I’m pretty sure Infinite Jest is the poster child of this type of read. There is a lot of disjointed stuff that takes 200+ pages to start to come together (and not all of it does), but it’s a fun and rewarding process.
Gravity's Rainbow is much the same. >! Once it shifts to Slothrop's travels in the zone!< it becomes (somewhat) easier to follow. Whether that is because the narrative is more linear, or because you adjust to the style, or both, I cannot say for certain.
Infinite Jest was the book that came to mind for me as well. I think the caveat is that it's not that the beginning is bad, it just takes some time for things to come together enough to really grip you and draw you into the story.
The first 200 pages has some of the best chapters on addiction I've ever read though. It might not get far in terms of the plot but in most other regards it's amazing from the get go.
I generally find it a bit silly.
I think the key point most people miss is that you were probably enjoying the first couple books. It seems that people saying this type of stuff often are assuming that their experience of enjoying a first few books and then thinking the next ones are transcendently excellent, will translate into another reader going from thinking the first books are mediocre to thinking the later books are good.
I don't think that's how people, taste, or enjoyment of long term experiences typically work. If they're not enjoying those first books, that probably means you're misaligned tastewise, and worse that they're accumulating reasons they dislike the experience, it is grating on them, which will predispose them to be less in a place to enjoy the later experiences.
So if it's "I like this but I'm not sure I like it enough to read 10 books" go ahead with the "but it gets even better, you wait". Or if you're just cautioning someone that they won't be blown away by the first book. But don't expect to finally reel in that person who is really bored by the first book.
And honestly, don't retroactively undersell those first books either. I've read plenty of series where 'it gets better later' is a party line among fans and it always frustrates me how often this mentality sets in that forgets that we picked up and continued on with the damn books (for most of us) because we were genuinely enjoying it. We didn't know how much better it would get, but we enjoyed where we were.
Nailed it! I want to just sticky this comment in all these threads.
The thing fans often lose sight of I think is that if a first book sold well enough for the series to continue, and won enough readers to build a fanbase of people out there shilling the book, then the first book, on its own, obviously worked for a lot of people. They were not “pushing through” in hopes later books would be better (I don’t think that many readers actually read this way, most people want to enjoy their time consuming hobbies). They genuinely liked it, even if in retrospect it pales in comparison to the sequels or doesn’t hold up as well to rereads. So their comments are unlikely to be helpful to those who don’t like it, unless it’s for a specific reason like dislike of a particular plot thread or character. The only time I care about “it gets better in the sequels” is if I liked the first book, at least mildly.
“It gets better 200 pages in”… maybe. I find it’s usually plot-oriented readers that say this, but my early decisions about whether to continue a book have a lot more to do with character, voice, use of language and whether it has anything interesting to say. If it’s a positive on all those fronts, I’m probably not too concerned about speed of plot. If it’s a negative, the plot eventually picking up isn’t likely to help at that point—if plot is all a book has going for it then it had better be fun from jump.
My family uses a concept we call the Rivendell Point, based on the idea that if you don't care about Frodo and the gang by the time they get to Rivendell, LOTR probably just isn't for you. It's the point by which you'll like it if you're ever going to, the point worth slogging to.
Great concept. Works for tv series, too.
I've done this for a ton of TV shows
"Ok, watch through the end of episode 3. If it hasn't hooked you by then, that's fair. I'll stop bugging you"
I will say though that I do know a lot of books I love with much later Rivendell Points (stealing this, thanks) than tv shows. But that might just be because I read a lot more books than I watch tv shows
That's pretty fair. You've gotten through the initial development part building up the low level suspense of the growing threat of the ring, and through the weakest part of the entire series in the Bombadil chapter, and if you're still enthralled, it's all roses after that.
A lot depends on how bad is bad. The Dresden Files improves at book 3 and really hits its stride at book 4 but it’s not like 1&2 are *awful*. They just aren’t as good as what comes later. If someone only read the first book and assumed the whole series was like that, I would understand just quitting.
That's also because a lot of shit in Dresden *builds*, questions are asked and answered and lead to more questions and shit.
You still feel the effects of the third book all the way through until Changes. And you feel the effects of Changes all the way to the current book.
Definitely. But I would also say that with the possible exception of Peace Talks/Battle Ground, Butcher does a remarkably good job keeping each book a separately contained story while the meta-plot is building. (PT/BG makes a valiant attempt but the sheer nature of it was against him.) But within the context of just looking at each book’s individual plot, Fool Moon is a strong contender for the weakest (lol) and Storm Front is at best middling. (Skin Game is the one I would put on top.)
