"I don't know if I want to spend that much of my reading time devoted to one character to the exclusion of all other possibilities out there."

Dorieann - I know what you mean...however, it is nice to know there are several books out there waiting for those days that you just can't find anything else that suits for the moment.

I like reading series, but only series where each book is an independent story. I am not fond of multi-volume epics unless the series has ended and all the books are available. There is often an ongoing backstory, which I don't mind, but each main storyline should be independent and it should not be absolutely necessary to have read all of the previous books.

Whenever I start a new series, I like to begin at the beginning and read them in order until I find out whether the backstory is so involved that they must be read in order. I hate discovering that I have been plonked in the middle of an ongoing backstory where the characters only make sense if I have read all of the other books.

A good author anticipates that not all the readers will have read the previous books and will smuggle in short summaries of events and interactions from previous installations that are necessary for a new reader's understanding of the story.

Am I a lone voice in not reading series of books?
I don't think I have managed it since A Horseman Riding By books by R F Delderfield when someone lent me a box set in about 1972.
I did try a few of Ellis Peter's 'Cadfael(sp?) stories but again found I needed variety.
I don't even read books by authors I enjoy one after the other (when a 'series' is not involved). I feel that I should for, eg., only read one every six months so I have something to look forward to. I suppose it is rather like leaving the last chocolate in the box for a treat or a 'rainy day'. There is probably some deeply hidden psychological meaning behind this, that I'd rather not know about.

You're not quite a lone voice, Vee. I used to do it a lot - I have a large number of the Dalziel and Pascoe novels, and I've got a huge number of P D James - both of these I bought when I read one, liked it and read loads more - and then suddenly got sick of them. But I admit that I tend to buy the new Sue Grafton as soon as it comes out in paperback. And I'll pick up a Spenser novel if I find it in a charity shop - though I've made no attempt to read those in order.

But in general, I don't read serieses now. There are too many good stand-alone books. It's so rare for a follow-up with the same characters to be as good.

One major exception - of course - Harry Potter. But that's not a series, that's an ongoing literary event...

Wodehouse's Jeeves and Wooster series
James Lee Burke's Dave Robicheaux series
Sharyn McCrumbs Ballad Series and her Elizabeth McPherson series
Elizabeth George's Thomas Lynley series
Joan Hess's Maggody series is a favorite, her other not so much.
Marcia Muller's Sharon McCone series, her more recent stand alones not so much.
Sara Paretsky's V.I. Warshawski series
Elizabeth Peter's Amelia Peabody series, but I like her Barbara Michael's stand alone books better on the whole.
Jaqueline Winspear's Maisie Dobbs series
I gave up on his Xanth series years ago, but I read all of Piers Anthony's Incarnations of Immortality, Bio of a Space Tyrant, and a couple of other series long since forgotten.
Anne McCaffery's various series
Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover Series - none as good, of course, as the stand alone, originally, Mists of Avalon
Both of Roger Zelazny's Amber series are favorites
Colleen McCullough's Rome series
Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle
McMurtry's entire oeuvre which includes a couple of series -Lonesome Dove and the Last Picture Story for starters.
Nevada Barr's Anna Pigeon series
Laura Lippman's Tess Monaghan series
Diana Mott Davidson's series about her Aspen caterer.
Margaret Maron's series about Judge Knott
Then there are a few series I've read for local interest reasons. There is a Tim Cockey series about an undertaker in Baltimore who solves mysteries. The first two were pretty bad, but the later ones are pretty decent. Then there are the Beverly Connor series on an archaeologist and on a forensic anthropologist and these are set in the Southern Appalachians that I enjoy. I've a cousin who has tracked down a couple more series set in Tennessee and Kentucky that she has shared but who's names I've forgotten.

I go through spells of reading series, but honestly grow weary long before the publishers realize a series has played out.

I love reading series, it's like visiting friends again. However, I learned with the Brother Cadfael series and a Mercedes Lackey series, that I should NOT read series books one right after the other. It makes the books seem trite and predictable, at least for me. Seems like each author has their pet phrases, types of descriptions or plot devices, and reading 4-6 of their books back to back takes any surprises there might have been right out of it for me. So now I have a stable of favorite writers that I go look for to see if there's any new ones out there. I specifically don't read all the series in a row.

