It's strange. Reading shorter books, I like longer chapters, but reading large fantasy epics (or sci-fi, or any long book, really), I find I prefer shorter chapters. I don't know why.

Writing my own story, each chapter is 5-10 pages long. I don't know if this is indicative of a larger novel, since the ending is kind of murky at the moment.

CVG
 

Shorter chapters keep me going. When I'm about ready to put a book down but I see that the next chapter is only a few pages long I think, "Just a little while longer." When I get to the end of a dauntingly long chapter I am much more likely to take a break. But that's personal preference.
 

When I read, I find I like chapters that are about 10-20 pages long. This also tends to be the way I write my chapters.

That said, I recently discovered the joy of reading Douglas Adams' Hitchhicker's series and most of the chapters are quite short. I think this gives the books a particular pace. I can read several chapters and, if they are short, it feels like I have accomplished a lot; aquired a lot of information; or moved quickly through the story. I know this is a pschological reaction, but it does have an effect on the way I perceive the story.
 

But I don't think it really matters in the long run. A fast pace within a long chapter works the same way for me.

[This message has been edited by HSO (edited February 09, 2005).]
 

That said, I almost never plan on not reading a book in one sitting unless it's reference or I just don't like the book that much.
 

That said, I truthfully don't care that much. Shorter chapters is a vague preference, not even close to a deal breaker. Do what works for your story.

I did read a book one by someone (I wnt to say James Patterson but I really might be wrong) that had 3 page chapters....in large print! I actually found it to be annoying because nothing substantial ever seemed to happen in one chapter. It felt bouncy and jagged.
 

But anyway, he recommended shorter chapters. I think he called it the potato chip theory. Something to the effect that when people snack, chips are less intimidating then a whole potato, and often the snacker will end up polishing off the whole bag before they know it. Too this effect, also recommended ending many chapters in cliffhangers.
 

I recently finished reading THE DAVINCI CODE (yeah, I know, I'm slow--you should see how high my To Be Read pile is), and it's a good example of what goatboy is talking about.

I tend to get very frustrated with authors who jump from characters I am interested in to characters I couldn't care less about in a novel. Brown did this in THE DAVINCI CODE. (I enjoyed the mystery, but I found Silas boring and Bishop "ringaroundtherosies" extremely boring.)

Because the chapters were short, I was able to tolerate the jumps away from the mystery to the characters I didn't care about.

I also realized that one of the things I love about LORD OF THE RINGS is that Tolkien doesn't jump back and forth among the characters (though with his characters, all of whom I care about, it wouldn't have been so bad). They had to jump around during the movies, but Tolkien didn't jump around in the books. (He didn't have particularly short chapters either.)
 

There were other characters I was beginning to be interested in by the time he did that, but I didn't trust him any more in that series.

And I think George R.R. Martin is an excellent writer in spite of all that.
 

Read all the chapters of the same character straight through, and then go back and do the same for the other characters. That way, you can stick with the characters you enjoy and skip the ones you do not.

It makes for a strange, but interesting, read.

 

Sigh. I wish more people would release large print versions of their books. If I .... no WHEN I get published, I will insist upon a large print edition on principal. I figure a legally blind author ought to be able to read her own book!
 

On the DaVinci code--the extremely short chapters kept me reading, but also kept me agitated. I suppose one feeds the other.

I've found, as I've learned more about writing and pay more attention to these things, that I enjoy reading a book that starts out with short chapters AND has a variety of chapter lengths. AND that I don't like scene breaks between long (ish) scenes. If you're going to break for a scene, why not just make a new chapter?

The Lord of the Rings, bored me to tears. I somehow managed to not read this tome until the films came out (in my 32rd year :-). I loved the movies and was pretty familiar with the novels, even though I had not read them. So I decided to sit down and read them, it was like clawing at my eyes while being submerged in lemon juice.

I respect what Lord of the Rings means, and understand that is created the genre of High Fantasy. I understand that his exhaustive descriptions and explanation were neccesary since a great deal of the creatures and concepts had never been promoted in this genre or manner before. But I've seen toast in the Saharra that is less dry.

That said, I have a question to Christine.

Are you referring to Eddard making a stupid mistake or someone else?

The only other major character that gets offed is Viserys and his death was definately in character...as was Eddards if you catch the subplot regarding Jon Snow's parentage, that is supported by Eddards choice.

I personally love that Martin kills characters the way he does, in any other fantasy series I would be concerned about a character dying, but would also be confident that the character would be safe since they are an integral part of the story. In Martins books, I care about every character more, because I don't know how much longer they will be around. Apparent importance to plot is no safeguard in a Martin book.