Characters & Continuity

by Susan/Miranda:

Janga asked:
I would love to see you blog about writing connected books. How do you keep straight details concerning recurring characters? Do you know your characters so well that you remember? Do you keep characters bios to which you refer? Or what? And do you ever get tired of a character before your readers do?

This is an excellent series of questions, Janga, and with it you’re my book-winner. (I’ll email you separately for your address.)

As I run a rough mental bibliography of Wench books through my head, I’m guessing that all of us have written connected books of one kind or another.  Sometimes the connection is a family of characters.  Sometimes it’s a group of school-friends grown, or colleagues brought together by circumstance.  Sometimes the books are so interwoven that, if read together, they make one large story, while other series are independent of one another, joined together only by overlapping characters.  You name it, and I think we Wenches have written it.

The trick of any series, of course, is keeping the readers’ interest form one book to the next.  We’ve all read books (NOT by Wenches, I’m sure) that have long, tedious passages of back-story, or worse still, characters that spout soap-opera updates: “Oh, didn’t you know that two years ago Lord Peterboo married Lady Faretheewell soon after the scandal with the wild boars was revealed and Sir Henry shot himself, the villain?”

I’ve always liked writing connected books.  I like the chance to tell a “bigger” story, and I like the different points of view.  I like being able to see families change and grow through historical time.  And, like most writers, there are characters that you just don’t want to let go without having their own story told.  You want them to have a happy ending of their own.

My first series revolved around a Colonial Rhode Island family, the Sparhawks.  More correctly, I should say that it “evolved”; I wrote one book, and my editor suggested I write the next about one of the brothers.  Then came sisters, another generation, and a generation after that, until I’d written eleven books in all. Being a new and clueless writer, I also wrote them out of order –– one book in 1702, then the next during the War of 1812 –– with a number of unrelated single-titles scattered in the middle.  As you can imagine, this led to all sorts of confusion, both my readers’ and my own, and I lived by the elaborate family tree of the four generations, my only hope for keeping them all straight.  (It’s on my web site, if you’re curious: http://susanhollowayscott.com/images/Sparhawk_FamilyTree.jpg)  Even then, I still would have readers ask me “What about Johnnie’s story?”, and I’d have to admit that I’d completely forgotten about Johnnie’s existence, let alone his story.  OK, so Johnnie died.  End of story.

Since then, I’ve mostly limited my historical romance series to three books at a time –– a mini-series, I guess, instead of a season-long event.  My current series, loosely called “Love on the Grand Tour”, follows two sisters and their governess touring Europe in the late 18th century (before Napoleon’s shenanigans had such an impact on tourism) The first book is THE ADVENTUROUS BRIDE. I begin them knowing not only how each love story in each book will end, but how the last book’s “big pay-off” will be an ending for the series, uniting all three books into one story.  It’s satisfying, yet it’s also manageable.

But now my historical novels are turning into a series, too. With these books, Janga, I really must tend to my character continuity, because all my characters are based on real people.  I can’t adjust history for the sake of plot convenience.  I use a program called Stickies on my computer that creates multi-colored post-its on my desktop, and that’s where I stow all the important info.  I have Stickies for the dates of historical events, each character with their birth-death dates, their parents, spouses, and children, their titles and houses, break-downs of scenes by chapters, even favorite descriptive quotes I’ve come upon through research.  I sort the info by color, too, which makes my desk-top look a little like an Easter basket, but somehow it works.

With the success of DUCHESS, my editor, agent, sales reps, readers, booksellers, even my cats, wanted me to stick with the late 17th century English court setting.  DUCHESS begat ROYAL HARLOT, which will soon beget books about Nell Gwyn and Louise de Kerouelle, Duchess of Portsmouth (all newly under contract to NAL, yayyyy!)  In these three books, the link comes not from the three individual women, but from the fact that each was a mistress to King Charles II.  In other words, one hero, many heroines, and (I hope) never a dull moment.

