first novels in series

[minervaK]

Please take a look at this post:

http://minervakoenig.com/2009/06/10/feeling-serie-us/

I'm confused. Published authors of series, please respond!

Thanks -- MK

[Jeff Ross]

I think all it means is that the first novel you publish isn't necessarily the first one you have written. There's three or four tucked away somewhere that no one can find them. Which is true.

[Jack Getze]

Exactly. I've six or seven in my drawer.

[Jon Loomis]

I'm not sure what truisms like this are based on. I know lots of writers (including me) whose first novels were their first published.

[Jack Getze]

With me, it's been asking the crime writers I've met over the past two years -- maybe 40 or 50. The only two I know (besides you, you devil) who sold their first manuscript are Rosemary Harris and Jeff Cohen.

[Jon Loomis]

Wow--that's interesting. In the lit-fic world the ratio seems to me much higher. I could name a dozen young(ish) novelists whose first books sold either right out of grad school or a year or two after. Very different universes, I guess.

[Jack Getze]

I was going to suggest it might be MFA programs. They could be a better training ground than some people think. I tried to read a lot when I started at the newspaper (age 19), but I wish I'd had the chance to really study literature. You know, be taught.

[B.R.Stateham]

But Jon, were these first-timers writing detective lit? Or fantasy sci/fi?

[Jon Loomis]

Nope--literary fiction, with big-time MFAs. Which may be the value of a good MFA program--if you're lucky it'll save you the trouble of the self-teaching process, and a failed novel or two before you publish anything. There used to be some built-in vetting, too, but now the second and third-tier programs are competing for students instead of the other way around.

[Adrian Magson]

Hi, Minerva, I agree with the gentlemen below - or is it above? (Hi, Jack - how's the Smile?) I think the assumption among publishers is that we've all got other manuscripts lying around like stinky dead rodents which no agent or publisher has dared touch with a bargepole. I have several such rodents, some of which have been cannibalised for their useful parts, others which continue to stink. Truth is, though, if I thought any of them could be resurrected as part of my series (or even as a prequel), they'd be out there!
Adrian

[I. J. Parker]

Yes. Very true that first novels are frequently weaker than subsequent ones. I speak from experience, having written myself into the series, and now having to contend with reader confusion about the order of the books. My first publisher picked what they felt were the strongest two novels, skipping over number one. Number one got published later. Mind you, it underwent two rewrites.
Evanovich, I believe, was already a published author when she constructed the Plum series after considerable research into her audience preferences. Number one took off for that reason.

And then. of course, there are also writers who write a brilliant first novel and can never do as well again.

[Jude Hardin]

A series usually starts with book #1 in the series. That doesn't mean that that's the first book the author ever wrote. J.A, Konrath is a good example. He wrote nine novels before getting a deal. The deal was for Whiskey Sour, the first book in his Jaqueline "Jack" Daniels series. The previous nine books had nothing to do with that series. Ordinarily you wouldn't even write the second book in a series if the first one doesn't sell, although like everything else there are exceptions.

[minervaK]

Maybe I'm still too new at this. I'm just trying to envision how this works, from a logistics standpoint.

Author writes book 1 of a series, gets it all polished up and sends it out. While waiting for responses, she starts on book 2. Book 1 gets roundly rejected. At that point, she's mostly finished with book 2. Does she then abandon book 2 and start a new series? Or does she polish up book 2 and send it out? That's what's confusing. I've already started notes for the second book in my series, and I'm gonna write the damned thing, because that's how I am -- if the book's in my head, it's got to go down on paper before I move to the next thing -- so it could be five years (or never) before I screw myself to the sticking place and start a new series. I guess my question is, at what point does a writer give up on a series? And does it ever make sense to send out a series book out of sequence (maybe in the hope that it will help sell the first book)?

MK