# Do you like books that are in series or do you prefer ones that stand alone?



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I was checking out a few threads today on Goodreads and noticed that someone had mentioned that it seems like all of the books out there today are part of a series and how frustrating that can be having to wait for the next book to come out and how it was a little nicer/simpler when books just stood alone. Also how some sequels ruin the first books or really should have just never been made or go on too long...... you get the idea.

Anyways, it got me thinking about if I liked series or not or if I missed the days when there was only one book and that was it. 

My conclusion? I don't know!   I like them both.

I love finding a book, falling in love with the characters and then learning that there are more books out there with them in it. But, I also dislike it when I fall in love with the characters and then they get killed off or go bad or they break up or what have you.

So what do you guys think? Are series good? Are they bad? Do you read books that are part of a series or do you pass them by even if they look good because you don't want to get dragged into a story that is told over 6 books (or 30 in some cases)?

Which do you prefer?


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

I like them both, but I like knowing when something is part of a series before starting (unless it was designed as a standalone and then became a series like the 1632 books).  I don't like series that go on and on and on and on with the same characters.  After a while, I stop caring.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

I don't mind reading stand alone books, but I really love series books. I just love how much you can get to know the different characters. You just can't get that kind of connection with a single book. I also like trilogies and quartets like Nora Roberts, where each book focuses on a different character, but they're all connected.

I read so many different series that I don't really get frustrated waiting for a new book because I always have a different series to switch over to.


----------



## rscully (Jun 5, 2010)

I love a good series, but like books that come in two or three, maybe expanding, afterwards, like dragonlance, (Legends, Chronicles) You can read the three and stop, but there is more if you really want. IMO I find some series drag on waaayyy tooo looonnnggg. Sword of Truth Series, Wheel of Time, to name a few.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

I should also say that I absolutely HATE reading a book only to find it's from the middle of a series. I also must read all the books in order.


----------



## Daniel Arenson (Apr 11, 2010)

I think there's room for both in this world.  Sometimes you like a long series.  Sometimes you feel like a standalone.  I don't think we must choose only one or the other to read.

I just don't like series that drag out seemingly forever at a snail's pace, sometimes never to end....


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

I prefer stand-alone, as I have a very bad memory. The only time I will read books in a series is if the series is complete and I can read all of them in a row.


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

I like series well enough, but the individual books should be able to stand alone. I get royally hissed off it there's missing info that the reader MUST have read in a previous installment, especially when you can't always track down that earlier book. *shrug*

amy


----------



## Neo (Mar 30, 2009)

I almost exclusively read fantasy (epic or high or heroic or whatever - medieval), so I guess I prefer series?? I do like the fact that it makes the story longer, and that you really get to know the characters and connect with them.

However, I always thoroughly do my research before any purchase and make sure that 1) I got the series in order, and 2) the series is complete. If the series is not complete, I wait until it is to purchase it all and read it all at once.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I used to devour series, but I'm slowly appreciating well-contained stories more and more. Lessens the risk of, say, G. R. R. Martin syndrome.

David Dalglish


----------



## jackwestjr_author (Aug 19, 2010)

I have read a number of series novels mostly in the sci fi and fantasy genres. They were all classics, however, and so I knew how many were available and could jump form one to the next. Recently, during a particular stressful work year, I became addicted to the television series 24. I know it is not reading, but the idea is the same. I made it through the last season on netflix and felt like a drug addict without a fix when it was over. On the other hand, it was probably best that something limit my intake of gratuitous violence!

Thanks for asking.

My book: ParmenideanBreach.com


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

luvmy4brats said:


> I don't mind reading stand alone books, but I really love series books. I just love how much you can get to know the different characters. You just can't get that kind of connection with a single book. I also like trilogies and quartets like Nora Roberts, where each book focuses on a different character, but they're all connected.
> 
> I read so many different series that I don't really get frustrated waiting for a new book because I always have a different series to switch over to.


I love Nora Roberts trilogies! In fact I have a collection on my Kindle titled "Nora Robert's trilogies". 

