For most writers, past a certain point you move on and write stuff outside the series. Or you end up like Doyle, and get pushed by public demanding into returning to damn series. Because it turns out that Sherlock Holmes is better than anything else you write no matter how much you protest otherwise!
Literary Buffistas 3: Don't Parse the Blurb, Dear.
There's more to life than watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No. Really, there is! Honestly! Here's a place for Buffistas to come and discuss what it is they're reading, their favorite authors and poets. "Geez. Crack a book sometime."
I don't read the JD Robb books, so I'm not sure how she keeps those characters going for as long as she has, but I like her Nora Roberts trilogies/quartets just because they are restricted to only 3 or 4 books. When she adds on to those due to fan demand, like she did with Chesapeake Blue, her continuation of the Chesapeake Bay series, it's a real disappointment. Her later books in the Macgregor series were equally weak.
And P-C yeah Discworld is another example of a way to do it. Because series can mean "everything take place in the same fictional universe/world" rather than the same characters over and over again.
Come to think of it, a fair number writers use that.
Hmm McDonald managed to keep Travis McGee going pretty well for two million[rhetorical number] titles without getting stale. I wonder if I'd still like it if I read it today?
Another though - Comic books use continuing characters forever. Of course they reboot every once in a while, but even within a single series (From the start to the first reboot, or from the start of a reboot to the last issue before the next reboot) they maintain a good long series.
I don't read the JD Robb books, so I'm not sure how she keeps those characters going for as long as she has
Honestly, they read more like a television series. The story is the murder at hand; the characters are just like regulars in the series. They're one of my guilty pleasures.
oh, Pix, mine too. I like the fact that they're mysteries, but you get character development. And there's some humor as well.
My mother has even started getting sick of the Stephanie Plum series, and she was quite a fan of them for a while.
Speaking of series, I read 9 Dragons, which is part of the Harry Bosch series by John Connelly. I really enjoyed it. Has anyone read them? Are the others in the series worth looking into?
I liked them, for a long time, but sixteen seemed like kind of a lot.(And I think her boyfriend might be "Joe", now that I think about it.) I am even more impressed by Sue Grafton for pivoting away from writing the same book with the last few offerings. (I'm not exactly sure she's going to make it through the whole alphabet, though.)
Speaking of series, I read 9 Dragons, which is part of the Harry Bosch series by John Connelly. I really enjoyed it. Has anyone read them? Are the others in the series worth looking into?
Yeah, I like them, although I haven't read that one, I don't think.
I ate up Anne Perry's Thomas and Charlotte Pitt mysteries until they got really political, and all about some secret society. That had to be after twenty books, though. Probably the longest series I ever read.
And I loved Elizabeth George's Lynley mysteries with unholy, abiding love until ... two books ago? And then I just couldn't get through one and haven't gone back.