[themerchant]

Not sure the reply was meant to read cutting things out to make it in one volume as opposed to getting the book how you want it, then if the options are available make it one book rather than two. That was my personal reading.

I don't want any of the story lost due to trying to shoe-horn it into one book. If it is two books i'll just wait this time till both are published then read them together. I'm fine with waiting, been doing it since mid 90's anyway, last 20 years of my life i've been waiting on the next installment in a series.

[locke]

Because it is fucking psychotic to suggest splitting a book the length of a game of thrones or a feast for crows into two books.  It's either a naked money grab to bilk the handful of fans he has by forcing them to pay double or its just a naked attempt to torment the same handful of fans by withholding the climax.

All typ0s courtesy of Samsung.

[mrganondorf]

@ Abalieno - I like the way you put it:

So, it's not much a case of TUC needing to be a "game finisher", and more a case of it being a "game changer".

That's what I'm hoping for.

In case the publishers are reading this and thinking about the 1 vs 2 volumes issues, I don't give a damn so long as I get the whole story.  Please don't shorten the work to make it fit in a smaller format, whatever you do.

[Triskele]

I would rather wait a little longer for it to be a completely polished single volume than wait much longer for a 2nd book in a split. 

[Abalieno]

Some more of the quotes I dug up that are relevant to me, but I don't have the exact links:

The end of TAE is the end of the tale as I originally conceived it decades ago. All the plot threads from the two trilogies are cinched into a kind of Gordian knot (I fear you’ll have to wait to see what I mean).

I’m something of a pessimist, but for whatever reason I have always had faith in this story – far more so than in my abilities as a writer. Everyone once in a while some day-dreaming fool is gifted with the image of something genuinely iconic. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure this is as close as I’ll ever get.

The Second Apocalypse is big, so big that the narrative and thematic dimensions only come into collective focus here and there.

"a kind of Lovecraftian code that I could upload into the collective mainframe"

Here’s hoping. People like what people like, and I’m trolling many difficult themes, so I think any kind of mass commercial success is a longshot. But this story… It is just too fucked up not gain some kind of notoriety, I think.

[Abalieno]

Again, I don't understand why this should motivate him to release it as one book, instead of two, if he gets the opportunity.

I do not mean that the book should be cut to fit an arbitrary size.

I mean he should pressure the publisher as much as possible because IT IS POSSIBLE to publish 400k books. Add more lines on the page and you suddenly decrease the pagecount by 200 or more.

If the book is complete at 300k, then I'd say he should be able to edit and make the best thing at, say 350k at most?

350k = roughly 800 pages. It's not the end of the world.

If it's 300k it can comfortably squeeze in 700 pages or so.

[Wilshire]

Because it is fucking psychotic to suggest splitting a book the length of a game of thrones or a feast for crows into two books.  It's either a naked money grab to bilk the handful of fans he has by forcing them to pay double or its just a naked attempt to torment the same handful of fans by withholding the climax.

All typ0s courtesy of Samsung.

You're always so vehement, I love it. One man's psychotic is another man's sane.

Like I said, yes, there is no reason that it has to be two books. The link I posted shows word counts well over 300k and even 400k for many popular books. However, in the real world, things aren't so cut and dry. His publishers are shitty. Bakker isn't successful.

If its a choice between cutting content or two books, I'd pick two every time.
If its a choice between one big book and two small ones, both with the same content, one would certainly be better.
If they would be the same and Bakker/publisher want to make more money, I honestly wouldn't be upset.
Everyone's gotta make a living, and I'm far more willing to support someone like Bakker doing a money grab than someone like GRRM, or JK Rowling. My reasoning is that those two are rich, and don't need more money, and Bakker is not and could use it. Is that reasoning biased? Yes. But I'm not trying to convince anyone else to think that way.

[themerchant]

Because it is fucking psychotic to suggest splitting a book the length of a game of thrones or a feast for crows into two books.  It's either a naked money grab to bilk the handful of fans he has by forcing them to pay double or its just a naked attempt to torment the same handful of fans by withholding the climax.

All typ0s courtesy of Samsung.

If its a choice between cutting content or two books, I'd pick two every time.
If its a choice between one big book and two small ones, both with the same content, one would certainly be better.
If they would be the same and Bakker/publisher want to make more money, I honestly wouldn't be upset.

Pretty much this, although less keen on lining publishers pockets over writers.

[Wilshire]

Lol yes, but I haven't found a way to buy books directly from Bakker yet.

[mrganondorf]

I wonder if Bakker could short stories straight from his own website, like this, but not on amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Phoenix-Chuck-Palahniuk-ebook/dp/B00LLO83IK/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405052863&sr=1-3&keywords=chuck+palahniuk+phoenix

[ivance]

Hey Madness- thanks for answering the questions -- one more...

You floated the idea of two books because you feel there were sections that perhaps needed more attention / more detail. Is there a natural place in TUC for this split to happen? In other words, is the book structured so that there could be a split and it would work to the overall advantage of the series?

[mrganondorf]

Hey Madness- thanks for answering the questions -- one more...

You floated the idea of two books because you feel there were sections that perhaps needed more attention / more detail. Is there a natural place in TUC for this split to happen? In other words, is the book structured so that there could be a split and it would work to the overall advantage of the series?

I second this!  Would like to know...

[Madness]

Hey Madness- thanks for answering the questions -- one more...

You floated the idea of two books because you feel there were sections that perhaps needed more attention / more detail. Is there a natural place in TUC for this split to happen? In other words, is the book structured so that there could be a split and it would work to the overall advantage of the series?

I honestly don't know. As far as I recall, TAE long ago was only going to be two books. I remember Bakker commenting following both publications of TJE and WLW and suggesting that in each case he had simply lined up the threads as best he could and chopped them off at what he thought were suitable cliffhangers. I suppose he'll manage something like that again, if he has too. It seems to have worked out for him so far, in my opinion.

Again, personally, I'm not going to be upset if he can flesh out more story for us. I think a major dividend for us is that Bakker has, alledgely, had an exact end-game for The Second Apocalypse for a long time. So he's prone to much less meandering than other authors (and again, this whole opinion by me was simply shaped by greed - I wanted him to spend more words, explaining certain things, colouring certain aspects).

There is an overload of revelations, after all.

[EkyannusIII]

Madness, can you confirm or deny: the Inchoroi on Earwa are the last of their kind in the universe, or just the last from the Ark/on that planet?

[ivance]

Question -- although there is no Kelly POV, do we at least get some sort of clue as to his 'shortest path?'