There are a few series I love:

Cross Stitch etc by Gabaldon
Morland Dynasty by Harrod-Eagles
Bill Slider mysteries by Harrod-Eagles
Stephanie Plum books by Evanovich

I also have complete collections of Agatha Christie, Leon Uris and Dick Francis, but don't consider these to be series.

The Morland Dynasty books in particular don't become trite or boring, as each different historical period is so interesting.

Series I have given up on include Grafton's Alphabet books and Patricia Cornwell. In both cases I really got sick of the main protagonist and the troubles in their lives.

Cazelet Chronicles by Elizabeth Jane Howard-4 books.

Fairacre series by Miss Read-6 books I think-very gentle reading.

I do enjoy reading series, although not to the exclusion of everything else. I usually am in the middle of a series of some sort and I tend to read one or two other non-series books and then a series book and then a couple of non series books and then one of the series books again. My favorites lately have been the Amelia Peabody series by Elizabeth Peters, the Hamish MacBeth series by M.C. Beaton, and the Joe Leaphorn/Jim Chee books by Tony Hillerman. Now I am going back and rereading all of the Hercule Poirot books by Agatha Christie.
These series books tend to be light reads and give my brain a chance to catch up after I've finished one heavier book and before I start another one.

I love reading series, though I read many stand-alone books, as well. Series are good for when I am not sure what to read, or I need "comfort reading" (like comfort food, but healthier).

Some of my favorites are:
Terry Pratchett's Discworld series
Anne McCaffrey's Dragonriders series
Dorthy L. Sayers' Lord Peter Wimsey series
Katherine Hall Page's mystery series
Carolyn Hart's Death on Demand series
Susan Wittig Albert's China Bayles mystery series
Carola Dunn's Daisy Darlrymple mystery series
The Harry Potter series

I love reaing them & try to read them in order. They are indeed comfort reading, and now with places like Amazon, they notify you as soon as a new one is published.

Here are the ones I've gone through over the years:

Mazo de la Roche, The Jalna series (48 books!)
R.F. Delederfield, Both the horseman & the Dreaming Suburb series
Paul Scott, A Jewel in the Crown Series
Angela Thirkell, Her barsetshire novelds
Miss Read, All her English village novels
Dorothy Sayres, Lord Peter Whimsey series
Barbara Hambley, The Benjamin January mysteries
Elizabeth Peters, The Amelia Peabody series
Elizabeth Jane Howard, The Cazalett series
Anthony Trollope, The political books about the Pallisers
Alexander McCall Smith, The No.1 Ladies Detective Agency series
Sue Townsend, The Adrian Mole series. These have got to be some of the funniest books ever written.

Well, I read lots more series when I was in college, since it seemed that sci fi/fantasy was about the only thing I could read besides text books! My favorites:

>Piers Anthony Xanth (which I cant stomach now),

>Julian May Saga of P something Exile,

>Raymond Fiest, Riftwar series,

>Barbara Hambly Darwarth series.

I tried Anne McCafferty and she did nothing for me, and I may be the only one I know who really didn't like the HP books (but absolutely loved the movies.)

The one non sci fi series I loved was Caedfael. The PBS Masterpiece theatre production of them was marvelous as well (can't go wrong with Derek Jacobi, I'd listen to him read from the phone book)

The only series I follow religiously now is Terry Pratchett's Discwold.

Cindy

I agree with ell -- one shouldn't read series books in, er, series. I love Wodehouse's Jeeves and Wooster series along with Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe series. I used to love the Ellery Queen series but, for some reason, I can't get into them any more.

Of course, when I was younger I was heavily into series, especially those written by Enid Blyton. As a lot of you will probably remember, there was the Famous Five series, the Secret Seven series, and the Malory Towers series.

Nowadays, I guess I don't read as much series as I used to, with the notable exceptions of the Harry Potter series and the occasional Nero Wolfe.

Hey, let's not forget the Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan series! I mean, how can we forget Ryan's rise from a lowly CIA analyst to the President of the United States! And yes -- I read them all as well.

