Crimson King

[Taliesin]

So is TCK a novella or novel?

 

The Magnus Primarchs book is 196 pages while The Crimson King is a full HH novel.

[hopkins]

So is TCK a novella or novel?

 

numbered HH novel

 

there's also the smaller Magnus Primarch series book due shortly from McNeill

[Petitioner's City]

Three answers! My thanks!

 

It's striking that since ATS both John French and ADB have really added so much to the XV lore, including glimpses of pre-fall legion and tizcan culture. Wraight as well, in relation to Magnus in the Heresy period. I wonder if Graham will synthesise or follow his own, long-delayed, path.

[HeritorA]

Three answers! My thanks!

 

It's striking that since ATS both John French and ADB have really added so much to the XV lore, including glimpses of pre-fall legion and tizcan culture. Wraight as well, in relation to Magnus in the Heresy period. I wonder if Graham will synthesise or follow his own, long-delayed, path.

He will, after all each author has added a lot to the myths and style. If Magnus novella would be at BL Live as a prerelease title - Crimson King I think would get a release for a Horus Heresy Weekender in February, for a release of Forge World HH book 'Inferno' about Prospero.

[Taliesin]

 

Three answers! My thanks!

 

It's striking that since ATS both John French and ADB have really added so much to the XV lore, including glimpses of pre-fall legion and tizcan culture. Wraight as well, in relation to Magnus in the Heresy period. I wonder if Graham will synthesise or follow his own, long-delayed, path.

He will, after all each author has added a lot to the myths and style. If Magnus novella would be at BL Live as a prerelease title - Crimson King I think would get a release for a Horus Heresy Weekender in February, for a release of Forge World HH book 'Inferno' about Prospero.

 

 

That would be a dream scenario but I don't think that will happen.

I don't think they will do the Magnus Primarchs book as a pre-release because it is a Limited Edition already and it would sell out before non-visitors could get it.

 

I'd love if they hurry up with CK though and release that in parallel with HH Inferno which is expected in February.

[DarkChaplain]

If the Primarchs novel were pre-released, it'd be on the BLL! page already. It'd be a big selling point, after all.

[HeritorA]

If the Primarchs novel were pre-released, it'd be on the BLL! page already. It'd be a big selling point, after all.

196 is a novella. BL policy to write 'short' novels is dishertening. Lot of this 'novels' suffer from unexplored stuff. And I don't think it would be 'big selling point'.

I will buy 'Russ' - cause it's puppy slapping and written by Wraight.

But buirlliman novella was horrible

[Kelborn]

But those stories will be released as "normal" versions as well, right?

[Petitioner's City]

 

If the Primarchs novel were pre-released, it'd be on the BLL! page already. It'd be a big selling point, after all.

196 is a novella. BL policy to write 'short' novels is dishertening. Lot of this 'novels' suffer from unexplored stuff. And I don't think it would be 'big selling point'.

I will buy 'Russ' - cause it's puppy slapping and written by Wraight.

But buirlliman novella was horrible

 

 

I think it is worth considering the critical theory on novellas versus novels though. Here is Ingrid Norton, writing for a non-scholarly audience, but dipping into theory:

 

 

This kind of turning point is a good time to examine what distinguishes short novels aesthetically and substantively from their longer counterparts. Google “novels” and “length” and you will find tables of word counts, separating out novels from novellas, even from the esoteric and still shorter “novelette” — as though prose works were dog show contestants, needing to be entered into proper categories. But when it comes to writing, any distinctions that begin with an objective and external quality like size are bound to be misleading. The delicate, gem-like jigsaw of Thornton Wilder’s The Bridge of San Luis Ray could not be more unlike the feverishly cunning philosophical monologue of Albert Camus’ The Fall, but both novels are about the same length. In a 2006 essay interrogating the critical bias that long, sprawling novels are more serious and ambitious than their shorter counterparts, critic and poet Meghan O’Rourke points to short novels like Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping. She phrases the question admirably: “What exactly makes a novel small, aside from its length? And if we don’t know, is the term more of an obstacle than an aid in taking stock of great literature?”

