Series Work and Genre Hopping

Knowing so many writers the way I do (both in person and through your work), I know that some favor series work and like to go back and revisit the same character(s) over and over again or the same genre repeatedly. Others tend to leap all over the place, from one new character/world to another and bouncing between genres with the kind of abandon that can risk whiplash. Let's talk about that, shall we?

Do you have a preference between writing a series or writing unconnected stories, particularly those involving different genres? Which genres have you told stories within?

Scott Roche: I write in multiple genres. I've written sci-fi, lit fiction, horror, fantasy, urban fantasy, gaslamp fantasy, superhero stories, romance.

Lucy Blue: I really hope that the stranglehold of the series is finally coming to an end. 'Cause I hate them. As a writer and as a reader. But publishers, be they mainstream or indie or the algorithm of the 'Zon, just adore them for all the same reasons Hollywood does--once you've sold that can of beans, you know how to sell that can of beans, even if the cook changes the recipe a bit with every shipment. 

Amelia Sides: I prefer writing stand-alones in a similar world or a series of characters then series, but series seem to be what publishers want.

Paul Landri: Everything I've done so far has been a series. Crimson Howl is superhero pulp fiction and lends itself well to the serial format. My Simon and Kirby project is, of course, a serial since it's based on their comic books. I tend to stay with one particular genre until it's finished until I move on to my next project which will likely be horror with a historical bent (Al Capone vs. vampires? Samurai vs. zombies? Oh hell yeah!)

Matthew Barron: I tend to get bored doing things that are too similar, so I might revisit characters and worlds but I like to explore other things in between. I've written urban fantasy, horror, high fantasy, science fiction, short stories, plays, books, and graphic novels.

Sean Taylor: I much prefer to write non-series work, especially series work in the "epic" category. I have less vile for a recurring character in a series, a la James Bond or Ms. Fisher in standalone stories than I do for a multi-part series that needs several volumes to tell its tale. Not everything has to be the freakin' Lord of the Rings, even in fantasy. I do however like to go back and revisit certain characters, but only when I have a new story to tell for them, such as with Rick Ruby or with some of my superhero folks from the iHero/Cyber Age Adventures days. 

Rachel Burda Taylor: I like series, but I go back and forth between a series that follows a single character/couple and a series based in the same world and loosely following a world-problem but with a different Protag/LI and stand-alone plot for each book.

Aaron Rosenberg: I do bounce between genres, but I also write both standalone novels (and short stories) and series. There are times when, even if I love a character, I know their story is done—DuckBob is one of those, I revisit him in short stories occasionally but the novel arc was four books and finished. Other characters and their stories are a one-and-done, not because I don’t like them as much but because the story is told and it’s time to move on. I couldn’t write just one character, series, or even genre ad infinitum but there are plenty of characters and stories that I feel warrant more than one book, and I do revisit my favorite genres a lot.

As far as the genres themselves, I’ve written: urban fantasy, epic fantasy, dark fantasy, near SF, far-flung SF, space opera, superheroes, action-adventure, spy thriller, mystery, Western, romance, cozy, humor, and probably a few I’m forgetting. 

Ef Deal: When I create a cosmos, the characters lead full lives, so once one conflict is resolved, there’s no reason to assume there won’t be another one. When I wrote my first novel, it ended by setting up both political and ecclesiastical conflicts that my MC didn’t think would involve her, but I realized would absolutely have to involve her, so I began writing more stories. They are all standalone, but they are also sequential. I have planned nine novels in that series so far.

My current work is a steampunk series and again it evolved into a series because the characters were all involved with external affairs that created more conflicts. They have histories and futures. I have to tell their stories.

Brian K Morris: As a reader, I've loved series books (Doc Savage, The Shadow, Mack Bolan, Remo Williams, Captain Hawklin, Abraham Snow, Code Name Intrepid, etc.). As a writer, however, I've only recently begun work on a series, simply because certain mechanics of recurring characters (exposition-wise, mostly) intimidated me until recently.

Ron Thomas: Series for novels. One offs (that might be revisited) for short stories. Genres: action/adventure, sword & sorcery, science fiction.

Julie Cochrane: I like series fiction. It's what I like to read and what I like to write.

That said, some jumping around is, for me, necessary because at some point I can't continue to write a series while trying to sell the first book in it. There's just too much risk for me. So that has me, now, reaching out to do something different so I can keep writing while querying agents.

Also, there is the realistic possibility that trad publishing may look at my current work and say, "Meh."

I need a plan B, and that turns out to be something very different.

I've written military SF of the cloak and dagger variety and now I'm really feeling it for urban fantasy.

John French: Over the many years I have been writing I have created several series characters, many if whom have found their way into their own collections, which is another advantage. When I'm behind a vendor's table, I find that people like to buy books about the same character, and if I have more than one book about that character, they sometimes buy more than one or buy another when they come back. 

