Story series

[MaxNichts7]

I recently posted a six part series of which three chapters have been published. But the Moderator has not listed proceeding or following chapters at the end of each story segment.
Do I have any recourse for that?
Although each part is titled “chapter one”, chapter two” etc., the readers are almost certain to be confused without being guided to the rest of the story.
I realize now that I should have published this as a novella because it exceeds 30,000 words and I would’ve avoided this confusion.
Does anyone have any advice?

 

[MaxNichts7]

“ preceding” not “ proceding.” Uggh, spell chevk

 

[TheWritingGroup]

It's a good idea to link to the stories when you ask a question like that. It makes it easier for anyone trying to help you.

If you mean the "Abuse by the Muse" series, only two parts are published, according to your "Works" page. And yeah, they should be automatically grouped into a series, but that process is not instantaneous. Part 2 was only published yesterday (as I write this). Give the server time to "notice" the similar titles.

You could create a manual series, but it takes a while (days, sometimes weeks) for a manual series to be approved once you submit it.

FAQ is here: https://www.literotica.com/faq/series/series-automatic-manual

 

[Writer61]

You could create a manual series, but it takes a while (days, sometimes weeks) for a manual series to be approved once you submit it.

I get around the delay by submitting the Series before any of the Works. The Series won't appear until the first Work is published.

The advantage of a manual series is that the component works do not need to have similar titles.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I get around the delay by submitting the Series before any of the Works. The Series won't appear until the first Work is published.

The advantage of a manual series is that the component works do not need to have similar titles.

I have never found the need to do this.

I always publish the first story in a series before creating the series, largely because I am not going to commit to it being a series until I am inspired to write the next episode.

Keep in mind that I am a literary purist in many ways. I don't consider chapter stories as a real "series". They are pieces of a larger whole.

An episode within a series stands on its own.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I get around the delay by submitting the Series before any of the Works. The Series won't appear until the first Work is published.

The advantage of a manual series is that the component works do not need to have similar titles.

I do the same, but it's too late for @MaxNichts7 to do that, two or three of the components are already published.

 

[Writer61]

I do the same, but it's too late for @MaxNichts7 to do that, two or three of the components are already published.

I know, but for the future ...

 

[Writer61]

I have never found the need to do this.

I always publish the first story in a series before creating the series, largely because I am not going to commit to it being a series until I am inspired to write the next episode.

Keep in mind that I am a literary purist in many ways. I don't consider chapter stories as a real "series". They are pieces of a larger whole.

An episode within a series stands on its own.

I write episodes, so it works for me.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I write episodes, so it works for me.

I can see it working if you have a series of episodes already planned when you begin.

 

[Writer61]

I can see it working if you have a series of episodes already planned when you begin.

It doesn't matter whether you do or not. Should you decide, after writing the first, that it is better as a standalone, then simply remove it from the series.

The bigger question is whether you should complete all (or enough) of the series before publishing the first.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

It doesn't matter whether you do or not. Should you decide, after writing the first, that it is better as a standalone, then simply remove it from the series.

The bigger question is whether you should complete all (or enough) of the series before publishing the first.

I don't view completion of a series as a factor as long as it is an episodic series as discussed and not chapters called episodes that rely upon one another for standing.

I published my first episode in the Before They Were Stars series almost six years ago. There were three additional episodes published that same year, and then nothing new for two years. Then a break of two more years for another, and the latest episode published earlier this month.

Is the series finished? Maybe, maybe not, but that doesn't matter where each of the existing episodes is concerned.

My Uncle Sugar Daddy series hasn't had anything added since 2022 and may never see anything new. It makes no difference to the completeness of each episode already published.

 

[Writer61]

I don't view completion of a series as a factor as long as it is an episodic series as discussed and not chapters called episodes that rely upon one another for standing.

There is a school of thought in AH that some people do not start reading a series until it is marked as complete. Hence the question.

 

[caleb35]

Just to share my own related experience -- I had a couple of stories that I decided to make the first installment in two new series, after they'd already been posted and out for a while. I used the New Story Series option, created the series, and assigned the stories. That was back on February 5 and they've been "pending moderation" since. The Series feature is apparently a Beta feature so I don't know how well that process runs compared to other parts of the site. Since the stories are still posted, I'm not too worried about the time taken, I'll just wait to see how long they go before a moderator acts on them. Hopefully you'll get action on your series soon but if you're looking to contact anyone, as @TheWritingGroup recommended above, try this link:

https://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=81387&page=contact

 

[Britva415]

the Moderator has not listed proceeding or following chapters at the end of each story segment.

Your titles aren't in a format which supports auto-series (when the software creates the series automatically)

And so you can now create a series manually and add the stories to it.

Once the series is published, it will appear on the story pages of the already-published stories.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

There is a school of thought in AH that some people do not start reading a series until it is marked as complete. Hence the question.

