I agree with avoiding the Carpathians series. It's the most repetitive series ever. It's in the prose(there are other ways to describe a women's body than comparing it with various soft fabrics), the sex(Ms. Feehan doesn't seem the realize there are other positions than missionary), the plot(compassionate chick meets Carpathain male, doesn't like him, but is helpless in her attraction, ends up loving him anyways, and there's always the vampire trying to keep them apart). I hate my book addiction for making me buy most of the books in the series.

Another series i did not like is the Knights of the Darkness series by D.N. Simmons. I didn't like the female lead, and didn't find much originality in the mythology. The plot lines in the books also failed to keep me interested.

Jess, thanks for mentioning the Goastwalker series. Yes, I LOVE that one. Which is funny since basically I'd forgotten that I loved that series.

As someone said before, the Carpathians is an older series. Could be that today's tastes have changed too drastically. I did indeed get the impression that the Ghostwalkers series was much more in line with modern sensibilities. I might give that one a try!

I've read 3 of Feehan's series.

I like the Carpathian books I've read so far, but I've been reading them VERY slowly over time, compared with how I normally devour books. I figured I'd get sick of them if I read them too close together.

I've also read her Drake series. It's about 7 sisters who have powers, and each book is about a different sister. the descriptions in this one are a little flowery, but not quite as intense as the Carpathians. I don't think people would like it that much if they didn't like Carpathians, but you can definitely give it a try.

Now the Ghostwalkers series I LOVE. It's about this team of men, and women, who have been experimented on, and have abilities that are not normal. Each person manifests differently. This series is definitely modern, and suspenseful. The women are NOT weak at all lol. They kick ass and take names while doing it lol.

The only issue... in my opinion, and others I've spoken with, HATE the first book. But the rest get so much better. So if you try it out, and dislike the first one, at least try the second before you give up. Because they definitely get better. :) and the Norton boys are worth it.

A lot of people seem to like this Ghostwalkers (I don't know if that is right or not) series of Feehan's. I think it's got more suspense than the Carpathians.

Allison wrote: "I honestly can't imagine how this series has managed to go on as long as it has."

It's not as popular as it once was and she does write a lot slower now. She also has a couple other series going as well although I just haven't gotten around to reading them. I think she has some really hardcore fans still and they're the ones keeping things going.

I'm wondering if the newer books are any better? Towards the end there she was getting away from the "dominant males and fearful women," but I don't know if she continued on that way.

I don't know, I haven't all together given up Feehan's stuff. I just don't think I could recommend them to anyone.

And Starling, I agree, there really wasn't much paranormal romance back then so you took what you could get.

Michelle M. wrote: "I think perhaps if you're a fan of true romance novels (where it's all about my love, my darling, oh your heaving bosoms tempt my very soul and now I must molest you), then you'll like it. I am not..."

I haven't read a straight true romance novel in years. They got really old to me really fast. I tried a Feehan book once..........got about a third of the way through it and decided I'd had more than enough. Crappy writing, crappy story!

I guess it fits my own personal stereotype of the classic romance novel with brooding and ravishing going on. But you're right Kathy, it's more about the quality of writing and its ability to grab you. With so many othe fab series, it's easy to move on to something else!

Um...no. It's not the PNR versus straight romance stuff. I'm a romance reader and have finally decided to give up on Feehan. I've tried three different series now and they're okay I guess, but I have too many books I want to read to spend my time on mediocre stuff.

I think perhaps if you're a fan of true romance novels (where it's all about my love, my darling, oh your heaving bosoms tempt my very soul and now I must molest you), then you'll like it. I am not a romance reader. I was sneakily pulled in by the paranormal aspect and stuck around because, hey, who doesn't like hot men?

Feehan is about dominant males and fearful women...and just happens to involve a bunch of people who MIGHT turn into vampires if they don't get it on (hence the focus on velvet hootinanny).

They're still popular, so by all means, give em a go. To each their own. But if the the action and UF plots of today's PNR are what cements your interest in the genre, it's probably not for you.

Michelle M. wrote: "For THAT book, I thought I would poke my eyes out every time I had to read the words "velvet" and "molten."

I laughed when I read your words. That was definitely one of my chief complaints, the over use of certain words and phrases (ie awful editing). I honestly can't imagine how this series has managed to go on as long as it has.

Shannon I think that the Carpathian series has lasted as long as it has BECAUSE it is a decade or more old. There weren't as many books in the genre. In fact it wasn't actually a genre even if you combined what we now think of as paranormal romance and urban fantasy. And what they were calling urban fantasy ten or fifteen years ago was very different from what we are calling urban fantasy now.

