SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Members' Chat
>
Series: When to Start and When to Stop
I don't continue a series if I don't like the first book. I'm usually willing to start a series before it's finished but part of that is that I so rarely continue them. I used to hate reading a series without them all being out because I would reread the prior ones and it was very time consuming.
Uhh, it depends?Outside sci-fi and fantasy endlessly long series that you can drop in and out of or pick up out of order are a lot more common, but even in SF, there's series that are essentially like this.
I've noticed that where a series was originally intended to be say, a trilogy, but got expanded into a universe because it turned out to be a cash cow I often wish I'd stopped after the original planned trilogy. The rest feel like those poor quality direct-to-video sequels to popular movies featuring none of the original cast. They'll fill a Sunday afternoon, I guess, but I just don't care anymore.
There's a few series where I have figured out from reading the reviews to know I'll never finish. Not because they're not good, but because I'm quite satisfied with where things ended right now and prefer to not ruin my fondness for them. One of those I stopped at book 10 of 12, because after that the MC turns from kickass to damsel in distress. Boring. I'd rather remember her as the badass she was up until then. Another I stopped on book 3 of 4, and one I even stopped after the very first book because I think it's so utterly good and self-contained that I may never read the other two of it's trilogy, even though the plot does follow the first albeit about a different character, and even though I am planning to gobble up everything else that author has written because I love the writing!
And then there's the ones I've been burned on (and I am not even a GoT fan!), that never got finished, or had the publisher drop them.
I think my answer is: I don't necessarily need for the series to be complete, but I need some sense that something, somewhere in the plot, is actually getting wrapped up and it isn't just an endless soap opera from an author who never figured out how to write outside that one universe.
As for continuing a series I don't love the first book of: My carefully curated friends/followers list solves that for me. There are people on there who I trust almost completely when they tell me "It gets better, stick with it." whereas I don't trust the same sentiment from the general community reviews at all. If I don't see those reviews up top of the GR page telling me it's worth it, I have no compunction dropping it.
One consideration (of several) for me is, if the earlier books aren't either 1. memorable or 2. worth the time to reread, then why am I even bothering to pick up the latest?
I generally don't read series. I did read Asimov's Foundation series, and I'll also read books within a series that are stand-alone books, like most Lee Child novels. If I read a book that ends with a cliffhanger, I'll give it a one-star review unless it is very compelling, a rarity in a series. For my own part, I don't write series books, but I'm currently working on a sequel to my second novel. I guess that makes it a series of a sort, but both will be stand-alone or I won't publish it.
Mod
I think my answer is: I don't necessarily need for the series to be complete, but I need some sense that something, somewhere in the plot, is actually getting wrapped up and it isn't just an endless soap opera from an author who never figured out how to write outside that one universe.
As for continuing a series I don't love the first book of: My carefully curated friends/followers list solves that for me. There are people on there who I trust almost completely when they tell me "It gets better, stick with it." whereas I don't trust the same sentiment from the general community reviews at all. If I don't see those reviews up top of the GR page telling me it's worth it, I have no compunction dropping it. "
I like that idea. That the book has to answer something in order to pick it up. That feels like a good test or at least a valuable consideration.
I'm still building my 100% trust people. I feel like I'm on some sort of quest. "Do YOU read things the way I read them?" I am excited for the day I have a group of people I can gauge off of!
Cheryl wrote: "One consideration (of several) for me is, if the earlier books aren't either 1. memorable or 2. worth the time to reread, then why am I even bothering to pick up the latest?"
God I wish I had your memory! I love this test, and am jealous because the answer for me is that I have to go back and read reviews of just about every book I've ever read to remember what I thought of it. It's like books on the level of Harry Potter that I love, books I hate, and then everything else is a giant blur!
I should probably look into that...
Allison wrote: "It's like books on the level of Harry Potter that I love, books I hate, and then everything else is a giant blur!"
Oh gosh, I am like this exactly. It's the main reason I actually started writing reviews (and using GR, since I'd forget where I saved them if I kept them on my PC!) Although I'm pretty slack about reviewing later books in series, I try to always write a pretty thorough one for book one and maybe book two if it's a longer series.
So I actually read my own reviews when I'm considering picking up the next one, and either it brings the book right back, or I still can't remember it, in which case I guess it's a fail and I probably won't pick up the next :)
Mod
"
Oh gosh, I am like this exactly. It's the main reason I actually..."
