Skip Over or Skip to?

A couple of weeks ago Kris posted a blog about 'Keeping Calm and Turning to Page 394'.

Now everyone else seemed to immediately 'get' that this meant turning to the end of a book to find out how it ends.

I'm not sure what it says about me - maybe that some of the books I read are 500 pages long? - but my first thought was that this meant skip to the sex scene. lol

Which brings me to the subject of my post.

Recently I've found more and more often that I skip over the sex scenes. Maybe it's because they all seem to read the same - cock, thrust, cock, nipples, channel, cock,...yawn! I seem to find the characters have more chemistry when they're not having sex, than when they are.

I can't remember the last really good sex scene I read. (Thinking hard about it, it was probably a m/m, either Jordan Castillo Price or Josh Lanyon, and that was a while ago).

Maybe it's because as soon as the characters get in bed (or wherever) that they suddenly stop being the characters and become just two bodies performing a mechanical act. I know the best sex scenes I've read, told you something about the characters, it wasn't just about the sex.

Anybody else feel the same? Or are sex scenes still working for you?

Your Wall is Made of Holes

I start this post by admitting I wanted to title it - There's a Hole in Your Bucket - but I was kind of afraid that everyone would wonder why the content of the post was so different to the title.

After reading Anchored last week, it brought to mind something I'd read on one of the romance forums. (I have the feeling I may have posted about this before, so sorry if I'm repeating myself).

There was a discussion on this aforementioned board about a certain series, and someone posted that they'd really enjoyed the series and how solid the worldbuilding was, until they realized that the wall of this 'solid' worldbuilding was actually made of holes*. As soon as they realized this, they could no longer read the books because they no longer held together for them.

I think this is something different from 'jumping the shark', which is something that can happen very quickly:-

You read something in a story - OMG! - and the next sound you hear is the crash as the book hits the wall.

I think the 'wall made of holes' situation is something that can creep on you much more stealthily whilst you're reading. It can be a series of things that niggle at you and then just one too many tips you over the edge.

What's interesting is that those books which have jumped the shark for me - usually by killing off a character I was particularly attached to - I still have strong feelings (generally of hatred) for.

But the ones where I've realized that there's actually no substance holding them together for me - just complete apathy.

So has anyone out there had similar feelings about a book? Or are you more the 'I either love it or hate it type?'. I have a copy of Real Vampires Have Curves by Gerry Bartlett, to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number on Friday.


* - and I've realized whilst writing this post that hole is one of those words that if you say it more than five times, it loses all sense of meaning.

Under the Influence

Last week, or possibly the week before...okay the week before, geez it's been a while since I posted...DL posted on the DIK blog about how she'd been inspired by the BDB series to learn American Sign Language. You can read that post by clicking here.

It got me to thinking if I'd ever been inspired to try anything or learn anything that I'd read in a book.

For some reason I had this niggling feeling that I had.

:blushes:

Then I remembered. I wish it had been something as interesting or as worthy as learning ASL, but it was not. In one of the Weather Warden books Rachel Caine wrote this yummy description of the Omnia perfume by Bulgari. I think she might have used the word chocolate. Of course, Omnia isn't sold in any of the local shops, I think in the end I tracked a bottle down online. I think it has a very nice smell but a bit heavy, not one I'd recommend if you're prone to migraines.

I still have this feeling though, that there's something else I've done/tried/attempted and failed at, after first reading about it. But I've obviously scrubbed the experience from my memory and replaced it with something less traumatic.

Anyway just wondering if you'd ever been inspired to try anything from what you'd read in your favourite fiction? I have a copy of Practical Demonkeeping by Christopher Moore to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number on Friday.

I Could Care Less

Just finished Lord of the White Hell Book One, which I loved. I'll be posting a review - hopefully tomorrow. However, on the last page there's a phrase that makes me wince a little. I guess it's a UK thing. Javier says

"You could give a shit about the academy."

Which immediately makes me think about a certain David Mitchell Soapbox episode which for your viewing pleasure I've attached below. :)

To Be Spoiled or To Not Be Spoiled?

Usually that would be a simple question for me to answer. I'd choose 90% of the time not to be spoiled. So 9 out of 10 times I choose to remain in blissful or not so blissful ignorance.

However I've just read the Dear Author review of the next Black Jewel's book by Anne Bishop - Twilight's Dawn.