Like you, once I had something else to read, I stopped reading Feehan.

Michelle M. wrote: "For THAT book, I thought I would poke my eyes out every time I had to read the words "velvet" and "molten."

You crack me up.

I read the majority of the Carpathian series close to 10 years ago so I have to admit I don't remember much. I was younger then and not reading much romance so maybe I just didn't care, but I liked them enough to read the first 13 of them. I do remember the repetitiveness though and also that I really didn't love any of them until the 10th book. But even that I can barely remember.

But after finding much better series I think I kind of gave up on the Carpathians. I own the next 4 books in the series but I haven't gotten around to reading them yet.

I think if you were already reading a lot of the great series that are out now you wouldn't touch Feehan's stuff with a 10-foot pole. I can't even imagine reading the Carpathians after you've finished The Black Dagger Brotherhood's books, as an example. It'd be ridiculous.

But, even though I doubt I'll ever reread the Carpathian books, I honestly don't regret reading them. They weren't all that bad. At the time.

You guys have me worried now. I have several of the Feehan books sitting here in my TBR pile. Hope I haven't wasted my money.

Ugghhhhh, don't get me started on Feehan.

I tried three of them, only because a friend insisted and insisted. The first book bored me to tears. But I thought hey, maybe it's BECAUSE it's a first book--perhaps with the next one, she'll take off...

The second was ever so slightly less insipid, but still overwrought and repetitive. I was displeased.

Then the same friend said, "Ohhhh, but you must read THIS one, it's my favorite and it's far darker and since you like gritty..."

For THAT book, I thought I would poke my eyes out every time I had to read the words "velvet" and "molten." Lots of exposition. No actual action.

lucky you....I ended up borrowing the one i read from someone....so lucky for me too!

I shorted my response, sorry but you got the gist of it hehe. I admit to struggling through those four and only because I had bought the whole series before reading any reviews prior to purchase (lesson learned there). Thank goodness they let me return the rest for a full refund.

Allison wrote: "The entire Carpathian/Dark "series" (and I used the term loosely) by Christine Feehan. I admit to only making it through the 4th book (of 20?) and reading many reviews of the remaining books; howev..."

I only made it through about three fourths of the first book in that series, and was like, WTF?!?!?!....it was also my first glimpse at PNR some 5 years ago, and again, I was like, WTF?!?!...I thought it was too cheesy a genre and stayed away from most stuff like that for a while.
now I love PNR, but I'm picky and choosy, and still prefer my UF over it.

The entire Carpathian/Dark "series" (and I used the term loosely) by Christine Feehan. I admit to only making it through the 4th book (of 20?) and reading many reviews of the remaining books; however, the overwhelming "craptacularness" of those 4 appear to have been a dominating thread throughout the rest. The characters are flat, dialogue is repetitive, horrible editing, etc.

lol

I did finish, and thought maybe it was getting better at one point, but nope...not at all.

I couldn't finish Minion, I only read a couple chapters before giving up. I couldn't get into the writing style at all.

I've only read one book by Leigh and it was so-so. It was the first book in her Nauti boys series. I'm not opposed to reading her, but she always gets pushed down my list for other books I KNOW will be good.

An author that I've had a really hard time with is Lora Leigh. I really didn't like her first book in the breeds series, but some people convinced me to try some of the other books. And some of them have been pretty good, but others are horrible! It's really hit and miss with her. It was like the series was finally starting to get better and then I didn't like it again. There are a bunch more books by her out, but I think I've just given up! Too many great books to read without trying to muddle my way through a bad one.

Yeah I think I got about 3 books into the Banks series before I gave up. I was interested in the two main characters and whether or not they'd end up together. Obviously I wasn't THAT interested because i can't even remember their names lol..

Schnaucl wrote: "Books to avoid:

Yasmine Galenorn's Witching/Sisters of the Moon series. I wish I liked it more, she's a local author and friends with Kat Richardson, but the first book was not well written and her characters spoke like they were stuck in the 80's. I use the occasional "dude" and very rarely a "chill" and they were terrifically overused in that book."

I agree with this as well. I don't remember where I stopped but I gave up on this pretty early.

I also thought Minion was terrible. Her writing is too urban for me and I think that her books only appeal to a select niche which I'm not in. And I don't like the way the characters speak.

