PatW: Just wanted to make a comment about the Psy-Changling series – I have read them in order but because I’ve waited for each to be published. That said, I have favorites that I think could work as standalones for the main romances. I just recently re-read the entire series in order and I was very pleasantly surprised to discover a lot of little tidbits about the secondary characters and see “hooks” set in earlier books that came to fruition in later ones. I was very favorably impressed with how the author was tying the series world building together! These are not things I noticed when I first read the books, nor do I think they are necessary if one comes in the middle or skips, but they do add something to the experience when the books are read in order.

Pat, I don’t think you can notice these things – the little hints, unless you read them back to back, or re-read them before the new release.

I just recently re-read the entire series in order and I was very pleasantly surprised to discover a lot of little tidbits about the secondary characters and see “hooks” set in earlier books that came to fruition in later ones. I was very favorably impressed with how the author was tying the series world building together! These are not things I noticed when I first read the books, nor do I think they are necessary if one comes in the middle or skips, but they do add something to the experience when the books are read in order.

Years later I started the In Death series and when I got to “Conspiracy” I recognized the cover as something I already had in my pile. When I finished the book I was glad I had waited to read it. That book has a powerful impact that is only fully realized if you’ve come to know Eve over the course of the previous seven books.

The obvious difference between the two is their placement in the series, but moreso I see the difference as being plot driven vs. character driven. The In Death series is best when it centers on Eve’s growth as a human being rather than solving a mystery. If they were just “Mystery of the Week” books then I don’t think the order would matter.

I’m finding that I’m growing tired of series. I’ll read a blurb about a book that sounds interesting, but I won’t read it because it is book 6 in the series. For me that means that I have to read 5 books just to get to that one book. I also find that if I read too many books by the same author in a row I get burnt out.

Decades ago, when authors first referenced previous characters I was ecstatic. Now it seems like every character must continue to show up all the books. Now I can keep three or four stories straight in mind even if they are not memorable but after that I think why are these people cluttering up this book with pages dedicated to recapping their past difficulties and now how happy they are now. If I have read the story, then I know that information, and if I haven’t then their role in the current one should be significant- not just a “bro, you going to lose this girl if you don’t straighten out your act.”
I want more from female friendships too then oh, tell me about the great sex, or let go shopping for shoes or go to a spa.

And for many series books, that is the role that the secondary characters play. More or less a placeholder until their book. And once their books is finished then they go back to the placeholder role.

Lynne, count me in as really liking your definitions too.

Likewise, I started the Guild Hunter series with Archangel’s Blade and loved it. It gave me the incentive to read the rest of the GH series. I realize that there is stuff in Archangel’s Blade that I did not appreciate, not having read the previous books first. However, again, it still worked well as a stand-alone.

On the other hand, once I got to the third GH book (Archangel’s Consort), I was sick of reading recaps of Elena’s childhood, haunted past, whatever. Someone new to the series at that point would have welcomed the rehashing, but I was tired of it.

I guess what I’m really saying is that I appreciate when a writer can make a series book work well as a stand-alone, while still giving just enough background to entice the reader to read the earlier books in the series, yet not giving so much that faithful followers’ eyes are glazing over…

Tee:
Thanks, again. Not sure whether you made my day or not with the #30+, and I think it’ll probably take me 3 years to go through them, so the timeline just may catch up.

Think of it this way, you’ll always know there is something to read when you don’t know what to pick up next. Being Nora, you know how she writes, so there’s no surprises when you do pick up the next. Like most series the “grittier” books are at the start, the quicker reading books are later. But I find that is the difference btwn books written in the 90′s and books written after about 2005. IMO books have been “dumbed down” and in a lot of series – like SJ Rozan’s first books, and the one’s written after her hiatus – it’s really obvious to the reader.

farmwifetwo: If you aren’t one of those people… there’s 30+ books to read and 3yrs or so of book timeline.

Thanks, again. Not sure whether you made my day or not with the #30+, and I think it’ll probably take me 3 years to go through them, so the timeline just may catch up.