I can't tell you what a relief that is! I also started using GR to help me remember. A couple of months ago I reread the same crappy book I'd hated the first time because I couldn't remember it.
It was just as horrid as I didn't remember it to be.
Mod
That's interesting, what is it you dislike about series, may I ask?
These are fun questions… here’s a ridiculously long answer. :)I’m definitely one who tries not to start a series until it’s been complete. I would add that my definition of “complete” is probably more narrow than most because I consider something to be incomplete even if it's a complete subseries within a larger series (Malazan, for example), or even if the individual books in the series stand alone.
My main reason for this is just that I want to maximize my enjoyment of books while I read them. For me, that means being able to enjoy all the little nuances and connections between the books, and maintaining my emotional investment in the characters and the events from book to book. My interest cools if too much time passes between books, so that I might not read the next book with as much enthusiasm as I would have if I’d read it immediately after the previous book. Likewise, all the little details start to fade and I get frustrated because I feel like I'm missing out on stuff, even if I'm following the larger story.
Re-reading would be one solution, but that would take away from other new-to-me books I could be reading instead. My reading time is limited. If I read each book in a trilogy as it’s published, and if I felt the need to re-read the previous books before each new book, I would end up reading 6 books instead of 3. (Book 1, then Books 1 & 2, then Books 1, 2, & 3.) I’d rather just read other stuff while I wait, then read all 3 at once.
The reason it’s so easy for me to stick to this is because there are so many books I want to read! There are lots and lots of standalone books and apparently-complete series out there that I want to read just as much as I want to read some of the incomplete stuff. If I have two series I want to read, and one is complete and the other is not, I’m not the slightest bit tempted to choose the incomplete series over the complete series. In the unlikely event that I run out of complete series and standalone books on my to-be-read list, then I’ll start on the complete subseries that are part of a larger incomplete series, and series where the individual books stand alone.
Of course, it's impossible to always get it right. Sometimes I think a series is complete and then later discover more books are planned. For example, I read all 7 of the First Law books and then found out more are planned. I read the Red Rising trilogy, then learned another is planned. It happens, and I don't get too annoyed by it. Especially if I enjoyed it and would like to read more books, like with First Law.
As far as giving up on a series, I usually do that pretty easily, especially if I don’t care for the first book. Since I do tend to read a series all at once, I have to enjoy it enough that I actually want to live in that world for an extended period of time. And, if I don’t like it that much, then why would I want to read it anyway even if I spread it out?
I usually don’t have too much trouble with spoilers. If I know it’s something I’m going to want to read eventually, then I skim or skip any reviews and posts about those books. I read Harry Potter for the first time a little over a year ago, and I hadn’t had a single plot element spoiled for me beforehand. I also follow quite a few people between various sites, and I read most of the reviews my friends post if they’re in a genre I’m at all interested in. This means I see enough reviews each day that the details blur together and I usually don’t remember many specifics. By the time I actually read a book, which tends to be way after everybody else, I likely won’t even remember why I wanted to read it, much less what anybody said about it except possibly a general impression that people I know liked it, or that it was controversial, or whatever.
The discussion here is very similar to that in this thread - https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Mod
YouKneeK--
I think that's a really good way actually of avoiding the hype! I can totally see the benefit of waiting a decade to finish a series that everyone raves about. It would help, as you say, keep it "new." I'm hugely anti-hype. If I don't see a movie opening weekend or years later, I'll probably be angry at it for not being The Best Thing Since Wi-Fi even if I would have liked it if I'd never heard of it before.
It is just an unfortunate fact that it seems all of the people in my life fixate on books and don't accept "Please don't hype this for me, I want to like it" as a real threat. Maybe I'll buy the book and start ripping out pages every time they tell me to read it. >;-)
Allison wrote: "I'm hugely anti-hype. If I don't see a movie opening weekend or years later, I'll probably be angry at it for not being The Best Thing Since Wi-Fi even if I would have liked it if I'd never heard of it before."LOL, for some reason I don’t have much trouble with hype. I think because it varies so much whether I’ll like what other people did or not. The same is true even if it’s hugely popular. I don’t always hate the things that were popular, but I don’t always like them either, so I go into them without many expectations.
I’m more likely to suffer disappointment if I read a book by a favorite author and it isn’t as good as I’d hoped. I guess I’m most susceptible to my own hype, but tend not to be much influenced by other people’s. :)
Mod
"Dear Santa, this year I would like a memory, self-reliance, and as much patience as you can fit on the sleigh please."