I think this review from Kel, (it's the first one on the page for the book,) sums up my feelings as well:

"I was excited to see a vampire book written by and about an African American woman, but once I started reading I was totally let down and couldn't finish the book. There's way too much bad dialogue and "hip hop" talk for my tastes. I don't know anyone (of any color) who speaks like the author made her characters speak and if I did I'd probably have to walk away from them just like I walked away from the book. Real disappointing."

Jess wrote: "Looloo wrote: "Stav wrote: "I really really really did not like Minion.... I had such high expectations and they truly were not fulfilled, not even close."

I feel the same way. I've..."

Make that another who doesn't like Banks' books, too!

Looloo wrote: "Stav wrote: "I really really really did not like Minion.... I had such high expectations and they truly were not fulfilled, not even close."

I feel the same way. I've read about 190..."

I also don't like LA Banks!! I've always thought I was the only one! I don't like her writing style at all.

Stav wrote: "I really really really did not like Minion.... I had such high expectations and they truly were not fulfilled, not even close."

I feel the same way. I've read about 190 books this year and Minion was the one and only book I hated. It has turned me off of all Banks books.

I really really really did not like Minion.... I had such high expectations and they truly were not fulfilled, not even close.

Amy wrote: Is the HOLIDAYS ARE HELL story about Pierce?

Yep. It's about their first meeting.

Kasia, If you think A great and terrible beauty is bad try reading the second one, Rebel Angels! I found the first one okay, but the second one drove me insane! The book was way too long and nothing ever happened inbetween the good bits to make it worth reading!

Schnaucl wrote: "Kim Harrisonhad background stories for Ivy (Hotter Than Hell), the new character that shows up in the most recent book (Holidays are Hell), and I thought there was something about Kisten but I may be wrong about that. She also gives you the complete background of Madison Avery in Prom Dates from Hell and I suspect if you haven't read that first you'd be totally lost trying to read Once Dead Twice Shy without that background. She does cover it in the novel, but she spreads the information out over a large period of time."

Thank you for this. Is the HOLIDAYS ARE HELL story about Pierce? I've been wondering if there was a story about him since reading WHITE WITCH, BLACK CURSE.

Books to avoid:

Yasmine Galenorn's Witching/Sisters of the Moon series. I wish I liked it more, she's a local author and friends with Kat Richardson, but the first book was not well written and her characters spoke like they were stuck in the 80's. I use the occasional "dude" and very rarely a "chill" and they were terrifically overused in that book.

The other book I would avoid like the plague is Anton Strout's Dead to Me. This is another book where the language was problematic, at least for me. Internet slang was sprinkled in among the prose, ?! was used more than once as acceptable punctuation, etc.

Nearly every character in the book acted more like they were children than adults. The female protagonist had a diary in which she wrote entries to "dearest diary" and ended sentences with multiple exclamation points. On the plus side, at least it wasn't limited to just the female characters. The male protagonist was equally juvenile in his own way.

The world building was very poor. He couldn't decide if the world knew about the supernatural or not.

The book did have some good jokes, unfortunately, it was like SNL skit, they were used over and over again and so stopped being funny.

I read a lot of anthologies, and I agree Blood Lite was not very good. On the other hand, I loved Many Bloody Returns.

One thing I've noticed is that urban fantasy authors often publish short stories in anthologies that either give important background information on a primary or secondary character or fill in the blanks between stories.

Jim Butcher is particularly guilty of filling in the blanks between novels with short stories in an anthology. There's been at least one instance of a fairly major event being addressed in a short story that only got a 1 line throwaway in his next novel. I highly recommend seeking out all his Dresden stories in anthologies if you read the series.

Kim Harrisonhad background stories for Ivy (Hotter Than Hell), the new character that shows up in the most recent book (Holidays are Hell), and I thought there was something about Kisten but I may be wrong about that. She also gives you the complete background of Madison Avery in Prom Dates from Hell and I suspect if you haven't read that first you'd be totally lost trying to read Once Dead Twice Shy without that background. She does cover it in the novel, but she spreads the information out over a large period of time.

Vicki Pettersson had a great short story about Jo's mom in Holidays are Hell.

Those anthologies that are really four novellas are usually worth taking a look at if you follow even one of the series. As for Butcher, just track down everything, even if you only get it from the library for that one story.

Starling wrote: "I DO NOT understand the whole shoe thing.

Maybe the fact that I couldn't wear shoes with heels that high at 16 might have something to do with it. Maybe the fact that I couldn't wear shoes with a..."

