# Do you HAVE to read a series in order?



## L.J. Sellers novelist (Feb 28, 2010)

I hear this from readers on a mystery forum. They absolutely must read a series in order, and some say they have to have all the books in their possession before they even read the first. I wonder how prevalent this sentiment is. As a reader, it's not true for me. I often read the book that has just come out, especially if it's getting a lot of buzz. If I like it, I'll go back and read the rest. What about you?
L.J.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

I prefer to read the series in order because the character development is interesting, and there are often references to previous events and characters. I get a lot more out of the book if I understand such references. As for having all of the books in the series before beginning to read, that would be great, but it also might be quite expensive. (I just started reading the "In Death" series, which is now up to 39 or 40 books. I'm finding that I'll buy two or three at a time, in order, of course, just so that I know I'll have the next one in the series when I'm ready for it. The old "Be prepared" motto of my Girl Scout days still holds true, I think.


----------



## JoeMitchell (Jun 6, 2010)

No, if I'm going to read anything in a series, I'll always start with #1.  This is one of those absurd questions to me, like the one last week asking people if they like to skip ahead when a book starts getting good, to reach the end quicker because it's so awesome.

When I was a kid I loved going to the movies, and didn't care when the show started since I'd stay and see it again from the beginning.  I did this for a few years, and I still remember the midpoint of each movie where it 'began' for me as I watched and tried to fill in the blanks of what I'd missed.  After a few years of this I realized how silly it was, and I should just check the schedule and plan ahead to see the movie from the start.  This, reading book series out of order, is like that.  Start from the beginning and you won't be left wondering what you've missed.


----------



## AnelaBelladonna (Apr 8, 2009)

I must read them in order.


----------



## warobison (Aug 29, 2010)

HAVE to?  No

PREFER to?  Absolutely


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

For the most part, I prefer to read them in order. But some series don't necessarily go in any order. Take Dan Brown, for example. He's written 3 books featuring his main character Robert Langdon. But that is where the connection among all three books ends. There is usually only one very brief mention of the proceeding book and they are otherwise 3 completely individual books and it doesn't matter what order you read them in. I read Da Vinci Code first even though it comes after Angels and Demons and it didn't make a bit of difference. Also, the movie for Angels and Demons was set after the movie for Da Vinci Code because again, the plots don't go in any kind of specific order.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Yeah, if there's an order, I want to read it in that order.  I've been wanting to start Sue Grafton's mystery series, and I finally got the 'A is for Alibi' audio book from the library.

Been wanting to try Clive Cussler too, but I'm not sure where to start.

However, I didn't have any problem reading Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes out of order, so maybe it doesn't matter.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Must.read.in.order  

I am a bit obsessive about that, but absolutely I have to read in order. I research always beforehand, use fantasticfiction to make out order of series and make lists. Sometimes in certain series, especially Paranormals, there are even novellas that are sorted in the order somewhere. 

It would upset me to read #4 before #2.   You can never go back, never re discover the things you now know already. Of course I am talking about series that are at least somewhat connected. But even if its just some characters mentioned, I still want to read in order.


----------



## cagnes (Oct 13, 2009)

Yep, I *have* to read them in order. I don't have to have all the books in my possession, but I make sure I can get them easily before I commit to the series.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Cindy416 said:


> I prefer to read the series in order because the character development is interesting, and there are often references to previous events and characters. I get a lot more out of the book if I understand such references. As for having all of the books in the series before beginning to read, that would be great, but it also might be quite expensive. (I just started reading the "In Death" series, which is now up to 39 or 40 books. I'm finding that I'll buy two or three at a time, in order, of course, just so that I know I'll have the next one in the series when I'm ready for it. The old "Be prepared" motto of my Girl Scout days still holds true, I think.


I do this, too. As a for instance, I started reading the Mrs. Murphy series (cozy mysteries) at about... book 5 or 6? I loved it, so I went back and got the first books of the series. Now, once I've determined that I like a series I'll read them in order. I think it's also important to make a distinction between a series and a trilogy, for instance. Eh, what's the term? I'm thinking series as in "each book stands on its own, but is set in the same world and follows the same characters" vs. "This is part 1, this is part 2, this is part 6". I would NEVER start a set-of-six (I'm thinking of Jim Butcher's Codex Alera, which is comprised of six books) with book 3 or 4, for instance.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

swolf said:


> .
> 
> Been wanting to try Clive Cussler too, but I'm not sure where to start.