Just had a thought: for how many of you does the same principle carry over into film/TV? Why or why not?Would any of you who hold off reading book series hold off watching e.g. the MCU until it's complete (will it ever be)?
I'm a heretic. Hype means that I'm unlikely to want to even check out a series. I'm an outlier in my taste. The more people like it, the less I'm likely to be the least bit interested. I'd need to be given a good reason to check out a series. Is it original by the standards of someone who's been reading SF and F since the 1970's? Alternatively, does it deal with my favorite themes or really strange quirky characters? If not, I probably won't even start it. If I have gotten interested in a series, there is no gaurantee that I will read every single volume in the series. I have to be convinced that it's going to develop the universe further or that a strange quirky character will become even more interesting during the course of the book's events. If not, I'll skip that novel or even an entire sub-series. If the character that drew me to the series in the first place disappears from it, I may not bother to read the rest unless I find out from reviews that a new strange and quirky character has been introduced.
Allison wrote: "Ken--
That's interesting, what is it you dislike about series, may I ask?"
Reading a series is to me a lot like watching a TV show with an episode every week. Often the characters don't change, or change very little, and they never seem to learn anything new. I realize that not all book series are like this, but usually it's just too much trouble to find one that isn't. Also, as I mentioned, too many authors use the cliffhanger device to get you to buy the next book to find out what happens. Lee Child did this at least once, and although the book was fine up to that point, it was far from satisfying at the end, even though the sequel was already available. Some series may be very good, and I might enjoy them, but stand-alone is my preference.
That's interesting, what is it you dislike about series, may I ask?"
Reading a series is to me a lot like watching a TV show with an episode every week. Often the characters don't change, or change very little, and they never seem to learn anything new. I realize that not all book series are like this, but usually it's just too much trouble to find one that isn't. Also, as I mentioned, too many authors use the cliffhanger device to get you to buy the next book to find out what happens. Lee Child did this at least once, and although the book was fine up to that point, it was far from satisfying at the end, even though the sequel was already available. Some series may be very good, and I might enjoy them, but stand-alone is my preference.
Ben wrote: "Just had a thought: for how many of you does the same principle carry over into film/TV? Why or why not?..."I rarely start new TV series but my usual pattern is to buy the DVDs, binge watch, and then wait until the next year. I don't read series books back to back but I'll quickly lose interest if I have to wait a year to read the sequel, no matter how much I love the series, I lose interest and will only last a year or so.
I usually like a series to be finished before I start it. However, if 2 or more books are out, I look to see how long the publishing time between the books is. If it is years, I hold off.
Mod
I definitely try to see big screen movies on the big screen, too.
High five Shomeret, for us anti-establishment readers! I'm gonna go list all my books alphabetically by title instead of author and genre! Really get wild ;-)
Ken thanks! I can totally see that. It seems to me a lot of work though to find standalone books! The conventional book wisdom of the day seems to be to franchise. Do you find difficulty finding books that you're okay with?
Shomeret wrote: "Hype means that I'm unlikely to want to even check out a series. I'm an outlier in my taste. The more people like it, the less I'm likely to be the least bit interested. "I find I don't (generally) enjoy the hyped up books so much either, but I like to discuss books so I still try to read what's popular. It's one reason I persist with reading the classics - they are all overrated, but at least someone is likely to have read them.
I love series, but it is very hard to wait for the next book sometimes. I love seeing the characters develop, even if sometimes I want to strangle them, and I am often awed by the author's long ranging plan for a story. A really good series has little nuggets dropped throughout that you can go back and pick up on during a re-read.Having said that, I have actually given up on waiting for the final book of the Exiles series by Melanie Rawn. Don't think it'll ever be written.
Ryan wrote: "Shomeret wrote: "Hype means that I'm unlikely to want to even check out a series. I'm an outlier in my taste. The more people like it, the less I'm likely to be the least bit interested. "I find ..."
I know more than enough about Harry Potter from seeing comments about those books. Instead of classics, I read modern literary criticism about them which tend to be more interesting than most classics-- at least to me. ( I have read some classics that I love, but no Jane Austen. Shudder!) That way I'm familiar enough with them for discussions, if necessary.
