Larissa Ione

Reader Trust — When Do We Lose It?

I just read a fascinating discussion at Dear Author about a review of JD Robb’s novel, Creation in Death. The reviewer, Jane, thinks the heroine did something out of character. Some commenters didn’t see the action as out of character, and others did, but didn't have an issue with it.

That’s all fine and dandy, and not what this post is about. You can’t help how you feel about a book or what you think the author was doing. What I’m talking about is trust. At one point Jane says about the heroine, Eve, “Either she has to deal with the repercussions [of acting out of character] and that makes me dread the future books or this is a blip that won’t be addressed again which makes me think - plot contrivance.”

That comment made me wonder WHY she (and probably others) would think the out-of-character thing might be a blip, considering this is a series — mainly because my first instinct is to assume that this plot occurance would be dealt with in a future book. So what makes a reader NOT assume the same thing?

One comment that fascinated me was one that came after the author, Nora Roberts, explained why she handled the out of character action and that there would be consequences/discussion in a later book. The commenter said that they would now think on the book in a different way, knowing that the action would be explained/justified/whatever.

Her exact words are, “reading that Nora wrote it with this in mind makes me feel better about the whole thing. If she’s going to address all of this in upcoming books it will make a big difference in how I perceive this one. There are going to be serious repercussions within Eve if she has to redefine herself, and I look forward to reading them.”

What I’m wondering is why people would assume that an author would do something that won’t be explained in a future book – especially if said book is part of a series. Do some readers not trust an author to tie up threads? And why not? Is it because of the way the book was written? Is it because they've been let down before, by series books or even TV or movies? Is it something else?

Steph and I have been lucky in that 99% of the reviews for Riding The Storm have been wonderful, but some of the criticisms have to do with the subplots – some readers think that because they aren’t neatly tied up, we dropped the ball. Others think that because the special world/operatives special powers aren’t fully explained, we dropped the ball. The answers are all coming in future books – we promise. It has all been carefully thought out. So why do people think it isn’t?

Perhaps in our case, it could be that Sydney Croft is a new author and trust needs to be earned. Maybe we could have done a better job for those readers in making it clear that the loose ends would be tied up/explained (as Jane says about Creation in Death, “some clues should be put out there,”.) But in Nora Roberts’ case…I don’t know. Seems to me that someone of her caliber and reputation would know exactly what she’s doing when she does something that seems…off.

Personally, when I read a series (and I do prefer series over stand-alones,) I trust the author to answer all questions and wrap up all loose ends as the series progresses. Yes, there I times I finally give up, but that's usually because the series has gone on so long that I'm tired of waiting for the story I really want.

So what about you? Do you automatically trust authors to answer questions and address issues in future books, do you trust them until they burn you, or do you not trust until they’ve proven themselves to you? I'm especially curious because my first Demonica book kicks off a series, and I really want to know what people think!

7 Responses to “Reader Trust — When Do We Lose It?”

I sometimes wonder if certain readers have anything better to do than nitpick. If I know a book is part of a series, I don’t worry about it so much because you have no clue what the writer has planned down the road.

by Tori Lennox on November 16th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
You know, I feel pretty much the same way about series…I figure the author is going to handle things later.

I mean, I understand what Jane was saying…that with a few clues, it would have made the OOC event seem less out of the blue, and would also have clued her in on the fact that the author knew what she was doing and was planning to address this very thing later.

I can see how, if we’d hinted to the reader in RTS that the characters themselves were questioning their powers’ existence, it would have told the reader that we were aware that the powers hadn’t been explained. I get that, even if we made a conscious choice not to address the issue at all until book 3.

But still, I’m not generally the type to need that kind of authorial confirmation because I assume the author has a reason for doing whatever they’re doing in a series. I know I definitely read series differently than stand-alones. Leave loose ends in a stand-alone, and I’m going to come uncorked! *g*

by Larissa on November 16th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
I’m with Tori on the nitpicking…or we trust authors more than your average Jane because we ARE authors. I’m all for trusting someone until they burn me. Funny I don’t really get into LONG series, in part because with most I feel so far behind (IE Sue Grafton and yes, JD Robb *sigh*). I think I also go into a series thinking, there’s more to come so just chill

we made a conscious choice not to address the issue at all until book 3

Larissa I’ve always said there’s more than one way to write a book. I think the same is true for a series. THere’s more than one PATH a story(line) can take….and that’s okay. I hope that makes sense.

by Amie on November 16th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Amie, you might have something there, that we trust authors more because we ARE authors. Then again, even before I started writing, I was the trusting sort when it came to series books. Hmm.

And yes, you make sense! I’m starting to think, though, that creating a blatant signal that something will be followed up on might work better than leaving threads just…loose. Like how, in JR Ward’s 2nd book, Lover Eternal, Bella was taken by the Lessers at the end. Clearly, Z and Bella’s subplot was going to be addressed in the 3rd book. Had Bella not been kidnapped, would readers have felt a little…unsettled, wondering if the romance was going to be continued?

Okay, I’m thinking WAY too much now! LOL

by Larissa on November 16th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
How blatant a signal does an auhtor need to give?? “Dear Reader, this will all be explained in a later book, don’t get your panties in a twist.”

I love seeing little details (or big story problems) getting explained in later books. That’s part of the fun of a series. I haven’t been following the JD Robb stories (so shoot me, I haven’t had the time…I’m writing…) But it sounds like nitpicking to me.

by Natasha on November 16th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
I wonder if that’s a genre expectation thing? I was a series reader long before I was a romance reader (mystery series, fantasy, SF) and so I’m perfectly comfortable with plot lines that resolve over future books.

by Charlene on November 16th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
LOL, Natasha! You bring up a good point though — at one point does an author go from treating a reader like they’re idiots with too blatant clues, to looking like an idiot because they don’t give readers enough clues that what the author did was intentional?

Does that make sense?

Charlene, hmm…that got me thinking. Especially because yes, I was reading SF, fantasy, and horror long before romance, and there were so many books that are very leave-you-hanging in those genres, but really, it seems to be a fairly new thing to romance.

For me, writing like that came naturally — my very, very first romance, a historical, was meant to be a series and contained an unresolved plotline. Later, when I started writing contemporaries, again…I started a series that would continue through three books. Not just connected, but that carried a subplot that would play out from book 1 to book 3.

Hmm…

by Larissa on November 17th, 2007 at 11:14 am