Start with Raise The Titanic..that's the first one I adored.. Gone downhill a lot recently.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

I also like to read them in order. But often - I will read one book first (not knowing the order) which hooks me on an author..and then I consult http://www.stopyourekillingme.com/ to find out what I missed in order.. and what comes after in order.

Something else I like about this website is that if you select a book - it takes you right to Amazon.. Such a deal!


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

Absolutely has to be in order.


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

cagnes said:


> Yep, I *have* to read them in order. I don't have to have all the books in my possession, but I make sure I can get easily before I commit to the series.


^^ Me too ^^

I *MUST* read them in order. If I'm reading a book only to discover I'm in the middle of a series, I'll stop reading that one and track down the first book...

(I've even organized my Kindle library to show the series # and put them all in order when I sort by author)



Atunah said:


> Must.read.in.order
> 
> I am a bit obsessive about that, but absolutely I have to read in order. I research always beforehand, use fantasticfiction to make out order of series and make lists. Sometimes in certain series, especially Paranormals, there are even novellas that are sorted in the order somewhere.
> 
> It would upset me to read #4 before #2.  You can never go back, never re discover the things you now know already. Of course I am talking about series that are at least somewhat connected. But even if its just some characters mentioned, I still want to read in order.


Oh yes, can't forget about the novellas.. I have to track those down too snd stick them in where they belong..

Goodreads is very useful for getting series information.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

bordercollielady said:


> I also like to read them in order. But often - I will read one book first (not knowing the order) which hooks me on an author..and then I consult http://www.stopyourekillingme.com/ to find out what I missed in order.. and what comes after in order.


What an awesome website!!! Thanks a lot for referring to it here. I had no idea such a resource was available. I'll have to send the link to my daughters.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

Cindy416 said:


> What an awesome website!!! Thanks a lot for referring to it here. I had no idea such a resource was available. I'll have to send the link to my daughters.


You are welcome. One of my friends told me about it and now its one of my favorite sites. It has a lot of other stuff in there too.. about new releases, etc. Just wish there was something like it for non-mystery series..


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I came across this site yesterday. It lets you track series and you get notified. Haven't tried much on the site yet though.

http://www.fictfact.com/


----------



## emalvick (Sep 14, 2010)

I prefer to read series in order, but I don't feel like its a requirement. For me, it depends on how dependent books are on the previous releases, especially in terms of plot (character-wise I manage).

In a short series (<6 books) I almost always read in order usually because that is how I discover it. Other series like the James Bond books or as I am contemplating reading the Patrick O'brian series Aubrey-Maturin series, I will choose books that I think will be the most interesting and read those. I find that I don't "need" the books to be read in order. I also can't justify going out and doing all 20 at once.

Last, this question also brings to mind the Chronicles of Narnia. I grew up with a boxed set that was ordered by publication (as most people here probably know of), but apparently in the last 15+ years the order has been adjusted by various entities (people, publishers, etc). I don't know a right answer as I only know it by the order I read it (The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe first), but given the "controversy" over the order, one could do what they want. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Narnia#Reading_order)


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

If i have a choice, I will definitely move through a series in order. However, I often discover a book I picked up is part of a series only after i have finished it. In fact, that is almost always the case. So, the rule about reading in order is usually violated with the first book I read. Then I start backtracking and reading in order. Harlan Coben's Myron Bolitar series is a good example. There is a progression in the lives of all the characters as the series progresses.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Depends on what you mean by reading in order. Internal chronological? Date of publication?

If the books aren't closely tied together, then I don't care what order I read them in. As an example, the first Amber series by Zelazny would be confusing if not read in order. Stephen Brust's Vlad Taltos series should be read in chronological order and not in order published (the second and third take place before the first, IIRC). Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe series can mostly be read and enjoyed in any order (except the Zeck trilogy), but I prefer to read them in order. Sherlock Holmes? Any order (well, possibly excepting the first - _A Study in Scarlet_ - where Homes and Watson meet),

Do the Jack Reacher novels need to be read in order? I don't think so. Robert Crais' Elvis Cole novels probably benefit from reading in order due to the changes in his relationship with what's-her-name (sorry, can't think of the name).

