I’ve written many times about how bad I am at keeping up with serialized stories. Episodic television (especially shows that continue on in perpetuity) and long-running book series have been very difficult for me to keep up with.
This is partially because my memory is so weird that I will forget whole entire groups of characters but remember tiny moments of a character pulling burned fabric roses out of his pocket or something. Whenever I picked up the newest book in a series, sometimes I would have no idea who was who and what they were doing, and I’d be overwhelmed with the idea of having to start over to refresh my literary memory.
But brains are weird, and lately mine has been surprising me by…craving series.
And craving nothing but series, one after another, sometimes multiple series concurrently where I switch from book four of one series to book two of another.
What the heck?!
Who AM I?
My theory is that I remember restfulness more acutely, and re-entering an established world is a lower impediment to my own immersion in the story. In other words, the initial construction of the world is done once and then expanded in subsequent books. In the series I’ve been diving into for the past little while, all the books focus on the same set of central characters, so I don’t have to meet new folks. I’m hanging out with the same few people.
Side note: is there a word or a term for a series that has new couples and new central protagonists with each installment, versus a series where the same leads continue through multiple stories? Is there a term for each type?
Is this one of the dividing lines between genres, where romance series often feature new protagonist pairings forming New Courtships And Commitments, while, say, mystery or fantasy features the same characters meeting Yet Another Murder or Dragon or Possibly Both?
Anyway, my brain has been craving the kind of series where we hang out with the same characters through multiple adventures, and see the collection of characters growing and evolving as people. I want expanding depth and nuance in each book for each character, and I want puzzles and plots and emotional maturity – and lucky for me I’ve found a bunch.
Here are some series I’ve been really enjoying:
The Chronicles of Brother Cadfael by Ellis Peters
They’re in Kindle Unlimited, and in Hoopla, and there are so many of them. I’ve written about this series before, and how the pace (no one moves quickly in medieval Wales) and the setting (medieval Wales) are so restful, even if there’s murders all over the place, poor dude.
Psy Changeling and Psy Trinity series by Nalini Singh
This series features different couples, but they all interconnect and show up in each other’s stories as the Changeling packs and Psy and human collectives have to learn to get along.
Again, I’ve written about what I discovered while re-reading this series and it’s a fascinating example of not only character evolution and worldbuilding strength, but also the evolution of paranormal romance character archetypes over 20+ years.
The Peter Grant series by Ben Aaronovich
I love listening to these because Kobna Holdbrook-Smith is brilliant as a narrator, and because the world grows with each book. Peter learns more magic, and more complicated problems result from the increased knowledge. And I especially loved the novella What Abigail Did That Summer.
Penric and Desdemona by Lois McMaster Bujold
Again, I’ve mentioned this series before and I interviewed the author on the podcast (Ep. 461) (cue inner 13 year old NOT being cool).
Episodic mysteries and puzzles combined with deepening relationships and character growth (including all 14 personalities inside Penric’s head, poor dude) are one of the hallmarks of this world and I love reading, re-reading, and listening to the novellas in this series.
The Kat Holloway series by Jennifer Ashley
All of the above, plus food. NOT COOL, BOOK SERIES.
No, really, very cool. I love these books. They’re thoughtful and delicious.
The Crown Colony Series by Ovidia Yu
I love the time period, the cultural details, and the very precise observations of the sleuth heroine, SuLin, who navigates between different groups of people in Singapore in the 1930s.
The Wrexford and Sloane series by Andrea Penrose
Historical mystery series seem to be the most likely location for me to find all the narrative elements I’m craving, and this series features a slowly growing romance, which, of course, I like a lot.
This one and the next series also frequently feature the “foggy dude in a great coat” cover motif.
The Sebastian St. Cyr Series by C.S. Harris
This series is extremely atmospheric, and the covers often match the tone of what’s inside: misty, sometimes gloomy, often maudlin and melancholy mysteries, with a hero (St. Cyr) who I want to wrap in a blanket and have him sit in a comfy chair until he sorts his angst out. I can’t mainline these because the melancholy gets to me, but wow, do I enjoy them.