Personally, I start a series if Book 1 looks interesting. I don't really care what anyone else thinks, unless what they think is "This is badly written".It doesn't matter whether the series is finished or not; if I like the look of it, I'm not going to wait five years for the author to finish.
If it doesn't work out (at any stage), I don't read any more. Life is too short, and there are too many books, for me to keep reading books I don't enjoy. Some series I've abandoned after one book (or one page!); others, I've ditched after five or six books.
Allison wrote: "Do you find difficulty finding books that you're okay with?..."
I don't watch series TV any more--it's been awhile. I also never go to the movies; I watch them all on a big-screen TV at home, either streamed off the internet, downloaded, or DVD/Blu-Ray.
I'm almost never able to find the kind of books I like, classic, epic, technologically based Science Fiction with good characterization, and realistic (as much as possible) situations and motivations--no zombies, aliens, werewolves, vampires, magic, gods, supermen, etc. I got into Science Fiction as an Arthur C. Clarke fan, and I loved Rendezvous with Rama
The scarcity of good new books of the type I like (or maybe I just haven't looked far enough) is why I started back writing after a 20-year hiatus (and after I retired). If nothing else, I can read my own stories. Okay, I'll admit it: I'm totally and utterly self-absorbed, self-centered, selfish, self-seeking, and self-serving. Did I say self-involved?
That said, in spite of the spate of Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons, I was a Star Trek fan from the beginning. I like some of the Star Wars movies, too. And yes, I know some of those were episodic TV shows and movie series, but I was younger then and could waste more time. And movies are different. My favorite Sci-Fi movie is the very well-done "The Day the Earth Stood Still," in glorious black and white from 1950. My favorite movie series is "Back To the Future."
I don't watch series TV any more--it's been awhile. I also never go to the movies; I watch them all on a big-screen TV at home, either streamed off the internet, downloaded, or DVD/Blu-Ray.
I'm almost never able to find the kind of books I like, classic, epic, technologically based Science Fiction with good characterization, and realistic (as much as possible) situations and motivations--no zombies, aliens, werewolves, vampires, magic, gods, supermen, etc. I got into Science Fiction as an Arthur C. Clarke fan, and I loved Rendezvous with Rama
The scarcity of good new books of the type I like (or maybe I just haven't looked far enough) is why I started back writing after a 20-year hiatus (and after I retired). If nothing else, I can read my own stories. Okay, I'll admit it: I'm totally and utterly self-absorbed, self-centered, selfish, self-seeking, and self-serving. Did I say self-involved?
That said, in spite of the spate of Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons, I was a Star Trek fan from the beginning. I like some of the Star Wars movies, too. And yes, I know some of those were episodic TV shows and movie series, but I was younger then and could waste more time. And movies are different. My favorite Sci-Fi movie is the very well-done "The Day the Earth Stood Still," in glorious black and white from 1950. My favorite movie series is "Back To the Future."
I decided I'm not gonna read series beyond book 1 anymore. Often series are front loaded and the rest is stretched and thin. I do not want to say all authors are milking a good idea, but many do. After finishing some series, I was left with the impression just one stand alone book would have done the job. I won't finish the Imperial Radch series even if Ancillary Justice was awesome. Same goes with the Jean le Flambeur series, even if The Quantum Thief was smart and fun.
Dune should have been only one novel and not a series. Herbert stretched it too much and I'm not gonna talk of the horrors his son and Kevin J. Anderson produced.
Marc-André wrote: "Dune should have been only one novel and not a series. Herbert stretched it too much and I'm not gonna talk of the horrors his son and Kevin J. Anderson produced..."
I read Dune many years ago, never saw the movie or read any of the sequels. I thought it was an "okay" book at the time, well written, but was never interested enough to go any further.
I read Dune many years ago, never saw the movie or read any of the sequels. I thought it was an "okay" book at the time, well written, but was never interested enough to go any further.
Mod
Yeah, there are a few series that I'm basically considering "done" now which is sad. I also then lose trust for those authors. If you expect me to follow you into another series while your first series languishes, you are sairly mistaken.
Haha Ken! Hey, we all have our hobbies and foibles. I hear you, though. I'm thinking about writing a book about a dude werewolf who doesn't use violence or sexual dominance to control people because I am just so tired of that, and it seems to be infiltrating just about all the genres I enjoy.