For me, it really depends on how stand-alone the stories are. Christie's Poirot and Marple stories can be read in any order, but Sayers' Wimsey-Vane stories should definitely be read in order.

Mike


----------



## prairiesky (Aug 11, 2009)

Yes, if I'm going to invest time with a series, I feel the need to read in order.


----------



## mistyd107 (May 22, 2009)

absolutely no question...its why I'm beyond glad to have come across www.fictfact.com


----------



## julydreamer (Jun 29, 2010)

yeah I have to read a series in order, I'm a big series reader because I get so sad having to give up reading after I'm engrossed if it's just one book. but I also don't like to start a series until it is complete. if I do then I must reread each book when the next is about to come out to refresh myself on the storyline. so needless to say I keep an eye on series I might like for when they are complete. before starting any series I check different websites to make sure that it is complete and no more books are being written. nothing worse than being left with a cliffhanger and having to wait a year or two to find out what happened, I hate it! lol


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

I prefer to read in order. 

But on rare occasions (I say rare because I usually vet out a book enough before picking it up to know if it's a series or not) I might get a book not realizing it is part of a series. 

For example, Sujata Massey's  mystery series and Laura Crum's horse vet series. I was in the library browsing the stacks, saw the author name on the first, remembered it being recommended to me by a very trusted source (probably the only times I forgo my usual vetting process), and grabbed a title at random since I had a bus to catch. I just happened to see the Laura Crum book on the way out on a book stand, and decided to take a chance on the horsey title and cover. (I'm a sucker for horse based books, but the horses better be a HUGE part of the story and not just decoration.) 

Both were three, four books into the series and, while I was satisfied with them as standalones, it peeved me to no end they were part of a series (and without numbers!)  But I eventually ended up reading them in order, although I liked them too much to restrict myself to that.

If I KNOW a book is part of a series, I will read in order. And I won't wait for them all to be published to start, life's too short for that.


----------



## stormhawk (Apr 29, 2009)

I prefer to read series in order, usually there's backstory that you need to know before you move forward. The couple of times that I haven't, it's been because I've had to chase down books.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

Luvmy4brats said:


> ^^ Me too ^^
> 
> I *MUST* read them in order. If I'm reading a book only to discover I'm in the middle of a series, I'll stop reading that one and track down the first book...
> 
> ...


Count me into the bunch as well. It drives me nuts if I get books out of order in a series.

As to whether I have to have them all before I read/start a series? No, but it is nice to start a series that is already complete but honestly it wouldn't detour me from starting a series if I didn't have access to them all right away or they weren't all released yet.

In fact I am reading several series that are still very active.


----------



## Erick Flaig (Oct 25, 2010)

The quest for a new series to explore is exhilarating thing, and the only shopping I actually enjoy.  Things can get stale in a series; I like the freshest cut, so I prefer to start at the beginning.  If later books become too cut-'n-paste, I drop out.  Time is too short to re-read the same characters moving through the same plot, speaking the same dialogue.  Television was invented for that.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

It depends on the series. While I generally prefer to read them in order, especially the first time through, it is a stronger requirement if the books are very serialized in nature (e.g. a typical fantasy trilogy that is really one long story), and less of a requirement where they are more episodic (e.g. many detective series).


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

if they are meant to be a series, yes, I read them in order, but I don't HAVE to own them all first.

I do not however read the Star Trek novels in order, because unless they are a part of a sub-set meant to be in order, none of them relate to the others except for basics.


----------



## Hoosiermama (Dec 28, 2009)

I prefer to read in order, because invariably, there's some reference to an incident in an earlier book that'll drive me nuts til I read it. I just finished the In Death series (JD Robb) on my Kindle and two of the books aren't available in Kindle format. I want to know what happened in those two books, and I'll have to see if I can get them from the library.


----------



## Carol Hanrahan (Mar 31, 2009)

I generally don't read series books.  Well, I read all the Nancy Drews as a kid.
I started reading Alexander McCall Smith's The Ladies No. 1 Detective Agency with book 3.  Loved it, then I read book 2, then book 1.  It didn't matter a whole lot.  But since then, I've read them in order, mostly because I grab the latest one as soon as it comes out!


----------



## cagnes (Oct 13, 2009)

mistyd107 said:


> absolutely no question...its why I'm beyond glad to have come across www.fictfact.com


I love fictfact.com for keeping track of my series!


