Is it just me or does it seem like every book written these days is the start of a series? Don’t get me wrong, I love series’ just as much as the next person but sometimes I just can’t start another one. Every now and then I want to sit down with a book, read it, and be able to move on. I don’t want to have to worry about cliffhanger endings, when the next book is coming out, and things like that. I just want a solid conclusion that leaves me with no questions and a smile on my face.
Also, who else gets supremely annoyed when a book you thought was a standalone ends up getting a sequel? Sure there are some books that I love and would like more of but not if there is no point (kind of like what happened with the Mortal Instruments series.) If everything is tied up at the end of book one, don’t write a book two. Most of the time I lose interest at that point because I see no reason to read the second book. I admit that if a book doesn’t have a cliffhanger ending, I usually lose interest in the series. There just isn’t a great pull for me to read the next book. That’s why when an author writes a sequel to a book that was meant to be a standalone I tend to not read it. I know that’s bad but it’s true.
By far my biggest pet peeve though is when authors say they are writing a standalone but they leave things open for a sequel. If I pick up a book thinking it’s a standalone, I don’t want to get to the end and wonder why so many questions were left unanswered. And what if the sequel doesn’t even sell? Then all the readers who picked up the first book are left with all these questions that will never be answered. I like everything neat and tidy at the end. If I read a series or a standalone I want all my questions answered by the end. I hate it when I’m left wondering what happened.
What about you guys? Do any of these things bother you?
Oh and you should give me some recommendations for awesome standalones.
I mentioned this the other day on Twitter, but I totally agree with you. There were several books I read this year that were like that, and it just made me go AHH! Why?! Some books don’t need a sequel. And there are books that REALLY don’t need a sequel. Sometimes authors need to branch out and try new things, and I hate to bring up Cassandra Clare, but maybe it’s time she explores something else than the Shadowhunter universe in yet another series.
Great discussion!
I weote a post bout this in 2010 so it’s a problem that has progressed for a while now. It seems to be a ploy in some cases just to get money. Why didn’t The Mortal Instruments just stay a trilogy? I’ve found that some good books have open endings where the reader can guess what happens. I like it when author’s don’t write sequels. For instance, If I Stay didn’t really need a sequel but I knew that Gayle Forman couldn’t have done it just for money or whatever. Where She Went was a good book!
The False Princess by Elis O’Neil
Brightly Woven by Alexandra Bracken
Anything Sarah Dessen (they have overlapping characters but they’re really standalone books)
John Green books
I agree with you. Pet peeve. SO MANY books today are series and its REALLY annoying when a standalone becomes a series. Then I sort of abandon the book. 85% of my bookshelf is full of series. 🙁 problem…
My book is a standalone, and I intended it that way. Hoo, boy, is the ending final. But I have a different worry: because I wrote a short story for Tor.com set in the world of the book, a Goodreads librarian has created a series for it, where the Tor story is Monstrous Beauty 0.5 and the book itself is Monstrous Beauty #1. To me, that little parenthetical series name next to the title of the book implies to readers that there’s more coming, doesn’t it? Should I ask to have that taken down, or is that how it’s done even for standalones, in this new world of companion short stories?
If I pick up a book, knowing it’s part of a series (or part of a planned series) then that’s fine.
But turning a standalone into a series, or leaving the ending open for a sequel, really bothers me.
You can tell which books were always meant as a series, because hints for the final book are mentioned in book one (for example). When a standalone is turned into a series (or left open), you miss out on that continuity.
I think that books that can standalones should be.For instance the hunger games. It really didn’t need to go any further than the first book. I felt it was wrapped up in the first book, with Katniss and Peeta together even though she wasn’t sure she was in love with him and they were together and the games were over. It just didn’t need another two books. Because of all this explosion of sequels in the book world, I have come to appreciate standalones.
I think there are so many series, because it’s better for sales if you build an audience. I love series, but yes, there is something to be said for a good standalone.
I’m tired of all the series books. I’d like to see the pendulum swing back towards stand alones. I can’t keep up with all the series books I started in 2011. Each year my TBR pile grows exponentially. I also can’t stand cliffhangers! Even though Harry Potter was a series, you could almost read each book as a stand alone, same with the Percy Jackson series. I’m more in favor of those types of series.
I am with you. You really cannot find a good stand alone book these days because everyone is trying to write series or connected books.
I agree!! I really enjoy a good series (I will miss Harry Potter forever!) but I don’t want every book to be part of a series. Then I feel pressure to read them all to see it through. Sometimes I discover a book that comes from later in a series and of course I have to go back and start at the beginning. My TBR list is long enough! And if it’s a long time between books, I sometimes forget what happened in the past and lose important details. I like to have stand alones too!