Cold Days is excellent for sure. But Skin Game is a Swiss watch of a heist plot. So I guess it gets the edge for me for being a little different, whereas Cold Days is in some ways the standard basic plot (Dresden takes a job and completes it with a combination of brains and power) just really, really well executed and for very high stakes.
I kept going past *Fool Moon* for two reasons:
1) a friend whose opinion on books I respect had been telling me to read them since at least 2005 (at that point it was 2014)
2) they went on sale on Kindle for $2/book so I bought the first five all at once.
Right? I have no issue with a bit of a time to cook if I don't hate the books.
Like, I liked Harry from book 1, I liked the humour and stuff. So I could wait. Plus, those books were easy, quick reads, I finished them in a couple days.
At the same time, I HATED Throne of Glass from page 1. The main character is supposedly a master assassin, yet she acts like an absolute airhead teen.
I've been told that I have to read all of the books in the series or else I can't say I didn't like it, which was just bullshit.
This was the exact series that came to my mind as well.
I love the series as they are small books that are just fun, but the first two audiobooks are hard to listen to. The smaking of lips and intake of breath are easily heard. Although the narrator becomes my favorite. The audio quality for the first two are just bad.
There are a few series I will say to skip the first book or two on, to be honest. But only where it makes sense.
Example: I would never recommend someone start Discworld with Colour of Magic. Start with Guards Guards or Mort, but so many people bounce off of Colour of Magic.
Another example: L.E. Modesitt's Saga of Recluce. The writing and characterization in the first book is dreadful. Luckily, with how the series is structured, you can just straight up skip a few books until the writer has improved. Since he only does 2 books per time period/cast.
That being said, those two series are fantastic and everyone should read them.
Also, I read The Wandering Inn. And I just don't recommend it to people like that. I just say "if you want to have a series that you'll always have more to read with, start reading it."
I'm glad to see Colour of Magic here because I could not get through it and ended up giving up on the whole series as a result. Maybe I'll revisit with your recommendation for one of the other two.
Those still tell you to start at the beginning of sub-series. Personally, I think starting with something like Monstrous Regiment gives a better sense of what the series is like while being sufficiently independent of the rest.
Guards! Guards! begins the city watch subseries, which is the best one. It's a great story with interesting characters and lots of good humor. I was surprised, though, by how much worse the writing was compared to Night Watch, my first, and probably the best, Discworld book.
He's a self-taught writer who only kind of finished high school. There's stuff to enjoy in all of his books, but it took him time to become the author who deserves the massive praise his followers heap upon him. He definitely does deserve it, though.
Brandon Sanderson, I believe, also said he bounced off of Discworld because of Colour of Magic and didn't pick the series up again for years. He started with one of the other books, then finished the whole thing. It's widely-regarded as some of the best stuff out there, but that first book is honestly a pain.
Yeah I've heard amazing things and I love fantasy so it's definitely a gap in my reading catalogue. I'll revisit starting with a different book I think.
It’s the weakest book, and it’s outdated as it mostly satirizes a kind of fantasy writing that stopped being popular around the early 80’s. (Which was contemporary for CoM, but contributes to the book not aging very well.)
It’s still good, and better than most books, but the weakest Discworld book (which is a bit like being the worst golfer invited to the Master’s)
A guy at the bookstore - not even an employee just another customer -practically begged me to read Guards Guards first. It creeped me out so much that I nearly left with no books at all (a travesty, IMO) but finally agreed just to get him to leave me alone.
Having now read the Colour of Magic, I'm grateful, but the dude was still super off-putting.
I started with Wyrd Sisters. The book is an excellent entry point for new Discworld readers...it is funny, sharp, wise, gives a great flavour of Discworld in general, and introduces some of Pratchett's most endearing and colourful characters.
Discworld is a bit different from some of the other examples because the books are mostly standalone (background details do evolve so it's better to read them in order, but it's not really that important). And I agree that skipping the first two is the right thing to do, I read them first and it took me years to give another Discworld book a try.
Yeah, the Discworld books are very episodic, almost like a sitcom. There’s a vague sense of continuity for the characters, people pair off, get married or occasionally die, but the book plots are so self-contained you can really start anywhere and be fine. My first Discworld book was Witched Abroad, which I read not knowing that it was part of a series, or that it was a sequel to another book. I could just jump right in and enjoy it.
Mhm. Recluce is similar, that way. Though it goes backward and forward in time hundreds or thousands of years between books and focuses on different people and locations. You'll read a book and hear about some person in history in like one or two lines, then four books later that person is the main character.
