Why I Don't Like Sequels by Naomi

Okay, first off, let me apologize for going MIA for-- what's it been, a week? Two weeks? Sorry about that....
(Also, apologies for the ugly header. I asked Kara to change it because I've fail several times to find and put a header in there that I a liked.... but I might try again because I have an idea. Anyways.)

And now back to the post.

While the name of the post says specifically sequels, it's really about things I don't like that could really happen in any book, and I've honestly only read one sequel that-- after thinking it over-- decided it could've been better. So....

Just like in the first book, your second book should have certain things. You're main character needs a goal. There needs to be challenges-- some can definitely by tied into the previous story but-- you want to add new challenges in too, because if you don't you'll be telling to the same story twice which is something to avoid.

For example of something (in my opinion) not to do, let's look at the Hunger Games and its sequel Catching Fire.

In the first one Katniss is put into the Hunger Games to fight for her life, having to pretend to be in love with a boy from her district to get sponsors to help her live through this terrible thing.

In the second one, Katniss's district (all the districts really) are unhappy. There is talk of rebellion and then Katniss has to go back into the Hunger Games again.

Now, obviously Suzanne Collins (the author of the Hunger Games trilogy) did something right because they sold a lot of copies and were made into movies and whatnot. But personally, I think that she should've done it differently. Katniss already lived through a the Hunger Games. She had to mentor someone to fight in the Hunger Games that would've been a little different, but still. I kind of feel like Ms. Collins cheated a tiny bit and wrote the same story slightly differently.

So just like every story you write, make it your own. Make it original. :)