What do you think of series books?  Do you like the “community” of interlocking books, or do you find the complexity annoying?  Do you wait until you have the entire series before you begin reading, or doesn’t that matter?  And if you’re a writer as well, how do you keep the continuity in your series books

Comments

[Christine Wells]

I enjoy series, especially ones about one generation of a family. Historical romance readers almost expect the hero to be the eldest son (ie, the titled, landed one) and I always find it interesting to see how authors make younger sons heroes of their own stories, even though they might not inherit the title or the bulk of the family wealth. The interplay between brothers and sisters always fascinates me--perhaps it's because very few people know you as your siblings do, therefore their commentary on the romance that is unfolding is particularly insightful and subversive. And when an author can build a great community of characters, you want to stay with that community as long as you can!

[Maggie Robinson]

I love connected books, although I am less fond of the obligatory "let's-bring-'em-all- together-again-on-a-silly-pretext" toward the end. While it's always nice to catch up with past couples, sometimes they just intrude, particularly if you missed their book.

That said, I've written two connected books, and stuck my first couple in with my second, LOL. Breaking my own taboo!

I think there's such an advantage for a writer to create that one world and populate it with companionable characters, be they related or friends. I miss those family sagas that let you see how the sins of one generation affected the next. When you're so well-rooted in your own fictional history, you have a chance to really develop the characters.

[Gretchen F]

The very first connected books I read were the Patricia Veryan novels- she had two series, The Saguinet Saga and The Golden Chronicles. ( If you don't count Georgette Heyer's These Old Shades/Devil's Cub). Veryan's works are hard to track down- last I saw, some of the books in the series were going for hundreds of dollars on the internet. Yet no one has thought of reprinting them! I like series books, but get frustrated when I can't find all of them. Often I come into a series in the middle and have to track down the earlier books. If they are no longer in print, I try the local used bookstore, and then the internet. But I am resigned to missing out on some, like Veryan's, that are just not reasonably obtainable. Fortunately I have all of Jo's Company of Rogues- I got in on the ground floor and bought An Arranged Marriage first, but An Unwilling Bride was still available. From then on I just got them as they came out. However,each story can stand alone, which is the mark of a good series. I hate it when the later books weaken to the point of being codas to the first story. I assume some writers just have to finish out a contract and actually run out of interest in their own creations....

[shscott21]

Maggie, I miss the old family sagas, too. I like seeing how characters change over the course of several generations. With the Sparhawk books, I followed the family through the early-settler days, through establishing wealth and power through a family shipping business, only to see most of that wealth disappear during the American Revolution. IMHO, it made for a much more interesting story-line than being limited to the romances alone.

So many historical romances today have the characters exisiting in a vaccum, oddly unaffected by historical events. The time frames are short, too, with most taking place over only a few weeks or months at best.

Oh, well, we don't put big 80s shoulder-pads in our jackets anymore; I suppose the styles in historical romance change, too. *g*
Susan/Miranda

[Nina P]

Great question Janga! And thank you for a most excellent response Susan/Miranda. I’m definitely going to check out Stickies.

As a reader, I like series and yet I don't. Getting involved with one can be like 'killing two birds with one stone.' I know a bit about the hero or heroine from the first book so I'm already half sold. But, sometimes it just gets too long and I lose interest or experience life change and hang it up for a while or I'm out of the loop and don't find out about the series until the middle or the end. Then I feel like an outsider. The characters know things or are alluding to things I don't understand. Which makes me jealous. And being the mature reader that I am, I sometimes don't finish the book, or the series. (Now, if I was a mature reader, I'd buckle down and start over with book one, but...)

The neatest thing I found in a series was MJ’s WILD CHILD and CHINA BRIDE. Both are part of the longer Bride series. But WILD CHILD and CHINA BRIDE are like a little mini series in of themselves. By shear dumb luck, I picked them up in order but if I hadn’t, stopping and going back one book isn’t as daunting as going back five or six just so I can get to the one I picked up in the first place. (Which, knowing me, probably had everything to do with the cover.) The down side is that when I was finished book two of the mini series, I was satisfied. And possessed little desire to buy the rest of the overall series. Man, this writing business is tough.

As a writer, I like series because it allows the storyline to blossom and grow beyond the first 100,000 words. And because I’m lazy and want to start the second book with characters I already half know (and it tends to shut them up and make them more cooperative when they know their time is coming.) So, here’s a question. When a publisher buys book one (from an unpub) of what could be a series, will they contract for the second book without ms in hand or are they more likely to want to wait and see how the first one sells?