Dear Author - Twilight's Dawn Review

And I think on the whole I'm glad I read it, I'm glad I got the heads up.

(I interrupt myself to add here that I enjoyed the recent novels that featured Lady Cassidy and I think I'd hoped there would be more books set in that situation, with maybe less focus on the main Black Jewel characters and more on the Shalador characters.)

Twilight's Dawn is an anthology along the lines of Dreams Made Flesh - one of my favourite comfort reads. But I don't think I'll be picking TD up. It sounds a little to me like the Black Jewels books have jumped the shark. I could be wrong, it's only one review and the book isn't released until March. Maybe I'll wait and see what other review sites have to say before picking up a copy.

But I'm glad that I haven't gone my usual route of pre-ordering the hardback.

Be warned if you read the review it contains MAJOR spoilers.

Do You Like Neat or Messy?

Storylines that is.

I've been thinking about that this week after reading Magic Bleeds by Ilona Andrews and Fallen From Grace by Laura Leone.

Do you like everything tied up at the end of a story with a nice little bow on top or do you like a little bit of mystery left at the end. Something for you to think about after you've closed the book.

Personally, I like my stories to be a little messy - not too messy, I like to have an understanding of what's going on - but I don't need to have everything spelled out for me. I think it makes things a little more real, it also engages your brain with what you're reading.

In my review of the first in the Kate Daniels series, I made a comment about Curran being a bit of a wanker - he blames Kate for misidentifying the bad guy when in fact it was he who made the suggestion. So...a little bit messy. Did he have to be such a git? lol. But having just finished book 4 in the series - Magic Bleeds - I absolutely LOVE the fact that it acknowledges that Curran does make bad decisions but cannot take it back if he does and no one is in a position to contradict him either or say - "you're being a git". It helps make the characters feel so much more real.

Fallen From Grace is the first m/f in a long time that I've really enjoyed but I wish that something that happened at the end, hadn't happened - this is a really personal thing, so for most readers I doubt it would bother them, especially if they're reading a lot of m/f contemporary anyway. But it was like - here's your happy ending and now I'm going to put a bow on it. (One of the main reasons why I've come to prefer m/m over m/f).

This type of thing always makes me think of the Amazon review of one of my favourite urban fantasy's, which complained about the hero and heroine having sex. The fact that the hero couldn't wait to get his hands on the heroine, that they didn't make love, but rather went at it like two rabbits hopped up on viagra. But I like the fact that the sex was a little messy, that they couldn't wait 'til they had access to a bedroom.

So do you like your stories all wrapped up at the end, or do you like them to be a little messy? I have a copy of On the Edge by Lynn Erickson to give away to one posted to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at randomnumber.org on Saturday.

Prologues - Yay or Nay?

I started a book last week and my mum looked over my shoulder and the following conversation went something like :-

(Mum) "You're not reading the prologue, are you?"

(Me) "Yes."

(Mum) "I never read the prologue. Why are you reading the prologue?"

(Me) "Because it's part of the story." ??!?

Which got me to wondering - surely most readers read the prologue don't they?

Maybe it's because I read a lot of murder mystery and urban fantasy, and you generally find that if there's a prologue it's important and usually three-quarters of the way through the actual book there's a big reveal and suddenly everything that happened in the prologue makes sense.

I'm sure there have been cases where I haven't wanted to read a prologue, where I've been put off a story by a badly written / boring one.

I have a vague memory of books where the prologue seems to have been a very dry recounting of either a world's history or a character's genealogy. And I admit I probably skipped those. But in general, at least these days I read the prologue. (If anything I'm more likely to skip the epilogue, especially those that seem to consist of a single page at the end - they got married and had children.)

What about you? Do you read the prologue or skip it? I have a copy of the Cravings anthology to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen on Sunday by random number at random.org.