Oh, and how about Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker series and his Dirk Gently series? (Got snagged into those as well)

Read every Michael Connelly that hits the deck Harry Bosch my vintage, same attitudes and I hope Conelly never retires him.
When younger and stupider read all John. D McDonalds Travis McGee books. Still have them. Never reread so don't know how they hold up theses days,
Love Ross Mcdonald's Lew Archer series and Nelson DeMille's series on the New York cop - can't recall his name. Used to love Cornwell's Kay Scarpetta but the author and her characters seem so febrile, brittle and full of angst I can barely read her anymore.
Read Harlan Coben's stand alone novels, enjoyed them immensely so decided to give his series with Myron Bolitar a shot. Never again - totally unbelieveable, wise cracking every moment complete pain in the butt.
Should I be ashamed to admit I've read all of Auel's Ayla and Jondalar prehistory epics? Enjoyed them as well. No accounting for taste is there? Larry

Miss Read wrote two series, the Fairacre and the Thrush Green. There are many more than six-they remind me of the Mitford series-small town or village, recurring characters, main character a pillar of the community-but Miss Read's are less "rose-colored glasses" in their outlook-gentle, but not sappy.

What a great topic! This has given me several authors to follow up.
ccrdmrbks - have you come across the Bubbles series by Sarah Strohmeyer, the Southern Sisters mysteries by Anne George and the Sharon McCone books that I have just stumbled on after catching a short story in an anthology. I saw an early title once "Edwin of the Iron Shoes" and thought it was a medieval mystery, not my usual cup of tea apart from Cadfael. I did go to Shrewsbury but there is only a Victorian church there now and a theme park, of course!
Martin - I wonder what you thought of the latest Sue Grafton? I started a thread but got few answers, so thought not many RP posters liked murder mystery novels.
I prefer cozy to hard-boiled but they are woeful at times, I will admit...like the way Hazel Holt's Sheila Mallory tramples all over scenes of crimes!
I do agree that it is not a good idea to read a series in one lump because of the character's traits starting to grate but as I get my books from the libraries, they sometimes all come at once, when requested or all over the place so it is like trying to assemble a jigsaw puzzle.

Reading a series is like having a chat with an old friend. I do not usually read more than two back to back because I need the break. But I keep lists of the titles, in order, so I know where I left off.

Has anyone ever read Kate Sedley's Roger the Chapman series? They are, in order, listed below. HIGHLY recommnended. Set in the Middle Ages in England.
Death and the Chapman (1991)
The Plymouth Cloak (1992)
The Weaver's Tale (1993)APA The Hanged Man
The Holy Innocents (1994)
Eve of St. Hyacinth (1996)
Wicked Winter (1996)
The Brothers of Glastonbury (1997)
The Weaver's Inheritance (1998)
The Saint John's Fern (1999)
The Goldsmith's Daughter (2001)
The Lammas Feast (2002)
Nine Men Dancing (UK)

I've also lost interest in Kay Scarpetta. Got tired of her huge long Mercedes complete with minute details in regard to the interior and performance of the car (it's a Mercedes, of course it's great...move on already), ego-centric house, etc, etc. So now I read Kathy Reichs. She is what Patricia Cornwell wants to be... Kathy Reichs really holds the job her main character holds and has th background to write the books. Again, in order, the Kathy Reichs books starring Tempe Brennan:
Deja Dead (1997)
Death du Jour (1999)
Deadly Decisions (2000)
Fatal Voyage (2001)
Grave Secrets (2002)
Bare Bones (2003)
Monday Mourning (2004)
Cross Bones (2005)

PAM

PAM, yes, I've read the first six of the Roger the Chapman series. I'm not sure why I stopped there -- just lost interest probably -- but I could probably pick up where I left off without much problem if the last six books are as good. Do you think they are?

I've read all of Arthur W. Upfield's series with Napoleon "Bony" Bonaparte, the half-aborigine/half-caucasian Australian who uses his native instincts to solve crimes. Most of this series was written during the 1930s and 1940s. I tried reading too many of them in succession one time and Bony's instincts began to seem more like conveniences; but reading them several months, or years, apart makes them more interesting.

Mary Roberts Rinehart's mysteries aren't really a series, but they have similar conceits -- usually an older female who somehow, peripherally, gets involved in multiple murders. She's not a detective or even an amateur sleuth, but an observer. This is true of the few stories from the perspective of a male protagonist, as well. They are nearly all told in first person, so the reader identifies and, in a way, becomes the narrator/storyteller. I find this intimacy very appealing. The first one was published in 1908 and Rinehart was still writing them into the 1950s.