There are so many more I can mention – Veronica Speedwell, Lady Darby and hooray!
And! And! And! There’s a new Charlotte Holmes book out, too!
I was surprised when I started writing this post how many series immediately sprang to mind that I really enjoy. Looking back at my reading history over decades, there were a few series I kept up with for years, like Sweet Valley High, for example. But now, I’m hopping across series back and forth and happily grabbing the next one in each.
So maybe I’m not as bad at series as I thought I was. Or my reading tastes are continually changing.
What about you? Are there long running series you love? Which ones, Which type (central protagonists through each book, or new protags in each installment?) and why?
Regarding terminology, I’d say some books “continue the series” and other books are “set in the same universe as…”
Pleased to see the Andrea Penrose series listed because my pending library reservation for the first book in the series just came through and is waiting for me to read over Shabbat!
Who can keep track of book series? Fortunately, there’s a website for that. https://www.fantasticfiction.com/
Searchable by author, book or series.
I don’t mind series, but it’s not often that they hold my interest beyond the first few books – e.g., Joanna Bourne could have stopped with Adrian and Justine, Diana Gabaldon’s Outlander series would have made a nice trilogy, and there didn’t need to be quite so many Bridgerton books and prequels.
What I do like is when authors set different books within the same universe and the crossover appearances are well-integrated into the story and not a distraction (or an opportunity to show us how blissfully happy and fertile past couples are). Two authors who come to mind are Sherry Thomas, whose novels are linked despite being in different genres; and KJ Charles, who has past characters pop up in newer books in interesting ways. Though I’ll it took me way too long to realize who Kim was working for in the Will Darling books 🙂
I’m also a big fan of the Veronica Speedwell and the Sebastian St. Cyr series—they hit a lot of the same notes for me: highly competent heroines, slightly darker heroes, problems to solve, and relationships that support the characters. (Er, maybe because that’s an approximation of my actual life, albeit with no murders. Who can really say!)
Also, there’s only three of them so far, but I will read as many books as T. Kingfisher cares to write in the Paladin series. With every one of them I have gotten to the end and been like, “WAIT! I am not ready for the story to be over yet!!!”
I’ve had publishers refer to overarching-plot series as chronological or sequential or some other continuity-related word, and we jokingly refer to related-but-standalone books as “the [insert series name] cinematic universe” (if you want to be pedantic about medium, “shared universe” is recognized enough to have a Wikipedia entry), but in 25 years of publishing, I haven’t encountered consensus terms that eliminate the need for further explanation of series type. Maybe because genres set expectations? “This couple’s romance takes three books to get to HEA” is an outlier among bazillions of loosely connected standalone romances, so that one bears the burden of explaining itself.
*steps atop handcrafted artisanal soapbox* Sequel bait (side characters being horny or sometimes simply existing) is NOT an overarching plot.
Honestly, Laurell K. Hamilton put me off series. I used to love them, and I read her Anita Blake series for over 10 years. Then somewhere along the way she decided that she was the greatest thing since sliced bread, ditched her writing group and her editor, and threw away plot in favor of boring repetitive sex scenes (that apparently drew a little too much inspiration from her personal sex life) and relationship drama. Oh, and she claimed that everyone who didn’t like the constant sex scenes were just a bunch of prudes who didn’t understand her “Art”. I dropped the series after the dumpster fire that was “Bullet” and haven’t looked back.
After investing time in 20 books just to get burned by the author’s ego, I’m doing good to read a trilogy at this point.
I have mixed feelings about book series. I do love mystery series for that comfort of familiar characters and a familiar world and I love when there’s a slow burn romance, but I do feel like sometimes after a while they start to feel like retreads and I end up abandoning the series before it’s done. Especially if the series continues on and on and the books get more and more bloated and self indulgent. I just want to get out a little red pen and slash, slash, slash away at the extraneous words and tedious scenes. (yes, I am fun at parties, thanks for asking.)