 

And yet, we do sense a difference between long novels of several hundred pages and shorter ones, even if it is elusive. When Fyodor Dostoyevsky realized that Crime and Punishment was outgrowing the short work he’d planned and becoming a work of several hundred pages, delving into the lower layers of Muscovite society instead of concentrating within Raskolnikov’s conflicted consciousness, he switched from first to third person and got in touch with his editor.

Long novels have expanse to interweave plots and subplots. With length comes room for tangents and wide tableaus. They have what Jane Smiley describes in 13 Ways of Looking at the Novel as an immersive quality, slowly creating a world we can wander through. In Thomas Hardy’s Return of the Native, central character Eustacia Vye only appears on page 60, after five chapters describing the wild English heath where the story is set. A shorter novel, on the other hand, has less time to establish its setting; it must earn a reader’s belief quickly. A long novel thrives on “multiplication of incident, proliferation of character” and authorial digressions, noted fine and fierce critic Philip Rahv. The short novel, on the other hand, is a form which “demands compositional economy, homogeneity of conception, concentration in the analysis of character, and strict aesthetic control.”

 

Within the bounds of that form, much is possible. In The Art of the Novel, Henry James points out that blue-prints and narrow categories hinder the creation of great art, which stems, after all, from an author’s distinct and idiosyncratic impression of the world. Discussions of form are by nature post-hoc. “The form, it seems to me,” he wrote, “is to be appreciated after the fact: then the author’s choice has been made, his standard has been indicated; then we can follow lines and directions and compare tones and resemblances.”

 

Comparing “tones and resemblances” as James suggests, we find different resonances between the shorter masterworks. It is no coincidence that many of the most famous philosophical novels are short. Voltaire’s Candide; Dostoyevsky’s Notes from Underground; Franz Kafka’s The Trial and Metamorphisis; Camus’ The Fall and The Stranger; Herman Hesse’s Siddhartha; Par Lagerkivist’s Barabbas; Nathanael West’s Miss Lonelyhearts. Through concentrated plots and narrative intensity, these works explore great questions of identity and awareness. Short novels are perfect for focusing on an idea and its implications in the world. Dostoyevsky’s great big novels (The Idiot, The Brothers Karamazov) are certainly philosophical, but the ideas and themes they explore are many and multifaceted, whereas Notes From Underground, while complex, probes the limits of rationality and self-reliance with searching intensity. The “homogeneity of conception” Rahv calls the strength of the short novel provides perfect canvas for exploring ideas through narrative.

 

And from an authorial view, the American science fiction author Robert Silverberg writes of the novella:

 

 

 

[The novella] is one of the richest and most rewarding of literary forms...it allows for more extended development of theme and character than does the short story, without making the elaborate structural demands of the full-length book. Thus it provides an intense, detailed exploration of its subject, providing to some degree both the concentrated focus of the short story and the broad scope of the novel.

 

And a list of novellas include:

 

 

 

Some notable examples of the novella include: John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, George Orwell's Animal Farm, Truman Capote's Breakfast at Tiffany's, Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea , Robert Louis Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.

 

I think we need to be less critical of the scale of books BL releases, a size of book form which can easily provide complete and satisfactory pieces of art. Rather we should remain critical of the ridiculous price point. 

[Kelborn]

Maybe we just named it: the book instead of novel or novella?

 

Would like to avoid yet another novella discussion. :/

[Roomsky]

I always thought the nomenclature was used because "Novel", "Novella", and "Short Story" were a tidy little criteria to use over: Numbered entry, Non-numbered Novel, Novella, etc.

[Taliesin]

It is rather odd that these Magnus/Leman Russ books come in so short. It really is still around the novella size especially with the prodigous use of blank pages to come to 175 or 196 pages. They regular hardcovers are advertised as being 240 pages on Amazon but BL's listing is clearly wrong, they are not that size ( which would indeed be a short novel). When I say odd I am referring to a clear BL directive that is being given here with regards to such a limited word count. What I don't like about it is that not just the pricing but also the advertising seems to suggest a series of novels. On the other hand to be fair to BL, they do no now list the actual page count of these limited editions so you know what you're getting.

