In which Rolanni realizes that she can’t read

[rolanni]

Yesterday, I had an email from someone who wished me to give them the One True Reading Order for the Liaden Universe® novels.  Usually, I don’t answer emails like this, because it never ends well, but I was thinking that maybe I ought to be a Better Person and answer my email instead of letting it pile up until it gets oppressive.

So I answered my email, explaining that, no, I really couldn’t give them the One True Reading Order by reason of the fact that there isn’t one, and suggested a couple of starting points.  You can see the gist of what I said over here.

My reward was a grumpy note indicating that my correspondent wished to read the books in the order that would avoid spoilers and maintain the rush of reading for discovery as opposed to the chore of reading to fill in the gaps.

Now. . .I don’t mind, myself, personally, reading to “fill in the gaps.”  In fact, if I’m to be brutally honest, I’m not sure I have ever experienced the rush of “reading for discovery.”  Some books are more engaging than others, sure, and I certainly like some novels better than others.  And there is absolutely a difference between a first read and a re-read.  But I make no such fine distinctions, when I’m reading fiction, between the sensation of “gap filling” and “discovery.”

Obviously, I lack the ability to savor nuance, which is possessed by other readers.  For some reason, this depresses me, perhaps only because I was slightly depressed anyway.  But, I don’t think I’ll be answering my email for a while.

Round the house news includes the fact that earlier in the week Mozart conspired to help Steve fracture his toe.  And they say cats don’t Care.

On the plus side of the injury, Deceiver arrived yesterday, and Steve got first dibs, since he has to sit in the comfy chair and ice his foot.  He’s getting to be Quite the Expert in icing-the-foot.

My aged and much-beloved boombox (radio, CD, and a cassette player!) died the True Death, leaving me without a cassette player, which, yes, is a problem.  A minor problem, in the scheme of things, but, still…

Also, yes, I know that both this website and the Carousel Tides site are suddenly and without warning Thoroughly Borked for Mac users using Safari.  I’m sorry about that.  No, I don’t know what happened, and, no, I don’t know how to fix it.

I did do something vaguely useful today on the writing side, and tomorrow I intend to sit down at this computer and rip the guts out of the manuscript in process, which’ll be, yanno, fun.

For those who Ebay, remember that there’s an auction going on until Sunday.  Go ahead, indulge yourself.

Hope everybody has a relaxing and uplifting weekend.

Originally published at Sharon Lee, Writer. You can comment here or there.

Comments

[barsukthom.livejournal.com]

I think the fail was on Safari's side; they just had an upgrade. Not that that really helps, but possibly they will have a patch soon?

[von-krag.livejournal.com]

Sorry to hear about the e-mail & the ungrateful chile. Maybe this'll help:



Corn Maque Choux
PREP TIME: 1 Hour
SERVES: 8



COMMENT:
Although Maque Choux is normally thought of as a corn soup, the River Road Cajuns cooked a similar vegetable flavored with the freshwater shrimp of the Mississippi River. Here is their version of that dish.

INGREDIENTS:

* 8 ears fresh corn
* 2 cups (150-200 count) shrimp, peeled and de-veined
* 1/4 cup andouille, finely diced
* 1/2 cup bacon drippings
* 1 cup onion, chopped
* 1/2 cup celery, chopped
* 1/2 cup green bell pepper, chopped
* 1/2 cup red bell pepper, chopped
* 1/4 cup garlic, diced
* 2 cups tomatoes, coarsely chopped
* 2 tbsps tomato sauce
* 1 cup green onions, sliced
* salt and black pepper to taste

METHOD:
Select tender, well-developed ears of corn and remove shucks and silk. Using a sharp knife, cut lengthwise through the kernels to remove them from the cob. Scrape each cob using the blade of the knife to remove all milk and additional pulp from the corn. This is important because the richness of the dish will depend on how much milk and pulp can be scraped from the cobs. In a 3-quart cast iron Dutch oven, melt bacon drippings over medium-high heat. Sauté corn, onions, celery, bell peppers, garlic and andouille approximately 15-20 minutes or until vegetables are wilted and corn begins to tenderize. Add tomatoes, tomato sauce and shrimp. Continue cooking until juice from the tomatoes and shrimp are rendered into the dish, approximately 15-20 minutes. Add green onions and season to taste using salt and pepper. Continue to cook an additional 15 minutes or until full flavor of corn and shrimp is developed into the dish. Serve as a vegetable or add stock to create soup.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

OK; now I'm hungry.

