MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - SF/fantasy books that turned into series, and shouldn't have

wayrad · 11-05-2009, 07:05 PM

Well, I already mentioned Dickson's The Dragon and the George, Stasheff's The Wizard in Spite of Himself, and Asprin's Another Fine Myth in the other thread as books that (IMO) never should've spawned sequels. All three were light, whimsical fantasies that had a central conceit that was only good for one book, and/or couldn't stand the retrofitting of the underpinnings needed to make their worlds more than paper-thin. The Dickson series is a particularly good (or bad) example of the latter - he's been trying to cram his fantasy world into a quasi-historical setting, and it just doesn't work.

That reminds me, has anybody else noticed that in series involving the hero learning magic, he never learns much of anything after the first book?

11-05-2009, 07:05 PM	#31
wayrad Fanatic Posts: 551 Karma: 1121392 Join Date: May 2008 Location: USA Device: HTC One M8	Well, I already mentioned Dickson's The Dragon and the George, Stasheff's The Wizard in Spite of Himself, and Asprin's Another Fine Myth in the other thread as books that (IMO) never should've spawned sequels. All three were light, whimsical fantasies that had a central conceit that was only good for one book, and/or couldn't stand the retrofitting of the underpinnings needed to make their worlds more than paper-thin. The Dickson series is a particularly good (or bad) example of the latter - he's been trying to cram his fantasy world into a quasi-historical setting, and it just doesn't work. That reminds me, has anybody else noticed that in series involving the hero learning magic, he never learns much of anything after the first book? Last edited by wayrad; 11-05-2009 at 07:33 PM.