[HeritorA]

 

 

If the Primarchs novel were pre-released, it'd be on the BLL! page already. It'd be a big selling point, after all.

196 is a novella. BL policy to write 'short' novels is dishertening. Lot of this 'novels' suffer from unexplored stuff. And I don't think it would be 'big selling point'.

I will buy 'Russ' - cause it's puppy slapping and written by Wraight.

But buirlliman novella was horrible

 

 

I think it is worth considering the critical theory on novellas versus novels though. Here is Ingrid Norton, writing for a non-scholarly audience, but dipping into theory:

 

 

This kind of turning point is a good time to examine what distinguishes short novels aesthetically and substantively from their longer counterparts. Google “novels” and “length” and you will find tables of word counts, separating out novels from novellas, even from the esoteric and still shorter “novelette” — as though prose works were dog show contestants, needing to be entered into proper categories. But when it comes to writing, any distinctions that begin with an objective and external quality like size are bound to be misleading. The delicate, gem-like jigsaw of Thornton Wilder’s The Bridge of San Luis Ray could not be more unlike the feverishly cunning philosophical monologue of Albert Camus’ The Fall, but both novels are about the same length. In a 2006 essay interrogating the critical bias that long, sprawling novels are more serious and ambitious than their shorter counterparts, critic and poet Meghan O’Rourke points to short novels like Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping. She phrases the question admirably: “What exactly makes a novel small, aside from its length? And if we don’t know, is the term more of an obstacle than an aid in taking stock of great literature?”

 

And yet, we do sense a difference between long novels of several hundred pages and shorter ones, even if it is elusive. When Fyodor Dostoyevsky realized that Crime and Punishment was outgrowing the short work he’d planned and becoming a work of several hundred pages, delving into the lower layers of Muscovite society instead of concentrating within Raskolnikov’s conflicted consciousness, he switched from first to third person and got in touch with his editor.

Long novels have expanse to interweave plots and subplots. With length comes room for tangents and wide tableaus. They have what Jane Smiley describes in 13 Ways of Looking at the Novel as an immersive quality, slowly creating a world we can wander through. In Thomas Hardy’s Return of the Native, central character Eustacia Vye only appears on page 60, after five chapters describing the wild English heath where the story is set. A shorter novel, on the other hand, has less time to establish its setting; it must earn a reader’s belief quickly. A long novel thrives on “multiplication of incident, proliferation of character” and authorial digressions, noted fine and fierce critic Philip Rahv. The short novel, on the other hand, is a form which “demands compositional economy, homogeneity of conception, concentration in the analysis of character, and strict aesthetic control.”

 

Within the bounds of that form, much is possible. In The Art of the Novel, Henry James points out that blue-prints and narrow categories hinder the creation of great art, which stems, after all, from an author’s distinct and idiosyncratic impression of the world. Discussions of form are by nature post-hoc. “The form, it seems to me,” he wrote, “is to be appreciated after the fact: then the author’s choice has been made, his standard has been indicated; then we can follow lines and directions and compare tones and resemblances.”

 

Comparing “tones and resemblances” as James suggests, we find different resonances between the shorter masterworks. It is no coincidence that many of the most famous philosophical novels are short. Voltaire’s Candide; Dostoyevsky’s Notes from Underground; Franz Kafka’s The Trial and Metamorphisis; Camus’ The Fall and The Stranger; Herman Hesse’s Siddhartha; Par Lagerkivist’s Barabbas; Nathanael West’s Miss Lonelyhearts. Through concentrated plots and narrative intensity, these works explore great questions of identity and awareness. Short novels are perfect for focusing on an idea and its implications in the world. Dostoyevsky’s great big novels (The Idiot, The Brothers Karamazov) are certainly philosophical, but the ideas and themes they explore are many and multifaceted, whereas Notes From Underground, while complex, probes the limits of rationality and self-reliance with searching intensity. The “homogeneity of conception” Rahv calls the strength of the short novel provides perfect canvas for exploring ideas through narrative.

