io9
Why do so many amazing novels sprawl into so-so trilogies? Let alone blah tetralogies, or dull ten-book series? Blame "Herbert's Syndrome," in which a great writer gets tempted to keep writing about a popular universe, like Frank Herbert's Dune, long after its expiration date. (The Fantasy Review coined the term "Herbert's Syndrome" back in 1984, so Brian Herbert didn't enter into it.) Here's a handy guide to the symptoms and causes of Herbert's unfortunate ailment.
The sprawling saga that loses the thread is a more common problem in fantasy books than in science fiction — think the Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time, or Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover books. But science fiction still has its own never-ending stories that really ought to end. Here are the biggest problems:
Changing the rules: When I first read To Your Scattered Bodies Go by Philip Jose Farmer, I was incredibly excited by its story of an artificial planet where everybody who's ever lived comes back to life. Until I got to the end of the book and realized it was actually Book One in a long series, and none of my nagging questions about the resurrection planet, Riverworld, would be answered for another three or four books. I was even more annoyed when a friend of mine told me that Farmer changes the rules of Riverworld after the first book, to make it easier to keep spinning out tales. I think there my have been some book-throwing involved.
The heir apparent. As I mentioned, a reviewer coined the term "Herbert's Syndrome" in 1984, when Frank Herbert was still alive and had yet to publish his sixth Dune novel, Chapterhouse: Dune. The reviewer defined it as when "a large advance induces a good writer to extend a successful series beyond its natural span." You may have your own opinions about whether six Dune books were too many — but since Herbert's death, his son Frank and his collaborator Kevin J. Anderson have already written seven Dune books, with more on the way. Say it with me: "The cash must flow."
The neat trilogy that becomes a messy tetralogy, and more. The first two Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy books by Douglas Adams seemed pretty well-rounded, encompassing more or less the same arc as the original radio series and TV series. So I was a little nervous about the third book, Life, The Universe And Everything, but it was still a fun ride and seemed to move things forward. I was less thrilled by the fourth volume in what Adams called "the increasingly inaccurately named Hitchhiker's trilogy." So Long And Thanks For All The Fish, felt sort of anemic, as if Adams really didn't have any more ideas for the series, but he needed the Ningis. And then I think I read the fifth volume, but I have no memory of it whatsoever.
The need to explain the meaning of everything. Feminist science fiction blogger Liz Henry says this is where many series break down:
People write a series, and then they feel the need to finish it off and Explain it and they go all mystical and metaphysical. [They] try to solve every giant Burning Issue of Existence and good and evil, and why does the universe exist at all, and [the meaning of] utopia. So often, you get the underlying Manifesto or attempt to come up with a coherent philsopy of the author, but all too often, you sure wish they hadn't. By the time Herbert hits God Emperor of Dune, he has gone compeltely mad, trying to explain Everything, and there is no plot any more.Another example: Gene Wolfe's Urth Of The New Sun, which is a follow-up to the four-book Book Of The New Sun series. In the Urth books, Wolfe tries to tie everything from the first series together, while throwing in a lot of mystical ideas, including kabbalah.
The random left turn. Isaac Asimov gave into fans' pressure, after a thirty-year gap, and started writing more Foundation novels again. And few would argue that Foundation's Edge or Foundation And Earth are in the same league as the original trilogy. One major problem: a slew of new characters, including one who's introduced right at the end of Foundation And Earth, who might have played a bigger role in a final Foundation book, had Asimov written one. But in the end, it just feels as though Asimov is floundering a bit, in the unnecessary sequels.
The miraculous save. In Suzette Haden Elgin's Native Tongue series, there's a clan of women and children who become language experts, and learn a ton of alien languages so they can serve as translators. But over time, they create their own secret language that the men don't understand. Which is great, but then in the third book, suddenly the women discover that they can eat sounds. They can survive by ingesting noises — sort of like a plant's photosynthesis, except noisier.