I recently read "My Name is Memory" and I still can't figure out if it is a part of a series or not. I am almost hoping it is because it ended so strangely and without any real closure.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

jackwestjr_author said:


> I have read a number of series novels mostly in the sci fi and fantasy genres. They were all classics, however, and so I knew how many were available and could jump form one to the next. Recently, during a particular stressful work year, I became addicted to the television series 24. I know it is not reading, but the idea is the same. I made it through the last season on netflix and felt like a drug addict without a fix when it was over. On the other hand, it was probably best that something limit my intake of gratuitous violence!
> 
> Thanks for asking.
> 
> My book: ParmenideanBreach.com


I am the same way with series on TV that I like as well. I have a hard time starting one if it has already gone on for a season. I have to watch the previous ones first before I can start it and then I hate that long wait before it starts again, especially when they end on a cliff hanger.

I have heard the Fever Series always end on a cliff hanger so I have yet to start them even though I have purchased them all.


----------



## pdallen (Aug 3, 2010)

I enjoy a good series. But I prefer not to read it until the series is complete. I don't like to wait a year or more until I can find out what happened next. Sometimes, though, it seems like a game of trying to outlive the author in order to read the complete work.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

MLPMom said:


> I love Nora Roberts trilogies! In fact I have a collection on my Kindle titled "Nora Robert's  trilogies".


Nora is a major contributer to my Kindle. I have 3 categories, all thanks to her.

Nora Roberts Trilogies & Quartets (31)
Nora Robets Novels (11)
In Death (37)

The last Fever book comes out in January. I'm not a fan of cliff hanger endings. Before Kindle, when that happens (or a beloved character gets killed off) my books would get flung across the room in disgust. I try to not do that now.... Although I do have SquareTrade if I forget.


----------



## Thea J (Jul 7, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> I used to devour series, but I'm slowly appreciating well-contained stories more and more. Lessens the risk of, say, G. R. R. Martin syndrome.
> 
> David Dalglish


Ahahahaha! Excellent point!

I like a series, but I'll read almost anything that catches my fancy. And I've given up on waiting for Martin, since those books, while fascinating, are too unrelentingly grim. There are plenty of other books to read.


----------



## Rebekah (Oct 9, 2009)

I like both.  I enjoy a good series, but I have to read it in order.  My favorite is when I can read all the books in a short series one-after-the-other, without having to wait on the next book.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Both.  The problem is real though--I am sometimes in the mood for a stand alone and have a hard time finding one.  I especially like stand alones on audio for a road trip so that my husband can listen as well--and he won't be lost in the middle of a series.  But I don't think they are encouraged by publishers.

And I completely agree that many series go on too long (yeah, y'all have heard me gripe about a couple of them on here!)  I generally don't read past 3 books in a series anyway (there are exceptions, of course.)  If I do read 3, five is another kind of limiting point.  It's hard for me to stay interested after a certain point.  That could be me or it could be the author running out of character/plot development.


----------



## Pawz4me (Feb 14, 2009)

pdallen said:


> I enjoy a good series. But I prefer not to read it until the series is complete. I don't like to wait a year or more until I can find out what happened next.


Ditto.

I read more stand-alone books than series. But when I read a series, I want at least the first couple of books to be available, and preferably the entire series.


----------



## Bane766 (Aug 2, 2010)

I mostly read Fantasy as well so I love series books.  I do hate waiting for books, but sometimes it's worth it.  Once I start reading the next book I usually remember everything so I don't worry about re-reading them.

Of course some authors just refuse to finish the series (I'm looking at you Melanie Rawn!)  and that sucks bad.  Some are kinda slow...aka Robert Jordan (who died and didn't get to finish his series-someone else is finishing it) and George R R Martin (who's newest book is over 3 years after he said it would be done).

I do read alot of Stephen King books.  And most of these are standalone novels.  It's a good break from the series reading of Fantasy (also they are in a different genre which can also be refreshing).


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

I like them both.

Reading a series is like seeing an old friend and having a conversation with them to catch up.  It's pleasant and calming (well ... depending on what's going on in the series of course).  I guess I'm patient because I don't mind waiting for the sequels to come out.

Stand-alone's are great too.  They help fill the void/gap when the next book in a series isn't ready yet


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

I love a good series, but I haven't found many that are able to maintain the quality of the story after the first few (Patricia Cornwall comes to mind).  I still want a specific book of a series to be "self-contained" and have a conclusion, cliff-hangers make me crazy (I jumped on the Fever bandwagon and read the first 3 one right after the other, but won't purchase book 4 until the final book 5 is available - huge cliffhangers).


