Post History
Artistically, each book should be as long as it needs to be. Commercially, there are certain limits determined by salability and risk. A thin book may not be perceived by the reader as value for m...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2020-01-03T20:41:53Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/27041 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T06:12:17Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/27041 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
System
·
2019-12-08T06:12:17Z (about 5 years ago)
Artistically, each book should be as long as it needs to be. Commercially, there are certain limits determined by salability and risk. A thin book may not be perceived by the reader as value for money and so may not sell. A fat book costs more to produce and so represents a bigger risk for the publisher. So publishers generally want books to fall between the Scylla of unsalability and the Charybdis of risk. Exactly where that is for new authors in a particular genre at any given time is something you probably need to research with an agent of publisher. However, the range between unsalable and too risky changes greatly if you already have a successful book. If you prove you have an audience willing to snap up a few hundred thousand copies, then both salability and risk issue are substantially reduced and you have a wider range of length to play with. So the answer to you question about your second book really comes down to how well your first book sells.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2017-03-06T12:44:31Z (almost 8 years ago)
Original score: 1