Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
That's on you, man. My labeling system doesn't factor in any value judgements. it neither intends, nor confers, any insult.  |
The same could be said for your concerns of "authors playing fast and loose with the term 'stand-alone'." The whole argument doesn't amount to much of a hill of beans anyway, I suppose.
As for any possible harm, if I came upon Dune, Psycho, Flowers in the Attic or Gone with the Wind and heard that each was the first book in a series, I'd likely give them a pass as I don't care for series.
Knowing that each is actually a stand-alone that was followed on by inferior sequels, I will read them.
Quote:
|
I personally don't read sequels, prequels, or installments that are "authorized" by dead authors' estates. But if other people want to, then I feel no particular compulsion to try and convince them that the original book isn't really part of the later "Gone with the Wind" series they've enjoyed. *shrug*
|
I don't worry about other people reading any sort of authorized follow-up, fan fics or whatever flips their skirt. But if I were describing Gone with the Wind to someone, it would never occur to me to describe it as the 'self contained first book in the GwtW saga.'