The shrinking protagonist. Harry Harrison's Stainless Steel Rat books become less and less fun, as his roguish protagonist, Slippery Jim DiGriz, becomes more and more of a pussycat. But worse yet is when we get a new protagonist whose story cheapens our original hero, like Bean in Orson Scott Card's Ender's Shadow.
To be fair, why shouldn't novels go on and on and on? It's what movies do, with their endless sequels. And TV series — who really thinks Smallville deserves an eighth season? On the other hand, the thing that makes novels superior to other media is the fact that they have a single author, who puts his/her stamp on them. When that one person runs out of ideas, the novels themselves start to deflate.
With TV, movies, comics and other media, as long as the corporate copyright-holder can find another Akiva Goldsman or Roberto Orci to spin out a new idea, you can have endless installments. In theory, no TV series ever needs to go stale, as long as the writers have the grace to leave when they run out of ideas. (Which almost never happens.) It's a bit harder with books though — and I like picking up a novel and discovering a new universe for the first time.
Comments
I rather liked Foundation's Edge and Foundation and Earth.
The Foundation was an amazing book. It was amazing enough that I felt totally satisfied after reading it and didn't need to read all the squeals.
guide to the symptoms and causes of Herbert's unfortunate ailment.
Symptoms: desire for money. fear of real job.
Causes: the offer of more money for more books.
Great post until you claimed TV series can go on forever.
I can understand why an author would want to keep writing about the world they've created. It's more comfortable, for a start. You know it, it's safe.
This was a great post, Charlie. And then you wrote the second-to-last graf:
"To be fair, why shouldn't novels go on and on and on? It's what movies do, with their endless sequels. And TV series - who really thinks Smallville deserves an eighth season? On the other hand, the thing that makes novels superior to other media is the fact that they have a single author, who puts his/her stamp on them. When that one person runs out of ideas, the novels themselves start to deflate."
Having come to know and trust your writing since the inception of io9, I feel kind of silly explaining to you that:
• Just because movies and TV series go on and on, that doesn't mean it's good that they do that. In fact, the most righteously lauded series of the past few years (The Sopranos, The Wire, Arrested Development) were all conceived with an endpoint in mind.
• Novels are not superior to other media, any more than hammers are superior to saws or algebra is superior to geometry or Wilco is superior to Journey.
Otherwise, though, great post.
Since we bring up the Foundation series, I'd like to mention Psychohistorical Crisis by Donald Kingsbury. I never read any of the Foundation books (not really an Asimov fan (heresy, I know!)), but was blown away by this book set in that universe, well after the events in the Foundation series.
In a way, it's like you suggest- a new writer steps in and breathes new life into the series.
Personally I enjoyed the Ender's Shadow series. In fact I've been a big fan of Card's efforts to expand the Ender universe.
@moff: Nothing is superior to Journey. Man, I remember when Staci broke up with me. I was so depressed I drove my van up to the overlook and cut my mullet off, and it was Journey that I blasted on the speakers while I did it, man. And Journey inspired the art I had airbrushed on the side, man.
Don't look down your nose at Journey.
To be fair to Ender's Shadow, the series wore out it's welcome at the end of chapter 1 of Xenocide.
I loved Douglass Adams' response to a question about a successor to the 4th Hitchicker's Guide book:
"A fifth book in a trilogy? That would be silly!"
@moff: I wasn't really saying TV series SHOULD go on forever, just that they can. It's only SHOULD in the case of Doctor Who, which I want to watch new episodes of on my death bed. So I can die talking about how the 20th Doctor was better than this new idiot.
@moff: But honestly, I really wanted another season of The Wire. (And Journey is, in fact, superior to Wilco; while geometry is superior to Algebra. These are not a personal opinion; they are objective facts.)
It would be nice if more forms of media took long breaks and revisited. I'd love to see another season (could just be one) of The Sopranos or The Wire, 10 years from now.
In theory you can do this much more easily with books, and so the authors do. Of course it also lessens the dramatic effect.