Gosh! I didn't know Mazo de la Roche wrote 48 books in the Jalna saga. I only read three or four of those and probably out of order -- it didn't seem to matter, though. Another set of historicals that I was enamored with for a while are Elswyth Thane's Williamsburg novels.

All the series I've mentioned so far are an older crop. I have trouble with the newer bunch because so many of the debut books seem half-baked, which is a dead giveaway that they are the start of a series and the writer is holding back character development. A few lately that have done that are Jacqueline Winspear's Maisie Dobbs series and Erin Hart's archaeology/pathology team that solve mysteries in Ireland (Haunted Ground is the first). I suppose that's all well and good if the reader doesn't mind a certain open-endedness. I do mind, though -- like someone mentioned above, I'm not necessarily willing to invest my time or money on long, drawn-out affairs with the same characters and it's awfully presumptive of writers (and publishers) to think I will be willing. And I think it is very unimaginative all around for the stand-alone to be discouraged -- it smacks of franchise (like the small independent being drowned out by the huge mega-chains). It's a pet peeve of mine. :-)

Freida, I've read up and including to The Goldsmith's Daughter and have the next to the last requested at my library. I don't think the very last one is available yet in the USA.

As has been mentioned, a long drawn out series can definitely bog down if the material and characters are not very well done. Personally, I am more likely to read a series if they are in the mystery genre than fiction. Some fiction series do not truly necessitate a series as much as they need an editor. Just like a movie sequel demands more, better, deeper, plus answers and conclusion, so does a book sequel demand more. Similiarly, I am especially suspicious when an author moves onto other books and characters that are not as successful as previous works only to return to a more commercially successful character.

PAM

I do read series on occasion, but overall, have a tendency to avoid them. If a series involves three or four books over vast amounts of time or generations, then I feel they are justified. Or if it is a series where the stories are fairly short and self-contained, then I might be tempted to pick them up. However, these series that just never end where characters get put through more than twenty people go through in one lifetime, well... I just can't take those. I know I've done myself a disservice by avoiding some of them. I suspect there are quite a few that I'd really enjoy if I could ever commit to them, but the thought of reading thousands of pages when I have 50 books in my TBR pile always defeats me. I keep hearing how good Outlander is, for example, but the sheer size of it makes me balk.

I have mixed feelings about series. On one hand, if I have become fond of characterters, I am reluctant to leave them. I want to know what happens to them next. So I must say that I do enjoy independent novels written in series.

On the other hand, I dislike it intensely when an author drags a single story out over several volumes. One author I can think of is currently on volume 11 of an increasingly tedious tale. I gave up several volumes ago, no longer caring what happened to any of the characters; in fact, starting to hope that they all came to bad ends. It is rare that any one story deserves in excess of a thousand pages. Maybe LotR. And even Tolkien wanted his epic to be published as one book. I believe it was the publisher who decided to break the story down into three volumes.

Paula

I have read many, many of the series all of you have mentioned and enjoyed most of them. I agree about Kay Scarpetta; they have deteriorated badly. I've just read the first two Morland Dynasty books and have three more waiting, but, as some of you mentioned, I'm taking a break and reading The Other Boleyn Girl that was in my TBR stack and that I thought would fit nicely after the second Morland book.

OT, I got a catalog today that has a framed print to order called "Books to the Ceiling." It has huge stacks of books and a verse at the bottom by Arnold Lobel, who, it says, is a children's author and illustrator. The verse says:

Books to the ceiling,
Books to the sky.
My piles of books are a mile high.
How I love them!
How I need them!
I'll have a long beard
By the time I read them.

I love it and would order it if I had anywhere to hang it. Or maybe I'll order it anyway and play it by ear.

Yes, I like series, particularly fantasy series. Since October, I've read Harry Potter, the "A Song of Ice and Fire" series by George RR Martin, the "Wheel of Time" series by Robert Jordan, the first two books of the "Inheritance Trilogy" by Christopher Paolini, and the "Ilium" series by Dan Simmons if two books count as a series. Actually, these books are more of a sequence since the plot continues through each one. I like that because once you and the author have created and invested time in this alternative world it makes sense to continue to have recourse to it. After finishing the "Wheel of Time" which took about a month and a half, I'm sort of at a loss as what to read next. I was immersed in that imaginary world for so long that it's hard not to keep thinking about it.

