: Should a beginning writer start with a series or a stand-alone? I am an aspiring author, but I intend to start publishing soon. I have several ideas for potential books; however, they are all

Vote Up Vote Down

Really simple answer is this:

Write one book. Tie up all the loose ends. Make it one complete story. But imagine it as book one of a series. Don't let we the reader know that -- it should be undetectable to us, but you will know there's potential for a series.

When sending to agents and publishers ensure you include the golden words: "Stand-alone novel with series potential"

If it sells really well and they want a series, then you've got the ideas ready and you can crack on with the second book of what is now a series!

Few publishers will want to take on a series from a debut author. What if it doesn't sell too well? Now they've promised a series that they won't want to publish.

Have the potential there, but ensure book one stands alone perfectly on it's own merit.

(And Good Luck!)

Bonus: You mentioned Rowling, well ... it's true Stone leads into a series, but it has no loose ends. Sure, we wonder what happens next to Harry, and we're pretty sure Voldemort isn't gone forever, but the entire plot of Harry's first year is completely wrapped up. Compare with the Half-Blood Prince, where they find the locket with the note. There has to be something next from the 6th book because of that loose end, but the first doesn't have that same need for a sequel.

ETA:

From @Paul A. Clayton's comment:

It might also be worth noting that publishers do not want to break up a series among different publishers and so may reject one book if another in the same series is rejected. From the "Author's Afterword" of Lois McMaster Bujold's Young Miles:

"Seven months later Warrior's was returned unread from its first submission, because they'd decided not to take the revised Shards and didn't want to break up the set. This was devastating at the time, but I was in fact grateful later."

(0)