That's a bummer you have a hard time finding things to enjoy though! I guess it's good you found a solution :-)
Marc-André only ever the first book?? Even if there are reviews that say how amazing subsequent books are? That boggles my mind a bit. I've walked away from series that I know I'll never enjoy, but ones I really like? Not ever meeting Sirius Black or Lirael? Man. That'd be a world changer.
I do agree about the stretching though, and find it aggravating. I haven't read past Dune, and I'm not sure I ever will to be honest. That was a good amount of novelty and plot for one world.
I generally agree that only the first book of a series is worth reading. That's the one where everything is set up, where we meet the characters and learn about the world. The others tend to be just more adventures. But Harry Potter and Name of the Wind are not series in that sense, imo. Nor are many trilogies. Those are more like ginormous books broken up into (somewhat) more manageable units.
T. K. Elliott (Tiffany) wrote: "Personally, I start a series if Book 1 looks interesting. I don't really care what anyone else thinks, unless what they think is "This is badly written".It doesn't matter whether the series is fi..."
This is almost exactly how I feel. I will read just about any Book 1, finished or not. I will keep reading until I am not enjoying it and then drop the series, usually 1 book too late but that doesn't bug me.
If the author takes too long in between books, I can certainly loose interest and not pick it up again. GRR Martin and Rothfuss being current examples but I am sucked in with Dresden and even if it takes him 10 years to write the next one, I will probably pick it up.
I read series immediately I don't care if the first book just came out now and it's by some random indie author and has no guarantee of ever finishing or perhaps driving off the cliff into garbage land. If I don't like the first book I generally will stop right there with only 2 real exceptions.1) Overwhelmingly positive improvement in praise for future books in the series.
2) It picked up a good bit on the end and is showing straight good signs of getting great later.
But even with both of those it gets placed lower on my list.
If I really like a series and it has hit a rut, and is slowly churning for like 1-2 books then I will temporarily drop it and pay attention to see if the opinion is that it got better and if I need to read the middle books or just skip/read quick summary.
Hmm I was thinking about this last week or so. TL;DR I have a problem with wanting to finish series, so got more hesitant with starting them.
Because contrary to the people who answered here (how I envy you all) I must finish a series. It's ridiculous I know. It started when I was younger and my library had a very good sci-fi and fantasy section (at the time at least). Also I had a lot of time so rereading a series when I new book came out wasn't a problem for me.
As I got older that somehow transformed in owning multiple series that weren't finished and it drove me bonkers. So much so that I gave everything away that wasn't finished. Bought the ebooks and made a file to track the unfinished series.
Now I only collect the really nice hardcovers of series I really enjoy and reread when I need cheering up.
But I buy way too much ebooks of series which aren't finished but I started and now I have this itch in my brain when I don't finish them.
Thankfully I don't enjoy YA. That shit is out of control...
I used to gobble them up.Then I started getting burned: incomplete series, overly long publishing breaks...
the final indignity was King's 10 year hiatus while I was reading The Dark Tower series (at the time it was called Wizard and Glass). For those who've read it, I was on book 4. Yeah, bad place to be left hanging for TEN YEARS.
So. I try not to start series until they are complete now. I do fail in this often, of course, but I try. I also buy entire series before reading book 1. Also a very bad move. I doubt I'll ever finish the Black Company and I don't think I'll ever start that assassin trilogy.
I'm on book 5 with Kate Daniels - whom I love and I auto buy in hardcover so I have 4 books unread.
My behavior varies from series to series depending on the nature of the series and the behavior of the author.I began A Song of Ice and Fire without knowing what I was getting into. It's unfortunate that I have to wait for book 6, but honestly I'm glad to have read them.
I've delayed starting The Kingkiller Chronicles because in that case I do know what I'm getting into.
I don't mind at all starting a series if I know the book I'm reading can stand alone, or if the story arc it's part of is finished and stands on its own.
MrsJoseph wrote: "I doubt I'll ever finish the Black Company and I don't think I'll ever start that assassin trilogy."
This is actually a perfect example: I read the original Black Company trilogy and that's it. I know there are a bunch more books, but I don't feel any pressing need to read them because the specific story arc I read was concluded nicely.
I understand the appeal of not starting a series until it's finished if the series is one continuous story, but I also couldn't imagine doing that for "series" that are collections of mostly-standalone books in a single world.
