Quote:
Originally Posted by eschwartz
Is this Jon I hear? 
Careful with those absolutisms of yours...
It can be wrong, at least in situations where it happens to be wrong, that is.
Now, I actually did not start with the first book. Take that as you will...
(I must admit I would've read them anyway, even if I had read the first books first and gotten the wrong impression.) |
I didn't mean to sound quite so definitive. I merely meant that the published order will definitely make sense and won't spoil any of the other books. (Actually, in the case of Discworld, the published order might even be in internal chronological order. I'd never really thought of that before, but I can't think of any counter-examples.)
I have read and enjoyed series in internal chronological order where it doesn't match published order - Sharpe, Vorkosigan - and I have read and enjoyed series where my first book was just a random book from the middle - Sharpe again, Honor Harrington. I have also abandoned series which I'm assured are great but have a weak first book - Malazan, Dresden. Maybe I should worry less about possible spoilers and more about what's a good representative starter.