Why CATCHING FIRE Didn’t Suffer From “Second Book Syndrome”

(Minor spoilers for CATCHING FIRE)

The Second Book Syndrome happens when a middle book in a trilogy sags and drags.

Sometimes when I read trilogies, the second book is more of a holding place, a continuation that can’t stand on its own. And too often second books don’t measure up to the first book. Middle books can be like the light fluffy middle in an Oreo; delicious but not solid enough to stand alone.

But CATCHING FIRE surprised me and worked in a completely unexpected way. While waiting for this book to come out, I anticipated Katniss would be on the run, maybe hiding out in different districts. And it did start in a way that may me think my guess was on-target. But when I reached Part 2 and found out that there would be another competition, I was astonished.

At first I thought, “Not again! This can’t work.” But the tension kept growing with unexpected story twists and the new competition setting was unique. The setting for the new competition raised the stakes plus added science fiction elements (so if this fantasy or science fiction? Interesting question there). New plot twists appeared making this middle book unique and interesting enough to be a stand-alone book. CATCHING FIRE gave a solid delicious middle to this trilogy.

But that doesn’t happen in many trilogies. I’ll name one, but only because I can honestly say that I LOVED Catherine Fisher’s INCARCERON and SAPPHIQUE. Those books worked well together and each was fascinating and exciting. She was smart to keep it to 2 books which worked perfectly.  So I decided to try another series of hers and read THE NAMED. I loved THE NAMED. It set up a fascinating world with some mythology based fantasy mixed with time travel. The characters were sympathetic and I couldn’t wait to find out what would happen next. But for me (and others may have a different opinion) the second book fell flat. It just felt like one drama to the next, with danger dumped on so much the original fun of the series seemed lost. I need to connect with my characters and feel their successes, but I lost interest since they were in constant peril with little hope. And often second books will use this device — making drama so intense and terrible, without giving success and lighter moments. Each book needs to have a good mix of despair and hope, without waiting until the final book in the trilogy for success and triumph.

Other common problems with middle books fall into the categories of could be called “IT REALLY SHOULD BE ONE BOOK” or “SAME STORY, NEW DRAMA.”

Without naming a popular trilogy that completely failed in my opinion with the sequels, what failed was that the drama in the first book built on strong characters who survived a disaster. The 2nd book continued the same event but with new characters. Then the 3rd book brought characters from the first 2 books together — and it fell flat with plot and characters, like a wrong turn on a familiar road. The author lost the momentum and I was very disappointed since I really admire this author.

A series that does a good job with additional books is UGLIES by Scott Westerfeld where the same character takes on a new challenge and changes in huge ways in each book. Each was a complete book on its own although it continued a larger story arc.

Can you think of trilogies/short series that had middle books which failed? Or some that totally worked for you? I’d love to hear your opinions!

Linda Joy Singleton

About these ads


Filed under Linda Joy Singleton

5 responses to “Why CATCHING FIRE Didn’t Suffer From “Second Book Syndrome”

  1. Natalie Aguirre

    I can’t think of one that failed. Sorry. But I think you describe some of the problems that can arise with sequels. I can’t wait to read Sapphique.

  2. Great post! Though just FTR, THE NAMED series is by Marianne Curley, not Catherine Fisher. If you want to see more of how Fisher handles series, try the ORACLE trilogy, or her SNOW-WALKER books.

    And I know what popular trilogy you mean and am interested you feel that way, because I actually thought the third book was comparable to the other two. In some ways I thought it better because it didn’t pull its punches (i.e. not even the CAT died in the first book? I found that very hard to believe).

  3. Claire Merle

    I totally agree with you – I couldn’t believe that Catching Fire was as good as The Hunger Games and was astonished by the twist of them returning into the arena. Collins totally pulled it off.

    Funny though, I’ve found myself on several occasions disappointed, not by the second in a series, but by the third. I loved the first two in the Uglies series, but didn’t feel the same way about Specials. And the first two books in Alison Croggon’s Pellinor Series are simply staggering. But the third? I couldn’t figure out what happened there.

  4. Parker Peevyhouse

    I’ll be the lone dissenter here and say that I do feel as if Catching Fire suffers from second book syndrome. I felt like much of the plot was devoted to setting up the rebellion that Katniss will eventually join–and to me that set up was boring. I pretty much skimmed until the games themselves actually started. Loved that part of the book.

    Here’s hoping the third book will be a great read no matter your opinion of the second!

  5. I agree, Catching Fire worked for me. As for the mystery trilogy, the world was still hauntingly realistic in the third book, but, in my opinion, the two main characters from book one and two had no chemistry when they were together.
    You can see my reviews of both trilogies at http://www.notreadyforgrannypanties.com/search/label/Carmen%27s%20Picks

    Two trilogies that worked for me are Whalen Turner’s The Thief/The Queen of Attolia/The King of Attolia and Lene Kaaberbol’s The Shamer’s Chronicles. They are four books actually, but they are great, so I hope you forgive the inconsistency.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s