Oh, and Vee, speaking of "deeply hidden psychological meaning," what kind of person can save one piece of chocolate? What if that rainy day were delayed?

Had to change the title in order to post to the thread again. Is this new?

No, Carolyn, that is one thing that isn't new - there is a time limit I think between subsequent postings by the same person.

Some of the books above are not what I consider series, for example, the Cazalet chronicles and Paul Scott's Raj Quartet. I feel both of those were quite finished after the four books. A series to me is more likely to go on and on and on, for as long as the books keep selling *g*

Carolyn you should have been there when my Mother used to cut a litle strip off a Mars bar, certainly less than half-an-inch, and add a couple of 'sweeties' to the daily 'allowance' we three children used to receive. Of course this was in the bad-old-days of food rationing that went on well into the '50's. One thing in its favour; we never got fat. And no, I don't hoard crusts under the mattress!

re the title thing. You often find the system cannot cope with the same 'poster' adding anything for ??? time/hours.

something a little easier than changing title is to put a couple of spaces between the RE: and the subject.

I don't read many books in series unless it's PD James but when I was a kid I can still remember the thrill of picking up the 2nd Anne of Green Gables book and going up into our apple tree to start reading it. Maybe it was the smell of the apple blossoms or who knows but that memory is so clear and one I'll never forget.

Interesting, here most seem to be into mystery and detective series. I was never much of a fan of those, but I did discover Barbara Vine and Pat McGrath last year - all independent stories tho, no series.

I can't believe I forgot my most favorite series of all: Douglas Adams Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. I read four of the books in this 'trilogy' many many times since my first love affair with them in college. And there is absolutely nothing like listening to the original BBC radio production. And don't bother to see the movie - bleh.

Greetings!
Does the Encyclopedia count as a series? Once, as a callow youth, I determined to read most of the Brittanica...honestly! I did get through a lot of it, but confess I had my "favorite" volumes, and others I probably didn't touch.

I haven't been posting much at all for a while, but have kept reading the various threads... Anyway, I have been a long time fan of series...I guess the comfort of finding 'old friends', finding out what happens next, and being able to fall back on a tried and liked author, are all factors. There are some series which I think do need to be read with some space between them, and other series which are really just continuations of the same story, so those can benefit from sequential-style readings. Even those that are written as ones that could "stand alone" (like Elizabeth George or Peter Robinson) have characters that change and develop over time, so those I like to read in "chronological" order if at all possible.

As a kid, I read many, many of the Walter Farley "Black Stallion" books, Albert Payson Terhune's dog stories, Jim Kjelgaard's "Big Red", etc., and just about any other animal sagas. Wasn't much for the Hardy Boys or "titian-haired" what's-her-name.

Then, I hit the "grown up" mystery series -- of which I still read many:

Agatha Christie, Dorothy Sayers, Ngaio Marsh, Elizabeth Peters (Amelia Peabody), Peter Robinson, Elizabeth George, P.D. James, Tony Hillman, Faye Kellerman, Anne Perry and the "Rabbi" series by Harry Kemelman (quite a number of years back). I did a brief foray into folks like Sue Grafton and Patricia Cornwall but tended not to stick with those for long. I do like some of the medieval/renaissance era ones -- like Candace Robb's series, certainly Brother Caedfael's, but I haven't liked Michael Jecks' (sp) or the Sister Frevisse series. Recent additions to the books I continue to watch for are Bruce Alexander's "Blind Justice" series, as well as Dianne Day's "Fremont Jones" chronicles, and Stephanie Barron's "Jane Austen" mysteries. They are fast, fun reads. Thanks to RP, I found Daniel Silva, and scoured the used book stores to complete my stack - I like those quite a lot.

Adolescence had me reading LOTR about twice a year, and some of Anne McCaffrey's dragonriders series.

25+ years ago, when first getting to know the guy who became DH, I started reading lots and lots of Sci-Fi and Fantasy (since that was what he had on his shelves). So that got me going through all of the Dune series (which, with the publication of the "prequels" written by Herbert's son, I've now re-read), Asimov's Foundation series, and many others. I didn't, for some reason, come across the "Ender" series of Orson Scott Card until just a few years ago, but enjoyed those immensely. I went through David Edding's, Katherine Kerr's, and Katherine Kurtz's fantasy series, but can't say they stayed on the shelf long before I tired of them. David Duncan's earlier 2 series (A Man of His...