Banned Books Week September 25th - October 2nd 2010

It's that time of year again - Banned Books week. And as always I'm kind of left wishing that I'd read more of the books that are or have been banned. The 2009 top ten list of frequently challenged books on the ALA website can be found here. And the top 100 most frequently challenged books from 2000 - 2009 can be found on the ALA website here. I have only read a few of the books on these lists, to give me a wider range of banned books that I've read I have to look back to the top 100 of 1990 - 1999, and to the banned and challenged classics list . Ironically when I read these lists most of the banned books I've read, I read whilst I was at school as part of my English lessons - 1984, To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, Animal Farm, The Pigman. And more recently as part of my English Lit. course - The Color Purple. Others are books that I just loved from my childhood - Charlotte's Web, The Wind in the Willows, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, The Lord of the Rings, Winnie the Pooh. And from my teen years when I was a bit of a Stephen King fan - Cujo, The Dead Zone, Christine. I find it almost amusing in a way that the list has changed over the past two decades from challenging Stephen King to challengine Stephenie Meyer. It's also interesting when you look at the most frequently challenged authors lists by year to see both P.C.Cast and Richelle Mead there for 2009. Presumably both for their young adult urban fantasy series. To try and rectify what I feel is a lack in my reading repertoire next year one of my challenges is going to be to read 12 banned books. I think I should be able to manage at least one a month. 

What Turns You Off in a Protagonist

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about what turns me on in a protagonist, so it seems only fair to write about what turns me off.

Stupidity

This probably ranks as number one for a lot of readers. So hardly surprising that it makes the top of the list. I think you can forgive a protagonist a lot, but stupidity is a hard one to let go. Characters should be allowed to make mistakes it's one way in which they grow and develop. But there does come a point when (if the character is constantly making mistakes and not learning from them) you begin to question if they don't deserve all the grief they attract. At that point it's usually difficult to regain any empathy you might have had for them at the beginning of the story.


Not Listening

In a way this is linked to stupidity. But when a character doesn't listen to what another character is telling them, or interprets what they are being told in a completely bizarre way it can become annoying - to put it mildly. As the reader you can 'hear' what the other character is saying. And if the character is being told something logical and interpreting it in an illogical way - it's patently obvious. If I as a reader can work out what's happening, then I think the hero/heroine should be able to as well.


I think the stupidity thing and the not listening, mainly happen because the author needs the plot to go in a certain way, so the characters serve the plot rather than the plot serving the characters.


My last turn off is a little hard to describe. But another annoying trait is if a character is 'up themselves'. Lol, I'm not sure that this translates very well. But it's almost a kind of smug vanity - a sense of superiority that isn't justified.

So these are my protagonist turn-offs. What about yours? Is there anything a hero or heroine does that really annoys you? I have a copy of Finders Keepers by Linnea Sinclair to give to one commenter on this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at random.org on SAturday.

Words, Words, Words

I admit I have started watching Spartacus : Blood and Sand and am quite enjoying it. And when I was reading historicals - several years ago now - one of my favourite eras was Roman Britain. I still have Defy the Eagle by Lynn Bartlett on my bookshelf, not that I read it that often, 'cause it's over 600 pages long and my pback copy is looking a little tatty. And one of my favourite series are the Marcus Falco books by Lindsey Davis.

With 300, Spartacus, Centurion - that time period is obviously coming back into fashion. So when I saw a new romance book set in Roman times I admit I was overcome with a little nostalgia and thought I'd check it out.

I'm not buying books at the moment having made the decision to tackle my TBR pile. But I am adding books to my wishlist after careful research.

So I search out an excerpt and within the first few paragraphs the heroine is talking about her pussy. Now I'm not a prude, I read a hell of a lot of erotic romance both m/m and f/m and probably know more words for genitalia than the average person. But this completely put me off the idea of buying the book.

Why?

Because it knocked me out of the time period. I cannot believe that this is set in Roman Britain. If you check the etymology of the word pussy most sources say it wasn't used to describe female genitalia until the mid 19th century. So I get pushed from Roman to Victorian.

I don't think you even need to know that. It just sounds wrong. (Maybe after reading the Falco novels I've been spoiled.)

Does this matter? Well it does to me. If you're going to set your book in a certain period surely you want to make it authentic on at least some level. If not, why bother writing an historical?

What does everyone else think?

What Turns You On in a Protagonist...

...this post is not going to be as provocative as the subject makes it sound. :)

After reading Psycop 1 last week I've been thinking about what really makes me like and root for a protagonist. Looking at my favourite heroes and heroines - Marcus Falco, Miles Vorkosigan, Kate Daniels, Elena Danvers, Nadia Stafford, Adrien English, Jaz Parks, Gen (from The Thief) - there is some common ground there.

So without further ado - my three favourite things to find in a hero/heroine.


Sarcasm, Painful Honesty, and not Shutting Up

Lol - I love me a sarcastic hero. Someone who has a withering put down always ready on the edge of their tongue. Someone who has a clever comment to deliver at a moment's notice.