 

And from an authorial view, the American science fiction author Robert Silverberg writes of the novella:

 

 

 

[The novella] is one of the richest and most rewarding of literary forms...it allows for more extended development of theme and character than does the short story, without making the elaborate structural demands of the full-length book. Thus it provides an intense, detailed exploration of its subject, providing to some degree both the concentrated focus of the short story and the broad scope of the novel.

 

And a list of novellas include:

 

 

 

Some notable examples of the novella include: John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, George Orwell's Animal Farm, Truman Capote's Breakfast at Tiffany's, Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea , Robert Louis Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.

 

I think we need to be less critical of the scale of books BL releases, a size of book form which can easily provide complete and satisfactory pieces of art. Rather we should remain critical of the ridiculous price point. 

 

Good points - but not uplicable to BL. They start doing short novels - because 1) They are quicker/easier to write and edit. 2) They still sold this 'novellas' for a price of a novel (compare with old stuff from 2010-2014). 3) they are cheapier to print and produce.

 

It has nothing to do with authors point of view. It's simply a bad business model for us. And good for BL (GW).

[DarkChaplain]

Again this topic? I'll just repeat myself from barely a month ago...

I think the shorter novels are here to stay. It is an inevitability of GW/BL's release policies. They have to balance the quantity of output to keep up with the rule of thumb of "a novel a week" while keeping their workloads, and those of their authors, manageable. We're getting a massive amount of new stuff over the coming 6-8 months, even if we're just looking at Amazon for sneak peeks.

That wouldn't be possible if authors had to put in roughly double the time to write the books, and editors had to invest probably three times as much time as right now to read through the drafts and make adjustments, working with the authors. Their authors have been pumping out a lot more individual books lately, on many more different topics than in the past, where they'd spend many months on even just one.

Of course, I too would love to have more longer novels again. Even just comparing books like Crusaders of Dorn, Khârn: Eater of Worlds and Sons of Titan to your average Space Marine Battles book from the past years, while seeing the same exact pricetags on them, is making me mad. But then I also get why this is happening, and can support it on some level.

Raw length isn't really a concern for me. Classics like Angels of Darkness and other novels from yesteryear weren't much, if any, longer than new releases right now. They were still good books. There are also plenty of longer novels which don't need to hit 400 pages and feel padded and spread too thinly. Then you have novels that could well use another 200 pages to flourish. Some stories are best told as novellas, others may even just need a short story. I don't mind that at all - I just think that the editors at BL need to recognize that just commissioning a "50k word novel on topic x" isn't the way to go in some cases.

Things at BL have been changing again lately, and they've come from being almost purely about putting up topics with certain requirements and authors calling dibs to being approachable with authors' pitches again. Robbie MacNiven, for example, managed to pitch his Red Tithe Carcharodons novel to them, something that before wouldn't have been possible. Peter Fehervari is finally back in action after a few years where his approach to 40k wouldn't have gone through with the higher ups' requirements.

What I'm trying to say is that, at last, BL is improving on the communications front with their authors again. We had a few dire years and many of the decisions made then still cast a hungry shadow ( ) on us for the foreseeable future. But things are improving, and I'd rather have editors and authors discuss the right format for a pitch than having them get stuck with *any* specific format requirement, whether it be 50k or 100k or 120k words. Or even just 25k. The right format for every story. BL needs to maintain a somewhat coherent lineup of novels, but they need to become much more flexible and realize that they have many different demographics interested in their products. Which, I think, they might just be on the verge of doing.

And yes, bloody hell, GW, have appropriate prices on your stuff. C'mon.

Honestly, the money they save on printing for a hundred pages less is negligible. It won't put a dent in their wallets either way. It is more the work effort to go from commission to finished release that is important here. You want quicker, more frequent releases? Then you gotta put up with some concessions to make it happen.

[HeritorA]

Again this topic? I'll just repeat myself from barely a month ago...

I think the shorter novels are here to stay. It is an inevitability of GW/BL's release policies. They have to balance the quantity of output to keep up with the rule of thumb of "a novel a week" while keeping their workloads, and those of their authors, manageable. We're getting a massive amount of new stuff over the coming 6-8 months, even if we're just looking at Amazon for sneak peeks.