Romance series I don’t really have the same issue with b/c there are usually new characters every time (I gave up on truly loving any new Outlander book long ago even though Jamie and Claire will always be special to me, maybe I’ll just read the wiki article when the next one comes out), but I feel like it’s hard to find a romance that *isn’t* a series these days. I definitely don’t feel any compunction about abandoning them or skipping around. If a character or couple I’m interested in becomes the main plot, I am happy to loop back in.
Lately, I am finding the compromise is reading series that I’m fairly confident are finished. That way if I hit mediocre one, I feel like I can just skip ahead and see if the series is truly going downhill or one hit me the wrong way. If I hit another one that’s bad, I usually drop it, but if it’s good, I press on and I don’t feel like I’m an emotional limbo, never knowing if I’m really done or not like I would with an ongoing series where there’s always a dash of hope there might be improvement.
Brother Cadfael is a good example of a finished series that I’m enjoying taking my time through. I was also working my way through Phryne Fisher but then I heard a new one came out that wasn’t very good 🙁 and her last few have been hit or miss for me, so she’s back on the undecided pile. I finally (!) listened to the Bridgertons this summer after reading almost everything else Julia Quinn has ever written. I will probably never go back and read the first two. (Really didn’t like book Simon or Anthony), but I still have that sense of completion I crave.
Meant to mention that I echo the praise for the St Cyr series. It’s one of the few where every single book has been really well written and well plotted. Usually series start to peter out or are at least very uneven from book to book but that one really holds up.
Surprised no one has mentioned the author who IMHO is the champ of mixing and matching characters in series: Mary Balogh.
Continuing stories with familiar characters are my – I started to write catnip, but that isn’t addictive enough. The first book I can remember reading is one of the Little House on the Prairie books, and then I graduated to Nancy Drew and Trixie Belden, and by that point I was completely addicted to series at what age, age 10. I was just looking at my bookshelves and realizing how few non-series books there are, and how long some of the series have run (Dell Shannon, Patrick O’Brian and Elizabeth Peters). I’m currently immersed in/obsessed with Victoria Goddard’s Hands of the Emperor, and my little heart went pitty-pat when I read that she’s working on a sequel.
@SBSarah, your experience is so close to mine (“This is partially because my memory is so weird that I will forget whole entire groups of characters but remember tiny moments of a character pulling burned fabric roses out of his pocket or something”) but I have read all of the Ellis Peters and the Lois McMaster Bujold with great satisfaction. Last night I finished JD Robb’s #52 in the In Death series. The growth of the main characters and the slow increase (and emotional growth!) of secondary characters has been exactly what I have needed this last year. I think what I want and need in series is the kind of recognition of personal weaknesses/vulnerabilities and a gradual addressing of those issues with the help of those around. NO insta- anything in series.
@HeatherS, I totally agree about Hamilton; I still have a bad taste after reading one too many of her books. A good series doesn’t get stuck in a rut (or rutting).
I’m sure everyone has their own internalized vocabulary for referring to books that are connected in some fashion, but these work best for me:
If a group of books follows a number of different couples across a finite number of books, I just refer to the group as a series. For example, a family of adult siblings where each gets their own book/romance, but the characters appear in each other’s stories. (Claire Kingsley is really good at this—most of her series—Miles Family, Bailey Brothers, Bootleg Springs—also feature a central, overarching mystery or storyline that gradually gets resolved over the course of the books.) I like to see other couples show up in each other’s books, but it has to be carefully done or you’re just getting recaps of every couple’s story (I found this to be true of Avon Gale’s and Piper Vaughn’s hockey romances—some of the later books in a series spent an inordinate amount of time providing backstories for MCs from other books). I like a series where each couple’s storyline runs concurrently and you get little glimpses of what’s going on with Couple B while you’re reading the main story about Couple A: if it’s well done, it gets you really intrigued for the next book. I just finished a series called The Kringle Family Christmas (I’m writing about it in the next WAYR) which I thought did the concurrent storylines very smoothly—especially since each book was written by a different author.
