The Series Conundrum

Every author who pens related stories is likely faced with these questions: How, exactly, is a series defined? When do I end it and leave this world and these characters to their own fates? How many books are too many . . . or too few . . . or just enough?

Readers get frustrated when authors err on either side of the spectrum. If a series drags on for book after book after book, ad infinitum, characters get stale and conflicts become repetitive. Predictability replaces drama. On the other hand, if a series ends before readers feel all significant relationships have been fully developed and all issues resolved, they feel cheated -- and rightly so. Loose ends don't make for a satisfying conclusion.

I've lately been wrestling with this issue, because I currently have three sets of related tales. First, there's the Galdeshian fantasy cycle at Ellora's Cave. Composed of two novellas and a novel (Wing and Tongue, Cauldron of Keridwen, and Prince of Glacier Glas), this collection isn't, strictly speaking, a series. All the stories take place in the same world and share some characters, but there's no central plot thread or pair/group of protagonists. The titles are stand-alones, which means I could easily stop right now . . . but, I do have another in mind.

The second group is a series. Called Utopia-X and published by Loose Id, it's m/m futuristic urban fantasy with a central trio of repeat characters. The world expands with each book. Looking for Some Touch is Book 1. Seeking Something Wicked, coming out on March 3, is Book 2. A third novel, Exploring Savage Places, is completed. Instinct tells me I can't fully "tidy things up" without writing another book or two . . . but, how can I be sure?

Finally, I have another group of novels and novellas knit together by two characters rather than a world or mythos or storyline. Jackson Spey and Adin Swift have a relationship arc that thus far extends over three books -- Plagued (EC), Obsessed (Changeling), and now, InDescent (a big urban fantasy coming from Liquid Silver). At least one more story is necessary to bring this relationship to a satisfying conclusion . . . but, one more may not suffice, given such complex characters.

So, the Devil isn't in the details, it's in the "buts." Unless an author lays out and slavishly follows a blueprint for a series, s/he will likely start wondering at some point how far to go. It’s easy to become enamored of our characters, to want to shepherd them through one trial after another because we’re loath to give them up. Easy, as well, to get lost in worlds that keep growing like crystals, new facets continually emerging from the original structure. (As examples of what I mean, consider Laurell K. Hamilton’s Anita Blake series, which now stands at 17 books. Or Don Pendleton, creator of tough guy Mack Bolan and the action/adventure Executioner series. After Pendleton wrote 38 Executioner books – a hefty number by anyone’s standards -- he franchised the character in 1980. Another several hundred series-related books have since resulted from that deal.)

What determines the end point? When all major characters have their happily-ever-after? When all bad guys have been dispatched and all threats neutralized? When the series’ world has been sufficiently explored and teeters on the brink of getting boring? Or should sales figures coupled with reader feedback decide the issue?

I'd be interested to see what readers and other authors have to say about the series conundrum!