I subscribe to that school of thought, which is why I believe it behooves a writer to respect the difference and avoid considering chapters of a story in the same light as episodes of a true series.

Readers can pick up pretty quickly if a writer is publishing piecemeal work by chapter versus completed episodes of a series. It's like comparing apples and fire trucks. Literotica allows both to be red in color, but that's where the similarities end.

The site contributes to the confusion by allowing the two to exist as equals when they are clearly not.

 

[IWroteThis]

I subscribe to that school of thought, which is why I believe it behooves a writer to respect the difference and avoid considering chapters of a story in the same light as episodes of a true series.

Readers can pick up pretty quickly if a writer is publishing piecemeal work by chapter versus completed episodes of a series. It's like comparing apples and fire trucks. Literotica allows both to be red in color, but that's where the similarities end.

The site contributes to the confusion by allowing the two to exist as equals when they are clearly not.

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. Whether it's a series of chapters or a series of independent episodes, it's still a series.

The series feature provides two main benefits, when it works. First, it links all of the parts into a whole. Second, it provides a suggested reading order.

Even with stand-alone episodes, they never truly are. For example, Daisy Duke drove a 1974 Plymouth Road Runner (or it's 1971 Plymouth Satellite stand-in) in some episodes and a 1980 Jeep CJ-7 in others. If you watch them out of order, she jumps back and forth without explanation until you get to that one episode. However, if you watch them in order, the change is explained when the change occurs.

Likewise, characters develop throughout an episodic series, so you get the best experience if you do read them in order. This is also why add-on prologues/prequels tend to struggle so much. Besides the obvious inability to just let the story flow, since the future is already set, the writer tends to have the developed characters from the end of the original story in their head, and it's hard to go back to the undeveloped characters they were when they first started writing the story.

 

[Britva415]

The site contributes to the confusion by allowing the two to exist as equals when they are clearly not.

I don't know what the site would do differently.

What they do do is leave it up to the authors to signal the difference, or not. But as you say, people already pick it up pretty quickly. Often, without even having to read one "unit."

 

[BobbyBrandt]

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. Whether it's a series of chapters or a series of independent episodes, it's still a series.

The series feature provides two main benefits, when it works. First, it links all of the parts into a whole. Second, it provides a suggested reading order.

Even with stand-alone episodes, they never truly are. For example, Daisy Duke drove a 1974 Plymouth Road Runner (or it's 1971 Plymouth Satellite stand-in) in some episodes and a 1980 Jeep CJ-7 in others. If you watch them out of order, she jumps back and forth without explanation until you get to that one episode. However, if you watch them in order, the change is explained when the change occurs.

Likewise, characters develop throughout an episodic series, so you get the best experience if you do read them in order. This is also why add-on prologues/prequels tend to struggle so much. Besides the obvious inability to just let the story flow, since the future is already set, the writer tends to have the developed characters from the end of the original story in their head, and it's hard to go back to the undeveloped characters they were when they first started writing the story.

I disagree.

There are distinct differences, in television/movies, and in literature. I could cite dozens of examples, but why bother if you don't already understand.

I write chapter stories, although I don't publish them in pieces here. I also write series that share a common theme, but none of the characters, as well as series that share characters, but with different plot elements. Each type provides readers with a different experience.

 

[IWroteThis]

I disagree.

That's fine. After all, I disagreed with you as well. In fact, it would have been strange if you had agreed with my disagreement with you…

There are distinct differences, in television/movies, and in literature.

Of course there are differences. Nobody is claiming otherwise. However, the issue is the significance of the differences, and of the similarities. Nothing you pointed out is significant enough to justify splitting off 'books' from 'series' on the site.

Now, I'm not saying it wouldn't be used, or even useful. I have read some things on here that would benefit from being clustered into 'books' which are then in a 'series' that is within a 'universe.' I simply haven't read enough of them to justify the effort and confusion of implementing that system.

In fact, most of the benefits could be achieved simply by allowing a series to contain another series. You would have to be careful in the code to prevent circular references, either by adding a series to itself or to a series that is a member of itself, but it would allow those book/series/universe compilations without a more complicated system. Of course, that still would leave your problem of wanting multiple tools where one works.

I could cite dozens of examples, but why bother if you don't already understand.

That reminds me of how a certain person here says "Okay" when they can't defend their position but still want to get the last word in. You just used a lot more words.

I write chapter stories, although I don't publish them in pieces here. I also write series that share a common theme, but none of the characters, as well as series that share characters, but with different plot elements. Each type provides readers with a different experience.

And none of that stops you from creating a series with metadata that expresses exactly what it contains. It certainly hasn't stopped a lot of other people from doing it.