----------



## chiffchaff (Dec 19, 2008)

bordercollielady said:


> I also like to read them in order. But often - I will read one book first (not knowing the order) which hooks me on an author..and then I consult http://www.stopyourekillingme.com/ to find out what I missed in order.. and what comes after in order.
> 
> Something else I like about this website is that if you select a book - it takes you right to Amazon.. Such a deal!


I use this site all the time too! I'm another must-read-in-order person, and if I get a recommendation for a book I always check to see if it's a series and start at the beginning. As someone else said in this thread, you can't go back and rediscover something about a character. So I don't want to read about how they are AFTER some life-changing event, then read the previous book where that event occurs and already know the outcome. Plus, I admit to being a little OCD about stuff like this and just like to do books in order!


----------



## chiffchaff (Dec 19, 2008)

to those who mentioned fictfact.com  - thank you!  I didn't know about that site.  It's bookmarked now.


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

I have to read series's's's in order. If I run across an interesting-looking book, I'll go so far as to check and see if it's part of a series or a stand-alone. I've never heard of fictfact, but another good site I've used for awhile to get that kind of info is http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/

I don't have to have all the books 'on hand', but if only some in the series are available on Kindle -- I'll check -- then I won't start the series until they all are. (Of course, that can always change later, unfortunately, as to which ones are and aren't available. Someone mentioned upthread that they were reading the In Death series and ran across 2 that aren't on Kindle -- whichever ones were missing, they used to be available, because I have them all, just re-read the whole series over the past 2-3 weeks, but had bought most of them two years ago, so don't know when that changed.)


----------



## Laurensaga (Sep 29, 2010)

warobison said:


> HAVE to? No
> PREFER to? Absolutely


I'm with you. I don't have to, but I sure prefer to.


----------



## Selcien (Oct 31, 2008)

I've always felt inclined to start from the beginning, in the order the books are released, but I'm even more inclined to do so after having read _Bite Me_, as starting with the third book in the series was a huge mistake. The only thing that I need to do is to make a habit of checking to see if a book is in a series before buying it.

As for the idea of having an entire series before even starting the first book... there's absolutely no way I'd invest so much into a series before even starting it. It's one book at a time for me, that way I can drop it at any time I feel inclined to do so.


----------



## Hoosiermama (Dec 28, 2009)

Another thank you for fictfact.com!


----------



## Pinworms (Oct 20, 2010)

People who insist on reading a series in order are absurd.  I make my own rules and will read how I feel like.  I don't even read the pages of a book in order, I skip around and make every book a "Choose your own adventure".


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Pinworms said:


> People who insist on reading a series in order are absurd. I make my own rules and will read how I feel like. I don't even read the pages of a book in order, I skip around and make every book a "Choose your own adventure".


Well. . . .maybe people who like to read series in order feel that those who make their own rules are absurd?  

Or maybe you're trying to be funny. . . .hard to tell with no smileys.


----------



## stormhawk (Apr 29, 2009)

Does it make anyone else crazy when people try to read Narnia starting with Magicians Nephew rather than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe?


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

swolf said:


> Yeah, if there's an order, I want to read it in that order. I've been wanting to start Sue Grafton's mystery series, and I finally got the 'A is for Alibi' audio book from the library.
> 
> Been wanting to try Clive Cussler too, but I'm not sure where to start.
> 
> However, I didn't have any problem reading Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes out of order, so maybe it doesn't matter.


Count me in this camp. I have a huge TBR pile, mostly suggested series from friends. Sherrilyn Kenyon's Dark Hunters, Christtine Feehan's Dark series, Tamora Pierce's works...I keep finding several reading orders for these, so I've decided to go straight to the source for new authors. I google for them and see if they recommend a reading order on their website.

Discworld is another large series that can be read in any order IMHO. Although it can be fun to read them grouped by main character.


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

stormhawk said:


> Does it make anyone else crazy when people try to read Narnia starting with Magicians Nephew rather than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe?


I don't know anyone who's tried it. I'm glad I didn't, because if that was the first one I read, I don't know if I would have continued. Uncle Andrew creeped me out.


----------



## stormhawk (Apr 29, 2009)

terryr said:


> I don't know anyone who's tried it. I'm glad I didn't, because if that was the first one I read, I don't know if I would have continued. Uncle Andrew creeped me out.