...Jack said, "You saw my note, right? It said 'wait'."
"That was a note? I thought it was a haiku."(Made to be Broken - Kelley Armstrong)

Someone who doesn't always keep quiet when perhaps they should because they just have to push it that bit further.

"I pointed out that he'd been no help at the ford. He pointed out that I had climbed a tree. I pointed out that I had no sword. He offered to give me his, point first." (The Thief - Megan Whalen Turner)

Someone who doesn't always understand the meaning of too much information.

"...I can't think with my underwear stuck up my crack. I know it's a weakness, but it's just one of those things." (Bitten to Death - Jennifer Rardin)

And if in doubt you can always state the truth.

"...Now she believes I'm a liar. Probably because I lied to her." (A Hunger Like No Other - Kresley Cole)

Keeping the Brain Switched On

One of the other attributes that I rank highly in a protagonist is whether or not they think. I hate when I read a book and start wondering at what point the hero put their brain into neutral. (Usually this happens to serve a particularly unbelievable plot point.) Smart people are sexy. People who keep their brain ticking over no matter the situation are fun to read about.

"I could tie you to the bed, you know."
"No, you can't. It's round and you don't have any rope." (Twilight Fall by Lynn Viehl)

(Hmmm, perhaps this is a little linked to the previous point).

One of the things I most love about characters such as Miles Vorkosigan, Kate Daniels and Marcus Falco is that even when the situation is turning to complete shit all around them, their brains are still constantly churning over the possibilities.

"Hello, dove." He grinned at me. "Look at that: you don't have your pretty knife and I've got your hands. What are you gonna do now?"
I rammed my head into his nose.' (Magic Burns by Ilona Andrews)

They can be saying one thing, doing something else and thinking something else entirely. It makes for an exciting and thrilling read.


Consistency

Again this kind of links to the previous post in some ways - the character having their brain switched on- but it's also to do with the character behaving organically. I think it's important that if an author establishes a character will behave in a certain way that they are true to that. Put your character in the most awful situation imaginable but have them behave in a way that is true to them.

A brilliant example of this (and I'm going to write about it without spoilers because it just shouldn't be spoiled) is what happens to Miles Vorkosigan in Memory. Something awful happens. But it's been established since the beginning of the series that he follows this strategy of 'forward momentum' (keep going, just keep going). And up until this point it's worked pretty well for him. But in this case things just get worse and worse. He should stop...but he can't. As a reader you can see the inevitable disaster of the situation, but you also understand that Miles is behaving like Miles would.


So what are the attribues you most like your heroes/heroines to have? I have a copy of Phenomenal Girl 5 to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at random.org on Saturday.

Stalling out on a Series

I started reading Hostage to Pleasure by Nalini Singh this week - for the second time. For some reason I never made it past the first 50 pages on my first attempt. I'm not sure why because I love Singh's writing. I kind of noticed that I'm falling behind on the Changeling/Psy series and decided it was time I caught up before I got so far behind that I couldn't catch up.

This got me to thinking about the other series I no longer read - why did I stop reading them? Okay, some of them it was because they changed radically from the original concept but for some of them it seems I just stalled and never started reading them again. Are there any similarities between the series I've abandoned or is it just that I spend a lot less time reading now that I have in previous years. (Two or three years ago I'd manage at least three books a week, now if I manage one I'm doing well.)

So anyway I thought I'd look at a few of the series I'd stopped reading.


Changeling/Psy series by Nalini Singh. I have to admit this one is a bit of a mystery. (Not a good start to the post - sorry about that). I have the next two books in the series following Hostage to Pleasure on my TBR pile. But for some reason after I gave up on HtP the first time I just never got round to it again.


The Stardoc series by S. L. Viehl. Another series I love and stopped reading at Rebel Ice. Now I think I know the reason for this one. I seriously overglommed - I went into Cherijo overload. I think I read from Stardoc to Eternity Row in the course of two weeks. I need to go back and read the series from the beginning taking everything in properly. The thing I like about this series is that it has an end point. The last book (I think) has just been released. So now would be a good time to get back to it.

Stephanie Plum series. I stopped reading at book 8, possible earlier. This is the first series mentioned that I don't really have any interest in getting back to. Even though I have books 9 and 10 on my TBR pile. I think I realized I was reading the same book over and over. I also don't think it helped that at the time I was reading some fantastic fanfiction that dealt with Stephanie and Ranger in a much more interesting way than the series. I have the idea that the book that put me off is the one where Ranger and Stephanie finally got together (half a page IIRC) and after several books building up to a firework display complete with shooting stars...it was more of a damp squib really.

