First date jitters. Wedding jitters. First baby jitters. I’ve suffered them all. None compare to first book jitters. Well, perhaps first baby jitters did, but the Demerol really helped with those.
There’s so much to think about. How many typos did I miss? Will I get a good cover? What on Earth am I supposed to put in a newsletter? And is it good enough to make readers want to buy the next book? So much pressure on that one book. In my own mind, the expectations piled on to my first book have grown higher than my TBR pile. But what do readers expect from a first book?
I decided to do a small, extremely informal survey. I asked several readers—none of them columnists for nor commenters on RTB, but fairly active in online romance communities—what sort of expectations they had of a romance author’s first book. The results fell into two fairly distinct camps.
A little more than half expected a romance author’s first book to be good, but not her strongest, with each book she writes being stronger and more sophisticated than the previous.
That’s a natural supposition, I would think. Writing is a skill that is refined with use, and the process and craft will mature with the writer. Some writers shudder when they think of their first books. One or two have even revised and reissued their early works.
A little fewer than half expected a romance author’s first book to be the best she would write.
This is perhaps where the results show that I didn’t use readers off the street, but rather readers involved in the online romance community. Reasons for this being their expectation included ones I’ve seen mentioned before. The author took seven years to perfect her first book, but had a ten-month deadline on the second. The first book did the contest circuit for three years, being revised and honed with each round of judge’s remarks. Perhaps some detailed rejection letters. There was no pressure other than her own. One reader felt that in today’s Romancewriterland, the author’s first book is her best for several years, then they get better again. Her reasoning?
She gets to spend years working on one book. Then she sells it and has to churn out more to get her name built up and earn enough money to quit her job and then she has more time and her books start getting better again.
So what about you? Do you go into the reading of a debut romance with the fact that it’s a first book in mind? Do you have higher or lower expectations of a book if it’s the author’s debut? If you know it’s her first published novel, do you cut her some slack or do you demand more of her than your longtime favorites to get your attention?
Obsessing inquiring minds wanna know. *g*
No related posts.
I definitely have lower expectations for an author’s first book. Sure, she’s probably spent a long time writing and perfecting it, but it’s also a learning process. She may be under time pressure for the second book, but since she can apply the lessons she learned writing the first one, she’s not having to start from scratch, as it were.
Er… no pressure, though.
G’morning!
First book? I’m with the majority of those you poled, while the first book has to be “good enough” I think through experience–and believe it or not, a writer’s boost of self confidence at getting past that first sale–makes future books better.
It’s not always the case, for the reasons you mentioned, but I think ANY author should display growth when one looks at a timeline of their work.
~Mel, *Standing in line to buy Shan’s first book*
Did you mention that your first book, Twice Upon a Roadtrip,(and a very funny book I might add) will be available from Ellora’s Cave on October 5th? You didn’t? Why not?
That’s an interesting theory- about the writer having all that time to work on the first book and perfect it.
It’s kind of funny though, how some of an author’s earlier works are their better ones (for instance, LKH. Her series was powerful and strong in the early days and has gotten weaker as time goes by).
I don’t really have a point. Just rambling, I guess. Will have to think on this some more.
I’d like to think a writer gets better with every subsequent book. Not that I have expectations that her first book will be crap by any means (and from what I’ve read of Twice Upon A Roadtrip, it is most certainly NOT crap), but that every book you write after this one will be better and better.
Your first baby is beautiful, Shan. Every one after that will be even more so.
Quit obsessing.
Thought I’d chime in with one author’s POV.
My first published book was written in three months, and submitted to Silhouette immediately thereafter. I never did the contest thing or had a critique partner, so basically I was flying blind. And apparently fast. (Ah, those were the days.) The book sold with very few revisions, and even eight years later, I still think it’s a decent book, even though my writing definitely blossomed over the next few years.
However, I feel I hit a plateau — at least with my category writing — about three or four years after that first sale. The work has become much harder, but I’m not sure you can see any sort of absolute progression *or* decline in my twenty-plus book career. Some books work better for some readers than others (another inevitability), and some books are more of a pain to write than others — neither of which seems to have much bearing on how “good” any individual book is. But I often wonder if I feel some of my earlier work is better simply because it was soooo much easier to — I read it now and wonder where the heck it came from!
For some authors, yes, that first book may indeed be their strongest work, and subsequently writing to deadline works against them. Others will improve. Some will continue to grow over the course of their careers, while others will burn out after too many books written too closely together. If they feel unable to take the break necessary to refuel, the result might be uninspired writing. But it really is an individual thing.
One more comment: For many of us, each book really is like reinventing the wheel, because — aggravatingly enough — it’s almost a guarantee that whatever you learned with the last book (or two or ten) won’t do you a bleeping bit of good with *this* one.
Well, often the first book written is not actually the first sold or published, so I don’t really expect it to be best or worst. How’s that for helpful?
I just look for voice and a good story. If I like the way the author tells a story and the kind of story they tell, I’m going to want to read more.
For me, I know whether to buy her later books or not on the basis of her *third* book.
I think I am more interested in author’s writing style in her debut book and if I like it, I’ll make a note of her name for future reference.
Second book – there seems to be a pattern with new authors that it’s the weakest. I want to say it’s a rush job, but that’s a guess on my part.
Third book is the crucial point for me because by then, new authors’ strengths and weaknesses [writing-wise] will reveal themselves. If it’s good [I do take her weaknesses into account - there are some weaknesses I can't stand and some I accept without a blink], then it’s likely I’ll buy her later books and if it’s not, then I won’t take notice of her later books.
FWIW, anyway.
