Series? Or stand-alones?
 

I was just thinking about this earlier - do you guys prefer to read books that are part of a series? Or do you enjoy stand-alone novels more instead? Or for that matter, books that can be stand alones, but have recurring characters, do you feel the urge to read them in the order they were written, though it wouldn't really affect the storyline to read them out of order?

Am I making any sense? lol

I know some people who can read a long, epic series from start to finish with nothing in between, but I find myself needing to break up the stories with stand alones. For instance, I've been reading the Sword of Truth series since probably about 3 years ago, and am still only up to like number 7 or something because I read so many different things in between. I'm afraid I'll get burnt out on the stories and characters if I read only one series for a long period of time with no breaks.

So I was just curious to see if we had any marathon series readers here.

For me, it all depends on one thing- the quality of the writing and how much I like the author.

Usually though, I go for series. And if I REALLY like the series, I can and will go marathon on it.

I remember someone commenting in another thread - what about when you get to where the author's at and you have to wait a while for the next book? Simply read them as they write them? Or wait until there're several to read all at once?

Usually I discover the author when they're about halfway into the series. So hey. Gooood chunk of reading right there. Then I wait eagerly for the books and read them as they come out... or forget about them for a while, and then read the next chunk.

I tend to read series more often than standalones. My favorite is to read a trilogy, then take a break, then another trilogy... or just to read an entire series through, if it's more than that.

I suppose that's part of why I've been such a big fan of authors like Mercedes Lackey or C.J. Cherryh.. I feel like the story is moving along at the right pace for me.

But that doesn't mean that I won't look for a standalone book. Recently, I got Poison Study by Maria Snyder as a gift... Was content reading just that. Though now I've learned that is has a sequel, so I don't know if it counts... Heh. Don't mind me.

I would have to say that I definitely prefer reading books if they are apart of a series. When you get an author that knows you have to keep their readers interested for a good long time will try and make their stories more interesting, or have plots running from the first book to the last. I also believe that you get a better or more deep understanding of all the characters.

One book authors are perfectly fine, but if I find an author I like and read their one book...more than likely I'll fall in love with the characters and will want more books with them anyway! :p

So definatly series books for me.

Add me to the list of people that like books as apart of a series. Though, it will have to depend on the author. If I like the author, then bring the series on!!!

I love getting to feel involved in the many interweavings of what makes the characters in the books them. I learn so much more about characters in a series than I do in just a book. I like knowing that there is more to look forward to when the next book comes out. ;o

I hate when I'm reading a good book and it just ends. While I love stand alone books by great authors that are in general great books, I feel at a loss when I see the pages to the end of the book grow less and less. I'm the type of person that loves to have more to read about what I enjoy reading. I always feel a sense of disappointment hen I come to the end of my story. =(

I like both. Sometimes, stand-alones are good, because you get the story all in one heap and it's not stretched out endlessly. Series are nice, especially if you read them while they are going on because then you can enjoy them for a longer amount of time.

It depends on how good the book is. If it's a good book I would prefer it in a series so it will last longer. With a bad book, I like it when it is a stand alone book because once I start a series I feel somewhat obligated to finish it.

I like both. It depends on the mood I'm in when I'm starting a book, and how long it takes for me to read that book/series. I'm really bad about starting new books while I'm in the middle of old ones. Usually because I can't find the old one. Or there was the Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan, of which I read the majority. Still, I know that it took me a long time to read it, and I know I interrupted myself a lot. Nowadays, long series just discourage me; I don't check out books from a library, and the price for a long series is... daunting.

I've come to find that series are a lot more fun then single books. Series keeps on going, keeps your interest, I feel like a lot of single books just end too fast and I want more to happen. But thats just me however. Some of my favorite series have been Smoke Theif/Dream Theif by Shana Abe, and Blue Moon, Hunters Moon, and then Dark Moon (have yet to finish) can't remember the author's name.

They are awesome though ^^

For me it will depend what mood I am in. I commented in another thread that I had recently read a couple of stand alone books. Just whatever catches my eye in the grocery store or Target or wherever.

Then again sometimes I might want to catch up on a series. I read the first three books in The Song of Ice and Fire series by R.R. Martin but I have yet to read the latest book. I also still have to read the latest book in The Wheel of Time series. I've read almost all of the books by Terry Brooks and his various series of Shannara and Magic Kingdom of Landover but still have to finish books from The Word and Void Series.

So many books... so little free time.

I like both. Most of the time, however, I only buy series when I have the money to buy the majority of them in one shot. Stand-alones I do enjoy considerbly as well. My two favorite authors right now, Charles de Lint and Tamora Pierce, have stand alones I considerably enjoy since, In Charles de Lint's case places are often reused, and in Pierce's case, she brings in characters from earlier series or stand alones. Most of Tamora Pierce's book infact have characters in them from previous books, which I like a lot.

series vs novels
 

i love both types, stand-alones have (if they're any good) carved a little niche for themselves in anyones booklist, though on the other hand like some one in the thread said, you always have something to look forward to next in a series with lots of anticipation for them.
But stand-alone have their downsides, their only one book with no sequel which suck if there is an undercurrent or some characters that make you exclaim "What happens next!" and you won't ever find out :cry: unless there's a squeal and then it won't be a stand-alone will it? Series also have their downsides since if a series is boring or annoying it can drag on with each installment and sometimes the plot can become really stale, or too much going on with so many different characters making you :?
Still i love books so it's impossible for me to take a side in this debate, too much fun reading both :lol:

It depends. If it's a stand-alone, you can expect the story to be short and sweet, with a neat and tidy ending. However, sometimes the story is just too grand to fit in a book, and when the author crams everything into one volume, it feels rushed.

On the other hand, series that go on forever and ever get boring eventually.