The Black Dagger Brotherhood by J.R.Ward. Now I'm very naughty with this series and I admit it. The main character I'm interested in is John Matthew and because of the way the books are structured you can flick through and read one character's arc and find out what happened to them first. However in Lover Avenged he turned into a bit of a wanker which kind of put me off reading the rest of the book properly.

I never got past the first book in Meljean Brook's brilliant Guardian series I think because they're just so darn long and I feel the need to have a large chunk of time available to sit down and read them. I read the first book on an 8 hour train journey. And I just haven't have any long train journey's since then. This is definitely another series I want to get caught up on. Love her writing and The Iron Duke is possibly the book I have most looked forward to in the second half of this year.

:sigh:

If nothing else this has helped me decide that my reading challenge for next year will be to catch up on as many series as possible.

So do you have any series that you've abandoned that you want to get back into? Or once you've given up do you never go back? I have a copy of Sexiest Man Alive by Diana Holquist to give away to one poster to this post. Winner to be chosen by random number at random.org on Saturday.

Let's Talk Comfort Reads

These are books that might not be your number one best reads ever, but when you're feeling a little down, which books do you reach for? Which books cheer you up?

Here are three of my comfort reads:-

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. I first read this book last year and almost immediately appreciated why so many people regard this as their comfort read. There's something incredibly satisfying about Elizabeth and Darcy's story. I'm looking forward to reading the remaining Austen on my shelf.

My remaining two picks are both short stories.

The Prince of Ebon Rih by Anne Bishop (from the Dreams Made Flesh anthology). Anne Bishop's Black Jewels books are probably my favourite books to dip into when I have a spare moment, with TPoER topping the list. It was so disappointing to read the main trilogy and not know anything about how Lucivar and Marian met and fell in love, so this short story really feels like a gift. It's got angst, humour, sex and a kindred wolf - I don't think you can ask for much more. :)

Alpha and Omega by Patricia Briggs (from the On the Prowl anthology). I love the beginning of the Charles and Anna series (so much so I have the limited edition from Subterranean Press on my bookshelf). My favourite moment being when Anna first takes her life back into her own hands by phoning Bran. She's been made to feel like she's nothing but she still finds the courage to do the right thing.

So what are your comfort reads? I have a copy of Dark Protector by Alexis Morgan to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at randomnumber.org on Monday.

When Good Characters Go Bad

Have you ever really loved a character only to have them change into a completely different person between one book and the next?

Is this just a matter of personal interpretation? You think that they've changed but actually you're wrong. Have you misjudged everything about the character to the point where you didn't see what was blindingly obvious to the rest of the readership? Or on the other hand, you're not going mad and they've definitely changed.

Is it ever acceptable for a character to do a complete 180 personality wise - as regards beliefs, character traits etc. - with no other explanation than, that's the way it is.

A couple of examples. (My personal opinions other readers may disagree)

For me John Matthew of the Black Dagger Brotherhood series changed in Lover Avenged. Up until that book he'd been my favourite character and my main reason for following the series. I loved that though he was young and unsure of himself and his worth, he had a depth and vulnerability that put you firmly on his side. Unfortunately in Lover Avenged he turned into a bit of a wanker. (I now find I'm reading the series for the relationship between Blay and Qhuinn).

Another character who suffered an extreme personality change was Nicolette Peltier of the Dark Hunter series by Sherrilyn Kenyon. She'd always been portrayed as this earth mother type, firm but fair. However, in the book Unleash the Night she turns into a right cow (for want of a better description). Apparently all the compassion, understanding and diplomacy she showed in the previous books was just for show.

I'm sure there are other cases where I've read something and thought Noooooo, that character just wouldn't do/say that. Don't you remember way back in book 2 he said he'd never do x,y or z. (Insert the appropriate action in place of the algebra)

Are there characters who you feel have changed without good reason? Or has this phenomenon never happened to you? (In which case consider yourself lucky)

I have a copy of Shadows and Lace by Teresa Medeiros* to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at randomnumber.org on Saturday.

* Yep the giveaway is going a bit historical. :)

Who Owns The Story?

Firstly I'm not sure that owns is the right word here but it feels the most appropriate. And there's a lot of topic here, so I may carry some of this over to next week.

