Lisa Lutz series inconsistency

[Elaine]

Lisa Lutz has four books listed. They are all part of the Spellman series, but the series titles are inconsistent.

The first book title, The Spellman Files, is used for some, but variations of Spellman are used for others.

What do you think should be used?

Also, is there anyway that when the series statement is corrected on one edition, it will change on the others of the same title as well?

[Lisa]

Elaine, I don't see what you're seeing. I looked at all editions of her first book, which is titled The Spellman Files, and except for foreign language editions that's what I'm seeing. It is the first in a series so the series info is also included.

What specific discrepancies are you seeing?

ETA: Well, are you referring specifically to the series info? Yes, each one has to be changed individually. Lisa is a member here and we could ask her which she prefers! Whatever it is, the standard here at Goodreads is the series name, #1, #2, etc.

[rivka, Former Moderator]

Elaine wrote: "Also, is there anyway that when the series statement is corrected on one edition, it will change on the others of the same title as well?"

Nope, and this is actually deliberate. Series numbering is not always consistent across editions, especially across editions in different languages.

[Elaine]

Some editions of The Spellman Files have Spellman Files and others have Spellman Files series for the series statement.

Book two, Curse of the Spellmans, is the same, but it also has Izzy Spellman Mysteries.

Book three, Revenge of the Spellmans, uses the same as the first book.

Book four, The Spellmans Strike Again, does not use The Spellman Files, so it does not show up if you search for that.

The author uses The Spellmans on her site.

[Elaine]

Not trying to be difficult, but why would the series numbering be different across editions? Not that I would make any changes to a book in another language besides English. I definitely know my limitations! -grin-

[rivka, Former Moderator]

Elaine wrote: "Not trying to be difficult, but why would the series numbering be different across editions?"

All I have to say about that is: Narnia.

[Lisa]

Well, for English language editions then, why don't we use (The Spellmans, #1), (The Spellmans, #2), (The Spellmans, #3), and (The Spellmans, #4).

Some foreign language editions for some books split them up, for instance. One book may be spilt into 2 parts, etc. etc. etc. Some authors also have books that are a part of 2 different series. There are lots of variations.

[Elaine]

rivka wrote: "Elaine wrote: "Not trying to be difficult, but why would the series numbering be different across editions?"

All I have to say about that is: Narnia."

Okay, you got me! I'm a YA librarian and I still have a hard time deciding how the Narnia series should be numbered.

[Lisa]

Oh yeah. Narnia. I'm in the camp of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe being first but I can understand those who disagree!

[rivka, Former Moderator]

It's not even a question of opinion: different editions have different numbering ON THE COVER.

[Lisa]

rivka wrote: "It's not even a question of opinion: different editions have different numbering ON THE COVER."

That is true, and yes, that is the point. Confusing indeed!

[Elaine]

I read somewhere that Madeline L'Engle said they should be read in the order they were published. Personally, I prefer chronological order. Of course, I haven't read them in years. I really need to add them to my list. -sigh-

[rivka, Former Moderator]

I prefer publication order for almost every series I can think of.

[Carin]

Another example: Little House series. I've seen some editions with Farmer Boy removed to the end. I agree with publication order.