I don't think I've seen any mention of Rosemary Aubert on this site. She has a series about a Canadian judge, Ellis Portal, who got into trouble and dropped out of society and then begins to come back by helping friends (or former friends) solve crimes. I liked them a lot.

As far as I know, there are four of them, the first, Free Reign, written in 1997. It helps to read them in order, but I didn't and still enjoyed them. I just looked her up on Amazon, and it says a new book is due out this summer.

I do hope Erin Hart writes more-I have loved her first two series books. I am thoroughly enjoying The Morland Dynasty series. Most series I read are mystery types-I never get sick of Harry Bosch and have read all Peter Robinson's and Ian Rankin's books. Elizabeth George's Inspector Lynley is another favorite. I agree the quality of some goes way down ie. the Kay Scarpetta books. They were great at first-although the latest is fairly good. When I find a character I like I do get quite attached. Of course, I read many other books besides.

I nearly wept when I read the last Inspector Morse book...I had grown quite fond of the old curmudgeon!

I love the Elizabeth George books about Inspector Lynley & Havers - I am wondering if she will write another after the last one...and that ending.

Pat

I read series as well. Most of my favorites have already been mentioned, including Ellis Peters (Brother Cadfael), Elizabeth Peters (Amelia Peabody), Rex Stout (Nero Wolf), Tony Hillerman (Jim Chee/Joe Leaphorn) and Anne McCaffrey (Dragonrider series). That being said, I have found that frequently, I get tired of a series long before the author does (for example: Anne McCaffrey's various series). Sometimes the authors just keep on with a series because it is popular, not because there is anything new or interesting to say. For another example, I got tired of The Cat Who series (Lilian Jackson Braun) several books ago. I liked the earlier ones much better.

I'd almost prefer that an author would end a series before it gets tired or trite, even though, contradictorally, I still want to read them.

First time posting on the books side of gardenweb.

I love series, but it's sometimes frustrating to figure out the order of the series. I was just looking at the Discworld series (I'm new to Pratchett) and it took me several minutes to figure out which one to read first. And there are often complications with prequels and such. Some series have a name, others don't. I'm easily confused I suppose, maybe in too big of a hurry most of the time. I wish publishers and Amazon would make such things crystal clear.

One of my favorite series so far is Alexander McCall Smith's #1 Ladies Detective Agency series. Another favorite is Robert J. Sawyer's Hybrids.

jolimont, welcome to RP! You'll love it here.

There is a web site that is wonderful for finding the sequence of series books. It was initially posted by someone else from RP and I have used it frequently. The link is below.

Only last year I started reading Michael Connelly's Harry Bosch series and read all that were available then, one after the other. They were never boring and I hope he continues on with Harry Bosch as well as other books, too.

I also read the Nina Reilly series by Perri O'Shaughnessy and haven't tired of them. They are in the legal thriller category of books.

I've started on the Stephanie Plum series and Linda Fairstein's Alexandra Cooper series but was unable to read either of them straight through, which means I will be able to enjoy them for a long time.

Most of the early Kay Scarpetta books were great but I haven't read one for a while, although they are in my TBR room. My complaint about them is a little different than other people have -- they just became too gruesome for me. I can't watch CSI for that reason, either.

Here is a link that might be useful: Fantastic Fiction

I'm another one who would not choose series as my preference. I just generally get bored with them. In childhood, OTOH, these were my favorites: Terhune dog stories and Nancy Drew mysteries.

The last time I completed a series was the Mitford books. By the end, I had had more than enough detail about the village and its characters. Even Cadfael leaves me lacking. I get tired of the characters and predictability.

The one exception to the above is anything by Miss Read. I absolutely adore her books and could almost read them non-stop.

jolimont, welcome. I am pretty new here myself, but I already feel quite at home.

>I was just looking at the Discworld series (I'm new to Pratchett) and it took me several minutes to figure out which one to read first

This is one series I wouldn't recommend reading from the start. Reason? While I loved the first few, they are rather juvenile compared to his later ones. I started with Small Gods and Lords and Ladies and went from there. After I got the feel for the series I then went back to the beginning for more background. I think my fav of his older books is Interesting Times, and my fav of the newer ones Jingo.