I always maintain that knowing how the world started screws up the enjoyment and wonder of TLTWATW. You have to not know what's going to happen the first time that wardrobe door opens.

I have a friend (Ecuadoran, never read the books as a child) who insists on reading the the "wrong" order because that's how her set of books is numbered. She bought them in the late 90s or early 2000s, when the set with the changed (and renumbered) covers came out.


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

With series that relate enough to each other I read those in sequence.  For series that it doesn't seem to matter then I don't care.  I read a lot of Hardy Boy books when I was younger and I know I didn't read them in order.  Each one seemed to be independent mysteries with the same characters solving them.

I don't have to own an entire series before I start reading them.  In fact I prefer to get the first book in a series and read it to be sure I like it before spending money on the rest of that series.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Anyone read the Richard Sharpe series? That's a case where each book is set in a specific time during the Napoleonic Wars, but the author wrote them in a different order. In that case, I try to follow the historical order rather than the order in which they were written.


----------



## carl_h (Sep 8, 2010)

I "prefer" to read a series in order, but that's only if I know it to be a series and start with the first one.  There are many that I've read and later found out to be a series, then, if I liked the book, I'll go back to the first and then read through the series.  In some cases, it's necessary to read them in order.  In others, less so.  Most of the authors seem to do a fairly good job of not leaving you totally in the dark without overkill (i.e. filler).  Then there are others, like W.E.B. Griffin, who sometimes painfully retell prior events ad nauseum.  

I've never felt the need to own all of the series prior to starting them, though.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

Yes, I absolutely *have* to read in order. I don't need to own the whole series to start but if I do happen to have them I have to read every one straight after the other.


----------



## PG4003 (Patricia) (Jan 30, 2010)

I very much prefer to read a series in order.  Not too long ago, I wanted to read Dennis Lehane's books, then I found out some of them are part of a series, so I wanted to read them in order.  Well, guess what, the very first one (A Drink Before the War, I think it was), was not available for Kindle.  So I actually bought a paperback copy.  But since I got my Kindle I can't bear to read a paper book, so it sat here and sat here, and I actually already had several of the later ones on my Kindle.  Then I got oh so lucky, the first one was finally Kindleized!  So I'm about half way through the series now.

I also keep hand written 3x5 index cards stuck inside the cover on my Kindle, listing various series and the order they are supposed to be read in.


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

stormhawk said:


> Does it make anyone else crazy when people try to read Narnia starting with Magicians Nephew rather than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe?


Guilty as charged. I'd watched the old BBC (?) movie for _The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe_, so I wasn't completely lost. All the same, sometimes books aren't meant to be read in chronological order. You get so much more out of it when you get the information in its proper context.

I tend to read through a series in order but then jump about when I reread. You pick up new things that way


----------



## RiddleMeThis (Sep 15, 2009)

I absolutely 100% MUST MUST MUST read the series in order. I will stop midway through a book if I find out its a series and start the first book.

I started and read Chronicles of Narnia with The Magicians Nephew and Im not sure I would want to read it any other way. This is the set I had, and it started with The Magicians Nephew


----------



## jason10mm (Apr 7, 2009)

The Sharpe series is interesting. The "prequel" Indian campaigns were written MUCH later, yet the seeds of those novels were present way back in the early Sharpe books, set later in Spain. Cornwell must do some fantastic background work before he puts pen to paper. Then again, it isn't that hard to stick to a pre-set series of events for him, given the way he mismashes history and fiction (in a good way).

I almost always read in order, though acknowledge that in many series, especially technothrillers/spy/crime books it is largely unnecessary. About the only linear series I'm tempted to read out of order would be the Wheel of Time series. I just want to read the end, I can use wiki to fill me in on the cyclical go nowhere filler of the previous 6 books I didn't bother to read 

And yes, Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe is FIRST!


----------



## ESStobymom (Mar 16, 2009)

I much prefer to read series books in the order in which they were written, but until I discovered FictFact.com, it was often difficult to get that information.  Now I track all my series books on that web site, and it also notifies me when new books in the series come out.  There are some series (someone mentioned Jack Reacher) where it's not as important, and others, (Louise Penny's Detective Gamache novels come to mind), where I felt I got more out of the books by reading them in order.  And with the popularity of the Steig Larssen series (The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo, etc), I think if you don't read those in order, it would be harder to keep track of the characters.