If a group of books follows the same MCs through their romantic arc, I refer to it by the number of books it takes to tell the story: duet, trilogy, quartet, etc.; I think, when it comes to romance storylines, if we get to book five for the same couple, I’d be like, “Come on—get it over already!” I’m sure quintets about the same couple exist in Romancelandia, but I’m not sure I want to follow a couple for that long. Perhaps it’s just a marketing thing, but duets and trilogies seem to be much more frequent these days. I don’t mind them, but I like to know in advance that I’m getting into a story that will take more than one book to resolve. It’s so frustrating when none of the blurbs mention that a first book is not a standalone and you reach the dreaded cliffhanger ending and have to wait three months for the next installment. Arrgghh! Please be honest with the reader in the advertising is all I ask.
If stories are set in the same world as others, but are complete standalones (or feature a number of series within the bigger storyverse) I usually just refer to all the books as being “interconnected.” In yesterday’s Books on Sale post, there were some comments about Kate Canterbary and about how all of her books are all tangentially related to her Walsh Family series. Some of the connections are very strong (the sibling of two characters who married into the Walsh family got his own story in MISSING IN ACTION), some of the connections are very loose (the entire Talbott’s Cove series is only connected to the Walsh family because one of the heroes in FRESH CATCH is a Justice of the Peace and presided over the shipboard marriage of one of the Walsh siblings), but all the books are connected in some way. Also, there’s no finite number of books in an interconnected universe. Books, stories, and individual series keep appearing. Right now, there’s an ongoing multi-author dark romance universe called Midnight Dynasty, about two rival families who love and hate each other in equal measure, which has so far produced two short story anthologies and at least five storylines following individual couples; there are also set-ups for future couples, so I expect this universe to keep running for a good while.
JaniceG’s wording on the terminology is extremely common over on the fantasy side of things, and is how i translate it in my head even when discussing other genres. That is definitely one of the major dividing lines of genres, the changing main characters every book in romance, while sff defaults to following the same people. Most of the exceptions on either side i can think of are from writers who write heavily toward that border area where sff and romance have an overlap. Which structure the books use definitely matters a lot in terms of what i think i’ll get from it. If i can’t tell, and at least two are out, i’ll try to glance at the back of the next and see just if the names are the same, because i don’t like being prepared for one and getting the other. 🙂
Ilona Andrews is a great place to look for examples on this: Kate Daniels is definitely structured as a Series, On The Edge is structured as a Shared Universe (although i think it’s still called a series because there’s no consistent agreement). Hidden Legacy books is trickier, but i tend to think of them as multiple sequential series. Definitions are wide ranging though, this is just the pattern i find most of the folks i talk books with loosely falling along. We also aren’t involved in the industry side, which often makes a difference. 🙂
Mysteries of course also have a long tradition of same detective/different crime, and mostly those are series. I can’t think of any mystery book groupings off hand that i’d call shared universe, it almost completely opposes most of their tropes to change main characters every book. There may be some somewhere though!
I’ve written a 7-book (plus prequel) and counting series outside of Romancelandia under my real name. I must say that series are vastly more profitable and sell better than stand-alones, which is why I plan to continue my romance book series.
I think Kindle Unlimited, plus the additional real estate a series will get on Amazon, plus self-publishing (which makes it easier for authors to keep plugging away at a series, even if a publisher might be disappointed by initial sales) means that we’re likely to see more series in the future, for $$$ reasons.
My favorite character of all time is Sherlock Holmes, and, come to think of it, in terms of all mystery series, it’s rare the first book is my favorite. Romance-wise, though, I usually have little problem reading books out of order, because they are more self-enclosed.
I was big on reading book series and then LKH went off the rails and I felt betrayed.