Look, plenty of us just want to know what happens next, even if the result isn't perfect. I love decades of Doctor Who, countless James Bond films. It doesn't even have to be a perfect link with the past, but you get to love a character or place and you can't help but wonder what will happen next.
Also, I might add, a reason to want to live forever.
@wolfjoat: I agree. Actually, I felt the original Ender tetralogy was super boring aside from the first one. Since the Shadow series continued the interesting part of the Ender series, I followed that one. Plus, Bean is a badass.
I actually enjoyed book 5 of the Hitchhiker's trilogy. It's completely insane, and messes with the whole continuum, but it does end in a rather satisfying way, and it ties everything back to the beginning of book one.
@t3knomanser: Hey, I hope you don't think I was making fun of Journey! Given a choice between seeing them or Wilco live, I'm right there with you, lighters in the air.
@Charlie Jane Anders: But novel series CAN too! Thus the point of your post. And they do for exactly the same length of time that TV series stay on: for as long as the company producing them thinks they'll turn a profit of some kind.
You're right about Doctor Who, though, obviously.
@t3knomanser:
Discovered this not too long ago, myself. Was a nice read.
I'll also take the opportunity to plug Kingsbury's Moon Goddess and the Son, on my short list of 'comfort book' re-reads.
I was going to say something pithy but I'm mesmerized by the cave-chick.
Gotta say
God Emperor of Dune is my favourite of all the Dune books, should've ended it there. I refuse to read any more trash from Brian Herbert, he lacks the depth of thought of his father, I remember thinking about the Dune trilogy a long time after i first read it. After CHapterhouse, my only thought was "meh"
@Epaminondas: She's from the cover of a Philip Jose Farmer novel. From back when SF book covers weren't scared to be exploitative with a capital X.
@92BuickLeSabre: Well, even David Simon wanted at least a few more episodes of The Wire, and got screwed out of those by the writers' strike. But I would argue that there are only two options: Leave the audience wanting more, and succeed; or drag things out until only the most devoted, least reasonable fans aren't kind of bored, and fail.
I mean, obviously it's a little more nuanced than that. But I'd always go with leaving them wanting more. And I totally get what you're saying about wanting to see what happens next, and this isn't like a moral issue, so good on any artist who doesn't want to end something; but I have more admiration, artistically speaking, for the ones who do.
The Foundation trilogy was a nice, compact series that left plenty of room for imagination and told a good story. Foundation's Edge, while an admirable attempt to bring his writing up to the times, violated the simplicity of Asimov's original storyline. The then unnecessary folding in of the robots to the Empire stories and now the seemingly never-ending Seldon stories authorized by the Asimov Estate have diluted that original vision. I will only ever read the original three books, because they represent the intent to tell of the fall of a galactic empire and the darkness to come in a meaningful way.
@Charlie Jane Anders: It was pretty clear that the conclusion was the equivalent of: I personally don't care if Dr. Who is guilty of all these things. That doesn't make it any less stupid a conclusion.
@B: I finally managed to read Mostly Harmless and while it lacks the punch of the original three books, it's a great story. I have all the books in a fine, leather-bound, gilt-edged volume with its own bookmark, and it has become a prized possession because stamped in gold lettering on the spine it states quite clearly "Literary Classics." I know the idea that science fiction would ever be considered literary material would drive my old high school English teachers nuts.
@Epaminondas: I'm mesmerized by the both of them!
@NefariousNewt: The Hitchhiker's series is a literary classic. Along with other Sci-fi books. And your old english teacher was wrong. But you know that already.
Thanks for the article. I feel better now.
I thought I was the only one who found God-Emperor Of Dune just plain bizarre. Plus, I'd forgotten there's a fifth Hitchhiker book.
@Tim Faulkner: But I would say that when it comes to the Doctor or James Bond or Batman, etc., it's notably different. A character is a different thing from a series, and there's something to be said for (and learned from) watching how an enduring character responds and reacts to different periods in time.
