![\"\"](\"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/06\/Duke_of_Eden_cover_lg-200x300.jpg\" "\\"The")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
As I began editing Part 2 of The Duke of Eden<\/a><\/em>,\u00a0 the book I'm currently putting out as a serial\u00a0exclusive to Amazon's Kindle<\/a>,\u00a0I'm thinking ahead to Part 3 and the overall length of the book.\u00a0 And I've decided that this time I have a grand ambition\u00a0- it's going to be a shorter book than the ones I've published previously.\u00a0<\/p>\n Why is that such a grand ambition?\u00a0 Because for writers like me, the ones who get caught up in our own characters and their story, keeping it shorter is much harder than letting it conclude at its own pace.\u00a0 But I'm gonna try to\u00a0keep Eden<\/a><\/em>\u00a0shorter\u00a0because I've decided that these days, there are a bunch of readers who prefer shorter books.<\/p>\n I was already thinking about this issue a few days ago when I read a post on\u00a0Dear Author titled \"Is Our Attention Span Getting Shorter?\"<\/a>\u00a0 The author of the post noted that Harlequin category romances had started appearing on the USA Today bestseller list<\/a>.\u00a0 As we all know, Harlequins are shorter romances.\u00a0 Within the Harlequin family of imprints, word counts range range between 50k to 75k, but generally hover between 55k and 65k.\u00a0 Dear Author<\/a>\u00a0noted that\u00a0one of the\u00a0things the bestseller list appearances reminded them of was that more shorter books are being sold in the digital age.<\/p>\n Don't get me wrong, I love a good meaty, long ole' historical, but when I read the piece I realized that I've been reading a heck of a lot more Harlequins lately.\u00a0 I've always enjoyed the books, but I have never bought as many of them as I do now.\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Well, maybe shorter books do read better in an e-world.\u00a0 You get in, you get the story, and you get out.\u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n From an author's prospective,\u00a0shorter books being preferable would be a very\u00a0good thing because you could write books faster and build up an inventory. So you'd sell more books.\u00a0 It's like with a restaurant.\u00a0 If it takes 2 hours to turn over a\u00a0table, you won't seat as many guests and you won't sell as much food.\u00a0 If you get the food out faster and turn over the table in 1 hour, you'll sell more food and make more money.\u00a0<\/p>\n I think the trend toward longer books will continue for\u00a0paperbacks that people buy off the rack in the store.\u00a0\u00a0If books have a physical presence, you'll compare how thick book A is verses book B.\u00a0 If both cost about the same, you'll buy the longer book.\u00a0 With physical books, more is definitely more.\u00a0 But digital books don't have that same presence.\u00a0 I don't think that many people stop and check file size and go to Google and calculate how that translates into pages.\u00a0 So with digital books, the snappy description and the catchy product sample people download are gonna be where the book sells or doesn't sell.\u00a0<\/p>\n My earlier books were written before the digital age arrived.\u00a0 100k was basically the standard length for a novel that would go to a traditional publishing house.\u00a0 And before the digital age, Harlequin was to books what Dollar General<\/a> or Wal\u00a0Mart<\/a> was to retail.\u00a0 These days, in the digital world we're in\u00a0which is growing every day, physical presence and the 100k standard have gone by the wayside.\u00a0\u00a0And in the current economy, a lot more folks are shopping at\u00a0DG<\/a> and WM<\/a>.\u00a0 Consumers are creatures of habit.\u00a0 So when the economy improves, I'm\u00a0betting that DG<\/a> and WM<\/a> will continue to sell because folks will know they can\u00a0spend some of that extra money for better vacations (or more ebooks).\u00a0<\/p>\n I've gotten the critique from\u00a0someone who read\u00a0A Faerie Fated Forever<\/a>.<\/em>\u00a0The buyer said it was a good read overall but that it would have been a great read if the book had been shorter.\u00a0 Getting that review really made me think.\u00a0 I do listen to my readers and I'd like to give 'em what they want.\u00a0 It sounds like what they want is shorter books that they can read faster.\u00a0\u00a0And if that's what readers want, then its what I'm gonna try to give 'em.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/p>\n Part 2 of Eden<\/a> <\/em>should be up at Amazon next week.\u00a0 Like I mentioned earlier, I'm editing it as we speak.\u00a0 Later today it'll go to Mr. Quack who performs all the computer formatting magic.\u00a0 If he can get to formatting it today or tomorrow, I hope to have it submitted to the Great Wizards at DTP<\/a> by Tuesday - which would make it available for purchase around Friday of next week.\u00a0<\/p>\n I've already started writing Part 3, which I'm gonna try to make the last part.\u00a0 That also makes sense in terms of economy.\u00a0 Each section sells for a scant 99\u00a2 on Kindle.\u00a0 If\u00a0there are 3 serial sections and I put the book up and sell it for $2.99, then the economics equalize.\u00a0 Lots of indie writers have been raising their prices on Kindle.\u00a0 I think $4.99 may be the \"new\" $2.99 there.\u00a0 I'm not positive whether I'll put\u00a0Eden<\/a><\/em>\u00a0out for $2.99 or $3.99, but right now I'm inclined to the lower price.\u00a0<\/p>\n I'd rather give my readers good\u00a0value especially in these tough times, because I look for good value when I buy anything these days.\u00a0 Maybe when times are better I'll raise those prices, but for now I've been sticking to $2.99 on Kindle.\u00a0 Some of my SW<\/a>\u00a0stuff is priced at $3.99 but that's mainly because it gets distributed to other vendors (thanks so much) but the vendors tend to discount.\u00a0 And Amazon picks up the discounts.\u00a0\u00a0To all the\u00a0Kindle owners, you should know how very hard Amazon works to be sure their Kindle peeps get the best value out there for everything.\u00a0 It makes pricing a little challenging for authors who publish in different venues, but it keeps prices low for Kindle owners.\u00a0 I give Amazon real props for that.\u00a0<\/p>\n So, Part 2\u00a0of Eden<\/a><\/em> should be out and about by next week, and I hope to have the series finished around Christmas to early January.\u00a0 I'm aiming to keep it short and sweet and bring it in at around\u00a060k words.\u00a0 I really hope to get Part 3 and then the full book out there soon, because I want to see how the combination of the shorter length and\u00a0the erotic\u00a0cover image help the book with marketing.\u00a0<\/p>\n A lot of the big, NY publishing giants have been busy shrinking their companies as their sales tank more and more.\u00a0 Those folks used to sneer at category lines like Harlequin.\u00a0 So it's a little - a lot -\u00a0funny to me that these days those sneers have turned to envy and admiration.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n In the new digital world, Harlequin may be the Wal Mart or the Dollar General of book publishers.\u00a0 You know what?\u00a0 I'm guessing they're okay with that.\u00a0 And if the shorter length works for me -- I'll be just fine with it too.<\/p>\n I'm spending a lot more of my dollars at DG<\/a> lately.\u00a0The family Graham was there just yesterday.\u00a0 And if \u00a0Mary Anne Graham\u00a0could one day turn out to be the Dollar General<\/a> of romance authors, she'd be a pretty happy lady.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As I began editing Part 2 of The Duke of Eden,\u00a0 the book I'm currently putting out as a serial\u00a0exclusive to Amazon's Kindle,\u00a0I'm thinking ahead to Part 3 and the overall length of the book.\u00a0 And I've decided that this time I have a grand ambition\u00a0- it's going to be a shorter book than the ...continue reading \"Are Shorter Books Better?\"<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3,7],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1346"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1351,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1346\/revisions\/1351"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quackingalone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}