These days my attention span is crap but I like shared universes. I did start the Immortals After Dark and it’s crazy fun. I read the full Kate Daniels series, but not the Julie spin-off. I like closure and with long running series, I worry about my faves making it through.
I love series that have the same MC usually meeting, learning to respect and appreciate and trust the other and becoming a couple over the course of a few books. And this means they’re usually mystery or other genre with a romance sub-plot.
Like others have mentioned I grew up on series, my keeper shelf is all series.
Linked romance book series (same world, diff couple) I usually jump books. The author will vary the pairings to keep it interesting and there is usually a couple I don’t like.
My pet hate is when an author writes essentially one book but it is chopped up into two or more parts and sold individually. Usually self-published and I realize economics and possibly trying to keep having new books is a factor but as a reader I feel like I paid twice for one book.
Love the St. Cyr series. However, if you like Cadfael, let me recommend THE CHRONICLES OF HUGH DE SINGLETON, SURGEON by Mel Starr. Hugh is a young medieval scholar who trains as a surgeon. We follow him through bachelorhood and true love and crime solving. The 14th one just came out and I need to make my way over to Amazon pronto!
I am trying to think of an author I like who *doesn’t* do series, or at least books set in the same overlapping universe (which I always think of as being “like Balzac” both because I am a nerd and because his name amuses me but I have learned to say “like MCU” out loud).
I like my books to be cubic, so I have no problem with a series, despite GRRM’s best efforts. Also, I get annoyed if the books in a series aren’t wholly realized books. Cliff-hanger endings are extremely off-putting, or the feeling that the next book could have been the next chapter. I hate when a series gets cluttered up with sequel bait, or children.
KJ Charles is the best (at everything) but especially impressive is how the darling adventures or the magpie lord series, each book is independent and has an actual ending and yet the romance changes and builds over the series.
Suzanne Brockmann does really great series where there’s multiple romances in each book so you can get both a hea and a multi-book arc. I wish there were more authors who could make disparate plot-lines equally engaging much less weave them together so well.
Those are the only romance novelists I’ve found who can keep the same protagonists over a series, but of course it works more easily in other genres.
The Spenser novels are the template for me of a compelling series that’s practically the same book with the same characters having the same banter, but my reasons for enjoying them are unlikely to be widely applicable. I also like that Venetian police series, and I am a sucker for inevitably disappointing Sherlock rewrites.
Wodehouse, of course. Murderbot. I like Ilona Andrews although I think the series get played out a bit.
Oh! The Master and Commander series, which is some might say is not a romance but they’re wrong.
Sorry to be pedantic, but Shrewsbury is in England and was at the time of the Cadfael books. It was the time when Stephen and Maud were fighting each other for the Crown; Cadfael’s friend Hugh is a supporter of Stephen which is seen in various of the books. 🙂
I have been comfort reading Sarah Waldock’s “Bow Street Runner” series, which is a continuation of Emma from Jane Fairfax Churchill’s POV.
They are tidy little stories, with mysteries and danger and London underbelly cant.
I’ve recently been powering through a series; Greenwing and Dart by Victoria Goddard which follows the same characters. The current book I’m reading is slightly slower going for me, I think because the last one did what felt like ending things. For me I really enjoy series with great characters or worlds. I grew up reading my way through mystery series.
I have certain series that I pick up and read the next one as soon as I can mainly Seanan McGuire’s series. Also love the Penric and Desdemona books, and this reminds me I wanted to read that Ovidia Yu series as I enjoyed the first few books of the Auntie Lee books. And I’m working my way through the Peter Grant books.
When I was younger, series was like reading in shorthand. Neurotypical I am not. As a result reading was slow for me, but there was a relief in not having to read as precisely as a series progressed. Anne of Green Gables was my gateway series. The old formula of -get the reader to care/wonder about a non mc in book A, then make that character the mc of book B works well for me.
I love series for many of the reasons listed here. I am slightly obsessive about reading books in order (and if a new book comes out in a series I like, I will often re-read the entire series before reading the new book. I am finally getting better about stopping a series if I am just not feeling it anymore.