Great topic! 🙂
Definitely agree. It’s so hard now to find a good standalone. Everything is a series! I’m also kind of leery of picking up series any more because then I have to wait three or more years for the story to reach its conclusion. I’m starting to wait until the final installment is released.
I mean, don’t get me wrong, I enjoy series to a point, but sometime it seems like the author is just trying to capitalize on past successes.
I’ve read quite some stand alones this year. If an author states it’s a stand alone, it should be one. I can’t take it serious when I see there’s coming a sequel after all.. Something I really hate is cliff hangers/open endings when it’s clearly a stand alone. I want everything to be tied together!
I do love series, but indeed; sometimes you want to read something and then move on to another book.
I also agree to a point. I grew up reading standalone YA books or trilogies. I love serieses but I’m sure I’m missing out on many great stories because I just don’t have the time or money to catch up with 8 books before I’m up to date. Personally, since discovered The Mortal Instruments quite late (only last summer) I didn’t mind the extension. I had the impression that a lot of things were unanswered after the first three books, and I love the Infernal Devices. But thew new spin-off? I’m just wondering what other stories Cassandra Clare could give us.
Generally I think the author should know whether their book is part of a series or not when it comes out and stick with the decision. Or if they want to write another book in the same world maybe choose a different character’s POV and write something new (aka not a retelling of book 1 from that POV).
Especially in paranormal YA it’s almost all series. A recent standalone I’m reading right now and really enjoying is Origin by Jessica Khoury.
I totally agree! Although I love a good series, I’m now in the middle of about 100 of them. And that may not even be an exaggeration (by much).
One thing I’ve really started to like is companion books, like the Graceling series, If I Stay/Where She Went (although that’s kind of a sequel), His Fair Assasin, Anna and the French Kiss/Lola and the Boy Next Door – I like how we’re left feeling that the story is complete, but we still get to carry on with some same or similar characters in another book.
The only stand alone I’ve really read recently was Tiger Lily (which was amazing), but even that’s already been connected to another story since it’s a retelling.
Great post! It’s a great topic to talk about 🙂
I totally agree! When a book becomes a series, everything just starts to drag out, which makes me lose so much interest in the book.
I used to dislike companion books, but like BookAddictsGuide, I’m starting to like them now (Anna and the French Kiss/ Lola and the Boy Next Door).
A great standalone is The Fault in Our Stars by John Green. Also, Amelia Anne is Dead and Gone by Kat Rosenfield is also pretty good!
Crazy Red Pen
I am totally with you. I think stand-alones are almost stronger simply because they have the capability to “wow” you with one book and their message and plot has to be that much tighter and well-crafted to do that effectively. Plus, series nearly always let me down. With the exception of a few gems, I always find that I drop a series or simply become annoyed that some books are good and other suck and it’s a marketing gimmick half the time just to make money which sucks. I picked up so many books this year thinking they were stand-alones and I KNOW I won’t be continuing with the series because I was so annoyed they weren’t stand-alones. *sigh* Some of the best stand-alones I’ve read though are The Scorpio Races, Brightly Woven, Fire by Kristin Cashore, Graffiti Moon by Cath Crowley, and anything written by Melina Marchetta. I hope you enjoy those and start to find some stand-alones that really ARE just stand-alones! *fingers crossed*
~Keertana
Ivy Book Bindings
I’ve thought about this quite a few times. Standalones are so refreshing because I don’t have to bother keeping myself updated on the release dates of the rest of the books in a series.I agree and wish there would be more books sold as standalones, without announcing later that the book has been sold as a series. Great discussion, thanks!
That’s the main reason I’m not interested in a lot of the popular books that have been coming out lately. Because if I get a book when it first comes out and it’s in a sequel, then I’ve got to wait another year to figure out what happens next, and then another year for the third book, and so on. And most of the time, after I’ve waited awhile I don’t care anymore, or I’ve simply forgotten what happened. Sometimes, if a book is really good (say, The Hunger Games) I’ll reread it before the sequel so it’s fresh, but if it’s not so good then I’ll just skip it in favor of a standalone or a finished series. At least then I don’t have to wait.
Jane
I agree wholeheartedly that most of books these days are in series (especially in YA literature). However I do not find problems with it because I also read books for adult readers where series are not as many.
I like cliffhanger, but only in chapter ending, not the book ending. Waiting for another year just for the sequel? Well, my time is too precious for that. So when I start reading a series, I try to read ones that are already completed.
I didn’t want SOLID to be a series, but then it had to be. Especially once I realized that that okay-but-absolutely-no-more-than-a-trilogy series probably needs one more installment, I am determined that all 3 of my pipeline projects will be standalones!
As much as I love series books, I’m with you — I want stand-alones! Sometimes it’s nice to finish a book and not feel committed to an entire SERIES of books. But sometimes, I finish a stand-alone and want MORE of the characters!
