I guess I don't really care, as long as it comes in an omnibus edition.
Printable View
I guess I don't really care, as long as it comes in an omnibus edition.
I just realized you were behind the times :p I'd like to see your take in some of the threads about the longer works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy M.
back on topic, i prefer longer series in general. ive only read a few fantasy standalones i consider good or great.
Pththththththththth!Quote:
Originally Posted by Andols
I prefer to think I just march to a different drummer. One who may have no sense of rhythm, granted, but different all the same.
I'm reading a longer fantasy work now, On Stanger Tides by Tim Powers. It's over 350 pages!!!!
Seriously, being a fairly slow reader with limited reading time, I get picky. Most long series in various genres that I've read in the past would, with effective editing, have been stronger at half the wordage. (Yes, ghost of David Eddings, I am looking at ... er ... through you.)
I did read Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell in the spring and enjoyed it. Not sure I need another book in that world, though. (And I felt similarly about Dune -- the first one was sufficient in and of itself so I never bothered with the rest.) On the other hand, JS&MN will probably spur me to read some longer works, like John Crowley's Aegypt series and Jeffrey Ford's Physiognomist (sp?) series, and eventually get around to Wolf's New Sun series. But, with limited length series, I'll only read ones that are completed. Martin, for instance, will have to finish his before I'll start it.
Pthththththththththtth!Quote:
back on topic, i prefer longer series in general. ive only read a few fantasy standalones i consider good or great.
Randy M.
Part of the fun with incomplete works is speculating on the future of the characters. You're missing out!
I prefer standalones or trilogies. A longer series would have to be extremely good for me to read it.
I never read more than one book at the time and I usually read in very long sittings, because I like to feel that I'm giving the book my full attention and, I suppose, because I'm the sort of reader who likes to analyze and pick things apart.
If a series goes on for more than about 2000 pages I lose track of all the details, which is frustrating, and I start to get impatient and distracted, thinking about all the other books I want to read.
When I have read long series/books with mysteries or lots of details, I find myself taking notes :rolleyes:
I try never to start a series if it's still a work in progress for the same reason. Partly the wait is too frustrating, and it makes me feel like I ought to start from scratch when a new volume comes out to make sure I remember everything.
I'm actually waiting with starting A Song of Ice and Fire for that reason ;)
I prefer series like this when I can find good ones, but they seem a bit rare. I like them just because I get to spend so much more time with the characters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson
That said, my favorite book of all is standalone, so it's not an absolute kind of thing.
I prefer stand alones as many authors struggle with trilogies and crash with longer works.Quote:
Originally Posted by dan95 DL=<3
Jimmy Magnusson and Toma, you should give Dennis L. Mckiernans Mithgar series a try. It's a longer series that has stand alones and trilogies within it. If you want to give it a try without commiting to a trilogy read "The Eye of the Hunter".
I always enjoy reading a series again in the run up to the release of the next installment, I think the number of times I have read the WoT books would horrify some of those here, lol. That being said I suppose I've only actually done this with WoT and asoiaf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oubliette
i prefer trilogies.
if the story cannot be contained in the 3 books, i think 5 or 7 is the longest i could contemplate [Dune, Crown of Stars]. I liked it very much how Bakker and Tchaikovsky for example have managed to write a self contained storyline in 3 or 4 books within the larger epic canvas, as opposed to Erikson or Jordan who by the time you read the 9th or 12th novel you barely remember where you started and need novel length synopsis.
I am still undecided on the stand alone serialization: I like Discworld and Vald Taltos, but trying to read them all in sequence can lead to burnout.
Rather series to not take 20 years to be finished or have some ungodly page count :P And now that I have a Nook, I'd prefer them to be electronic as well. Or not too pretty so that I wouldn't feel guilty from unbinding them & running pages through a sheetfed duplex scanner ;)
I prefer stand-alones, but I'll start a series if it looks promising. Each book must stand on its own merits, though. I'll abandon a series if it doesn't continue to grab me.
I guess I prefer anything written by GRRM, Hobb, or GGK, no matter how long or short. Martin personally changed my opinion of short stories, as well as sprawling epics.
Pretty much everything I've read by any of these 3 is better than anything I've read by any other, barring some Historical fiction authors like Penman and Clavell. I consider them the top of the pyramid as far as modern fantasy is concerned.
Personally I'd rather read GGK writing about an artist standing still in court than any number of epic battle scenes by inferior fantasy authors.
Disclaimer: I've yet to read Soldier's Son, which I hear is not up to Hobb's usual standards, and I haven't yet gotten around to under heaven or Martin's newest short story from Warriors.