@kkw I also like series that have multi book arcs in the background. In addition to Suzanne Brockmann, Kit Rocha does that well. On the historical side, Grace Burrowes has a lot of interconnected story arcs, although she usually doesn’t do a multi book slow burn.
I like the ones where the book series is bundled into one giant Kindle book, so when you need comfort reread you have a nice long one with familiar characters and you never have to stop and figure out which one is next in the series.
I got to book 22 of Anita Blake before I gave up on the series! Admittedly, I didn’t bother with a lot of them after book ten but 22 made me rage quit. It felt like I was reading about Anita Blake giving lectures to everyone about her lifestyle and generally being a angry harpy. Personally, I don’t mind the odd reverse harem in fiction, but Anita seemed to be collecting lovers like Pokemon! To top it all off the antagonists were offer in the last three pages! There were Also a lot of interesting side plots which were never concluded.
To be a great series (either tv or book) I think the most important rule is to know when to wrap up a series. Generally nothing beyond book or series nine, after that, there’s usually shark jumping or hero develops too many powers. Spin offs in the same universe with different characters are ok though.
The best series have been the ones that haven’t gone beyond three. The worst? The ones that seem to be making it up as they go along. My late partner and I used to call it “Lost syndrome” (as in the show). I miss watching dramas with him.
Tracy Grant’s Melanie and Malcom series is a great historical mystery series with a wonderful cast of characters.
I don’t want to read a romance series where it takes more than one book to reach the HEA because I like my romance to move faster than that. But I’ll occasionally read a fantasy or urban fantasy series with romantic elements, because the romance isn’t the focus of the books and I get that delicious character development and world-building you mention.
For romance series with different characters, I call those a “series of standalones.” For the ones where all the books feature the same main characters, I don’t have a special name for them. I just call them series.
My preference are interconnected series, where each installment is a standalone with different central characters. I have a few series (with the same central characters) that I have enjoyed, but it seems that most lose momentum for those character arcs – how many times can one person find a dead body/fall into peril/etc in a small town without making any significant changes in their life. There is a point that the genre structure is overwhelmed by the formula and becomes predictable in a way that is no longer enjoyable. I also appreciate that there is more distinction between serials and series now; as much as I am a series fan, I do not enjoy the structure of serials. Duets/trilogies are often passes for me as well.
I’m still going thru all the comments, but wanted to jump in with a response to @ #12 Malaraa: One mystery shared universe series with different leads is Derva McTiernan’s Cormac Reilly series. There have been (I think) 5 connected novels and novellas so far with 3 different leads/POVs. It took a bit of getting used to at first because it was unusual and unexpected, but I’ve really enjoyed the books.
Ugh. And that should have been *Dervla McTiernan.
The thing about writing a series following the same couple that was once pointed out to me is that you have to endanger the happily ever after of the couple in order to continue telling their love story. So it’s usually a no-go in straight romance, and I find lately I don’t often enjoy it in other genres, either (eg got sick of Robert Galbraith, and hated how it devolved into abuse in another series I can’t think of).
But I love stories set in the same universe. As a kid I loved Tamora Pierce’s Tortall books, and as an adult I’m loving everything T Kingfisher writes in the world of the White Rat (both heavy on fantasy tropes).
That same note about having a lower barrier to entry is supposed to be why people enjoy fanfiction too, so that’s always an option, particularly with more well-known books!
Kelley Armstrong’s ROCKTON is kick ass with a side of romance and a great cast of characters. Can’t read her paranormal stuff but can’t wait to read the latest in this series.
If a romance book ends on a cliffhanger and/or the main couple has to wait for the HEA, it’s a definite “NO” for me. I won’t even pick up a free book if it’s like that. For a romance, there better be a HEA ending or I’m outta there. For a mystery series, I am okay with a romance that continues since the mysteries always get solved (and why is that not considered “formulaic” like the HEA in a romance by the “literary” types?). Basically, I demand completion of the main point of the story in a single volume.
