The disappointing second novel is measured against the brilliant first novel - often no novel lives up to the first. Literary improvement seems like an unfair expectation.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The difficulty of writing a second novel is directly proportional to how successful the first novel was, it seems.
I was aware that there is an expectation that writers inevitably falter at this stage, that they fail to live up to the promise of their first successful book, that the next book never pleases the way the prior one did. It simply increased my sense of being challenged.
A lot of people have trouble with their second novel - the dreaded sophomore jinx. I wrote three books in between the two novels, and they just weren't very good.
If one book's done this well, you want to write another one that does just as well. There's that horror of the second novel that doesn't match up.
Second novels are bears. As are other people's expectations for them. I think taking the time you need with the second book is key. Writers spend years and years on their first novels and then are often expected to turn out a second at warp speed, a recipe for failure.
I personally feel I still have so much to learn as a writer; each novel is better than the one before, just because I'm getting better at it.
It's with bad sentiments that one makes good novels.
A book's flaws make it less predictable.
The great American novel has not only already been written, it has already been rejected.
My greatest fear is disappointing the reader, so each book has to be better than the one before.
No opposing quotes found.