An extreme example would be the Vorkosigan books by Lois McMaster Bujold, which is one of my all-time favorite series. That "series" consists of 16 novels and a number of shorter works written over a period of 31 years! that I would never in a million years have started if I thought I was signing up for all of them at once. Thankfully I did start, and my life is richer for having done so. Now she's semi-retired and it's there's a good chance that she won't write any more books in that universe, but she also hasn't ruled it out. Should somebody choose not to start reading them until she's dead, so they can know they're reading the whole thing at once? Certainly not.
The opposite extreme would be The Wheel of Time, which I started 20 years ago when I was a kid and stopped at book 5 or so. I probably would have been better off waiting until it was finished. Now it's unlikely that I'll ever start again.
I don't think there's any one good policy that applies to both extremes, so I just decide on a case-by-case basis.
Hank wrote: "If the author takes too long in between books, I can certainly loose interest and not pick it up again. GRR Martin and Rothfuss being current examples but I am sucked in with Dresden and even if it takes him 10 years to write the next one, I will probably pick it up...."Me too.
I don't know whether it's me getting old, but there are few authors whom I'd be really, really sad if they decided they'd rather be alligator dentists instead. For most, it would be sort of, "Well, it was nice while it lasted. Now, let's find a book to read..."
"There's plenty more fish in the sea" is also true of books. :-)
T. K. Elliott (Tiffany) wrote: ""There's plenty more fish in the sea" is also true of books. :-) "It took me too long to figure this out. Back when I didn't read nearly as much, I'd finish the available books in the series and I wouldn't know what to do. I somehow didn't have it in me to pick up an unrelated book and start reading.
It helps to be part of a group like this, where I have a ton of reading scheduled out for months in advance.
So far Martin, Rothfuss, et al., don't even crack the top 10 in times between books - http://www.blastr.com/2009-1-21/which...
David wrote: "It helps to be part of a group like this..."Yep. One of the major things for me was realising how few books I actually read - less than 100 new books (not counting rereads) per year.
Multiply average books-per-year by remaining life expectancy and you get a very small number indeed!
No time to waste, got to keep reading the good stuff, or I'll never get through it all! No time for reading stuff I don't enjoy, no time for indecision, switch on that Kindle and get reading!
Kim wrote: "So far Martin, Rothfuss, et al., don't even crack the top 10 in times between books - http://www.blastr.com/2009-1-21/which..."Well, yeah, but most (all?) of those weren't promised. Martin and Rothfuss claim to have more to come. The listed ones were like 'oh, yeah, I've been thinking about that very old book of mine, let's see if there's something more I want to do with those characters/ that world....'
Cheryl wrote: "Well, yeah, but most (all?) of those weren't promised. Martin and Rothfuss claim to have more to come. The listed ones were like 'oh, yeah, I've been thinking about that very old book of mine, let's see if there's something more I want to do with those characters/ that world....."Good point Cheryl. An unplanned sequel doesn't make a two book series.
I usually just read the first book. I think its an incredibly difficult thing to take the magic that makes a great book and recreate it over and over again. That's expecting too much.
Mod
Does Cheryl's point change anything? Are you more inclined to read a second book if from the get-go the author says "This series is going to be X books long and they're already all outlined" ?
When the series/sequel is planned I almost expect the first book will end on a cliff hanger. And the book will probably contain a bit too much world building and setup for the rest of the series. If the sequel(s) weren't planned then I expect the first book to stand on its own.
Cheryl wrote: "Well, yeah, but most (all?) of those weren't promised. Martin and Rothfuss claim to have more to come. "Didn't Rothfuss also claim to, essentially, have the entire thing written when the first book was published?
I like a series (when the books are good) and cannot wait for the next part to appear. To me this is part of the enjoyment of a good series, the anticipation. Of course sometimes it becomes a let down and the sequels do not stack up to the original but just as often the books improve with each new volume. "AJ Smith" has been particularly good in that way. Each volume better than the one before. I do prefer books that work as standalone novels as well as part of a series but that rarely happens these days authors/publishers prefer things to end with a cliffhanger.
I'm another "it depends".I don't hold off on starting series until they're all published, though it is nice coming to a series later and being able to binge them. Sometimes binging can lead to burn out, though. Also, I do derive some enjoyment for waiting for the next in a series - especially when a book you've been waiting for arrives, there's an excitement attached to it which you miss otherwise. So I think both have their pros and cons.
As to when to continue...
