The Reading Vent & Rant Thread

[issybird]

^^I've been banging the series/serial drum for a while. It's a critical distinction especially in that serials need to be read in order but series don't. In fact, you might be more readily hooked by starting a series a book or two in, once the author's found their feet.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Discworld is another long series that should be read in full.

Why? Wouldn't it be more to the point to say that it should be read as long as you're enjoying it? No one needs to make that commitment.

There are a few prolific authors of 40+ books where I'm working my way through them and it's undeniable that some books are better than others. In two cases it doesn't much matter as even the worst has redeeming qualities and they're not terribly long, but with the third I know some will most likely be left unread. Why read absolute duds once you identify them as such?

[ownedbycats]

Buying eBooks really spoiled me. I recently ordered a few paper books, out-of-prints that never been digitized, and they'll take nearly a month to ship.

It's currently stuck for days at a package distribution center...

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I have read it in full, but there books that could be skipped, and if you are re-reading some sub-series in it work well and better than widely separated, like all the Witches books including Wee Free Men and the other Tiffany Aching books.
Or all the books with Death/Susan/Susan's Parents (Starting with Mort).

Some are very much standalone.

I bought most of it on paper as it was released after the first few. I've repurchased some on ebook that were reduced and on my "list to re-read".

While most of those standalone books may seems standalone, they aren't. If there is a single reference to anything from previous books like a person, place, or thing. it's not standalone.

I disagree with reading out-of-order when reading for the first time. After the first read, read in the order you want. You will spoil/ruin the series if your first read is out-of-order.

I have all of "Wheel of Time" and was increasingly fed-up with it and never read the last few. I now don't care how it ends. Ditto with all of the Thomas Covenant trilogies and Shanara.

I've read some of the Wheel of Time series. I'm not sure if I'll ever give it a go to try to read it all. I've read (I think) most of Shanara and do plan to get back to it. As for Thomas Covenant, I've read all but the last series. I remember when I read the first two series, I really devoured them.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

^^I've been banging the series/serial drum for a while. It's a critical distinction especially in that serials need to be read in order but series don't. In fact, you might be more readily hooked by starting a series a book or two in, once the author's found their feet.



Why? Wouldn't it be more to the point to say that it should be read as long as you're enjoying it? No one needs to make that commitment.

There are a few prolific authors of 40+ books where I'm working my way through them and it's undeniable that some books are better than others. In two cases it doesn't much matter as even the worst has redeeming qualities and they're not terribly long, but with the third I know some will most likely be left unread. Why read absolute duds once you identify them as such?

It's not enjoyable on your first read when you are reading a book in a series and already know what happens later on in the story arc.

It's one thing to see a movie and then read the book. You know what happens, but you don't know what happens past that book.

With Discworld, there are hardly any duds. So by the time you find a dud, you are far enough along to finish. Besides, Discworld duds not that bad.

[Sirtel]

Tastes differ. I read the first Discworld book and probably will never read any other. Just didn't enjoy it.

Ditto for Shannara, Thomas Covenant and Harry Potter. Not my cup of tea, really.

I did read all of Wheel of Time. While not all books were equally good, I liked them enough to finish the series. Yes, it had many flaws and was certainly not a five-star read, but somehow I never got bored with it. There are other series I've read in their entirety, as well.

And then there are series/serials I've enjoyed up to a point, but not read further from that point. Miles Vorkosigan (the last book for me was A Civil Campaign) and ASOIAF (the first three books), for example.

[Cactus Chef]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Tastes differ. I read the first Discworld book and probably will never read any other. Just didn't enjoy it.

Ditto for Shannara, Thomas Covenant and Harry Potter. Not my cup of tea, really.

I quite liked the original Shannara trilogy. Well, 2/3 of it--the Mad Lib Lord of the Rings clone was a bit weak.

I debated getting the Humble Bundle sometime back to get the whole series, but the number of novels being in the pre-apocalyptic present-day was a real turn-off. I don't know why authors feel the need to give us George Lucas-style backstories about everything.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Tastes differ. I read the first Discworld book and probably will never read any other. Just didn't enjoy it.

Ditto for Shannara, Thomas Covenant and Harry Potter. Not my cup of tea, really.

I did read all of Wheel of Time. While not all books were equally good, I liked them enough to finish the series. Yes, it had many flaws and was certainly not a five-star read, but somehow I never got bored with it. There are other series I've read in their entirety, as well.

And then there are series/serials I've enjoyed up to a point, but not read further from that point. Miles Vorkosigan (the last book for me was A Civil Campaign) and ASOIAF (the first three books), for example.

I quite enjoyed Shannara, Thomas Covenant, and Harry Potter. One thing that's coming out early November are the full cast audio books for Harry Potter. They sound very good from the samples I've heard.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Cactus Chef

I quite liked the original Shannara trilogy. Well, 2/3 of it--the Mad Lib Lord of the Rings clone was a bit weak.

I debated getting the Humble Bundle sometime back to get the whole series, but the number of novels being in the pre-apocalyptic present-day was a real turn-off. I don't know why authors feel the need to give us George Lucas-style backstories about everything.

I agree. I liked the first few, but I think making it into Post Apocalyptic and tying in other novels spoiled it.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

Why? Wouldn't it be more to the point to say that it should be read as long as you're enjoying it? No one needs to make that commitment.

Because Discworld is that good to keep going until the end. Even a dud Discworld book is better then some series good books.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Because Discworld is that good to keep going until the end. Even a dud Discworld book is better then some series good books.

Well, that's your opinion. I grew bored with the first book and feel no urge to read the rest.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Well, that's your opinion. I grew bored with the first book and feel no urge to read the rest.

With some series, you have to take the advice of others when they say to keep going because it gets better.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

With some series, you have to take the advice of others when they say to keep going because it gets better.

I've heard it gets better. But I just cannot force myself to slog through any more books like the first, I don't have the patience. And it's not like there aren't enough other books to read.

Maybe I will read a later Discworld book someday. Heresy, I know, but there's no way I'm going to start over at the beginning.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

I've heard it gets better. But I just cannot force myself to slog through any more books like the first, I don't have the patience. And it's not like there aren't enough other books to read.

Maybe I will read a later Discworld book someday. Heresy, I know, but there's no way I'm going to start over at the beginning.

Terry Pratchett himself said that people new to the series should not start with the first book.

Moderator Notice
@JSWolf: Do not post any more messages in this thread about reading order of the Discworld books.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Terry Pratchett himself said that people new to the series should not start with the first book.

Did he? Well, maybe I'll take his advice and try some other Discworld book.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Did he? Well, maybe I'll take his advice and try some other Discworld book.

You might want to start with the City Watch subseries.