Bobby Nash: I do both. Series are fun because you get to revisit the characters again and again. Readers also enjoy series so they can keep up with characters they love (or hate). There is something fun about a stand-alone though. Even my series book wrap up the main plot in each book. I play in most genres. It’s fun.

Susan H. Roddey: I love the idea of a series, but it never seems to work out well for me in execution. I tend to get bored a little too easily. Most everything I write starts out standalone, but eventually evolves into something that could have additional books. The problem is, it puts too much stress on my ADHD squirrel brain and I end up falling off with everything. 

Tamara Lowery: I personally prefer writing a series. I love spending prolonged time with characters I've created, getting to know them and making their lives difficult. Of course, I've had immense fun writing the few short stories I have. I do have a couple of stand-alone longer works I wish I had time to get to. There's just not enough time to dedicate to everything.

The two series I do have published and in process are both action/adventure, but one is semi-historical dark fantasy that I intend to take more towards grimdark as it progresses. The other is steampunk episodic fiction. I have an epic fantasy stand-alone awaiting my attention as well as a dystopian slightly political stand-alone in the wings.

What are the advantages (both marketing and as a writer) of doing a series?

Lucy Blue: Every book I've ever published with a NYC press has been part of a trilogy, and most of the indie ones I have, too, but not because I wanted to. Right now I have an ongoing cozy romantic historical mystery series, The Stella Hart Mysteries, and the first book in a new medieval romantasy series, The Dragon's Wife, is coming out on January 15. And I love all of those books and loved the experience of writing all of those books. And the Stella books have been some of my most successful. But my southern gothic horror book, The Devil Makes Three (which has also done pretty well) is very much a standalone, and I loved writing it that way.

Tamara Lowery: The advantages of series from both marketing and as a writer is a chance to more fully develop characters, events, and settings. From a marketing standpoint, it lets readers know that there will be more story, a chance at prolonging their escape to another world.

Ron Thomas: I hope that book 1 makes book 2 more sale-able and so on. (I have a nine-book deal, so I need to keep growing readership.)

Susan H. Roddey: In this market, a series is definitely advantageous if you get it in front of the right audience. Read-through seems to be the biggest draw, especially with Booktok being as insanely useful as it is. The primary DISADVANTAGE of a series is that there are a lot of readers who won't even start it until it's completed, which messes with sales algorithms and frustrates writers. It's part of why I prefer standalones -- both as a reader and a writer.

Rachel Burda Taylor: Advantages of series are that they are easy to get reader follow through from one book to the next, since the readers get hooked. As a writer, I really enjoy exploring my worlds (even the contemporary ones) and it's impossible to thoroughly do that in one book. I also like the feel of a bigger plot that moves from one book to another. World-building, if complex, is also just really time-consuming so a series cuts that down.

John French: I prefer writing about series characters, even when writing short stories. It saves my from having to create new characters and settings, which is one of the advantages of having series characters. 

Matthew Barron: Readers who like a series tend to come back for each new installment, so it might be easier to grow an audience that way.

Bobby Nash: Readers love following series, especially if they love the characters. When asking someone about their favorite series (book, comic, TV, or movie), it’s rarely the plot they talk about, but the characters. “I love the Bosch books” for example. Marketing a series can cover multiple books at once.

Brian K Morris: Marketing a series seems to be easier because it's mostly preaching to the choir. You would have a built-in base of readers and from there, you can attempt to grow it. As a writer, I find I don't have to pack EVERYTHING I want to say with a character because there will be other opportunities to make those points down the road.

Aaron Rosenberg: It’s a LOT easier to build a brand if you’re writing in a single genre, and even easier if you’re writing a single series. That way, anyone who finds and likes your work knows exactly what they’re getting when they pick up the next book.

Sean Taylor: The biggest advantage I can see is the marketability. Fans want to follow the next book, because fans really dig series. And as long as fans drive sales, publishers will dig series too. To me, though the whole enterprise leads to weakened storytelling brought on by the increased need to keep going. It's like when you get a surplus or supply issue of a comic book that just isn't as good simply because a new story had to come out because the calendar date changed. 

Paul Landri: I don't have a very big following yet but I know people are looking forward to Crimson Howl 2 and 3 so I guess my particular audience likes serial-type stories. It's definitely easier to market because it's pre-established and known (even in a limited capacity)

Scott Roche: Your fans know what to expect. It's easier to market. People love series.

What are the advantages of hopping from one new, unrelated work/genre to another?

Rachel Burda Taylor: There is something fun about learning something entirely new, especially in terms of genre/world. Creatively, it gets my brain going.

Susan H. Roddey: I'm happy with a one-and-done story. I also despise a cliffhanger, which is how so many contemporary series force read-through.

Ron Thomas: Doing something in between is a mental palate cleanser. I am working on a military aviation short story between action novels. Lets me come back fresher.

