I thought of a couple questions that will affect my near future, and you're just the guy to ask!

1- The concept I'm flirting with as the basis for my first novel is a sci-fi three-book trilogy. I'm not too overly attached to it yet, though. What I'm wondering is, while I've heard that editors like trilogies and series (because they can take the risk of just one book, and if it does well, sell three)... would publishers be reluctant to commit to a trilogy from a first-time author? Would it be better to do a stand-alone book as my first foray?
1b- How does publishing a trilogy work, anyway? I'd assume they would want some kind of language in the contract guaranteeing their right to publish the sequels, but would they want to buy them upfront and then hold me to a deadline for completing them, or would they just make me sign some kind of contract that forbids me from selling those books to any other publishers? How does the relative success or failure of the first book affect the subsequent ones? (Obviously, if the first book fails, they won't want to buy the other two at all, but how does the level of success of the first book affect the deal for the sequels, especially if you've already promised to only publish them through that one publisher?)

2- I'm fairly certain that I want to begin with a sci-fi book of some sort... but I would also like to write in other genres. What's the risk of getting typecast as a sci-fi writer, hurting my chances of publishing in other genres? If I published half a dozen sci-fi books, but then wanted to write a romance or mainstream or something, could my reputation as a sci-fi writer hurt my chances?
Or, if that did become a problem, how much of that problem would be alleviated by publishing the other-genre books under a pseudonym?

#2 is a great question, and I refer you to Kristine Kathryn Rusch's blog on pen names. The summary is that writers often use different pen names for different genres, not because readers care, but because publishers look up how much your last book sold to decide how much to pay you. If you write a mystery novel and it ships 8,000 copies, that's great for a mystery. But a romance publisher will refuse to publish your next book, because 8,000 is low for a romance.

It's hard to believe publishers are so mind-bogglingly stupid about their own business, but that's what she said.

3697967

She's right on most points, but publishers care about orders, sales and reviews. The metrics are a little complex now adays, as we try to predict future sales by the "hype" produced by previous books. What bloodsuckers we are.

Scott's also right; the reader, through both the locus of statistics and common sense, doesn't care.

3697682

That blog post says everything about #2 I would, and in a nicer, less indicting way.

So, #1:
Few publishers will tie themselves to a three book deal from a new author unless all three are at least in rough copy. They'll sell the first book on its own, so if it tanks, they'll pull the plug. If they carry the series, they can run a re-print of the first. That's exactly how Frey ran Eragon through over at Knopf.

1b.- The publisher will usually require you sign over rights to all of it at once. I think part one answers the rest. Whether or not you get the rights back if they decide not to publish books two and three is hashed out in negotiations.

Now, when you're an established money maker, you'll get a lot more say in the stipulations of your contracts. That's when we'll try to pin you down for three or five book deals. If you sign the contract, you owe us how many books the contract says. Change your mind, you better pay back that advance.

3697967
That blog is very helpful, aye, and it answers my #2 question very well: Yes, I should use a pen-name when jumping to a different genre.

(Heh, I wonder if I would get sued for pony puns? – Jack Appleton)
(Sweet E. Bell)

3699734
Hm... yes, I see.
For #1, I am now kind of leaning toward a stand-alone book instead at first. I'd want to get my foot in the door more quickly than it would take to draft out all three books.
(And besides, that trilogy idea is really ambitious... Maybe I should start with something just a bit easier to pull off.)
...Which sort of leads me to another question related to #2. If I was to publish a romance, might I be better off putting it under a female pen name, rather than using my male name? While I don't have any specific plans at the moment, I'm sure I could cook up a decent romance.

Hm... maybe even a historical romance; that might be fun. ^.^ Tie it into some extremely-well-known historical figure, and that would draw the readers in... Stalin, perhaps, or Lenin... my Russian girlfriend and her mother could help me with authenticity... (Be right back, having ideas!) ... Yes! A romance about Stalin's daughter, titled In My Father's Shadow, where fear of her father is holding her lover back... maybe they'll make a desperate bid to flee the country? (Now I've got to go see if Stalin had a daughter or not.)
Ooh, he did! And she has some interesting stories!

At 16, Alliluyeva fell in love with Aleksei Kapler, a Jewish Soviet filmmaker who was 40 years old. Her father vehemently disapproved of the romance. Later, Kapler was sentenced to ten years in exile in the industrial city of Vorkuta, near the Arctic Circle.

At age 17, Alliluyeva received a marriage proposal from Grigory Morozov, a fellow student at Moscow University. Her father grudgingly allowed the couple to marry, although he made a point of never meeting the bridegroom.

And even better, she died in 2011, so I can't potentially be sued for libel!

Yeah... I think I have a new book idea. I know my best talents are setting and character voice, and that would allow me to take full advantage of both. ^.^
Might end up being an 'alternate history' romance, though. The ways her real romances turned out aren't all that dramatically satisfying.

3699992

Mother of God.

If I was to publish a romance, might I be better off putting it under a female pen name, rather than using my male name?

No. Nicholas Sparks forever.

3700223 Hierophant at Monday 13th of October 2014 07:24:08 PM said:
. . .
Mother of God.. . .

*squints*
Not sure if good 'Mother of God' or bad 'Mother of God'.

At least I know it makes an impression!