----------



## monkeyluis (Oct 17, 2010)

I don't have to read one after the other but I do want to read them IN order.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

swolf said:


> However, I didn't have any problem reading Hercule Poirot out of order, so maybe it doesn't matter.


Just make sure you read "Curtain" last!


----------



## Rie142 (Oct 28, 2009)

warobison said:


> HAVE to? No
> 
> PREFER to? Absolutely


Same here. I don't have to own all of them before I start reading but I like to.


----------



## Monti (Apr 4, 2009)

I think it depends on the series. If it's connected loosely, then order doesn't matter. If it's ongoing with a character focus, it does. I like the idea of having a continuing character in a series and enjoy reading those books.

Monti


----------



## VHopkins_Author (Sep 15, 2010)

I don't think you have to read a series in order, but if the book is a good one, it should stand on its own merit alone with enough background woven into it to make sense. I've read seven books in a series, and frankly each book built upon the other one. If readers were not familiar with the back story, it wouldn't make sense. I'm attempting my second in a series and plan to add enough background to make it stand by itself and hopefully pique the interest for the first. We'll see how that works!

http://thepriceofinnocence.com


----------



## stormhawk (Apr 29, 2009)

RiddleMeThis said:


> I absolutely 100% MUST MUST MUST read the series in order. I will stop midway through a book if I find out its a series and start the first book.
> 
> I started and read Chronicles of Narnia with The Magicians Nephew and Im not sure I would want to read it any other way. This is the set I had, and it started with The Magicians Nephew


See, that's what I mean. Doesn't even know it's wrong. And what a lurid cover ... unicorn dripping blood off it's horn. I had problems with those covers ... deceptive advertising. It's not Stephen King for small children!

Okay. You can go on about your regularly scheduled on-topic discussion. Digression over.


----------



## RiddleMeThis (Sep 15, 2009)

stormhawk said:


> Doesn't even know it's wrong.


I'm aware that it was originally the other way, but I enjoy it this way and don't think I would have enjoyed it any other way.


----------



## L.J. Sellers novelist (Feb 28, 2010)

I agree that some series read more like trilogies with ongoing story lines that carry through each book. These really do need to be read in order. Series with stories that are more loosely connected, which are usually plot driven rather than character driven, can be read out of order with less sense of missing something. Of course, I prefer to read both types in order if I can, but I'm not compulsive about it. If one of my discussion groups is reading book three, I'll read the story so I can participate, even if I don't have time to read the first two.
L.J.


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

I just remembered a series I read as a child: the Redwall series. All of the books can function as standalone pieces or act as a part of a larger story with a timeline that spans centuries. It didn't seem to matter much if they were read in order or not, from what I can recall.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

It depends on the series.

The Vlad Taltos series by Steven Brust isn't written in chronological order. Some of the later books take place before the first book in the series. I think I started reading it with book 2 or three.

Meanwhile Lord of the Rings and the Tom Clancy's books featuring Jack Ryan are books that I had to read in order to get the most enjoyment out of them.


----------



## MelissaF (Oct 28, 2010)

Yeah i want to read them in order and thanks for sharing it here.


----------



## Aravis60 (Feb 18, 2009)

I like to read in order, but in some series it is okay to skip around. And put me down as another person who does not like the new Chronicles of Narnia order. I will always read them the old way.


----------



## Linjeakel (Mar 17, 2010)

If there's any kind of continuation of story involved, even if it's just the development of the main character, then yes, I have to read it in order. I'll stop half way through a book if I realise it's part of a series and not the first one and go back to the beginning before continuing. It's one of the reasons that I _hate_ prequels, be it in books or movies. Heck, I don't even like _flashbacks_ within a story!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

jmiked said:


> Stephen Brust's Vlad Taltos series should be read in chronological order and not in order published (the second and third take place before the first, IIRC).


Gotta disagree on this one. Unless you wait another 10 years to start reading them, you cannot read them in order. He usually publishes one book that took place in the past and one that is in chronological order and alternates them. I think he also intends for that to be the case. I got my husband turned on to the Vlad books a couple of months ago and he actually enjoys the fact that he "knows" some things that Vlad does not - for instance


Spoiler



that Sethra is Kiera the thief


.


----------