Tamara Lowery: The advantage of hopping from one unrelated project to the next is the chance to reach a wider audience and to keep from getting in a writing rut or just getting lazy.

Aaron Rosenberg: For me, it’s the chance to write something different than what I’ve just finished, and also to explore something completely new. I’ve done darker (for me) books and though they were fun, I wouldn’t want to always write dark. But I feel the same way about over-the-top comedy—the DuckBob books were a blast to do, and I do like to do the occasional short story in that idiom, but I couldn’t do that kind of wackiness all the time. Switching things up lets me experiment, which I feel helps me grow as a writer. And sure, people who like my SF comedies might not care for my dark occult thrillers. On the other hand, someone might try a genre that’s new to them because they liked my work in a more familiar genre, and that’s just awesome.

Brian K Morris: For me, genre-hopping helps keep me fresh. I don't enjoy reading two similar books in a row unless it's research. But that's a me issue.

Paul Landri: It allows a break from the genre you are working in. Horror will be refreshing to me since I've been consumed with superheroes.

Bobby Nash: It keeps me from getting bored. As a reader, I read multiple genres because I like multiple genres. As a writer, I write multiple genres because I like multiple genres.

Scott Roche: I'll let you know when I find out. But seriously, for me the benefit is purely personal. I enjoy writing in different genres and I have series in different genres.

Sean Taylor: For me, it's the joy of creating what I want to create. On top of that, I get to pretend I'm a classic writer like Wells, Bradbury, or Vonnegut, who rarely even revisited characters, much less wrote a series. 

Matthew Barron: The pros are that it keeps me interested, and if a reader comes to my table there is a lot of variety. The con is a big one though. Branding and marketing are harder, and a reader who likes one of my books might come back to my table or website and not find anything similar.

For new authors, do you recommend one over the other? Why?

Lucy Blue: As for new authors, my advice on this is the same as my advice on everything else--nobody knows what's going to work in the marketplace ten minutes from now, much less two years from now or longer when you finish your book and get it published. Write the best book you can write right here and now, the one that makes your soul sing, and if it features a character or a setting or a trope that will bear repeating in a series later, awesome, but if it doesn't, that's fine, too. Wait until you have a bestseller and a publisher clamoring for a sequel to worry about it. Writing to the market has never been a good idea for novelists, but right now, it's a TERRIBLE idea.

John French: To the new authors, I would recommend creating characters you can use more than once and, as a genre hopper myself, don't limit yourself to only one genre.

Bobby Nash: Do what works best for you.

Scott Roche: No. You need to write what you enjoy. You do you.

Rachel Burda Taylor: For new authors, I'd recommend writing a stand-alone and making sure they enjoy the process and actually finish the book before worrying about more. They can always turn a stand-alone into a series. When I see new writers talking about their 12-book series, I always wince a bit. Overcommitting is a great way to really sink yourself (for me anyway.)

Susan H. Roddey: As for a recommendation on what to write -- whatever you think you have the stamina to finish. Don't be an ambitious knucklehead like me and fizzle out mid-series, because that never seems to end well.

Sean Taylor: Write what you love. If you love a character and want to tell an epic story, do it. Just know it's not for me. If you want to hop around to different MCs and different genres like a pinball, go for it. I'll probably dig at least half of it. But the important this is to write what you want to write and create the kind of stories you'd like to see more of in the world. 

Ef Deal: As for new writers, I think having a series can be an advantage to be able to offer a future to publishers.

Ron Thomas: When I was new, I wrote whatever I could for whoever would take it (academic, trade journals, non-fiction magazines, pro wrestling mags … which are “creative non-fiction” on pulp paper). However, the book series was always in planning and “under construction” in the background. I felt I needed plenty of clips to be taken seriously to pitch something book-length and beyond.

Paul Landri: I don't recommend any author doing something they don't like or won't enjoy. Writing is done for yourself first an the audience second so wrote how you want and let the chips fall where they may.

Brian K Morris: I have no preference. Write what you want to read, pure and simple. Write to chase a trend and you'll find the trend changed by the time you publish. Write your best book for you, then market to find like-minded readers.

Aaron Rosenberg: I think it really depends upon the author. If you feel in your heart and soul that you are an epic fantasy writer, focus on that to start. You can experiment and try a hard SF short story once you’re established, but first make your bones on the area you already know you love. On the other hand, if you’re not sure which genre appeals to you the most, or you have several you love, then absolutely try them all. Flexibility can be a gift—some of my work has come about when someone asked me to write something and I said, “You know, I’ve never done one of those before. Sure, let’s give it a go.”

Tamara Lowery: I recommend new writers tackle whatever they feel most comfortable with, regardless if it is a series or various stand-alones. I also think they should experiment with both long form and short form. These are very different styles requiring different skill sets. Both can help make for better writing with practice.