----------



## masquedbunny (Jul 18, 2010)

I don't think I have a hard and fast preference for one over the other. There are some characters that I just want to see more of--and I leap at the chance to do so. On the other hand, there's a wonderful sense of closure in picking up a book that I know has a definite ending. Almost all the books I've been reading lately are in a series, so I may be forgetting what the stand-alone feels like.


----------



## mistyd107 (May 22, 2009)

I LOVE either. I don't mind series at ALL as long as they manage to keep my attention


----------



## bvlarson (May 16, 2010)

I prefer a well-built series, but for me, it depends on the story. Is there really enough there to carry out a series? For many books the authors have just stapled on more books and called it a series because the first one sold well. This can be a disaster, as the story was well and completely told the first time. A classic example of this would be Ender's Game (sorry if you read this, Orson!). It was really a short story that was successfully stretched into a fantastic book, but couldn't make it all the way to a series.
-BVL


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Generally, I prefer more-or-less stand-alone books, though they can be part of a series in that they are in the same "world" (Iain M. Banks's "Culture" novels) with many of the same characters, and some sort of serial progression (e.g. Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" books). What I don't especially care for, however, are series where you _must_ read all the books in order to complete a story -- especially if they end in cliff-hangers. That being said, that does not mean I will not read and enjoy the tightly connected book series; heck, some of my most favorite books ever are Zelazny's first Amber series, which is one story in 5 books, most with definite cliff-hangers; so good writing trumps any such preferences on my part.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Question: Do you like books that are in series or do you prefer ones that stand alone?

Answer:  Yes.


----------



## BookLover (Mar 20, 2009)

I like both! However, I must read the books in order. If I am unable to find the beginning book, then I will probably not be reading that series.


----------



## Taborcarn (Dec 15, 2009)

In theory I like series since I like to see the persistent characters, but lately I've been reading more stand-alone works.

A big reason for this is that I find it annoying when I see a new release that grabs my attention, only to see that it is number 15 or 20 in a series.  I would have to read all the previous entries before getting to the newest one, even though that is the one that I want to read.  And I just don't have time to stick that many more books in my backlog


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

Based on what I'm  reading  in some of the agent blogs, publishers aren't all that hot for "new" series books, either. Used to be the author would get a contract for 3 books (especially in mysteries), and the contract would be renewed if sales were good for another 3 titles, and so on. But these days, it's more of a "write a good stand-alone and if it sells, then we'll see about more of the same." 

I wonder if some of the well known authors get tired of writing about the same characters for 10+ books. Hmnnn.

amy


----------



## Gordon Ryan (Aug 20, 2010)

Well, everyone has to have a first post I suppose.  Just found the Kindle forum, so here goes.

Stand alone or series need not be exclusive.  Many of my favorite authors produce a continuing cast of characters, but each story is completely stand alone.  When picking up a book from the grouping, one might see the occasional reference to something the character did in years (books) past, but it generally does not keep the reader from enjoying the story.  Lee Child (Jack Reacher) Tom Clancy (Jack Ryan) John Gilstrap (Jon Grave) and several others use this format to bring the reader into an immediate familiarity with the primary characters.  So, my answer to the question is: I like both.  How's that for sitting on the fence with my first forum post?


----------



## Carolyn J. Rose Mystery Writer (Aug 10, 2010)

Both. Sometimes a book just feels complete, all the loose ends are tied up, and the ending resonates. But sometimes a book ends with the characters already on the way to a new adventure, and sometimes I'm the one who wants the characters to go on.
Being a Virgo, if I start a series, I like to start at the beginning, but that doesn't always happen. I'll pick up a book because I'm hooked by the blurb and start reading before I realize it's part of a series.
When I wrote Hemlock Lake, I envisioned it as a stand-alone mystery. But as time passed, I saw how other connections could develop among the character and I'm now at work on a sequel.


----------



## 4Katie (Jun 27, 2009)

I love both, but a series is so much more fun. I love getting to know th characters and their histories. It's gives me so much more than just reading a stand-alone book.

