|
I'm not much of a series person in general. I don't like genre fiction and frankly, most of the series I see referenced sound pretty terrible, with endless cycling of situations and characters with no resolution.
As with most things, there are exceptions! The Sharpe series was mentioned upthread; I think kind of the point of them is that all the books are exactly the same. When you're in the mood for one, they hit the spot. All are self-contained, so then you can let it go until the next time.
With some reluctance, I'm wondering if my current favorite of all series, the Aubrey/Maturin books by Patrick O'Brian, have finally hit the wall insofar as my own pursuit of the series goes. I've strictly rationed myself on these wonderful books, but when I recently finished the thirteenth of twenty books and a bit, I thought that even he might finally be running out of steam.
The Sharpe and Aubrey/Maturin books, both historical fiction set during the Napoleonic Wars, had a similar problem which the authors resolved differently, namely, that they ran out of war before they were through with the series. In the Sharpe instance, Bernard Cornwell decided on infilling, which means that if you read the stories in historical chronological order and not by publishing order, the backstories are inconsistent; it also strictly limits any effect of the action that hasn't already been established. O'Brian instead decided on a time suspended approach, where the characters' personal stories continue to advance, but the historical action is no longer rooted in real time and becomes increasingly fantastical. Both have their drawbacks.
|