoming my resistance. In my own writing, I find I’m producing shorter and shorter works because I love the clarity this brings. Sure, I could bloviate and wander down garden paths … but speaking personally, I’m convinced that isn’t a good thing.
Ooooh! Pet peeve time! You hit the nail on the head, Lilyn. My 2ct:
1.) Do (primarily fantasy) writers feel like if they don’t write a novel of at least 500 pages, they’re not doing it right?
I understand that introducing a world that is different from ours may take up a lot of space. However, it doesn’t *need* to. Terry Pratchett is one of the world’s lead fantasy authors, and he never needed ridiculous word counts to tell a great story and build a unique world. His books have 350-450 pages.
As a writer I say: If a story needs more space, take it, but for Heaven’s sake, use it well! Padding is not appreciated.
2.) Do ‘big name authors’ abuse their status to keep their novels just as they wrote them, instead of letting editors do their job and whittle them down into a tighter book?
I’m convinced that they do. Some of them, anyway. I still haven’t forgiven JK Rowling for the last 4 Harry Potter books. Especially Goblet of Fire could – and should! – have been severely condensed.
And let’s not get started on ‘IT’, shall we? Suffice to say I agree with your opinion of both the book and the writer…
3.) Do most readers actually salivate at the longer word count when it comes to science fiction and fantasy?
Nope. I can only speak for myself, of course, but this reader is very suspicious of high word counts. Anything over 200,000 words must come with brililant referals before I even consider picking it up. Too often, high word counts mean either padding with unnecesary details/scenes, long expositions or court politics, and I don’t have much patience with any of those.
But that is just my opinion. ;P
I always love getting your input, Chris! Sometimes I feel like I’m too much of a minimalist, so it’s good to have others speaking up that feel the same way I do.