# Discuss a book series that eventually lost momentum, and your interest.



## Comrade Yuri (Oct 3, 2012)

I'm a bit leery of cracking open a series of books these days. Seems like so many works start off with a bang, then fizzle out by installment two or three. Sometimes, even my obsessive nature cannot provide the initiative necessary to surge through to the end.  What follows is a bit long, so get comfy, or click away before it's too late to escape.  

A couple of examples for you, then I'd love to read your own thoughts. 

*The Maze Runner Trilogy, by James Dashner: (some spoilers)
*It's a line of post apocalyptic young adult books, that started off with an interesting premise: a bunch of kids, caught in an endlessly shifting maze, who must band together to survive and escape. Book one was a great read. Although some of the characters were annoying, I found the execution very entertaining. These kids, some of whom were trapped in the maze for a long time, tried just about everything imaginable to escape. Then, Thomas appeared, and things changed. 

Unfortunately, by book three, I was ready to move on. I found it tedious. I've read that Dashner has now written a prequel, which goes even further toward removing every shred of mystery about the enigmatic maze, its creators, and its purpose. I don't anticipate reading it. 

So what went wrong? Well, I found the cast most interesting within the confines of the maze. It brought out the best and worst of everybody. Afterward, things went downhill. The first book was quite strong, but those that followed were mere shadows of the first.  Reminds me a bit of season one and two of the TV show LOST, and the weaker seasons that followed. 

*The Odd Thomas Series, by Dean Koontz:* I loved the character of Odd Thomas, the young fry cook from southern California who talks to dead people. He's humble, lovable, and witty. The first several books were great fun, as he fulfilled his commission to help restless spirits find their way to the afterlife. The first three books were great, but I was very willing to move on afterward. I don't anticipate reading book four, or any of the rest of the series. 

So, what happened? Familiarity breeds contempt, I think. By book three I was quite familiar with the whole "talking to the dead" thing, and nothing new and interesting showed up to maintain my interest. Each successive volume seemed like business as usual, so I stopped reading. I still like Koontz, and think he's a good writer, but after three books, I didn't need to read any more. 

Now, I'd like to read your thoughts. Discuss a series that started off well, keeping you engrossed, but eventually lost momentum. Describe the train wreck, if you'd like, and consider mentioning how it could have maintained your interest.

Consider it an exercise of sorts... :untroubled:

Yuri.


----------



## Jon M (Oct 3, 2012)

It's rare that a book series keeps my interest nowadays. The only series I can recall sticking with, although it pains me to admit it, is Goodkind's _Sword of Truth_ series. This was many years ago, when I was still a wee lad, and my taste was not quite as refined. I hung with it I think for six books -- whenever the chickens started talking. Just couldn't tolerate the smell after that. 

;P


----------



## Wessik (Oct 4, 2012)

You know, quite surprisingly, I lost interest in The Lord of the Rings after The Two Towers. Strange how things work out, I guess.


----------



## Comrade Yuri (Oct 5, 2012)

Jon M said:


> It's rare that a book series keeps my interest nowadays. The only series I can recall sticking with, although it pains me to admit it, is Goodkind's _Sword of Truth_ series. This was many years ago, when I was still a wee lad, and my taste was not quite as refined. I hung with it I think for six books -- whenever the chickens started talking. Just couldn't tolerate the smell after that.
> 
> ;P



I read Goodkind's series as well; seems like we lost interest at about the same time. Do you think the lack of desire to continue is more personality driven, or related to the books themselves? 

For me it's a little of both, but the author certainly has a lot to do with it. If I feel like he's stretching the material out, then I lose interest. If I find myself saying "oh, get on with it," then he's probably lost me.


----------



## Jon M (Oct 5, 2012)

Yeah it just got stupid when Jagang was introduced, and then the story seemed to drag on and on. The first two books I remember being very entertaining, but then the series started going downhill towards the third book and on. And at that point I felt like he was cashing in.


----------



## Comrade Yuri (Oct 5, 2012)

Jon M said:


> Yeah it just got stupid when Jagang was introduced, and then the story seemed to drag on and on. The first two books I remember being very entertaining, but then the series started going downhill towards the third book and on. And at that point I felt like he was cashing in.



I understand. While I'd like my favorite authors to earn a decent living, I'd prefer they didn't write 'til they had something interesting to say. We can usually tell when he or she has run out of ideas, but I understand that many authors fee driven to write, even if it's not particularly interesting or productive.


----------



## MJ Preston (Oct 5, 2012)

I finished it, but was unhappy with where it went. Stephen King's The Dark Tower Series.


----------



## Comrade Yuri (Oct 6, 2012)

MJ Preston said:


> I finished it, but was unhappy with where it went. Stephen King's The Dark Tower Series.



Hi MJ.

What could King have done to bring the series to a more satisfying closure for you? Was it a matter of unanswered questions, unresolved conflict, etc?


----------



## thecostumedanceparty (Oct 7, 2012)

A Series of Unfortunate Events

The ending was so sudden and ambiguous that everything I knew prior seemed to be thrown out the window.


----------



## MJ Preston (Oct 8, 2012)

Comrade Yuri said:


> Hi MJ.
> 
> What could King have done to bring the series to a more satisfying closure for you? Was it a matter of unanswered questions, unresolved conflict, etc?



Well it's a number of things actually. Introducing himself of as a character took away from the story, but that aside, *(SPOILER ALERT DON'T READ ON IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE ENDING).* it was what followed when Roland finally reached the Dark Tower.

Here we have this pivotal moment as Roland walks toward the tower calling the names of all who have fallen during his lifelong quest and that for me was the perfect ending that needed no further explanation. Instead King felt a need to take it further and turn it into some kind of enigmatic cycle that repeats over and over and for me that felt like a ripoff. His explanation that Roland and Eddie and the rest of their Katet were simply a figment of the author's imagination was wholly unnecessary. It seemed rather egotistical on King's part and while I acknowledge his obvious ability as an awesome story teller I feel cheated that he did not trust me, the constant reader, to accept the story for what it was. 

And up until the Song of Susannah it was my favorite of all his works by far.


I would have rather left to my own devises and I think that King actually ended it the way he did to appease the unimaginative.


----------



## Caragula (Nov 10, 2012)

Game of Thrones.  Did he divorce his editor?  Does he think any of us care about anyone other than that splendid dwarf?
My inability to leave epic fantasy trilogies that get more bloated and less interesting was tested with Thomas Covenant then proven with this.  I'd better not start the Harry Potter series for that reason, there's only a few thousand books I'll ever get to read.


----------