I was with on the whole series going for too long thing (though secretly I love some series) but then you went and picked on Orson Scott Card. I know everyone loved and Ender and all but get over it! He's just a characters in a book and Enders shadow blew away all 4 of the ender books that came before as just a far more interesting and enjoyable book to read. And regarding Asimov, although his novels are delightfully complex, his characters are 2 dimensional and only shades of every other character. If I was going to pick a series that doesn't get tired, it would be Charles de Lint's Newford stories but then they are "Urban Fantasy" whatever that means...Oh and all the Hitchhiker books were at least amusing but I really couldn't tell you which book most of what I remember happened in. I do however answer 42 whenever possible and always carry a towel...Those Bugblatter thingys could pop up anywhere!
I thought the Riverworld books, while cheating a bit (okay, maybe more) were still consistently enjoyable.
The same can't be send for Dune or Ender's, which somehow continue on life support no matter how many plugs are pulled.
They gotta lose that chess game eventually.
But seriously, despite all the enjoyment he gave me as a teenager, can we pick on David Eddings? As someone else once put it, remember when he wrote the Belgariad and then he went and wrote it again? (And twice more after that, if you count the Sparhawk books.)
...he said sardonically.
The thing about Doctor Who is that its whole premise is that the entire universe of space and time (and beyond) is fair game for stories. By definition, the universe of Doctor Who contains all possible stories. So, really, with proper writing, it COULD go on forever.
Sequels, of course, aren't necessarily a bad thing. When you've got established characters and settings, you can jump straight into a new story with very little world-building necessary.
David Brin's "Uplift" series of six books (and one or two short stories) is an example of a series that went past its prime. Honestly, the "Uplift" universe has got the legs for more books, but based on Brin's most recent entries in the series, I'm not sure he's up to it. I loved the first trilogy. The first two books of the second trilogy weren't my cup of tea, but I was willing to go along. Then the sixth book came along - it was more of the rip-roaring adventure I was actually looking for, but it completely threw the previous two books off the rails. If it weren't for the previous two books, I probably would have loved it. But the story that had been building up for two novels was really just left hanging. And then when he finally followed up on it in a short story, it was such a let down (it has the preachiness Brin has been doing lately, and wound up being kind of petty). A friend of Brin's once mentioned to me that he loves just tossing out hints of things in his novels without intending to follow up on them, so that the readers can wonder, and it works great. When he finally tries to explain things, though, it falls flat. And I should mention that I generally really enjoy his writing (Kiln People, The Postman, the earlier Uplift stuff, etc). It just... devolved.
@yeahblah: Six Hitchhiker books, if you count the partial last one:
1. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
2. Restaurant at the End of the Universe
3. Life, The Universe, and Everything
4. So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish
5. Mostly Harmless
6. Salmon of Doubt
This is exactly the point I was saying over on the MODOG post. Writers - please - give it a rest. Walk away from it, if not forever, for a few years. Not every idea must go straight to press.
Have we learned nothing from George Lucas? From J.K. Rowling?
I quite disliked the second five amber books...if anybody is keeping track... First five were kick ass fantasy.
Money and Age. It's always the same thing, what i call the second album problem. Here's this band, and they spend twenty years getting twenty great songs, just enough to fill one great album. One year later the company wants another album, even better.
You only get so many ideas. I think Herbert only had a few. His "Under Pressure" i didn't like at all, and is very unlike "Dune." So then what? The kids have to be fed, so you write more of the same. If it sells, fine, if not, then you sell insurance.
No big deal. Thinking of authors as different from other working stiffs is just plain wrong.
Long series that are any good in any genre are very hard to find. Jack Vance got two trilogies (one in five volumes) and one was fantasy. The others are v. slim.
Who else? Travis McGee got better and better, but MacDonald only wrote two SF books. Terry Pratchett was going strong after thirty book, but not SF.
Most of the old pulp stuff was written by teams, like comic books, and is horrible anyway. Robin Cook is fantasy, and stops at trilogies.
Time and money and age. Authors use up all the ideas they dreamed up in high school, then no more water in the well.
