In Radio Active #22 I rant a bit about trilogies. Not the new Star Wars trilogy (though there's plenty that's rant worthy there). No, I'm talking about the habit of small publishers to mimic the big ones and release books that promise to be the first "in a new trilogy".

Now I'm a Robert Jordan fan. I'm also a George R.R. Martin fan. I don't mind long series, but at the same time, those are the only two ongoing series I have time for. Seeing the words "first in a new trilogy", particularly from a small publisher worries me.,/p>

For one thing, there's a matter of time -- as a geek dad I have less time than ever to read books, let along trilogies, so when such a title crosses my desk for review, I'm automatically less likely to read it.

Second, small publishers, being small publishers, may not be able to make good on their promise of two more books: if there first one fails, what are the chances those other two books will ever be released?

I'd rather see small publishers counter-program their bigger kin, and produce self-contained, non-series books that I can easily pick up, read, put down and (perhaps most importantly) review.

But I'd like to know what you think of this? Are small press trilogies a good thing? A bad thing? Something in between? Discuss it in the Nuketown Forum