Book Blogger Hop

 

Welcome to my first Book Blogger Hop on my new blog.

The Book Blogger Hop is a weekly follow hosted by Crazy-for-Books.

For those new to my blog, this is a compilation of three former blogs: Afterthoughts..., Afterthoughts for Adults, and Afterfonts. With this one blog to rule them all, I plan to continue blogging about children's books, adult books, and fonts/typography. I hope you follow me and enjoy!

This week's hop's featured question:

"If you find a book that looks interesting but is part of a series, do you always start with the first title?"

My answer:

Not unless the whole point is for me to find a new series. For instance, if I'm at a library or a bookstore and I pick up a book I think I'll like, I'll read it, even if it's not the first book in the series. BUT, if I'm trying to find a new series to begin - say, I've read everything of Christine Warren's and am looking for something new to pass the time before her newest book comes out - then yes, I will begin at the beginning.

Later in the day:
Visiting people's blogs today has been really eye-opening. I had no idea so many people consider jumping into a series so sacrilegious! There are certain series such as Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien, Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling, or Anne of Green Gables by L.M. Montgomery (quick, what do those three series have in common?) where the reader would miss so much, even be lost, if they began in the middle. Yet for certain series — such as The Baby-Sitter's Club by Ann M. Martin or any number of paranormal mass markets I can think of — starting in the middle may not be all that bad. Personally, I find that characters are often richer, more fully developed, and have more complex emotional reactions the later on you read in a series. I don't necessarily have to have read books 1-4 in order to enjoy the character development in book 5. Though I can understand that's not everyone's cup of tea, people's visceral responses to this question have been quite enlightening!