4 ms·
I can give you a concrete example of where this is not true because the author went to a lot of effort to give both books open questions which are answered by t
by db48x 3y ago
I can give you a concrete example of where this is not true because the author went to a lot of effort to give both books open questions which are answered by the other: Vernor Vinge’s “A Fire Upon the Deep” and “A Deepness in the Sky”.
He made sure that the second book answers the open question(s) left by the first, but also that it had open question(s) which are answered by the first book. It really doesn’t matter which one you read first, because the other one closes the loop, as it were.
- mmastrac 3y agoIn fairness, Verner Vinge is an amazing author and this is probably a skill unique to very few writers. I've found his books to be repeatedly re-readable.
- roca 3y agoMAROONED IN REALTIME, A FIRE UPON THE DEEP and A DEEPNESS IN THE SKY are excellent. I could re-read them. THE PEACE WAR and RAINBOWS END are just average and I would only read them once. CHILDREN OF THE SKY is awful and I wish I hadn't bothered reading it at all.
- db48x 3y agoYea, even the best authors can’t consistently write excellent books. And “Children of the Sky” lacks many of the advantages that “A Fire Upon the Deep” and “A Deepness in the Sky” had, such as space travel. That alone makes it less memorable and contributes a lot to reader disappointment.
- kelnos 3y agoThat just proves what should be obvious: there are always exceptions. In general, I still think production order tends to work best for most works.