Anyone dislike series?

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The thing is, you don't know if you will be spoiled or not if you read out of order and once you are spoiled, you cannot be unspoiled. So when someone says a book in a series is standalone, I don't believe it because if I was to believe it and I did get spoiled, I would not be happy. So it's just easier to read in order. That way I don't get spoiled. I know what some thing is standalone I would think not and that's OK. Just don't try to convince me because I'll think you're wrong and I would be correct.

Nowhere in my post did I say that I was trying to convince YOU or anyone else to read books out of order. I personally do not care how other people read. If you want to read a series strictly in order or if you want to post a list of the books on the wall and throw darts at the list in order to choose a random book to start with, it makes absolutely no difference to me.

All was trying to do was to point out that SOME readers are okay with reading out-of-order mystery books as long as the mystery in that book was stand-alone (I meant this as opposed to a story arc over multiple books). I am sorry if I was unclear or if this came across as an attempt to proselytize but that was NOT my intent.

Maybe stating that the mystery in a particular book is "self-contained" would be better terminology than to say that the mystery is a "standalone".

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

Nowhere in my post did I say that I was trying to convince YOU or anyone else to read books out of order. I personally do not care how other people read. If you want to read a series strictly in order or if you want to post a list of the books on the wall and throw darts at the list in order to choose a random book to start with, it makes absolutely no difference to me.

All was trying to do was to point out that SOME readers are okay with reading out-of-order mystery books as long as the mystery in that book was stand-alone (I meant this as opposed to a story arc over multiple books). I am sorry if I was unclear or if this came across as an attempt to proselytize but that was NOT my intent.

Maybe stating that the mystery in a particular book is "self-contained" would be better terminology than to say that the mystery is a "standalone".

You may use me as an example. I love mysteries. Characters are very secondary.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

You may use me as an example. I love mysteries. Characters are very secondary.

And expendable!

[llcj]

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

The term is also widely used in the UK, New Zealand and Australia as far as my experience is concerned. That, in the manner you have described, as a book for young readers transitioning between picture books and (normally) fiction. I cannot comment on Canada, it being another English speaking country spun out of the English tradition, as I have never been to it (just over it many times, which doesn't count unless we crashed ).

It's also commonly used in Canada, or at least some parts of Canada.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

You may use me as an example. I love mysteries. Characters are very secondary.

Ever read a mystery series out of order and find that a character who's well established as the friend/lover/spouse of the protagonist in, say, book five was a prime suspect in book one of the series? It pretty much destroys any suspense or tension when you read book one.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Ever read a mystery series out of order and find that a character who's well established as the friend/lover/spouse of the protagonist in, say, book five was a prime suspect in book one of the series? It pretty much destroys any suspense or tension when you read book one.

That describes the In Death series perfectly. Also with the In Death series, there are a lot of things mentioned from previous books. And given how the characters progress, reading out of order will spoil things.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

That describes the In Death series perfectly. Also with the In Death series, there are a lot of things mentioned from previous books. And given how the characters progress, reading out of order will spoil things.

In death, he was a suspect in the first one. How else is she supposed to met the love of her life?

Side note: if I had read that one first, it would have turned me off the series. I didn't care for the style of the first book. So I am glad I read them out of order.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

In death, he was a suspect in the first one. How else is she supposed to met the love of her life?

Side note: if I had read that one first, it would have turned me off the series. I didn't care for the style of the first book. So I am glad I read them out of order.

I liked the first book. But I do have to say that there are others that are much better.

A lot of long running series start off not all that strong, but they do get better as they go along. But the worst book of the In Death series was not the first one. It was one in the middle.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I liked the first book. But I do have to say that there are others that are much better.

A lot of long running series start off not all that strong, but they do get better as they go along. But the worst book of the In Death series was not the first one. It was one in the middle.

I will agree with you there.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

I had never heard the term "chapter book" until I joined Mobileread. As best I can remember from my childhood several decades ago, we had "picture books" for young children and once you got past those into books that were mostly or all text, we just called them "books".

If you go into a Barnes and Noble (in the US at least) and you are hardy enough to brave the children's section, you will see that they have signage for Chapter Books (The Magic Treehouse and The Magic Schoolbus are some of the popular series I remember having to shelve in that section). In fact, if you go to the Magic Treehouse website, here's how they describe one of the more recent books in the series: Meet Jackie Robinson and solve a mystery in the #1 bestselling Magic Tree House chapter book series! So it isn't just users here that refer to these types of books by these terms.

I would guess that this isn't new terminology, but like 4691mls mentioned, it has become more popular in the last fifteen years or so. As a kid, I don't remember chapter books either.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

If you go into a Barnes and Noble (in the US at least) and you are hardy enough to brave the children's section, you will see that they have signage for Chapter Books (The Magic Treehouse and The Magic Schoolbus are some of the popular series I remember having to shelve in that section). In fact, if you go to the Magic Treehouse website, here's how they describe one of the more recent books in the series: Meet Jackie Robinson and solve a mystery in the #1 bestselling Magic Tree House chapter book series! So it isn't just users here that refer to these types of books by these terms.

I would guess that this isn't new terminology, but like 4691mls mentioned, it has become more popular in the last fifteen years or so. As a kid, I don't remember chapter books either.

We just told people the book we were reading or what genre we liked.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

We just told people the book we were reading or what genre we liked.

How did we survive

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

How did we survive

Pure dumb luck.

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

How did we survive

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Pure dumb luck.

Back then we didn't have the Internet so unless the people we actually knew in real life weren't using a term like "chapter books" we didn't know about it, or care - we were too busy walking 10 miles to school in the snow, uphill both ways

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

Back then we didn't have the Internet so unless the people we actually knew in real life weren't using a term like "chapter books" we didn't know about it, or care - we were too busy walking 10 miles to school in the snow, uphill both ways

While having to lug all those books.