short chapters or long?

[book_jones]

So which do you like better? Books that have a large number of very short chapters or a book that only has a few long chapters? I can see the merits of both. It seems like you can get a lot more done with long chapters, but short chapters break the book up easier and usually make it easier to read. What are your thoughts?

[mercymyqueen]

Short chapters are generally less overwhelming, and often better, because they're better thought through.

[Niamh]

Short.

[Dark Muse]

I love short chapters

[kelby_lake]

Short chapters. I can't stick endless chapters. Plus, it's a good place to stop, at the end of a chapter.

[ballb]

I suspect publishers who want to boost sales encourage short chapters as the book then becomes a page turner. "I`ll just read a couple more chapters before I turn out the light"

[mayneverhave]

The merits of short chapters are obvious, as they make for easier reading.

I'm rather ambivalent though: the majority of my favorite novels have exceedingly long chapters.

The Sound and the Fury is, I believe, some 300+ pages divided into 4 chapters.

Ulysses is 18 episodes some of which are short and others particularly long and involved (Oxen of the Sun is relatively long and extraordinarily difficult while the Circe episode is over 150 pages alone)

In terms of poetry (if we break longer poems into sections), the books of Paradise Lost are individually long while the Cantos of Dantes Inferno are relatively short.

Like I said, it doesn't matter. For every The Sound and the Fury, there is an As I Lay Dying with short, 2 page chapters.

[PabloQ]

Short chapters obviously improve the pace at which a story moves along. The story moves more briskly. I don't mind long chapters as long as there is reasonable stopping points within it (white space, etc.) To me, longer chapters indicate more complexity, more descriptive language, more depth in portrayal of the characters. I don't feel shorter chapters necessarily build better stories or characters. Overall, I don't think chapter length matters.

[kiki1982]

I rather have short chapters because the end of one is an easy place to stop and you can think about stopping your reading before the next chapter or that you will still make it to the end. Nevertheless, that a book has long chapters wouldn't repell me.

I like Dumas for his style and he has mainly short chapters, but then I like Saramago who has loooong chapters. When I read long ones I usually read until the end of a paragraph...

[JBI]

Chapters don't do anything for me, unless it's As I lay Dying. Really, I don't read chapters at a time, I read far more in one sitting, so the division isn't very important. Usually I'll read 100 pages minimum of a serious read, unless I am on the subway, where I only read poetry.

[Lioness_Heart]

I generally prefer short chapters, although it depends on the style of the book and mood I'm in. If the book moves along incredibly fast, short chapters are sometimes needed to give a bit of breathing space, so it doesn't become overwhelming, but on the other hand, if the chapters are too short, the flow can be lost and it can seem too rushed. Short chapters are also good in thought-provoking books as they give you the chance to stop and reflect, or where there are lots of characters, as each chapter often has a slightly different angle, so keeps all of the characters at the forefront of the reader's mind.

On the other hand, long chapters can be good if you plan to sit down for a long time with a book, and really immerse yourself... although if there's not much variation in tone or content (I mean, if the author is a waffler, like me), this can get quite tedious.

So... on the whole, I prefer short.

[papayahed]

I never really paid attention.

[Annamariah]

Not too short, but not too long either - medium length, anyone?

[Epistemophile]

if the book is interesting the length of the chapters doesn't matter. otherwise, i prefer short chapters.

[book_jones]

Wow, I'm surprised about how unanimous this has been. I figured most people would like long chapters better. I'm not sure why I thought this. I remember reading Ceremony by Leslie Marmon Silko which has no chapter breaks. I thought it was kinda cool but never knew when to stop reading. That made it somewhat difficult for my teacher as well. Silko claims that she just forgot to put them in. It was interesting.

[Dezminoo00]

Short chapters for sure, seems at times you accomplish more when the chapters are shorter.

[togre]

If the style and content are of a high quality, I prefer long chapters. Naturally if your are slogging through something that causes you to nod off every 3 minutes, you need paragraph size chapters, but a gripping story or style grabs you and holds you. It is good thing when you look at the clock and realize it's 3 am, right? And I prefer stories that are woven tightly enough that you can't find an easy place to stop every 10 or 15 pages. The imagination is a great thing, but if there is a break that skips a day or week or month every 5 pages, who's really writing the story?

[The Comedian]

Here's another vote for short chapters: I don't have long periods of time to read, so short chapters help me keep my reading life better organized.