Also, to the best of my knowledge, series are not searchable in any way. Not only can you not limit your search results to series, you can't even search for anything in the series metadata. The only way to find a series is to read a story that is in a series or look at a writer's story list. Until that changes, having 'books' and 'series' and 'anthologies' will never provide any significant benefit over just using 'series' for all of them.

Even then, I don't see it adding real value. I do see the benefit of including the corresponding series metadata in searches and returning both series and stories within the result set, but I don't foresee many people searching for long stories, but only if they're broken into small chapters. Likewise, I don't see a lot of people searching for short stories, but only if there are more complete stories with the same characters.

 

[Writer61]

I subscribe to that school of thought, which is why I believe it behooves a writer to respect the difference and avoid considering chapters of a story in the same light as episodes of a true series.

Publishing novels in parts was common in the 1800's. Even by authors who are still household names, such as Conan Doyle and Dickens. The latter would even incorporate feedback from earlier parts.

When The Old Curiosity Shop was being serialised, American fans waited at the docks in New York harbour, shouting out to the crew of an incoming British ship, "Is little Nell dead?" Clearly, they were not put off by serialisation.

I write chapter stories, although I don't publish them in pieces here.

Would you insist that all authors do the same? I prefer that writers have the choice.

The site contributes to the confusion by allowing the two to exist as equals when they are clearly not.

I hope by "equals" you are not suggesting that one form is superior to the other.

If the site changes to separate chapterised and episodic series, the question would then be what to do with all the existing ones. Then there would be the confusion caused by writers posting (or tagging) in the wrong category. All for no significant gain.

Even if Laurel and Manu had the inclination and bandwidth, I cannot see them undertaking this.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Of course there are differences. Nobody is claiming otherwise. However, the issue is the significance of the differences, and of the similarities. Nothing you pointed out is significant enough to justify splitting off 'books' from 'series' on the site.

One justification is the clarity for readers as to what they are investing their time into. As mentioned in comment #12 above, readers find value in knowing whether a story is complete before starting on it. They assume that the chapter, episode, or whatever we call it is complete because it is published, but is that the complete story? This is what they want to know, and what breaking a story into pieces and then mislabeling it as a series confuses for them.

Every complete story doesn't have to be a "book" in and of itself. There is nothing inherently wrong with publishing by chapter or parts. Just call them what they are and not something else.

Is the story complete? Call it a series episode.

Is this only part of the story? Call it a chapter episode.

If you need help learning what constitutes the completeness of a story, that is a different conversation.

That reminds me of how a certain person here says "Okay" when they can't defend their position but still want to get the last word in. You just used a lot more words.

Yes, seeking brevity can be misconstrued as acquiescing by some. So, here are some examples for you:

Take virtually any sitcom ever broadcast, but in particular, those that made it to reruns as perfect examples of series where each episode stood on its own. The very fact that these shows could be aired in any order is what makes them so attractive for syndication.

Compare those to a series such as Yellowstone, or any of the soap operas. Here, each episode ties into the one before and after it. Watching them out of order is confusing and disruptive to the flow of the story.

And none of that stops you from creating a series with metadata that expresses exactly what it contains. It certainly hasn't stopped a lot of other people from doing it.

I'm not sure what you are considering metadata, but yes, a series of chapters can be published in such a way that it is clear that they are part of a larger whole. I recommend that for anyone breaking their story into pieces or parts. However, doing so doesn't make the pieces whole. They remain pieces.

In literature, there are a lot of variables. We have fiction, non-fiction, poetry, autobiographies, picture books, and so on. We also have a lot of recognized standards, such as formatting of one type versus another, recognized genres, techniques, etc. Sites such as Literotica allow for some deviations from both the variables and the standards, but that doesn't dismiss the existence of them.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Publishing novels in parts was common in the 1800's. Even by authors who are still household names, such as Conan Doyle and Dickens. The latter would even incorporate feedback from earlier parts.

When The Old Curiosity Shop was being serialised, American fans waited at the docks in New York harbour, shouting out to the crew of an incoming British ship, "Is little Nell dead?" Clearly, they were not put off by serialisation.


Would you insist that all authors do the same? I prefer that writers have the choice.


I hope by "equals" you are not suggesting that one form is superior to the other.

If the site changes to separate chapterised and episodic series, the question would then be what to do with all the existing ones. Then there would be the confusion caused by writers posting (or tagging) in the wrong category. All for no significant gain.

Even if Laurel and Manu had the inclination and bandwidth, I cannot see them undertaking this.

The issue isn't whether a story is published whole or in parts, it's how it is presented to the readers.

Your example of the Old Curiosity Shop is a good one, where readers knew that it was a chapter story being published in parts going in and their expectations were set accordingly. They could even choose to wait until all the parts had been published before they started to read if that was their preference.