If the HEA for a couple requires multiple volumes to appear, I call it a “serial” since it doesn’t end (but it ends for me before it begins, as I said). A “series” is in the same world, so things like a bunch of relatives or co-workers or people in a community, where each couple gets a book and the HEA. I love those kinds of books since I get the familiar world but new characters to swoon over each time and they get their HEA.
It is formulaic for mystery: there must be a crime, and it must be solved. (Usually, but not always, murder.) Every genre has formulae, like that one for mystery and “HEA/HFN” for romance.
I read series without general problems probably because I read a lot of mystery, and series are very, very common in mystery.
I enjoy series, because I get attached and want to spend more time with the characters. They do tend to particular problems, however. Some series drag on as zombies long after they should have been decently buried. I also get annoyed by series where the tone changes drastically– if I start reading a fun, lighthearted series, I don’t want it to become grim and bloody. Then there’s what I call the Feehan problem– your first hero is the Most Everything Ever, but your 2nd, 3rd, etcetera heroes also have to be the Most Everything Ever, so it becomes increasingly ridiculous. I dread MCs having children in fantasy/sci-fi, because far too often the children have to be obnoxiously superior in every way. When I want to read about kids, I read children’s fiction. (There are ever so many excellent children’s series.)
I think Nalini Singh’s series are outstanding examples of combining an overarching series plot with different main characters in each(or most)of the books. Series I like that haven’t been mentioned yet include Dan Shamble, Zombie P.I. by Kevin J. Anderson (4 books, very funny horror/mystery, not scary) and Janitors of the Post Apocalypse by Jim C. Hines (Sci-Fi, funny, female main character, 3rd book due out next year).
I’ve always enjoyed reading series in a variety of genres, though I’ve never categorized them by structural type. I find it much easier to read a series as she is written rather than waiting till the whole thing is complete. Something about the spacing between books helps stave off extended plot fatigue. As long as I remain engaged with the characters and the author’s writing, I’m good to go. There is definitely comfort in familiarity if not in repetition; it must be quite the balancing act for an author.
Over the years, I’ve probably devoured more mystery series than any other type, liking best those that incorporate romantic elements, unfamiliar settings, a touch of humor, and some sense of edginess. The most memorable series, however, are those with a bone deep moral or ethical compass–often the opposite of comforting. Louise Penny’s Armand Gamache, Donna Leon’s Inspector Brunetti, Laurie R. King’s Mary Russell, and Carol O’Connell’s Kathy Mallory all live rent free in my head.
I’ve always been particularly grateful that I discovered SB-TB around the same time I got hooked on paranormal/urban fantasy series. The reader recs were invaluable. Not only did the SB community lead me to Kim Harrison’s Hollows, Thea Harrison’s dragonific Elder Races, and the ineffable Ilona Andrews’ Kate Daniels and Innkeeper sagas, but SB readers were already sounding the alarm about LKH back in 2007, thus preserving me from dipping my toe into that black hole of reader frustration and teaching me that there’s often more to be learned from a good bad review than from a good good review.
The longest series I’ve read are crime thrillers – Anne Perry (years ago) and Peter Robinson (DCI Banks), though these can also be read on their own. I romance, I like shared universe but am also ok if a couple’s romance takes more than one book. Great example for the first is, like others said, KJ Charles. As for the latter, I don’t like “they get together in the first book, ends with a supposed HEA, then that has to be endangered in the second bookand baaaaad things happen”. It has happened that I have read just the first book of such a series, enjoyed the HEA and didn’t buy the next book if I felt I was fine with how the first ended and that was that for me.
But it’s ok if a couple takes more than one book for their HEA. Case in point – Joanna Chamber’s first three books in the Enlightenment Series, which I adore. Funny enough, the next two books in the series are about other characters in that universe (that have already shown up in previous books) and two more are to come. That’s probably unusual, but works for me just because I love the books.