BTW, there is also a book he wrote called The Science of Disc World, which is a bit of Disc World, and a bit of Science 101. Definitely worth the read for fans.

And to get a taste of Pratchett - try Good Omens, a book he wrote with Neil Gaiman.

Hmmm. Neil Gaiman. May I then add his series, Sandman? And, of course, his two part series, Death.

Whats funny is that I never read his series of graphic novels, only his stand alone books. But I have heard so much about those two series that I just might have to start. Trouble is that I don't know how I'll do with the different format - but I suppose I could give it a try.

BTW I seem to remember there is a movie coming out with one of his books, or maybe it was a series. Do you know?

Cindy

MirrorMask. It had a very limited release (IMDB says 42 screens) and is coming out on DVD on Valentine's Day.

jolimont, I agree with CindyDavid - start with some of the mid-disc world novels. I tried to read the first one and put it down and only happened by chance to pick up another of his books and then got into the series. Once I'd read several of the later books, I went back to the first ones and enjoyed them. My favorite is Reaper Man, though I agree Lords and Ladies is an excellent book to start with.

>is coming out on DVD on Valentine's Day.

Oh perfect! We have a three day weekend coming up and that might just have to be one of the films we rent.

Oh, I'd forgotten about Reaper Man. But wasn't there one that starred Death's daughter, who took his place - or am I remembering a completely different book

DEATH is one of my favorite characters, since way back when he was one of the BikeRiders of the Apocolypse in Good Omen.

Just glanced at my collection and forgot about Soul Music. Another one that is a good starting point.

Cindy

Thanks for the warning on reading Discworld in order, I ordered a few of your favorite ones and will try them. Small Gods sounds intreaguing to me, I'll probably start with that one.

larryp......I absolutely agree.....("Used to love Cornwell's Kay Scarpetta but the author and her characters seem so febrile, brittle and full of angst I can barely read her anymore.")
I loved her books and was enjoying working my way through them but all of a sudden they changed, almost as if someone else was writing them. Scarpetta herself became such a depressing character, made for a miserable book. I won't be reading any more.
Does anyone else agree?

No more Scarpetta for me either. I've moved over to Kathy Reichs' forensic anthropologist, Temperance Brennan. A much more human character.

No one in this old thred has mentioned Thomas Perry's series on Jane Whitefield. I think she is one of the most original protaganists out there. And the excitement level is similar to what was good about the first Scarpetta's. And I love the moral issues that are dealt with.

I, too, loved Scarpetta, and noticed the feeling of the books changed when Cornwell switched from her first-person narrative to third-person. It completely changed the tenor of the stories, I thought. I've always wondered if she changed the narrative in order to delve more deeply into the other characters' emotions and actions, but I personally preferred seeing the other characters through Scarpetta's eyes.

I've also read all of Kathy Reich's books, although I feel that her first novel was the best in the series. I enjoy her books, but not as much as vintage Cornwell.

This is a great thread!

I liked to read series and by that I mean something like the Mitford Books, a self contained story in a number of books. I have to read them in order, and go right through the series.

I like mystery series too, and like to read them in order if the detective is the same, however since the story is usually completed in every book I don't feel compelled to read them straight through, but will read them in order but separated by other books.

yes i read series.
i've chugged thru the 'Dune' books
i read all the aubrey/mauratin novels by o'brien
i read all the horatio hornblowers (just to compare--there is none)
thinking of tackling the julius caesar/first man of rome
for this winter--re-reading all from the start.
i do usually find that they eventually become formula-ic
if the series is a continuation of action over time. also
a problem arises if each book stands on its own, in that the author needs to rebukd the character/environment each time (you want to say, ok,ok i already know this, tell the new reader to start at the beginning, don't bore me. but then you realize that the auther is just doing character development that is necessary, but you've read it over and over.
diggerb

I'm 4 books into the Mary Russell series by Laurie King. It's about an unlikely apprentice to Sherlock Holmes set during his "retirement" post WWI. It's well written and I think that the author succeeds in tying her new fictional character into the fabric of the original Arthur Conan Doyle stories. King's Holmes certainly resembles the late Jeremy Brett -- very appealing. While I found that the 4th book dragged a bit, my attachment to the characters encouraged me to read on. I'm enjoying O Jerusalem much more -- glad I didn't give up.