I've recently read a couple of author interviews and over time 'witnessed' a few author meltdowns via the internet about how readers choose to interpret stories.

So who does a story belong to? Who gets to decide what it means?

My own take on this is that once a story is published it 'belongs' to the reader. If a reader chooses to interpret a story in a certain way then I think usually it's either because the author made things too vague allowing the story to be interpreted in that way, the author was influencing the reader in a certain way as a source of misdirection or the author wanted to take advantage of the wishes of the minority of their fans whilst reserving the right to write whatever they want to.

Vagueness - I don't really have a problem with. I like when authors give their readers credit. I want to engage my brain when I read. I want to puzzle things out. I don't like always having everything spelt out for me. For me the joy of reading is engaging your imagination and the more someone chooses to guide you through the specifics the less you get to do that.

Misdirection - I don't really have a problem with. :) For all the above reasons to do with vagueness. I read a LOT. And if an author can get me to think one thing while really something else is happening I love it. Mainly because this increases the re-readability of a story by 100%. To read through a story for the second time and see where you read all the signs wrong, to have the insight of knowing where a story is going, is one of the best parts of reading and it happens so rarely. (Recently read The Thief by Megan Whalen Turner which has one of these moments and I'll hopefully have the review of that up this week - loved it).

I don't have a problem with vagueness or misdirection. If it's done well the reader will 'get it'. If it's done badly it's no use the author throwing their teddies out of the pram if a reader chooses to interpret the story in their own way.

I believe the author should write the story they want to write to the best of their ability. If a fan/group of fans says they want an ethnic character or a gay character or they want a certain couple to end up together* the author should ignore it unless it's organic to the story they were already telling, unless that's where they were already going. You can't please all of the people all of the time and you shouldn't try to, you'll just end up disappointing (and annoying) everybody.

So who does a story belong to? I have a copy of Kitty and the Silver Bullet by Carrie Vaughn to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen at random by random number at randomnumber.org. on Saturday (I add here that as far as I'm aware Carrie Vaughn has never thrown her teddies out of the pram, it just happens that I have two copies of KatSB after accidentally buying a second copy. An occasional hazard of having such a HUGE TBR pile.)



*I admit this is something I'm guilty of as a reader. Sometimes you can't help yourself.

Multiple Series/Same Author

Thanks for the suggestions last week. They will definitely keep my musings topics going for the next month or so.

This week I read a review of Anne Bishop's Black Jewels books - a series that I love. And it got me to thinking why I've never been able to get into the other series she writes. And why this seems to be the case with certain authors but others I can read all the series they write.

Black Jewels is a series I've enjoyed since I read the first trilogy. But I've not been able to get into either the Ephemera books or the Tir Alainn. I struggled through the first Tir Alainn book before giving up. I'm not sure if this is a case of subject matter not appealing or the writing style being subtly different. Is the association with the Black Jewels books so strong that I don't want to get into the other series?

When I was reading the Dark Hunter series by Sherrilyn Kenyon I was never interested in following her other series.

This isn't the case with all authors. I love Kelley Armstrong's writing whether it's the Otherworld series or the Nadia Stafford. In fact I think I'm more eagerly looking forward to the next Nadia book. And I love Lynn Viehl's Darkyn books and also the Stardoc books she writes as S.L. Viehl. Having said that I have yet to start her new Kyndred series though I've heard nothing but good things about the first book and it's been on my TBR pile for a while.

So do you think it's easier to follow multiple series if the authors stick to similar genres? Or does it have nothing to do with that? Are there series that you love and series that you hate written by the same author? Or are you faithful to whatever your favourite author writes?

I have a copy of Dark Thirst by Sara Reinke to giveaway to one poster to this thread. Winner chosen by random number at randomnumber.org on Saturday.

No Inspiration

I didn't post yesterday as it has been sweltering here in the UK and I've been suffering with a migraine / heat stroke.

I should be posting something today but find my inspiration has dried up.

So for this weeks giveaway, in the comments can you offer me some interesting subjects to muse about - preferably in some way linked to UF fiction. :) If I can have some subjects to keep me going for the next few weeks even better.

I have a copy of Atlantis Rising by Alyssa Day to give away to one poster to the thread. Winner chosen at random at randomnumber.org. and result posted on Saturday.

Words you'd like to have banned

I know I've mentioned this topic before but it's one I feel a need to return to.

