Quote:
Originally Posted by DrNefario
Don't The Hobbit and LotR kind of rule each other out? (How stand-alone is stand-alone?)
Same applies to The Eyre Affair. It's a series if not a serial.
|
I'm of the same opinion. A true stand-alone novel—to me—is one that has no prequels/sequels, not part of any series and not part of any shared universe/setting. The fact that a book CAN stand on it's own two feet (without NEEDING to read the rest of the books in the same series/shared environment) isn't quite enough. *shrugs*
But I've taken part in enough of these threads to know there's just no way to come up with a consensus on "the rules." Everybody comes up with their own twist (including myself at times) to get a book they love included. So I've given up acknowledging/suggesting/expecting any concrete "stand alone" rules—and life is easier because of it.
But for my own part (and I'm not expecting anybody else to comply with my personal rules, by any means)... I base my general opinion on the author's intention: "was that book written as part of a 'larger picture'?" If so, I don't consider it a stand-alone novel.
Case in point: Tim Powers'
The Stress of Her Regard was always high on my list of stand-alone favorites for years. But the recently released
Hide Me Among the Graves is acknowledged by the author as a "loose" sequel to
Stress; so both have to be excluded from my list of Favorite Stand-alone Fantasy Novels now. Yeah... I'm weird like that.
