I have been wondering why it is that authors who write series of books seem to increase the length of the story with each volume. This definitely is not across the board, but two example that I am thinking of are the Jack Ryan series by Tom Clancy and the Harry Potter books.

Harry Potter: Book 1, 309 pages; Book 2, 341 pages; Book 3, 435 pages.

Jack Ryan: HfRO, 387 pages; PG, 540; CotK, 543; CaPD, ??; SoAF, 914 (paperback); WR, 639; DoH, 766; EO 1358 (paperback); R6, 740.

I read that the newest Harry Potter if around 750 pages long! It is hard for me to believe that the fourth book in the series will be longer than the first two combined. Tom Clancy's longest book, Executive Orders, was also his worst (this is my OPINION, of course). I felt that he just wrote for the sake of writing, throwing in a lot of side plots, and then, wrapped everything up WAY too quickly with little to no suspense. His latest, and the one following EO, was shorter, tighter, and more interesting. I hope the next Harry Potter doesn't fall into this trap. I have no problems with a long book and an author shouldn't have to limit their work because of that, but taking a step back to look at whether the length is necessary or just redundant is a good thing.

So, has anyone else noticed a trend like this in other series? Is there a reason for this? Is this trend in other mediums of entertainment, such as film (James Cameron) music?

Ferr"is Bueller stayed home s"ick