Book Series That Go Sour

[MRC_Hans]

Yeah, Hyperion was great. Mmm long time. Maybe I should re-read soon.

Heheh, I loved the one about Bible. And this reminds me of another sequel which started out nice and fascinating; I'm thinking of this "History of the World" (the name of the author eludes me at the moment).

"Prehistoric times": Rather philosophical, and a little bleak, lots of loose ends.

"Ancient Egypt": Now, this one rocks! Weird, sci-fi environment, mysteries and magic galore.

Then with "Hellas" Roman Empire" and a couple more, it's just super drama, true Hollywood material.

Already "French Revolution" begins to be weer into political and socioeconomic rambling, and later installments, while having still plenty of drama, are totally bogged down in politics and unresolvable intrigues.

I shudder to think of the upcoming issue.....

Hans

 

[Interesting Ian]

The Dune series, the Foundation series, and (sadly) even the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy series are ones where I wished the authors hadn't written "just one more book".

The Harry Potter series is heading the same way IMO.

The first foundation book was absolutely crap! The worse book Asimov has ever written. Even the others in that series weren't particularly good. On the other hand both "the end of eternity" and "pebble in the sky" were excellent

Disagree with you about the Potter books as well. The first 2 Potter books were fairly boring but number 3 and 4 were much better. The latest one wasn't quite as good, but it was still better than the first 2.

 

[Interesting Ian]

Also Jean M. Auel, Clan of the Cave Bear. In spite of race chauvinism and idiotic dogmas, it was a fascinating book. But from then on, sequels became ever longer, sillier, an more boring.

Hans [/B]

I was going to mention this seies of books if no-one else mentioned it. The first book was absolutely excellent. The 2nd one almost as good. The third was quite a bit worse, and the fourth was one huge yawn. I haven't even read the latest, the fifth book, but I've heard that it is seriously bad. Oh well

 

[reprise]

Taking the opposite tack for a second, how about series which have remained constantly excellent? Has anyone else read Dan Simmons' Hyperion series? It is four tomes, but actually only two stories which, in spite of their length are packed with action, philosophy, novel concepts and truly great sci-fi from start to finish. There will never be a more enigmatic baddie than The Shrike, and I swear they stole The Matrix directly from Simmons.

Sadly, the other things I have read by Simmons have not measured up.

The Lord of the Rings trilogy (plus The Hobbit).

 

[Tricky]

The Lord of the Rings trilogy (plus The Hobbit).

Well, Lord of the Rings was really only one book. The publishers made him sell it in three volumes both to increase sales and to avoid scaring away customers with such a fat volume.

The Hobbit (which came first) was not nearly as good.

I couldn't even finish The Silmarillion.

 

[Hexxenhammer]

You guys have got me feeling good about not reading past "The Fabulous River Boat".

I never felt bad about not reading past "Enders Game".

Some say Heinlein got a little out of hand with his later books. I'm on the fence about that. The fifties and sixties really were his hey-day, but the later books have some good stuff too. I could have done without all the incest though.

 

[RSLancastr]

Here's another: The Thomas Convenant series.

I really enjoyed the first trilogy, but the second trilogy was unrelentingly depressing, to no good end.

 

[asthmatic camel]

As a child I enjoyed Ursula K. LeGuin's Wizard of Earthsea trilogy.
A few years ago I was foolish enough to purchase the sequel "Tehanu" thinking that it might be enjoyable. Wrong, incorrect, do not pass go, do not collect £200/$200, instead proceed directly to jail and hope that this is not one of the books stocked by the prison library.

Regards,

AC.

 

[RSLancastr]

Speaking of books read as a child, Baum's Oz series is another which took a huge dive into the craptank, as I remember.

 

[specious_reasons]

Just about any Piers Anthony series.

I'll pick on the Incarnation of Immortality series. The first book was a nifty concept, well executed. The rest varied in quality, but, really, how many times can you tell the same story? I only even liked the Nature and Satan books. The last book, about God, was an affront to the series.

 

[Glory]

Does anyone here read anything but science fiction and fantasy? Or is it just that the only genre's that end being series are sci fi, fantasy and mysteries?

Glory

 

[reprise]

I read horror and crime, but there are few series in those genres in which the first book holds out much promise.