That is different than say, Mark Twain's "Adventures of Tom Sawyer" and "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn", where two separate and distinct stories which shared a lot of commonalities, but didn't rely upon each other for their completeness.

My readers prefer complete stories published as a whole, but I used to publish them in chapters, so I can't argue against that practice for others. I always recommend that the story be complete before publishing any parts of it, but that is for the benefit of the writer being able to maintain control of the story more than what readers prefer.

There is nothing wrong with publishing in pieces, I simply believe that writers owe readers enough respect to clearly present their work as either "in progress" or "complete". Calling a chapter a "series" when it is clearly intended by the writer as a piece of the larger whole is misleading to readers.

Equal...

The television shows "Dallas" and "Magnum P.I." were both one-hour programs that aired a few decades back. Both were successful shows, popular with viewers, but I don't consider them "equal".

"Dallas" employed a soap opera format, where each episode followed the one previous and fed into the next one. "Magnum P.I." aired episodes that were each complete, and except for commonalities in characters, settings, and a few sub plots, they were each autonomous.

One show wasn't "better" than the other, but they weren't "equal" either.

Reader perception of a story falls on the writers, so I don't believe that the site has much responsibility in that regard. They could make things like the Series Manager more informative for writers to help them present their stories accurately, but the burden must remain with the writers to understand what they are publishing and how to clearly set reader expectations.

 

[IWroteThis]

One justification is the clarity for readers as to what they are investing their time into. As mentioned in comment #12 above, readers find value in knowing whether a story is complete before starting on it. They assume that the chapter, episode, or whatever we call it is complete because it is published, but is that the complete story? This is what they want to know, and what breaking a story into pieces and then mislabeling it as a series confuses for them.

Only if the writer fails. Simple things, like putting Ch. or Pt. in the title to indicate the story has been broken into chapters and putting Ep. in the title to indicate the story is a series of episodes gives the audience that information. Adding relevant metadata to the series also provides that information. Setting the status of the series from In Progress to Completed when you post the last segment does the rest.

Every complete story doesn't have to be a "book" in and of itself. There is nothing inherently wrong with publishing by chapter or parts. Just call them what they are and not something else.

Most people do. A lot of them are so well named, Literotica is able to create the series for them automatically. It's not even AI, and it can usually figure it out.

Is the story complete? Call it a series episode.

One could make a compelling argument that as long as you're still creating episodes, the story is not complete.

Is this only part of the story? Call it a chapter episode.

Um, what? You're complaining that chapters and episodes are different things, then suddenly want them called by both?

If you need help learning what constitutes the completeness of a story, that is a different conversation.

Nice little deflection there…

Yes, seeking brevity can be misconstrued as acquiescing by some. So, here are some examples for you:

Wow, that one went WAY over your head! Twice, apparently.

Take virtually any sitcom ever broadcast, but in particular, those that made it to reruns as perfect examples of series where each episode stood on its own. The very fact that these shows could be aired in any order is what makes them so attractive for syndication.

Yes, but when control was given to the viewers, they bought them as full seasons, if not full series. They tried doing "greatest hits" style releases with just select episodes, but that didn't really go over and they stopped. People wanted all of the episodes, in order.

Also, you conflated reruns and syndication. They are not the same thing.

With the first, they only showed some of the episodes because rerun season was shorter than the regular season. They tended to pick the more popular episodes, because viewership was already lower during rerun season. It's been a long time since I watched actual reruns, but I'm pretty sure they still tended to show them in order, just skipping over episodes as necessary to fit the shorter schedule.

As far as syndication goes, they generally broadcast every episode, in the original order. Some, like MeTV, would even loop the entire series, running through it several times before swapping it out for a different one. I don't recall ever watching a series in syndication where they played them in random order or skipped episodes (other than for issues with the content of that specific episode).

Compare those to a series such as Yellowstone, or any of the soap operas. Here, each episode ties into the one before and after it. Watching them out of order is confusing and disruptive to the flow of the story.

Yeah, I already mentioned that. Do try to keep up.

I'm not sure what you are considering metadata, but yes, a series of chapters can be published in such a way that it is clear that they are part of a larger whole. I recommend that for anyone breaking their story into pieces or parts. However, doing so doesn't make the pieces whole. They remain pieces.

The fields you fill out when creating the series. You know, the data about the series.

In literature, there are a lot of variables. We have fiction, non-fiction, poetry, autobiographies, picture books, and so on. We also have a lot of recognized standards, such as formatting of one type versus another, recognized genres, techniques, etc. Sites such as Literotica allow for some deviations from both the variables and the standards, but that doesn't dismiss the existence of them.

Yes, and Literotica has categories to separate topics and series to link related works.

Also, I think you greatly overestimate the standardization of the broad field of literature. Of course, most of what you said has nothing to do with what we were discussing, so I'm even less sure why you threw it in here.