I LOVE shoes, and even though I'd kill myself trying to walk in them I still love to look at those gorgeous high heels! I used to wear them back in the day. The last time I wore a pair was for a Christmas party in 2001. They had 4" heels and I just kept waiting to take a tumble all night. I didn't, but I haven't worn a pair since. Don't like that precarious feeling anymore!

I DO NOT understand the whole shoe thing.

Maybe the fact that I couldn't wear shoes with heels that high at 16 might have something to do with it. Maybe the fact that I couldn't wear shoes with any heel at all by the time I was 35 also has something to do with it. I do understand pretty clothes and color, but shoes??? <grin>

I actually liked Sex and the City, I just hated Carrie partly because of the expensive shoe fetish. Maybe that's why I disliked Betsy.

Amy, I get it. Happened to me with Charlaine Harris recently when I reread the whole series and could not figure out how we got from point A to point B. Where did that character come from? It turned out I had the anthology and had read that story but the second time around when I didn't read that story I was going nuts!

I like Betsy, but I have to make sure I read her when I'm in the mood. And I don't like any of the other series the author is writing. In first person they all sound like Betsy. Betsy does have redeeming qualities. And she is much smarter than she looks or acts most of the time.

I watched just enough Sex and the City to know that at various times all of the main characters also had redeeming qualities. If nothing else, they always stood up for one another. I'll admit that if you just saw a few of the programs you wouldn't think so, however.

Amy wrote: "After re-arranging my shelves to accommodate some new books I found another one - UNDEAD AND UNDWED by Mary-Janice Davidson. Betsy is incredibly vain and irritating, she was like a shallower Carrie..."

I used to really like the Betsy, Queen of the Vampires books. The last few have been so stupid and such a waste of time, I don't know if I'll bother anymore. Speaking of Carrie and Sex & the City, I watched that show exactly twice at a friend's house and cannot think of another I've detested quite as much in the last 20 years! Not a single redeeming character among the bunch...I could go on for hours on the horrors of S&TC, but I'll shut up for now!

Hunting for stories is incredibly irritating. One reason I like Charlaine Harris is that apart from one short, her stories are of the same universe, but not vital in understanding the series. The same goes for most of Kenyon's Dark Hunter shorts.

I actually like MJD's Undead series. I found most of the books laugh out loud funny. She's a ludicrous character indeed, but that's what makes me love her.

After re-arranging my shelves to accommodate some new books I found another one - UNDEAD AND UNDWED by Mary-Janice Davidson. Betsy is incredibly vain and irritating, she was like a shallower Carrie from Sex and the City and who in their right mind would want her for their queen?

Starling, what I meant with the anthologies is that authors are making them 'required reading to understand the next novel' as you say which is what ticks me off about them. I recently read a series book where a character had come out of nowhere but was known to the other characters, I had no idea (until I read some reviews) there had been a novella in an anthology out there that had introduced this character so I was a bit confused as to what was going on. That has happened a couple of times to me now and I'm finding it rather annoying.

Amy, I didn't like GREYWALKER either, tho I really like the author as a person. Just didn't like her book even a little.

As for the anthologies, I completely agree about BLOOD LITE. There was very little to redeem that purchase. OTOH, I liked everything in MEAN STREETS except Kat Richardson's story and even got introduced to an author & series I really like. Most of the ones I've bought have had enough good stuff in them to make the purchase worthwhile, but I did thing STRANGE BREW was pretty weak, too.

I think the anthologies are intended to be samples. You take the one BIG NAME author and add in all of the little ones. It is interesting when one of the little ones turns out to be a BIG NAME themselves a year or two later.

I don't mind unless the stories are required reading to understand the next novel in the series. Some of the time I find a new author I really like in the back end of the book. And at least once or twice I liked all of the stories.

I bought THE HISTORIAN based on a newspaper review and I sorely regretted it. The descriptions of scenery were long and even though it was supposed to be about Dracula, there was very little face-time with him. I skipped about 20 pages in the middle and never felt like I had missed anything. The ending was disappointingly predictable. It felt like the longest book I had ever read.

KITTY AND THE MIDNIGHT HOUR was a little different but the character Cormac intrigued me because he reminded me of Edward in the ANITA BLAKE series. I kept reading and was most definitely hooked when I read KITTY TAKES A HOLIDAY.

As for the ANITA books, I really enjoyed parts of NARCISSUS IN CHAINS and INCUBUS DREAMS but I stopped buying after the terrible DANSE MACABRE and THE HARLEQUIN due to lack of plot.