That wouldn't be possible if authors had to put in roughly double the time to write the books, and editors had to invest probably three times as much time as right now to read through the drafts and make adjustments, working with the authors. Their authors have been pumping out a lot more individual books lately, on many more different topics than in the past, where they'd spend many months on even just one.

Of course, I too would love to have more longer novels again. Even just comparing books like Crusaders of Dorn, Khârn: Eater of Worlds and Sons of Titan to your average Space Marine Battles book from the past years, while seeing the same exact pricetags on them, is making me mad. But then I also get why this is happening, and can support it on some level.

Raw length isn't really a concern for me. Classics like Angels of Darkness and other novels from yesteryear weren't much, if any, longer than new releases right now. They were still good books. There are also plenty of longer novels which don't need to hit 400 pages and feel padded and spread too thinly. Then you have novels that could well use another 200 pages to flourish. Some stories are best told as novellas, others may even just need a short story. I don't mind that at all - I just think that the editors at BL need to recognize that just commissioning a "50k word novel on topic x" isn't the way to go in some cases.

Things at BL have been changing again lately, and they've come from being almost purely about putting up topics with certain requirements and authors calling dibs to being approachable with authors' pitches again. Robbie MacNiven, for example, managed to pitch his Red Tithe Carcharodons novel to them, something that before wouldn't have been possible. Peter Fehervari is finally back in action after a few years where his approach to 40k wouldn't have gone through with the higher ups' requirements.

What I'm trying to say is that, at last, BL is improving on the communications front with their authors again. We had a few dire years and many of the decisions made then still cast a hungry shadow ( ) on us for the foreseeable future. But things are improving, and I'd rather have editors and authors discuss the right format for a pitch than having them get stuck with *any* specific format requirement, whether it be 50k or 100k or 120k words. Or even just 25k. The right format for every story. BL needs to maintain a somewhat coherent lineup of novels, but they need to become much more flexible and realize that they have many different demographics interested in their products. Which, I think, they might just be on the verge of doing.

And yes, bloody hell, GW, have appropriate prices on your stuff. C'mon.

Honestly, the money they save on printing for a hundred pages less is negligible. It won't put a dent in their wallets either way. It is more the work effort to go from commission to finished release that is important here. You want quicker, more frequent releases? Then you gotta put up with some concessions to make it happen.

Yes - I want quicker releases if they are good. But if they are rushed and suffer from simplified plot cause 100 pages are missing - then I could wait till full 350-400 pages would be finished

[DarkChaplain]

Sure, but not every novel needs the added pages, let alone benefits from it. A lot of times those pages would be mostly taken up by more action, which I can utterly do without. I'd rather have a story that does what it does well than one needlessly padded to comply with arbitrary standards just so that a tiny fraction of the vocal fanbase will consider stopping their complaints, while fully knowing they'll find other things to complain about (which, as everybody here knows, is an inevitability).

[HeritorA]

The best examples of suffering from chopped page count are ALL TBA books, Wolf King novella, Weregeld novella, definitely Genestealer Cults and all new and coming soon stuff.

[Taliesin]

Awesome.

[Mellow]

Magnus looks like he has a cartoon face!

 

Awful. Not awesome.

[Kelborn]

Except Magnus, it's a typical cover art

 

But my gosh

 

Magnus

 

What happened to you? Oo

[Roomsky]

I don't want to understate my respect for Neil, I think he's a great artist.

 

But man, if that's official, that's the worst cover art I've ever seen from him.

[bluntblade]

Foreground and some of the Sons look good, but Magnus is a mess.

 

Is that meant to be Prospero, or elsewhere?

[1ncarnadine]

Foreground and some of the Sons look good, but Magnus is a mess.

 

Is that meant to be Prospero, or elsewhere?

 

That, or it's the Planet of the Sorcerers as the Thousand Sons drive away the 13th Company?

[bluntblade]

If so, I'm bored of the Wolves being used as a punching bag in other Legions' books.

 

Was trying to tell myself they were DA, but nah.

 

Also I hope it's Prospero because I figured the Planet of the Sorcerers was too volatile for any structure but the Obsidian Tower to endure

[Tymell]

Yeah, most of that image is fine, but Magnus himself is just...bizarre. And not in a good way.