Nick Eaton at Seattlepi.com has an article titled, "E-books and the return of the serial novel."
.
Eaton sees the revival of the serial novel (via ebook) coming from The Huffington Post, which has said it will begin publishing serial novel's. Their first novel, "Seeing Red" by Claudia Ricci has had two chapters and the prologue published so far.
.
He notes that King has been a recent pioneer in the genre, with both The Green Mile and The Plant.
.
Eaton doesn't really seem too enthusiastic about serial novel's, though. For instance, why did Dickens write so much? Well, Eaton says it's because he needed to string the reader along and stretch the novel out. Eaton writes, "Authors such as Dickens liked the serial format because it meant more money. The more stories you have published in a magazine, the longer you draw out a narrative, the more cash you get. And a serial novel can hold the audience captive for months, even years, as the story plays out issue by issue. It's guaranteed long-term income."
.
We'll not tell Mr. Eaton that A Tale Of Two Cities is not really considered one of Dickens' "biggies." Try: Our Mutual Friend, David Copperfield and so on for the really big-uns.
.
I was surprised that he so blatantly argues that Dickens was in it for the money.
.
Consider, please, that the later novels (which are larger) were written after Dickens was already very successful. His money problems related to a publishing issue with the United States. See, American publishers did not honor the copyright and stole his material. Thus he was not paid for his work by the American readership.
.
King has stated often that he never wrote a single word for the money. Should we think less of Mr. Dickens'? And let's me clear, okay? Eaton is not saying that Dickens wrote the books, and a publishing decision was made to market them in a manner that would make more money. He is saying that Dickens actually stretched out his novels for the money; he was influenced by money, and thus the story itself was changed because of Dickens desire to get more money.
.
The argument that writers publish in installments for the money falls completely apart when Mr. Eaton gets back to Stephen King and The Plant. He writes, "Starting in 2000, King experimented with the e-serial format with his yet-unfinished novel "The Plant"; he posted installments of the story on his website for $1 each, though the plan fell apart thanks to hackers in the early Web 2.0 days." Well, I doubt then that Stephen King was doing for the money!
.
Like Stephen King, Dickens did not just write one size story fits all. Anyone remember a short novel called "A Christmas Carol"? And that was just one of several Christmas novels.
.
I'm not saying Dickens didn't need the money. I am saying that I have trouble with the idea that he allowed his need for money to dictate the direction and pace of the novel, which in Dickens case is always genius.
.
Then Again. . .
Hold on! David Todd says this about A Christmas Carol: When Dickens’ publishers required him to pay back advances due to the poor sales of Chuzzlewit, he knew he needed some other means of income. At that point in his career, 1843, Dickens was doing well, but had not reached a level of financial security that would allow him to go for a stretch of time without income. Years later he could have managed through, but not that year." Charles Dickens' Christmas Stories: More Than Just “A Christmas Carol” Over Twenty-Three Years
So, after all that ranting, maybe Eaton is right. But I don't like it. And I would point out that the book written to generate quick cash was not published as a serial novel. It was printed as a booklet..