I suppose Turtledove would be a good exception, but you never count him. I read about ten of the civil war books, and they were fine, but i do tire of remembering all those characters.
Trilogies, a third of a million words are a lot of work, and getting more than that is inherently difficult. No mystery. Just work. And keeping the publisher happy. They can sell series, no matter how bad they get. Somebody will buy Vol. VII just to see if it is any good.
@Turlough: No, Salmon of Doubt was another Dirk Gently book, and the third of it's kind at that.
As for the "heir" rule, we should also add in the not-so-ghost-writer. Brian Herbert doesn't even write the books by himself. This is sadly true of good authors (and bad ones, too) that just stamp their name on a book so it will sell. Has Tom Clancy written anything solo in the last decade?
I LOVE Dune! How dare you say anything negative about it! EVER! I read all six original books, TWICE, and I read the 6 prequels by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson. And I'm 20 years old. The universe is so...AWESOME. I haven't gotten around to getting the continuations because I fear what Brian may have done to the series. The prequels were amazing though.
You don't need a series to produce hack books. A lot of stand alone books are really bad all by themselves.
If an author can keep on turning out good intiguing reads, one after another, what does it matter how long a series goes on?
Years after reading the Ender series, I was pleased to find Ender's Shadow. The book did not disappoint me.
On the other hand, the Red Mars, Blue Mars, Green Mars books were just the same thing over and over. First one was interesting. Second one was OK. The third, well, I couldn't finish it. Caveat emptor. I am sure there are readers that loved all three books.
I maintain that Slippery Jim DiGriz always was a softie from the beginning.
Chandler wrote many "Gutsy Grimes" novels and I have enjoyed all that I have found.
F. Paul Wilson's "Repairman Jack" novels just keep chugging along (10 or 11 books now?)because Wilson has a great imagination. I am sure there are readers that can't stand this series.
All a matter of taste.
"Another example: Gene Wolfe's Urth Of The New Sun series, which is a five-book follow-up to the four-book Book Of The New Sun series. In the Urth books, Wolfe tries to tie everything from the first series together, while throwing in a lot of mystical ideas, including kabbalah."
You're mistaken about Gene Wolfe. Urth of the New Sun is a single book, more a coda than a fifth in his Book of the New Sun four-book series. It isn't five books.
@mussorgsky112: I stand corrected. And embarrassed about making a mistake like that. In my defense it HAS been a while since I read it, and I mostly remember it as a collection of essays.
@moff: I thought Charlie WAS explaining why novels shouldn't go on and on and on. And I agree, Great Post.
@Charlie Jane Anders: "She's from the cover of a Philip Jose Farmer novel."
"The World of Tiers" series?
"I was even more annoyed when a friend of mine told me that Farmer changes the rules of Riverworld after the first book"
I remember some revelations that I'll not mention to avoid spoilage. What rule changes were there?
Re Douglas Adams: "So Long and Thanks for All The Fish" was ultimately disposable, but "Mostly Harmless" tied up the biggest loose end of the entire Hitch-Hikers' series, sort of. It doesn't explicitly state what the Great Question is, but it gives you enough clues to make out the shape of it, if you look carefully.
Of course, once you've figured it out, you'll spend the entire weekend lying in bed, staring emptily at the ceiling and occasionally crying softly to yourself. At least I hope that isn't just me.
@Turlough: @Turlough:
And not forgetting the Hitchhicker's short story, 'Young Zaphod Pulls It Off'.
Do you think the never-ending drive for more books comes from sci-fi's heritage of pulp mags, periodicals and even saturday matinees?
With most literary genres, and author was expected to write one dramatic story. Publish one book, be the talk of the town for a year or two and then start a different story. There was no tradition of "A Tale of Two More Cities". But the roots of sci-fi, adventure and fantastic fiction mostly came from periodicals, not books. And goodness knows those guys were encouraged to keep writing stories about the same settings and characters, all the way back to Sherlock Holmes and the like.