[angela-n-hunt.livejournal.com]

Some people need to unclench. You go right ahead and ignore email. Those of us who love your work are just fine with the filling in.

Devil's Advocate

[redpimpernel.livejournal.com]

One True Reading Order

I respect everyone's right to read the books in whatever order they prefer. However, sometimes just having canned info out there that you can either point to or send can help prevent all the angst.

I admit that in the beginning I was one who wanted a list. It's natural to approach a well-established multi-book series (er, universe) with the intention of reading things in some sort of order. After all, reading Plan B as your first Liadan novel would be the best choice if you had all of the novels to choose from. I dutifully looked around the web, as best I could, for a Liadan book timeline and didn't really find one. Choosing publication dates as the next best guide, I started reading and ended up rereading a couple of book along the way when I realized that they would logically fall here rather then there. I found the partial Liandan timeline in one of the omnibi, and then proceeded to to build my own comprehensive timeline, adding all of the rest of the novels, chapbook stories, etc., because personally, I like to read in chronologic order.

I offered to share my timeline, but was told that such an item would contain spoilers, and so maybe not such a good idea. That still has me puzzled, because how can a list of book titles and the approximate order in which they come out be a spoiler? Unless it was the dates that stories take place? That we are not meant to realize up front, for instance, when exactly the Crystal Duology takes place?

My point is, that in a series Universe of this size having a couple of lists easily reference-able would be a good thing. Have a variety and people can chose as they will: published/written order, grouped as to which stories go together, and possibly even one in chronological order (with spoilery? parts obscured as necessary). Anyway, if such lists existed then our fearless author wouldn't have to ignore such requests nor trouble herself about them not ending well. Just send the link and say choose the order that suits your fancy.

Those of us who like to read in some kind of logical order really aren't trying to be ungrateful jerks when we ask for guidance, we're just...looking for guidance.

Re: Devil's Advocate

[batwrangler.livejournal.com]

But Sharon *did* offer the person some reading order suggestions, including listing all the books by publication order and by internal chronology....

Re: Devil's Advocate

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry that I don't remember the conversation with you about making a list. Lousy memory.

The thing is, there is a "written in" order over on the Liaden FAQ (http://www.korval.com/faqliad.htm). Granted; it is now in need of updating, but no one read/found it anyhow; and when we pointed to it, we got arguments similar to "But I prefer to read in X order in order to avoid any mention of Y."

Which sorta makes one wonder why they hotel they'd bothered to ask for an order in the first place.

There are several things that -- because there are so many more readers of Liaden material than there are writers of same -- become repeated and rejected as the Wrong Answer so often that the writers become frustrated with the question. Reading Order is one.

Timeline is another -- for the reason (that makes sense to authors, but maybe not to readers) that the tighter the timeline is made, the more the Universe (to readers) seems set in stone; and the less stories are available to us to write, because THIS couldn't happen THEN; THAT was happening THEN.

We are making this stuff up as we go along. No, honest. We're not working to a timeline, except in the loosest possible sense. The production of a detailed timeline leaves the erroneous impression that the Authors Have Planned All This Out from the Beginning, which is oh so not how it works around here.

A detailed timeline will also have the (unwelcome) side effect (based on my experience of emails regarding reading orders and improper invocations of the Code) of producing more Author Error to be pointed out by people who believe the timeline is Ghod and the Authors are required to Toe the Line.