Yes, I feel the urge to moan coming on.

There are certain words - and I'm not talking about swear words here - that I find really start to annoy when I read.

My major bugbear has to be - 'literally' - please can't we ban this word from fiction already. It really gets on my wick. Mainly because most of the time it's unnecessary, it's the word equivalent of an exclamation mark.

Now it's also closely followed by 'actually' in the annoyance rankings, a word which seems to be cropping up more and more often. This is almost amusing in that it's one of those words that people often overuse in television interviews (along with 'obviously').

Speaking of exclamation marks...lol...I think it was Dean Koontz who said that authors should treat that punctuation mark as if they had a finite amount to use in their writing career. Once they'd used them up, that was it, they couldn't use them any more. I tend to associate them with SHOUTING, especially if they're being overused. No one talks in exclamations all the time. If you ever think you're using too many in your writing, or an author may have got carried away with them, simply convert the exclaimed dialogue into upper case. IT GIVES A GREAT VISUAL CLUE!

Unusual words often stand out. I love the word 'susarration' it's so descriptive. But, chances are if you read a lot of novels that feature angels, it's going to crop up a lot.

So are there any words that annoy you? I have a copy of Wicked Game by Jeri Smith-Ready to give away to one person who comments on this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number (randomnumber.org) on Saturday.

Prequels - Post 2

I wasn't actually going to post about prequels again. But I was quite surprised by the number of posters last week who said they don't like prequels. My main problem with the e-book prequels was not the fact that they are a being marketed as a prequel but the fact that they are in a different format to the rest of the series.

So I've been trying to think of prequels that I like.

I know Alpha and Omega was mentioned last week. And this is one of my favourite prequels. I think I like it more than the first book of the Anna and Charles series - Cry Wolf - to the point where I have bought the illustrated, autographed version from Subterranean Press.

I also love Cordelia's Honor which is the prequel to the Miles Vorkosigan series. The main series follows Miles from child to adulthood. The prequel follows the relationship of Miles's parents from their first meeting, their courtship and marriage, the attack on them that resulted in Miles's birth defects and his birth. I read this before reading the main series and maybe this is why I've liked all the prequels I've read because I've actually read them before reading the rest of the books.

The only prequel I can think of that I read after reading the first book in the series was the prequel to Kelley Armstrong's Bitten - the short story Beginnings, which details the first meeting and developing relationship between Clay and Elena, leading up to the moment she is bitten. I also enjoyed Savage and Ascension the two prequels dealing with Clay's conversion to werewolf and Jeremy's ascension to pack alpha. Maybe this is because Kelley Armstrong has such a good handle on her characters, that you feel you are learning something new and not just retreading ground that you already know about.

If you don't like prequels do you think it's because in general you've read them after reading the main story and have no real interest in seeing where it began when you already know where it's ending? Do you think if you read the prequel first it would be more like reading a continuation of the series rather than a separate part? Do you think too many prequels don't bring anything new, that if they are part of a popular series it feels like they're written just because the publisher knows the fans will buy them? Are there any prequels that haven't been written that you'd like to read?

I have a copy of Tempest Rising by Nicole Peeler to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen by random number at randomnumber.org on Saturday because I'm one day late posting this week. :)

E-Book Prequels - Yay or Nay?

So at the moment I'm reading Angel's Blood by Nalini Singh. This is book 1 in the Guild Hunter series. Before this book was released an e-book prequel Angel's Pawn was (and still is) available to buy. The e-book is a standalone set in the same universe as the main book.

This isn't the first series where this has happened. Gena Showalter's Lords of the Underworld series also had a standalone e-book prequel - The Darkest Fire. This book will soon be available in the print anthology Into the Dark.

I wondered what everyone thought about this kind of thing. I admit I'm not keen. If I'm following a series in e-book I'd rather stick to e-book, if I'm following it in print I like to have the whole thing in print. I don't like to mix and match.

I'm pleased that the prequels aren't required reading for the rest of the series. But I still can't help feeling that I'm missing something. But if at some point in the future the stories are going to be available in print anthologies I'd rather wait and get the story in print.

So am I just being a stick in the mud? Am I missing out? Or do you prefer to kepp e-book series and print series separate as well?

I have a copy of Touch of Evil by C.T. Adams and Cathy Clamp to give away to one poster to this thread. Winner to be chosen at random by randomnumber.org on Friday.