I don’t care if a book is the author’s first or fortieth, as a reader I expect it to be well written and worth my time. Regrettably that’s not always the case. Like wine, some books are, indeed, released before their time.
Sometimes it’s an author’s first book release that gets me hooked, only to find that I’m not as enchanted with later books. That can be due to what Charlene mentioned about the first book published not necessarily being the first book an author has written (pretty common).
Often the newer books of past favorite bestselling authors will disappoint. I think this is due in part to how much success a writer has achieved and the time constraints necessitated by that success. Burnout can be another big factor. When I reach that pinnacle of success I’ll let you know. LOL
I think Karen summed things up well in her comment and I agree with many of her points.
As for my own writing, I feel that each book I pen is better than the last (puhleeze God)–more polished, more interesting, the characters more believable, etc., because writing is a continual learning process. The kernel of an idea; creation of characters and plots; submitting the manuscript and waiting; the acceptance or rejection; the editing; the positive and negative reviews; life experience; etc., amount to invaluable continuing education classes for writers.
Great article, Shan. Regarding your upcoming EC book–wishing you tons of sales, great reviews, fat royalties, and many more books to come! (Gets much easier after the first.)
One thing to remember, though, is that a writer’s books aren’t necessarily released in the order in which they were written. As someone else mentioned, that first published book might actually be the author’s second, or fifth, or tenth. And sometimes some of those older books — which might have been rejected due more to bad timing, subject-wise, than because of the writer’s skill at that point — will be published subsequent to that first sale. Since the copyright only applies to when the book was published, not to when it was written, one can’t determine actual chronology by that.
For instance, my first pub’d book was my second written; my third completed manuscript ended up as something like my ninth or tenth published book. And my upcoming SSE release had actually been languishing on my old computer’s hard drive for around six years, written for a line that folded.
Granted, sometimes writers will rework those older books to fit a new market/line/imprint (raises hand here), but not always. I tended to “revoice” my earlier books with every revision more within the first three years or so after I started writing seriously. After that, my style and voice were pretty much set. Hence, when I had to revise the aforementioned resurrected book, the changes were almost entirely confined to story, not to the actual writing. So if I’d had to make those changes then, I doubt the book would have been much different than the one that’s coming out later this year.
What I also wonder about, though, is whether one’s perception of an author’s writing improvement or decline over time is more due to changes in their storytelling than their ability. For instance, are an author’s earlier, straight romances really “better” than her new women’s fiction or paranormal or suspense books? Or is it that her older, loyal romance readers feel that way because she’s gone off in a direction that doesn’t work for them?
In any case, Shan, your first baby will always be special because it’s your first — and wherever your writing takes you from this point, nothing can diminish the importance and significance of this milestone.
And if it’s anything like your blogs, I’m not seeing a problem here.
After reading this particular article, I had to sit here and think about it. I’ve read a lot of books in my lifetime and am a writer too. I think it’s interesting that 9 times out of 10, I won’t read another book by an author if the first one didn’t hook me.
If it doesn’t have that special something and reads like a how-to on romance writing, I won’t read anything further by that person.
This is not always true though. There have been a few authors that I started out not liking because of their first book and after hearing something about a different book will read & enjoy. What can I tell you? I’m picky.
Do you guys think 1st book versus 10th book when you buy? I’m not convinced I do. If someone I’ve heard about or followed on the blogs etc. has a new book coming out, I get excited, get it and hope I’ll love it. If I don’t love the book but like the voice, I’ll go back for another. But, I’m not convinced I’m that conscious of the “oh, well, that was only her first I bet the next will be better” issue as I’m reading. Having said that, I hope others are because I think I get better with each book I write….at least I hope I do
What an awesome conversation! Thanks guys.
No, Angie I didn’t. Because we’re not supposed to.
Karen, you rock, as always. Excellent points about the order books being written in not necessarily the order they’re published in. And about voice development. I enjoyed All She Wants a lot, but I wouldn’t say that the KT voice is strong there. Whether one book is better than another is pretty objective, but I think you could probably trace the progression of your voice becoming stronger and more confident from ASW through your SIMs to the single title and RDI books. Especially if the heroine’s a mom.
MÃ ili, I love that third book theory. And it makes perfect sense to me when you write it out like that.
I don’t necessarily, as a reader, give any thought to whether it’s the first or fourth or tenth release. But online and in ads and especially reviews, you see debut book or debut author stressed alot.
It’s also something I’ve thought about because there are manuscripts that I’ve been seeing in contests for several years and I wonder, once that writers sells, how the second book can compare without those same years of work. (Assuming she didn’t revise and edit the voice right out of that first one.)
Thanks, everybody for your thoughts (and your congrats)!
Shannon — you actually read ALL SHE WANTS?
You actually found ALL SHE WANTS (otherwise known as The Book With a Printrun of Five)? 
:shock:
Girl, you never cease to amaze/impress me.
And BTW, my editor would agree with you about the voice/progression thing. Maybe that’s why it keeps getting harder????
Oh yes, I have it.
I have them all, actually. And one of these days I’m going to run into you at a conference and follow you around like a fangirl until you sign it. 
I give an author more leeway with a first book. I’m looking for a voice I like, an ‘attitude’ (don’t know what else to call it – some writers just turn you off and you can’t classify it) I like and characters I can root for. I can live with plot holes and inaccuracies *Shrug* – I want to know if they’re a storyteller.
And, actually, I think I give MORE leeway to a second book if I’ve liked the first. I know how hard second books can be, and I’ve seen plenty of not-so-hot second books sandwiched between lovely first books and brilliant thirds.
But I’m an easy-going kind of a gal…