Sigh. This has turned into a rant, for which I'm sorry.

Re: Devil's Advocate

[redpimpernel.livejournal.com]

Eh, that's not really a rant, but a good explanation of why you respond as you do. I guess we really do need to walk a mile in another's shoes. Man, if I had gotten all the crazy, grumpy, complaining letters and e-mails that you have gotten, I'm sure my completely bruised and battered ego & feelings would cause me to throw all writing implements away and I'd cease communicating with others forever. So it's good I'm not an author. Me, I'm a scientist and I collect and categorize data. I like making lists, I like things in order on my shelves, because sometimes that's the only order one has in life. =) We readers can be such putzs, and worse.

I was going to suggest just omitting the dates from the timeline, but checking the Correct Reading Order (http://sharonleewriter.com/bibliography/correct-reading-order/) page I see that you have done just that. Not listing dates avoids the whole "set in stone" problem. I will keep my secret list with the dates because then I can figure out which short stories go where, something that's a little more problematic then figuring out an order for the novels. Honestly (I hope), all readers want is to read, and sometimes to make order out of the confusion that having a bunch of unread books from one universe in front of them can present. Sometimes we just want to know which book we should logically read next. Because writers don't always write in chronological order, nor should they have to. And obviously when I've read everything, then I just read the new stuff as it comes out, doesn't matter when it belongs in relation to other books.

[(Anonymous)]

I haven't had any problems with Safari.

Of all the novels I would NOT suggest Plan B to start with. It was my second (after Balance of Trade) and found it very confusing until I had read "earlier" ones. Then I re-read with pleasure.

Peggy

Not Reading E-Mails

[trekgirlmo.livejournal.com]

As the Author isn't reading e-mails, one wonders about the status of the 6 sets of 10 Ace Editions offered for sale on Monday?

Re: Not Reading E-Mails

[cailleuch.livejournal.com]

Mine arrived today!!!!!

Re: Not Reading E-Mails

[trekgirlmo.livejournal.com]

You're lucky! Apparently, I was not. Bummer!! :)

Re: Not Reading E-Mails

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

I posted the Call on Sunday, I believe; went out to run errands; and came back to more than 30 offers of adoption. I used the timestamp method to determine the first-comers; wrote to everyone else in the initial list that the books were placed. I then put a note at the top of the original LJ entry (http://rolanni.livejournal.com/555461.html) indicating that the books were placed. It surprised me that people kept writing (for days) after that, but I had unfortunately moved on to other things, and assumed they'd figure it out. Sometimes, I assume too much, apparently.

Re: Not Reading E-Mails

[trekgirlmo.livejournal.com]

Nah, you didn't assume to much, it just didn't occur to me to check your original post for comments. I'm still new to Live Journal and don't quite understand all the nuances, yet. Thanks for this response, though! :)

[(Anonymous)]

I initially bought six of your books together and also wanted to read them in the "correct" order. It was, however, very simple to work out. I just read them in the order they were published which, strangely enough, is listed right there in front cover.

Tricia

[keristor.livejournal.com]

For first reading I normally go by publication order (in some cases I have to do that because they others haven't been published yet!). After all, that's usually the order in which the author thought of them. And that's the only order in which there aren't 'spoilers' (there may be back-references, but if so then they were supposed to be there).

Otherwise I generally prefer internal chronological order where there is a clear one (obviously some stories and books overlap, as do chapbooks, and taking the lot apart and reassembling them by chapter is a Really Silly Idea).

But complain about it? Sorry, that's just rude. I may ask if anyone has a timeline, but being told or shown where to find the information (and your page is far more comprehensive than for most series) is a good reply and deserves thanks not criticism.

(I have no idea why Safari doesn't like the page. I can even read it with lynx/links (text-only) browsers, for which thanks.)