If I rate the first book in a series a 1 or 2, then it's not likely I'll continue unless someone I trust assures me they get better. (I'm more likely to give a trilogy a shot more than a longer series in this instance.... but I'll also sometimes wait for that to be finished first.
For instance, I was a bit tepid on the first Name of the Wind. It's one I considered continuing - but only after other people had read it first to tell me if it was worth it. After the reviews for the second book, I'm unlikely to continue with it.)
I also tend to stay longer than I should for long series if I'm already invested. For instance, I enjoyed Dresden when I first started the series, but have since become burned out on them. I read 'Changes' on the assurance that there are some game changers... but I haven't been able to bring myself to read 'Ghost' yet. I just find myself not caring much anymore... though I haven't officially written it off yet, either.
It's pretty much the same for TV. If I enjoy a series up front, it probably takes me several books/seasons longer than it should to give up on it. But when it becomes more of a chore to pick up the next book or tune into the next episode, eventually it just gets so far down on the TBR list that it sort of just falls off due to lack of interest...
***
I am also another person who has a blur of a memory. There are a few series that I really like and look forward to, and more that are in that hazy middle ground which means I'll read the series, but it's not an immediate "must have" has soon as it comes out.
I also started writing reviews to remind myself of things more than for other people, and it came in handy recently when a new release came out in a series where I read the first book, and I didn't remember that I'd actually rated it 1-star, so I saved myself from picking up the second in the series.
colleen the convivial curmudgeon wrote: "I'm another "it depends"... I also started writing reviews to remind myself of things more than for other people, and it came in handy recently when a new release came out in a series where I read the first book, and I didn't remember that I'd actually rated it 1-star, so I saved myself from picking up the second in the series. .."Yup, another great reason to write reviews! :)
Very interesting thread. I have just had a heavy discussion with my sister over this same idea.I love a series but to buy before reading or not?? I used to get the first book, if it looked interesting, and ended up with a whole lot of 1st books. Then I moved close to a major library, so I would read the 1st book from there. Mmmmm liked the book I would buy the rest of the series before reading them.
Then we started getting series that went for ever.
The library wasn’t always good as I would go back for book 2 and it would be out for a long time, so I prefer to buy a series if I like it. After all I know I will re read it in a few more years.
My sister feels she can’t read one book after the other of the same characters. I find I become in love with these characters and want more about them.
I especially like a series that contain standalone books, but are about the same world/ group of people with maybe a linking theme. Eg Feist.
But then I always seem to come across a book that is great but the rest of the series isn’t out yet. Belonging to GR mean I have been introduced to so many new series. Reading the first chapter or two on line certainly helps.
I do find I lose track of the story if I have to wait, I loved the idea of doing a review and will start that soon.
So retirement has meant re reading some books before I get the new book for the series, or if I know there isn’t a big gap between books I will buy them all before reading (re reading book 1) .
Tv shows I like to wait until the end of the year ,buy the dvd and watch in a binge of viewing. Very few cliff hangers for books or tv are really that much of a worry.
Then again I usually have a few series/ individual book going at once: I need a deeper one with a light one to read when out and about.
Nicki wrote: "Avoiding something because it's popular seems just as follow-the-herd as reading it because it's popular, to me -- it's just a different herd."Is there something inherently wrong with following a herd? Popular culture is still part of culture, and most people feel a need to be part of it. Otherwise why join social media sites like Goodreads?
Ryan wrote: "Is there something inherently wrong with following a herd? "This is a good point, actually. Part of belonging to a culture is joining in the social discourse around cultural artefacts, and humans are essentially social animals.
It's why we feel left out when people are slinging around in-jokes that we don't know, and why it's hard to fit in when you move to a new country--or sometimes just across town. Following the herd is actually almost essential to survival, or at least good mental health--which can amount to the same thing for a lot of people--in many ways.
Which isn't to say you should follow every herd, blindly, on every single thing. It's just to say, we're all sheeple sometimes and for good reason so there's no need to look down on people reading a book just because lots of other people are. Or not reading it, as the case may be.
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
The Martian (other topics)Vicious (other topics)
A Darker Shade of Magic (other topics)
Bellwether (other topics)
Dune (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Lois McMaster Bujold (other topics)Melanie Rawn (other topics)
Lee Child (other topics)
And how often do you dislike/not love the first book but continue the series?
I don't need to wait, but I'm having a hard time finding a compelling reason to pursue series that don't grab me tight in the first book. I find I'm getting pickier about that.