Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Book & Author Page Issues
>
Editions are messed up
date
newest »
newest »
Oh, ouch! You're quite right -- I'll see what I can do here....
Okay, that should clear it up! I could swear I did some work on these not too long ago, too.... Oh well. Thanks, Bookworm!
One problem with the Chronicles of Narnia is the numbering system is inconsistent. The way they were originally published, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe should be #1, Prince Caspian, #2, etc. However, some publishers, for a variety of reasons, have started numbering them in order by the story chronology, which makes TLtWatW #3, Prince Caspian #4, The Magician's Nephew #1, etc. I've noticed a few librarians seem to be changing the numbering back and forth; we may need to come up with some basic decision and try to get people to stick with it. And going by what CS Lewis would have wanted may not work because he was apparently somewhat inconsistent himself.
From a reading perspective, it would make the most sense to stick with the original publication order (the same order the movies are being made in) because the books that were written later but take place earlier give away things the reader is not supposed to know in the books that were written earlier but take place later (hopefully that sentence is not too convoluted).
Mod
Getting people to stick with it, considering many librarians don't read this group at all, should be a fun.
Oh, I really don't think that we should be changing the series numbering for any given edition from what's printed on the book! Putting the book title in the title field should make it clear enough whether any given "Chronicles of Narnia #1" is "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" or "The Magician's Nephew".(What I corrected after Bookworm pointed it out was mostly a large number of "A Horse and His Boy" and "Voyage of the Dawn Treader" which had been combined with either "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" or the full omnibus "Chronicles of Narnia" -- why those two? I'm puzzled -- plus some free-floating uncombined German editions of things.)
I disagree. People come to GoodReads looking for books to read, not for precise information about publication order. For that, there's the British Library or LOC. If someone starts reading with Lion Witch & Wardrobe, and then discovers Magician's Nephew later on, and suddenly Narnia's being created, will they thank us for confusing them?I think the books should be placed in the order in which they should be read.
Just my two cents :).
*grins at Squirrel* Majority rules runs six to one in favor of putting Magician's Nephew at #6 in the series (But, seriously, until we get a series field in this database -- and possibly not even then -- it doesn't matter how each individual edition is lined up in its series, does it? The publishers could shuffle the order with every print run but they're still the same books inside.)
*grumbles*Majorities aren't always right yanno!
:)
It's not as clear-cut as "you should read first what happened first" - otherwise noone would write prequels.But anyway, nothing wrong with letting the individual titles match what they said on the cover of the book - no reason we can't combine a "Magician's Nephew, #6" with a "Magician's Nephew, #1".
Mod
If someone would take the time to fix it, that would be great!