I really disliked GREYWALKER by Kat Richardson, it just felt very boring to me so I didn't bother with the next one.

TOUCH OF EVIL by C T Adams & Cathy Clamp, supposedly about vampires was just odd, it sort of reminded me of movies like Alien and The Thing.

DANTE'S GIRL by Natasha Rhodes was all over the place in regard to the plot. It wasn't very well thought out.

Sparkle Hayter's NAKED BRUNCH, I'm not entirely sure why I didn't like it and it's been a long time since I've read it so maybe I need to read it again.

WORKNG FOR THE DEVIL by Lilith Saintcrow left me feeling cheated. It took me a while to get into it and when I finally did it ended unsatisfactorily. I don't mind an unhappy ending if the story has been interesting enough but to kill off a main character in book one of a series seemed a little much.

What about the anthologies which have become increasingly popular amongst authors recently? I'm getting a little tired of having to buy these things just to read one story by an author I like because it ties in with a series they are writing which may or may not be good (the story not the series) and then having lots of other stories to read which are mostly on the bad side. One of the worst I've bought has to be BLOOD LITE. I bought it for the Kelley Armstrong and Charlaine Harris stories but there were too many contributing authors and too few pages per story. Saying that there are some rare gems, DATES FROM HELL and ON THE PROWL were pretty good.

Oh, THE CARPETBAGGERS! My entire 7th grade class was trying to get a copy of A STONE FOR DANNY FISHER by the same author. I was 11 that year, but most of them were 12.

<grin>

I honestly do not know how many of them succeeded. I know I didn't get ahold of a copy until I was in high school.

Starling wrote: " I really, really wanted an excuse to say this.

My mother, if she was still alive, would have been 100 this year. Back in the mid-60s I discovered she was reading a series of historical romances ..."

I would read ANYTHING as a kid. My mom & my dad's youngest sister taught me to read by the time I was 4. My mom was a reader, but she doesn't read much anymore. She says it makes her sleepy. Anyway, she used to hide some of the books she was reading from me because she knew I was always looking for something to read and she didn't want me getting hold of things that would require her answering lots of questions that she was never comfortable answering. I remember finding FANNY HILL once and just being totally fascinated by it at about the age of 8 and then finding THE CARPETBAGGERS at about 9 or 10 and asking her what a "phallic symbol" was. She never did try to censor anything I read, tho. I bought a copy of THE HAPPY HOOKER when it came out and I was in high school. I hid it under my mattress. She of course found it when she changed the sheets on my bed and left it on my dresser. She told me I didn't have to hide what I was reading. Hmmmm, maybe Anita Blake wouldn't give her a stroke after all!

I got my niece started with the Sookie Stackhouse and Betsy Queen of the Vampires books when she was about 13. She's 18 now and is as big a vampire junkie as I am! We have a great time talking books (I read TWILIGHT before she did), and she comes over on Sunday night to watch True Blood.

<grin> I really, really wanted an excuse to say this. <grin>

My mother, if she was still alive, would have been 100 this year. Back in the mid-60s I discovered she was reading a series of historical romances that were thought to be "pure porn" in the original French. The English translations weren't as raunchy as the French ones were. I did read one of them in English myself, and can't remember if they were as explicit as the Anita books, but I think they may have been.

What is even more scary is that my daughter and I have very similar tastes in books. Don't know if she has read the Anita or Merry series, but the two of us had a real interesting conversation a couple of years ago about what books to share with the daughter of her friend who is only just now 13. I went out and found her a G rated Anime book. And she is really into vampires. And no, we are not sharing Anita at this point in time.

However, I still remember the look of shock and disbelief on the face of a teacher when I was 14 because of what I was reading. I had outgrown YA by that time.

Starling wrote: "Melodie, I'm not quite old enough to be your mother. I'm only 68.

As for the underaged boy, he isn't underaged in the state where it all takes place. AND you never see a sex scene with him in it..."

My mom is 73 and she'd have a stroke if she read an Anita Blake book!! LOL

Yeah, I had the time frame discussion in the other group when we were discussing why no one grabbed Richard for an intervention. It's so hard to keep the book time span in perspective though when from the reader's standpoint, the guilt just keeps on lingering! I guess I want her to roll with the punches more.

Even after a month or two, she should have been coping better, as far as I'm concerned. But that's me. I don't whinge over crap I'm stuck with handling, so I've little patience for it!