Wondering how everyone approaches a series or books that go on to get a sequel? For the longest time I would automatically reach for any sequels that followed books I loved but now…eh. Sometimes I just like how a story has wrapped up and am not looking for more of the characters even if I enjoyed them the first time around. Anyone else do something similar and/or what are your reading habits when it comes to sequels?
by eggsw00dhouse
6 Comments
It depends on the book, characters and my mood. I finished Pillars of the Earth recently. It was ok but I didn’t feel the need to try the following book. Rivers of London series of books I’m happy to pick up the next. It’s episodic with enjoyable characters. I’m rereading Necromancer that I read…about 20 years ago. Back then I read the sequel but not the third one. I think I’ll be doing that this time.
It used to be automatic for me too but then I got caught in too many series where either the quality dropped off significantly or the books became a slog. Now I’m a little more wary and will check the reviews before making a determination of whether I continue.
I’m a Science Fantasy reader and series are pretty much the norm in the genre. So if I liked the first book I’ll sooner or later get the next one in the series. Stories are often not wrapped up at the end of a book, or some plot lines aren’t at least. Some authors also deliberately build in cliffhangers.
I talk about it a lot….but when I found out Flowers in the Attic had a sequel, I got that book so fucking quickly, I gave myself whiplash
When I was younger I always did. Now I find my interests are too varied to go straight through most series. However, I will almost always go back and read the sequels eventually.
No, and that’s why I’m not opposed to reading unfinished series the way a lot of people are these days. It’s not remotely uncommon for me to read a book (or even multiple in a series) and like it, but not like it enough to continue the series.