[kay-gmd.livejournal.com]

I suspect they've read less exciting authors. Your writing keeps me on eager discovery even when I'm re-reading (what this says about my memory is not the point). I have however read books where I get the feeling that I'm reading this because some piece of it will be important later, but the current section isn't interesting. I couldn't state who, and wouldn't if I could. That said there are several good start points, and after finishing any of your books they shouldn't be concerned.

[hapaxnym.livejournal.com]

I dunno. You could take this as a sort of compliment. By the time people get into online screaming matches about the One True Reading Order, it usually means that you're an author of the stature of Tolkien or C.S. Lewis or Ghodhelpusawlll, Steven Brust.

(Or it could mean that you're Sherrilyn Kenyon. Never mind, scratch that idea.)

I'm with Keristor. Although playing with reading error and internal chronology can be great fun for re-reads and catching unexpected insights and connections, for a first read-through publication order can't possibly be Wrong. And that's freely available information.

It ain't worth being depressed over.

[(Anonymous)]

If someone wants to be OCD about Series Order, it is THEIR problem, not yours. Honestly, not every piece of fiction must be handed over on a decorated platter, with footnotes and end notes and glossary and bibliography. To me, re-reading a book to pick up new details is merely a confirmation that I have in my hands a Great Book, with lots of layers and food for the subconscious. It's ALL reading for discovery.

Your fiction is Great - ignore the grumpy reader. They'll figure
it out.

I used to have to find tape recorders to record my voice lessons
and as they broke (well, I had to at least warm up every day!)
they got harder and harder to find. Sometimes the drugstores will
have small boomboxes or cassette players?

I hope Steve feels better soon
Lauretta@ConstellationBooks

[(Anonymous)]

If anything, it seems to me that this annoying reader is the one who is not understanding of nuance. How is "filling in the gaps" not a legitimate form of discovery? If there was a gap to be filled, it was obviously previously unknown, and thus there was discovering to be done. The only way this even remotely makes sense is if you are reading a book solely to discover "what happens"--i.e., for the plot points. If that was all a book was, I could "read" a novel in less than a minute, just by scanning a basic list of events in an outline.

I have probably read most of the novels in the Liaden Universe at least ten times, and I still "discover" things as I am reading. Last week I got sucked into the ARC of Mouse and Dragon, after which I read Carpe Diem, Plan B, I Dare, Conflict of Honors, and then, randomly, Misfits. This ordering makes no sense in pretty much any methodology, being neither according to internal chronology or publication date. It wasn't even complete. But it was exactly what I wanted to do, and I found it satisfying.

There is something to be said for reading "out of order". Sometimes it just makes more sense to be unstuck in time, a la Billy Pilgrim. And if there was no more "thrill of discovery" left in a book just because I "know what happens," I'm obviously not reading it right. (Or, alternatively, it's a crappy book, but this is obviously not applicable in the present case.)

-Meara

[otaku-tetsuko.livejournal.com]

And then there are people like me, who sometimes need to read in order (and SITLL notice something that Now Makes Sense) when it didn't before, and sometimes grab the most comfort-y of comfort books (pretty much anything with Miri in it, bless her Sarge-y little heart!) so that I can remember that SOMEwhere and when, people still take responsibility for themselves and their actions...

I work with a woman , a few years older than me (if you can believe such a thing exists) who simply CANNOT (apparently) perform her job without a constant stream of whining and complaining and being a victim. And yet, after she has once again had everyone in the process jumping through hoops to somehow get the process completed even though (because of everyone else being so MEAN), it is now late and critical and urgent....the study goes out the door, the samples come in, and she actually has clients who ASK for her to run their study!

Point is? (She said, putting down the kynak glass with a small ) We shrug and roll our eyes and then forget about it. The job got done.

I'm only saying, some people simply can't function without irritating everyone around them, even for the simplest things. You just use what you can for joke-fodder (no one has apparently warned them that being mean to a writer can end up in PRINT!), and move on. Have a glass on me, Commander, and get back to the serious stuff - you know, STARING. There's more story in there waiting to get out!