Great topic!
Harry Potter was PLANNED to be a series, she knew from the beginning there was going to be 7 books. A lot of these other books are just trying to capitalize on a trend and that’s not cool. Esp. in the fantasy genre, there’s just book after book of series! I’m glad I read mostly contemp., it’s a lot easier!
I honestly am a huge fan of series! It feels so good to finish reading a fantastic book and know that another one’s coming. It means that you can have another adventure with the characters you know and love. If you can’t afford to read more series, why is that a problem? No matter what, you’re still buying the same amount of books so why not spend it with writing and characters you love in a series. Don’t get me wrong, I do enjoy a good stand alone, but I’m always sad when I finish the book.
Lately I’ve really enjoyed books that are linked but where you can read out of order. Each is good on their own but you can have a richer reading experience by reading all. If you want standalone, I think you’ll mostly have to seek contemporary/historical; non-realistic fic seems to have way more series.
I totally agree with this post. My sister and I were actually just talking about this the other day. I think the reason for so many series is to capitalize on marketing and cross-promotion to series/movies. Of course, not everything is going to be a blockbuster series, but that doesn’t mean people are going to stop trying. LOL. Still, there are some great YA stand-alones…anything by sarah Dessen and Ten by Gretchen McNeil. 🙂
PS: I also think it was ridiculous that they extended TMI series past the initial 3 books. I have strongly disliked the second trilogy.
I completely agree. It is majorly frustrating when you get to the end to only find out there is another book. Especially when I didn’t see anywhere that there would be more books. I like series, but the wait for another book can be really long sometimes. After a few books, it is hard to keep me interested. Only a few series have managed to do that for me. A stand alone is nice to read.
YES! I am so sick of trilogies and love triangles lately. I have soooo many series I am reading right now and I am really making an effort to finish them!!!
Angie
Angela’s Anxious Life
I am actively searching for stand alones lately, but they are not easy to find. Writers need to take note.
We had an interesting discussion on this over at YA Yeah Yeah a week or so back – definitely agree with you! I think it’s less of an issue in contemporary than in fantasy/historical/paranormal/dystopian where virtually EVERYTHING is a series. John Green, Jenny Downham, Jandy Nelson, Cat Clarke, Susie Day, Keris Stainton, and Tabitha Suzuma all spring to mind as people who’ve written wonderful standalone contemporary books – thinking of all the other genres the only standalone that immediately springs to mind is the stunning Code Name Verity by Elizabeth Wein.
I’d agree with Michelle above that one of the biggest issues is whether they’re MEANT to be series. Harry Potter worked so well because JKR had it planned out for 7 books – there are other books which seem to be originally written as stand-alones and split into two for release, or written as shorter series and then lengthened. In both of those cases, it’s hard to see how they’re doing anything other than cashing in. I think your third paragraph is very true – books need to give us a satisfying ending. (Even if they’re part of a series, I’d like to think that a reasonable amount of things get wrapped up – Rowling was superb at doing that in HP, Jillian Larkin is just as good in her historical Flappers series.)
Personally, I love ‘linked’ books! People like Jaclyn Moriarty, Morgan Matson, Sarra Manning and Sarah Dessen are fabulous at writing books which include references to their earlier work to make fans smile but don’t have to be read as part of a series.
Great post, and fantastic to see it kicking off so much discussion!
Jim, I believe Elizabeth Wein is actually working on just such a “linked” book for Code Name Verity as we speak.
I’m having such a problem with series at the moment. I like to keep my reading varied so I usually leave a gap before moving on to the next book in a series so I can read something fresh. Recently though I’ve started so many series and just never get round to reading the sequels! The list of 2nd or 3rd books I need to read is just constantly growing.
A lot of the contemporary YA I read are standalones which has led to me seeking out more books in that genre.
I’d much prefer to read more standalones but they seem so much harder to find. I agree with Jim’s post above about linked books. I’m a huge fan of Jaclyn Moriaty’s Ashbury/Brookfield series and you could pretty much read those in any order.
Great discussion topic!
Sarah @ TotalTeenFiction
I totally agree with you. I’m trying to read more standalones, but even the standalones turn into the first books of a series, so I’m kind of on the verge of giving up. Ugh.
Luckily I’ve found a couple of great standalones in the past year or so. They are mainly contemporary, so I’m hoping there’ll be some more other genre standalones in the next year or so, but I really enjoyed these:
Adorkable by Sarra Manning
Five Flavors of Dumb by Antony John
The DUFF by Kody Keplinger
Pushing the Limits by Katie McGarry
Second Chance Summer by Morgan Matson
Any of Janet Gurtler’s books
I think I’ll need to creat a standalone shelf on my goodreads page…
I think there are more of them now! Even in paranormal or thriller books, they tend to limit them to two book series now.