Nina

[Nina P]

Oh, I forgot to mention… I love! ROYAL HARLOT’s cover. The sword she’s partially concealing speaks volumes about her power. I’m off to put the book on order.

[shscott21]

Gretchen, I agree that missing a crucial "installment" in a series can drive me nuts. Trying to track down the elusive book can be difficult, and expensive. You were fortunate with Jo's books. So often romance books fall out of print so quickly (and disappear from store shelves even faser) that by the time a series is done, the first book's long gone.

That may be part of the reason publishers don't go for longer series any more....

As for writers who (may) lose interest in their on-going characters before their contract's done: let's just be kind, and say that sometimes editors are loathe to kill a particularly well-fatted calf, and push to keep a series going beyond the time the author herself knows it should have ended. *g*
Susan/Miranda

[Lois]

I looooove connected books -- they mean you definitely know there is another book coming, and you don't have to say good-bye to those characters just yet. I've discovered why people wait to read them all together, but sometimes it just doesn't work out that way. LOL I read The Secret History of the Pink Carnation and waited for the next one in paperback, but also luckily got the third in hardcover -- I went through the first two and now on the third, and boy I'm going to hate finishing it because I don't have the next one ready to move on to! :)

Lois

[margaret]

Susan/Miranda,
Really excited about the extension of your series on CII's mistresses...I await them most eagerly--and impatiently!

In my deep dark past I did 4 connected books--3 intentionally, 1 accidentally. Later I did 2 connected ones, which I think is my preference.

As far as I can tell, the market seems to dictate a minimum of 3 connected books...but no mandatory maximum! Which is great, for those writers who can sustain the connection over many, many books. And the readers who like it that way.

The Adventurous Bride is on my to-be-read stack!

[shscott21]

Nina --
I agree, coming into a series in the middle is a bit like getting to the party too late -- everyone knows everyone else, and you keep having this nagging feeling that all the good stuff already happened. *g*

As for what an editor will do with a possible series from a new author: it would probably depend on the first book, and how strongly the editor feels about the particular author's postential. Some houses will buy a series from a newbie, and some will wait until they've had sales figures on the first before they'll commit to more. I know, that's a waffle-y answer and no real answer at all, but I can't really venture more -- you just have to write the best book you can, and let the editor know there's more where that came from. THEN cross your fingers and toss all your copper into wishing wells and pray to every deity you can think of.

They really should move the publishing houses to Atlantic City or Vegas, writing's that much of a gamble...

Susan/Miranda

[shscott21]

Glad you like the HARLOT cover, Nina! I've finally been permitted to let her "out" for he e-world to see. Later on I intend to blog about all the nuances of this painting, too, just like I did with the portrait of Sarah Churchill, because wow, it's full of analogies and hidden meanings.

As for that sword in her hand: doesn't it strike you as a little suggestive? I mean, maybe a LOT suggestive? *GGG*

Well, no one ever accused Lady Castlemaine of being too subtle...

Susan/Miranda

[Janga]

Susan/Miranda, how exciting that you are doing a Nell Gwyn book. I have found her a fascinating character ever since I read Pepys's description of her when I was in high school--more years ago than I care to count.

I love connected books. A high percentage of my keepers are connected books, and they are my greatest comfort reads. But I do think connected books are being overdone at present. Not every cast of characters is strong enough to sustain a series, and I am always saddened when a great secondary character in one book becomes a failed hero or heroine in another. On the other hand, I can think of secondary characters who never got their own story that I still wonder about and long to know that the character did get her or his HEA.

[Nina P]

Susan/Miranda said..."As for that sword in her hand: doesn't it strike you as a little suggestive? I mean, maybe a LOT suggestive? *GGG*"

Uh... yea. *G* Considering the euphemism for the word 'blade' and that she's holding it. Gives a whole new meaning to "Got 'em by the..." I can't wait to read it.

And, thank you for the answer to my question. What was your experience with selling book one of your first series? Would love to hear from the other Wenches too.

Nina, who owns a real blade.

[shscott21]

Lois -- You illustrate a classic dilemna for writers: we're so GLAD you're that eager to read the books, but oh, you can read them so much faster than we can write them! *g*

"The Pink Carnation" books are an interesting series (and they have GORGEOUS covers)-- certainly romantic, but also with enough mystery to be almost a mystery-series, and those can have very long "legs" indeed. Wonder how long she's going to keep them going?

