Off-Topic Winter Reading 2020-2021

[BunnyHop]

Beth, I gave up on Outlander beyond the fourth in the series. I found it too dark and violent for my taste once the story developed beyond a certain point. I had really enjoyed the first, and pretty much inhaled the next few in the series, rereading them all as each came out. Beyond a certain point, though, I really didn't like the overall arc of the story, especially the way she interweaves violence and sex. It became something I didn't want to re-read, and I didn't enjoy the next books, so I gave up on the series entirely.

I do usually like to start a series at the beginning, mostly because it gives me a bit of a sense of how the story developed for the author. Things might morph beyond all recognition eventually, so I like having a sense of the overall progression of the story.

On the other hand, if I've heard that the books in a series work fine as stand alones and our library only has a few, I'll usually give whichever one interests me most a try without regard for the series.

I do think that there's a huge difference between books that are written as a series, and one gigantic story told in a series of books.

For example, the Nero Wolfe series of mysteries by Rex Stout doesn't need to be read in order. It's interesting to do nowadays because the earliest books carry glimpses of the world as it existed when those books were written, and I find that fascinating.

On the other hand, something like Lord of the Rings pretty much demands to be read in sequence. Sure, skip The Hobbit if you want, but the big giant quest story needs to be read in order.

Another mystery series I like, by Louise Penny could be read out of order, but there are details that I think really bring the series to life if you read them in strict as-published sequence.

I guess my advice is to do a bit of research and find out which sort of series you're dealing with, and whether or not you'll be spoiling major plot elements if you read things out of order. For me, sometimes reading out of order can spoil the fun, but if it's really well written it won't matter quite as much.

[toaster]

Anna, good point about an actual multi-part series like LOTR versus a series of books featuring the same characters. I actually have a bunch more in the latter category, such as Lisa Scottoline's Rosato & Associates and a few of David Baldacci's books.

[Erica H.]

[QUOTE=BunnyHop;2908603



I do think that there's a huge difference between books that are written as a series, and one gigantic story told in a series of books.

[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by toaster

Anna, good point about an actual multi-part series like LOTR versus a series of books featuring the same characters. I actually have a bunch more in the latter category, such as Lisa Scottoline's Rosato & Associates and a few of David Baldacci's books.

Very good point! The series I am interested in reading also is in the latter category.

Erica

[Pam61]

Originally Posted by toaster

I'm curious - has anyone read ALL the books in the Outlander series? I absolute loved the first 2 books, continued with the next 4 with growing discontent. I've considered returning to the series but am not sure; I recall that the last book in particular was something I really had to slog through. My next book would be An Echo in the Bone. Any thoughts?

[/I].

No, not yet! I have all of Diana's books and have only gotten as far as the last TV series that was aired based on "A Fiery Cross." I usually try to read whatever book the actors are currently filming, so I would also be on an Echo and a Bone now, but haven't begun yet. I have read books 1-3 twice each, though. I am a HUGE Outander fan and enjoy the books and TV series. But, the books can get a little too long. And, there have been volumes I haven't liked as well as others. I felt both Drums of Autumn and A Fiery Cross dragged in parts and were a little challenging to finish. It's worth it, because Diana is such a talented writer and there are parts of the book that you might miss if you didn't stick with it. There is no real reason for these books to be soooooo looooong! I know many people who started with them and have given up. I don't want to give spoilers but you would miss what happens to Claire in A Fiery Cross, if you didn't stick with it. And, the same with Stephen Bonnet. And, any intimacy between Claire and Jamie. So there are benefits to slogging through.

[toaster]

Pam, I agree that the writing is good...but definitely in need of better editing! I don't mind long IF the story is captivating me.

I did read both of those novels. I do recall what happens with Stephen Bonnet and I think with Claire, but it has been a long time. I caught a bit of the series when it first started, but I couldn't get into it, especially since I hated the casting of the two main characters.

[Pam61]

Beth, I agree that Diana's books could have done with more editing, for sure. She is such an intelligent woman and had an academic background pre-Outlander. To hear her speak, just blows me away....just highly intelligent. But, you wouldn't think such voluminous book/tomes would be popular reading for the mass market paperback romantic/historical fiction group at large.

Funny, I love the casting of the two leads in the TV series, but did not care for Sophie Skelton as "Brianna" at all.

[toaster]

Actually, I stopped reading Philippa Gregory for the same reason. I love the Tudor area and did enjoy The Other Boleyn Girl, but I found that book too long/overly detailed. I know I read at least one more (I think The Virgin's Lover), but then I stopped.

Since I recently brought up Victoria Holt - one of the things that got me into Tudor history was My Enemy the Queen. I read that book over and over in high school! I tend to prefer character-based stories versus tons of description. Another example is that I love Stephen King, but I didn't love one of his books that others seem to love, 11/22/63 - the story was good but there was way too much exposition for my tastes.

[Laura S.]

From the library, I am reading:

The Lightkeeper's Daughter by Hazel Gaynor - I'm really enjoying this book.

The Deep State by Chris Hauty - I'm on the fence with this one, but I keep reading it.

On my Kindle app, I'm reading:

Under the Tulip Tree by Michelle Shocklee - This one is really good.

In Farleigh Field by Rhys Bowen - I am enjoying this one. It seems different than her other stand-alone books.

Elastic Habits by Steven Guise - I'm just starting this book. He has my attention so far.

[Bluebelle]

Originally Posted by BunnyHop

For example, the Nero Wolfe series of mysteries by Rex Stout doesn't need to be read in order. It's interesting to do nowadays because the earliest books carry glimpses of the world as it existed when those books were written, and I find that fascinating.

Just wanted to chime in I love the Nero Wolfe/Archie Goodwin series. I read them totally out of order & hope to one day reread them in order just to see how the overall story builds.

[lreidgreen]

After a period of not reading alot of books I am on a roll. I use a light box pretty much every morning to deal with seasonal depression and I decided to use the time to catch up on reading. I started reading the New Yorker and Atlantic magazines that have been piling up. Then I decided to switch to books. I read Such a Fun Age by Kiley Reid which was for my book group. Not my cup of tea. It was an easy read but aside some thought provoking issues regarding race it was a bit too chick lit for me.
On the other hand I finally read The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen. Excellent. It was on my shelf for several years and I am so glad I made the time to read it.
Up next: The Vanishing Half by Brit Bennett, also for book group.