It's worth adding the Rainbow Six series to the "went horribly sour" list.

 

[JamesM]

Does anyone here read anything but science fiction and fantasy? Or is it just that the only genre's that end being series are sci fi, fantasy and mysteries?

In my quest to seem edumacated and cultured, I only read 'literature', preferably by foreign authors. However, I am under no illusions that they are any less formulaic than 'genre' fiction, and also probably a lot less fun.

I can't think of many non-genre book series. A la recherche de temps perdu? The Sword of Honour trilogy? Philip Roth's books have the same characters in them. His last few novels have been pretty good, he's definitely currently beating Updike (the Rabbit books, there's a series) in the 'grand old man of American novels' stakes.

 

[davidhorman]

I'll add my vote for Rama. The first was excellent - like a lot of other Clarke books it had plenty of hard science and speculation, but at the same time managed to be concise (I think it runs to just over a 100 pages). Then along came Gentry Lee, and we had to suffer the shenanigans of conniving news reporters and the like. And yet, I still stuck with it and finished the series, despite literally cringing at the dialogue as I went.

And then the final revelation of what Rama was all about - pah!

Dune kept me engaged all the way through the series, although it did seem to get a bit wobbly in the last couple of books. I thought the "House" prequels were surprisingly good too, as I hadn't been impressed with Kevin J. Anderson's Star Wars efforts

David

 

[VicDaring]

Does anyone here read anything but science fiction and fantasy? Or is it just that the only genre's that end being series are sci fi, fantasy and mysteries?

Glory

Okay then. How about Robert B. Parker's Spenser series.

While still capable of some good moments, the overall quality has steadily declined for about 10 years.

Small Vices, in 1998, was pretty good, but it's clearly the best for quite some time.

 

[davidhorman]

How about the Ripley books? The first was great (although I prefer the film), but the rest went downhill, albeit slowly. The Boy Who Followed Ripley took some rather bizarre twists and turns, and Ripley Under Water wasn't a very satisfying conclusion (to the book itself, or the series).

David

 

[thrombus29]

I was addicted to the Piers Anthony stuff as a kid, I think I stopped the Xanth stuff with "Ogre Ogre", I just could not take it anymore.

I thought Chithon and Pithor were great books, and then someone decided to continue the series as torture porn.


With what Hexxenhammer said about Heinlein, I have to agree if you consider the last 3-4 books (# of the beast, Cat who walks through walls, Sailor of whaterver) a series. It went waaayy down hill.

What about Dick Francis? I read every one of his books up untill "Proof" when he changed from jockeys to winemakers.

Even Phillip Pullmans Compass books went down in quality each volume.

 

[SteveW]

Alot of series in the non sci-fi world have gone sour.

Patricia Cornwall - first books were great, now its just one justification of lesbians after another.

Johnathan Kellerman - I loved Alex Delaware but Kellerman is getting rather stale and out of ideas. His wife is still great though.

Jeffery Deaver - Bone Collector and Coffin Dancer were outstanding. The last one was just so so.

 

[asthmatic camel]

Does anyone here read anything but science fiction and fantasy? Or is it just that the only genre's that end being series are sci fi, fantasy and mysteries?

Glory

I read anything available Glory, including the corn-flake box during breakfast. I'd tentatively suggest that the Sci-Fi and fantasy genres are more open to further exploration as a result of their necessarily speculative nature.

For example, I can't imagine anyone writing a succesful sequel or prequel to Wuthering Heights or Jane Eyre.

Just a thought, I'd be fascinated to read the opinions of others.

Regards,

AC.

 

[Mark]

I strongly disagree about Asmimov's Foundation series (including the tie-ins with the Robot Series). Marvelous books, all. "Foundation's Edge" and "Foundation and Earth" were amazing.

Although I have to say, the Foundation books written by others after his death, have been a total travesty. The weird thing is, they are all great authors on their own.

The Riverworld series was one of the greatest let-downs of all time. I don't think Farmer's career ever fully recovered. Although "God of Riverworld" was at least entertaining in a pot-boiler sort of way. I thought "The Dark Design" was fantastic although I, too, was let down by the lack of resolution at the end.

"The Magic Labyrinth"...well, I give him points for trying to come up with something different, but...