Susan/Miranda

[shscott21]

Margaret -- Glad you're looking forward to the next books in my Restoration series, and I know you'll be reading them with a thoroughly well-read eye. *g*

And how happy I am that Charles so loved the, ah, ladies. They are a colorful bunch!

Susan/Miranda

[Katy Cooper]

I started the Fairbourne series with the second book in, Cranberry Point and I was fine with not having read the first one...although, having finished and loved Cranberry Point, I wanted more by the same author.

I personally like it when characters who have had/will have their own stories elsewhere appear in a book because they're needed in that particular story.

[LorettaChase]

I like reading series, though it can be frustrating to discover them, as others have said, halfway through--or years after the series started. This happened to me with Lindsey Davis, and I have to order from the UK, since I won't buy used unless the book is out of print. I love writing series, too. I did loosely connected stories, picking up on characters who interested me, and never minding about whether or not they were in chronological order. Then I became orderly with the Carsington brothers series, which actually ran on longer than I'd intended. I am so happy, Susan, that you are continuing with King Charles II's women. I can't wait for Lady Castlemaine--oh, and Nell Gwynne as well. Be still my heart.

[Teresa]

Oooh - I LOVE the cover of RH!!!

As for series, I seem to end up writing something closer to connected/companion books, rather than straight series. Then again, I suppose it depends on how you define a series.

I enjoy reading them, as long as the authors avoid the huge info dump at the beginning of each book and/or making each entry in the series so interdependent on the others that I HAVE to start right at the beginning.

[shscott21]

Janga & Loretta--I'm glad you're looking forward to Nell Gwyn, because I can't wait to write in her "voice." She's the only one of Charles's mistresses that was common-born, and proud of it, and one who wasn't afraid to be outrageous, either.

Loretta, I'm glad to hear that you wrote you first series in the "meandering path" method, too. If Loretta Chase did it, then I must not have been a total ninny....*g*

Susan/Miranda

[shscott21]

Teresa--The ROYAL HARLOT cover is striking, isn't it? Especially when you consider that the folks in NYC decided that Barbara looked a little too disipated to grace the cover of a book, which is why most of her face is cropped away.

You're right about the "info dump" -- a great term for a terrible problem. Yes, most books in a series have to have a certain amount of catching-up, but there are good ways to do that, and bad ones. "Info dump" sure describes the bad!
Susan/Miranda

[Jane]

I really like series books too. When a series is well done reading the next book feels like getting together with old friends and finding out what they've been up to lately. But occasionally I've read a series (not by any of the Wenches) where the author continues to add so many characters that by the time you're several books in it gets hard to keep track of just who is who and how they are all related.

[Queen Bee]

What a great blog! I hope I can become a 'wenchling' too. I've always liked series books, beginning with the old Little House books, through Nancy Drew mysteries. Later I liked Galsworthy, but I also liked Angelique and Johanna Lindsey's family saga books.

I do remember your Sparhawk books, and I think I read all the Fairborn books, too. I've read Mary Jo's Angels books, and Jo's Rogues. You see why I want to be a wenchling!

[Sarah]

Series books are great. I particularly like it when a minor character in one book turns up at the center of another book. It's like meeting an old friend again. I particularly enjoy the connectedness of Mary Jo's Rogue series. And the modern ones (when are we going to see a book on the fourth member of the quartet?).

[shscott21]

Katy & Queen Bee -- Many thanks for remembering the Sparhawk and Fairbourne books! I always liked those books, too, though I'm afraid by now they're probably relegated to Romance Jeoprady questions ("This author is the only one who set her historicals in colonial Cape Cod and Rhode Island.)

Sarah -- yes, I'd like another one of Mary Jo's Rogues, too. Pleeeease, MJ?

Susan/Miranda

[Queen Bee]

Is there any chance that you'll be writing the "next generation" of the Churchill family? It would be neat if you could continue it all the way through to Winston (including his American mother Jennie Jerome), wouldn't it?

[shscott21]

Queen Bee -- Following the Churchill family to the present day would indeed make for a fascinating series, but I'm afraid that at this point it's a little more than I'd like to bite off. Still, Jennie Jerome is awfully tempting...

Never say never!