The Muses are busy recharging this week, but never fear. In our place we have three-time RITA Nominee Jessica Andersen. Jess's latest Harlequin Intrigue, Mountain Investigation, is out next month. (It's a RT Top Pick too!) And in August, look for the next in her celebrated NightKeepers series.
At the end of the week, one lucky poster will get a Jessica Andersen Intrigue! Take it away Jess....
Hi all, and a big THANK YOU to the Muses for inviting me to visit! On the theory of ‘blog what you’re thinking today,’ I’d like to talk about middle books. You know … like number two in a trilogy, or books four through six in a nine-book series.
Why am I thinking about middle books? Because: 1) I just turned in the first draft of
Demonkeepers, which is book four of the nine-book Final Prophecy series; 2) I’m sketching out ideas for Keepers5 right now; and 3) my July release from Harlequin Intrigue,
Mountain Investigation, is the middle of a three-book miniseries. So I’m all about middles right now!

When writing, I tend to churn out a decent synopsis, stick to it for the first third of the book, go completely off the reservation for the middle third, then pull myself back together for the ending. At which point, I’m 20-50k words over my target word count, so it’s no big deal (in fact, it’s critical) to go back in and rip out all the blither I wrote whilst trying to find my way through the story forest. Which is usually most of the middle.
(And I’m not advocating this as a writing process. Seriously, don’t do this if you’ve got any other option whatsoever. I’m simply unable to write a book without also writing a whole lot of crap that really shouldn’t ever make it out of my head and onto the page. Like meetings. I have this thing about writing scenes in which the Nightkeepers sit around and talk about stuff that the reader has already seen firsthand. Because, yanno, secondhand analysis makes for really gripping narrative. Not.)
Okay, so that’s how I typically avoid having a sagging middle in a given book- by writing enough that I have room to tighten the flab and focus on the characters and action. But what about when I’m thinking in terms of a series? I’d really rather not have to throw out an entire book upon realizing that it’s one big fat sagging middle. Eek!
When I sit down to write the synopsis for a middle book—regardless of whether it’s a short sketch that lets the editor know what I plan to do if they buy into the series, or a full multi-page outline—I concentrate on two key points: 1) I want to increase the danger/suspense from the point where the prior book ended (upping the stakes); and 2) although I want to set up pieces of the next book, the middle book must be self-contained, complete, and satisfying in its own right.
We’ve all read books and seen movies where the middle installment of a three-fer is the weakest of the bunch, existing largely to get the story from point A to point C, without really giving point B its due, yes? I try very hard not to be that writer … and I do that by going back to basics with that old adage: It’s the characters, stupid.
For me, the creation of a satisfying middle book comes from answering the following questions:
1) Why is the story goal necessitated by the overall series arc specifically critical to this hero and heroine? And I’m not just talking about ‘I should save the world/capture the bad guy because it’s the right thing to do,’ but rather a smaller-scale, more deeply personal motivation.
2) If they don’t succeed in reaching that goal, why is the potential negative consequence the worst possible outcome for these specific characters? Again, it’s too vague to use ‘because they want to live’- that’s a given. What I’m looking for is a set of consequences that are tied into the hero’s and heroine’s backstories and motivations.
3) And finally, if they do succeed in reaching the story goal (or identifying a way to get around an impossible goal to reach another, hidden goal), what sort of payoff will not only move us to the next story, but also provide a satisfying finish for these two characters?
See what I mean? It’s about the characters, and about making the story specifically personal to them, while still encompassing the larger series arc.

In the Intrigue trilogy I was talking about earlier, three ruthless terrorists escape from a Supermax prison north of Bear Claw City, and intelligence chatter warns that they’re planning a terrible attack. Furthermore, it quickly becomes clear that the terrorists have infiltrated local and federal law enforcement. So the series goal is obviously ‘recapture the terrorists, prevent the terror attack and root out the conspirators.’ Given that, I had to be careful to make each of the books ‘feel’ different, even if their end goals were very similar.
In the first book,
Manhunt in the Wild West, undercover agent Jonah (Fax) Fairfax helps the terrorists escape from prison on orders from a superior who proves to be one of the conspirators. With the help of medical examiner Chelsea Swan, he must clear his name while racing to prevent the planned terror attack and recapture the escapees. Things get personal when Chelsea herself becomes a target, and Fax must choose between his mandate and the woman he has come to love.
Here, the story goal is essentially ‘save the world,’ because that’s the sort of man Fax is. But then again, each of the books in the miniseries is about members of law enforcement protecting our home soil against terrorism. So … I needed to find an angle that would make the second book stand out. Since these are also romances at their core, I turned to the romance for that angle, focusing on the question: Why is this story personal to these people?
In
Mountain Investigation (July ‘09), I focus on the heroine’s fight to heal from an emotionally poisonous marriage and boatloads of guilt that she hadn’t realized her ex was one of the terrorists until after he’d done terrible things. When her husband escapes from the Supermax, she’s forced to rely on a revenge-obsessed FBI agent who walks a fine line between justice and vigilantism … and who just may hold the key to her new life.
Thus, while it’s still a ‘capture the bad guys’ book, the tone and focus are very different between books one and two. More, this second book ends with hints of a larger plot afoot, one that will be central to the final book in the miniseries, Internal Affairs (10/09). But even as
Mountain Investigation pulls together threads from the first book and sets up the third, it’s a complete, stand-alone love story. Romantic Times Magazine even gave it a Top Pick and 4.5 stars, saying: “Andersen’s first-class novel is terrifyingly real, shatteringly topical and sweepingly romantic.”
So that’s my take on middle books, and a bit of insight into how I go about ramping up the stakes without bringing things to such a hysterical fever pitch that I’m drowning out the character-driven romances that I love so much.
Now … if you’ve gotten all the way to the end of this, thank you! And I have a few questions for you … what middle books (or movies) have worked or not worked for you? Why? Do you have any thoughts on what an author should keep in mind when trying to make a middle book strong in its own right? Let’s discuss!
Mountain Investigation is available for pre-order now at
e-harlequin. To keep up with Jess's many releases and achievements, sign up for her newsletter at
http://www.jessicaandersen.com/books/ or
http://www.jessicaandersenintrigues.com/contact.html