I mainlined a LOT of series in science fiction and fantasy when I was young. The R.A. Salvatore’s series about the drow (dark elf) Drizzt Do’Urden was one of my favorites for years starting in junior high. Series by Madeline L’Engle, Ursula K Le Guin, Cynthia Voight, L.M. Montgomery, and Susan Cooper (Dark is Rising) also featured heavily starting from around 3rd grade or so. I’ve moved on to reading John Scalzi, Philip K. Dick, Richard K. Morgan, N.K. Jemisin, Octavia Butler, Margaret Atwood, and Murderbot, to name a few.
I think my Dad has read and then passed to me pretty much every book in the Star Wars primary canon, most by Timothy Zahn. He recently recommended Joel Shepherd’s “Spiral Wars” to me and of course I’m hooked (hello strong female protagonist).
Beyond science fiction and fantasy land, I do read a lot of series that are about various players on the same hockey team, so a shared universe series. 🙂 Samantha Wayland is one of my faves. I re-read, or rather retreat to the world she created of the Moncton Ice Cats and the family Morrison regularly.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the following:
*Rhys Ford’s “Cole McGinnis Mysteries” and “Kai Gracen Series”
*Charlie Cochet “THIRDS” series and spinoff (OMFG LOVE LOVE LOVE THIS ONE)
*R.G. Alexander’s “Finn Factor” and the spinoff “Finn’s Pub”
*A.E. Via’s “Nothing Special” and “Promises” series
I’ve read so many mystery series, some of which I continue to read and others I’ve abandoned (looking at you, Elizabeth George and Jacqueline Winspear, after you killed off major characters). One series of linked romances that I enjoyed very much but which hasn’t yet been mentioned, is Stella Riley’s Rockledge series. Many overlapping characters but the focus is generally on one couple per book – and for those who dislike series that go on (and on, and on) it is now complete.
I do read a lot of series. The Cadfael series is probably the longest one I have completed. They are so soothing, and short reads. I’m up to date with the C.S. Harris St. Cyr series. You have to wait a full year between books, and by that time I’m panting for the next one. Oh, And I forgot, decades ago, before I discovered romance, I used to read hard-boiled detective books. All of Spenser, and all of John McDonald’s Travis McGee series. Also any Patricia Wentworth books I could find, her little old lady British detective is Maude Silver. I gave on Nora Roberts’ “in Death” books after about 10, and I stopped reading the Kinsey Millhone books at “M is for Malice”. Virgin River is another one really petered out for me after a half dozen books, but I kept going to around #10.
I love both of Anna Lee Huber’s series, Lady Darby and the Verity Kent mysteries. Actually, I’m the audience for almost any historical mystery with romantic elements. Kat Holloway, Wrexford & Sloane, just give it to me. Luckily, there are so many, I won’t run out in my lifetime. I was in the middle of a very long series before the pandemic hit, The Gaslight Mysteries by Victoria Thompson. It’s Gilded Age New York, the female protagonist is a midwife, the male MC is a NY cop. My library only has them in hardcover, so I got cut off when everything shut down in 2020, and I have yet to pick them up again. But they were very good, better than the Rhys Bowen series that has a similar setting and also a NYPD police detective main character. I hated that guy in the Bowen books, I got so disgusted that the heroine didn’t just dump him that I stopped reading.
As far as the series with different MCs in each book, I loved the original Bridgerton siblings, the Smith-Smythe books and the prequels not so much. I enjoyed Elizabeth Hoyt’s 12 Maiden Lane books, although the last couple were not as great. Julie Ann Long’s Pennyroyal Green series ended after 9, which I think was a good stopping point. Excellent quality throughout. I’ll also happily read shorter romance series too.
I’ve got the Ashley Gardner Captain Lacey Regency Mystery series on Kindle, and I am looking forward to sinking my teeth into them.
@June: Even after I’d re-read The Sugared Game a couple of times, I still didn’t pick up on “Captain Yoxall is an earl now,” until after I’d read Subtle Blood