I, too, have to read books in a series in order. Recently I read #5 before #4, and I thought my head was going to exlode. Had to quicky read #4, so the world could spin properly on its axis again.

The BEST thing is discovering a series after it's been completed. It's like a book-reading orgy!


----------



## jason10mm (Apr 7, 2009)

My preferred fiction genres (fantasy, sci-fi and technothriller) are all prone to seriesitis, not really sure why. Marketing I guess, plus world building, particularly in sci-fi and the more recent "gritty" fantasy worlds, can be time consuming and repetitive, so just sticking to a background setting makes some sense. The horror genre seems to be the opposite, mostly stand-alone novels, though I suppose even Stephen King has a loosely adhered to common background. Must be due to the modern setting.

Fortunately by rotating around genres, spicing it up with non-fiction and short stories, I can keep even the most formulaic series somewhat fresh. Takes discipline though to not just rip through a series and burn out on that authors style.


----------



## Disappointed (Jul 28, 2010)

Amyshojai said:


> Based on what I'm reading in some of the agent blogs, publishers aren't all that hot for "new" series books, either. Used to be the author would get a contract for 3 books (especially in mysteries), and the contract would be renewed if sales were good for another 3 titles, and so on. But these days, it's more of a "write a good stand-alone and if it sells, then we'll see about more of the same."


Huh, do you mind showing a link? Because I've read the opposite on a writer blog (can't find link, still looking) for new authors. That there's an advantage to building a readership that follows a series to launch a career. Amanda Hocking and Zoe Winters come to mind.


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

I like both; I guess it depends on the story.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

Bane766 said:


> Of course some authors just refuse to finish the series (I'm looking at you Melanie Rawn!)  and that sucks bad. Some are kinda slow...aka Robert Jordan (who died and didn't get to finish his series-someone else is finishing it) and George R R Martin (who's newest book is over 3 years after he said it would be done).


I'm looking at Melanie Rawn too! I've all but given up on the Exiles.  
I wonder if George R R Martin knows, or cares, how many people are seriously p*ssed off with waiting for the next book ?

eta: to answer the OPs question, I think on the whole I prefer a series but I love a good stand alone book too.


----------



## CaraMarsi27 (Aug 7, 2010)

I used to love series, but nowadays I find I get bored after the first book. Each book in a series should stand alone. Editors love, love, love series so they must sell. If you've got a series, you'll have a much better chance of getting an agent and a publisher.


----------



## EllenR (Mar 31, 2009)

I enjoy both single novels and series, but I much prefer books that are in a series. I love it if I can read them all in a row!


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Question: Do you like books that are in series or do you prefer ones that stand alone?
> 
> Answer: Yes.


I'm gonna have to agree with Ann on this one.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Add me to the "both, but really love a good series" pile. Like a few others, I'm impatient and lose interest if the gap between books is too big. It's TV series that go on extended hiatus. When they come back, I've usually moved on to something else and can't get as excited about them as I once was.


----------



## TriBen (Jun 7, 2010)

I don't like books in a series and ignore them even if they sound interesting. I do love a good detective novel where the main character is carried on from novel to novel, but they must be stand alone novels without any hint of a continuing story.
I like Lucas Davenport in John Sanford's novels and Alex Cross in James Patterson's novels.

Trish


----------



## Guest (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't like serial series.  Serial being an ongoing tale with no end in sight.  A trilogy is great. We know where it starts and we know it has an ending.  But serials that drag on book after book after book after book become mundane.  ie: The Wheel of Time, and The Sword of Truth, both great beginings, but they seem to never end and, now I've lost interest.  just MHO


----------



## Cuechick (Oct 28, 2008)

I prefer stand alone books, even though I just finished The Hunger Games series and really liked it. I just feel lucky I discovered it just before the third was released. I do hate waiting for a book, I also hate finding a book that looks really good, only to find out there are prior books I need to read first.


----------



## Selcien (Oct 31, 2008)

I'm going to have to say series.

The way I look at it is if I like something a lot then there's a very good chance that I'll want to read more, if I don't like it enough to want more then I can simply stop, or rather, just never bother continuing it. It does help that my approach is to only have one unread book in a series at a time, and that book helps determine whether I move on with a series.


----------

