Timeline for Book Series - Is using 'Volume #' OK (with no book name)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 4, 2017 at 15:59 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackWriters/status/926841420715057154 | ||
| Nov 3, 2017 at 16:07 | comment | added | SFWriter | I'm having trouble with titling overall, although I know the theme for my universe and want to use that; But I think each book will need its own title that serves it (the individual book). Your solution is appealing to me, but it also feels somehow lazy at the same time. I suspect there is an art to good titling, and it is one more skill that should be learned. In my mind, I am trying to frame the title (which has been a bugger to discover) as one more element that contributes to the experience for the reader, so that the chore of learning to find the right title will be less tedious. | |
| Nov 3, 2017 at 15:33 | answer | added | ggiaquin16 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 3, 2017 at 8:16 | answer | added | ItWasLikeThatWhenIGotHere | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 3, 2017 at 4:55 | comment | added | Blckknght | How self-contained are the books in the series? If you read only "Volume 1" but not the rest, will you be satisfied that you got a story with a reasonable narrative arc? Could someone pick up #3 without having read #1 and #2? Using a number-only title suggests to me that the books are much more tightly tied together than if they had separate names. If your series is one single story that you're splitting up for commercial reasons (e.g. to make each book a reasonable size both to write and to buy), you might consider using "Part 1" instead of "Volume 1" to be even more clear about this. | |
| Nov 3, 2017 at 4:21 | history | asked | JALLRED | CC BY-SA 3.0 |