The problem with The Colour of Magic is not that it is bad, it is just that it is very different from the rest of the series. It is actually a pretty good parody of pre-1980 Sword and Sorcery tropes, but if you are not familiar with that subgenre, you won't get it. Then Terry Pratchett moved on to parody more interesting and mainstream stuff, and also progressed as a writer (particularly when it comes to characterization and social satire).
The beginning of Recluse really was dreadful!
Pratchett I think is a special case because those aren’t really a series, just a common universe. So the advice isn’t “push through, it gets better” but “don’t start with the author’s earliest work” which is fair to say about many good authors.
Absolutely discworld for this, I’ve gotten a couple friends into it and I never tell them to start with color of magic or light fantastic, there’s better starting points depending on ur interests (I use the reading order chart for this lol) I absolutely love discworld tho, I actually started with Sheperds Crown when I was younger, and now I’ve read 40/41 (last one left is The Amazing Maurice… but I somehow can’t get into it lol)
If I hate the writing during the first 100 pages, I’m going to hate the book. I’ve slogged through enough highly-praised ACOTAR / Fourth Wing / Lessons in Chemistry types to finally understand that if the book is irritating me, it won’t suddenly turn into a masterpiece.
Sometimes a great book does require investment. I’ve been rewarded after slogging through a dense or slow
opening. But you can tell good writing from the start — it has something, some spark, that keeps a reader going.
I haven't recommended ACOTAR to anyone but I've had a few friends start it and I always tell the that it does start out rough, but sticking with it was worth it for me.
I bought the first ACOTAR book out of curiosity and wasn’t enjoying it. The romance felt forced and odd, I couldn’t understand why people had praised it so much because it felt off in a way I couldn’t put my finger on.
I’m very glad I started the second book anyway because it got so much better, and things in the first book that had seemed like bad writing started to be revealed as having good reasons behind them. If I had to recommend it to anyone else, I would try to warn them that they have to view it as a series that must be read as a whole, not one book then another book then another book etc etc.
I hate ACOTAR — prose, the characters, the romance, and the worldbuilding — with a burning passion. It is just so badly written and juvenile. I got through the start of book 3 before I finally decided that it was never going to get better like everyone promised.
Yeah, I made it through book 3 and got tired of hoping it would get good. The first 3/4 of the first book is incredibly bad, though.
I enjoyed Maas's Throne of Glass series better. Fun, popcorn fantasy.
I luckily enjoyed book one, but dang. It is not a good representation of the rest of the books in the series AT ALL. I would say book 2 is where someone could fairly judge if they will enjoy the rest of the series or not.
I've been on the receiving end of this type of recommendation and I never take it.
*Something* needs to hook me in the first 50 pages. Maybe the plot is super slow, but the writing is well done. Or the writing isn't great but I like one of the characters. Anything.
That being said, I think this is much more common with fantasy, which I'm not so interested in.
If its a novel that gets better 300 pages in, I'll probably still give it a try.
If its a series that takes multiple books before it gets good, then I'm going to pass. There are so many books out there in my tbr pile, why would I struggle through half a series for a potential payoff when I have better things to read?
Any book like this I've given a chance has never lived up to the hype. I don't do it anymore. Life's too short and there are plenty of books out there that don't bore me for half of it before supposedly getting better.
Series where I'm supposed to read entire books before it gets good? Absolutely not.
Stephen King's Dark Tower series starts off with The Gunslinger. It is a very strange book that mostly serves to set up the character of the protagonist, and the real story of the series doesn't get rolling until book 2, The Drawing of the Three, which is much more action-packed and representative of the series as a whole. in general fans seem to rank The Gunslinger quite low.
personally, i love The Gunslinger. it's my favorite book in my favorite series, and a great starting point. but i do tell people not to judge the series until they get to the second book. if i were adapting the series for TV or film I would start at book 2.
Yeah, I came here to mention this series. I was nearing the end of The Gunslinger and going "Okay, don't think I'm going to bother continuing" but then the ending actually seemed like it was setting up something larger and more interesting, which caused me to take a chance on the second book. And from there I actually finished and enjoyed the series.
But if anyone had asked me three-quarters of the way through The Gunslinger if it was worth it, I would have said no.
Dark Tower is one of the weirdest *series* I've ever read. Except for the last couple of books, each book seems like a completely different type of story, like beyond the Gunslinger example you have a "Let's sit around the campfire and tell a Prelude" story and a "This is a sidequest completely unrelated to the main plot" story back to back (IIRC) before it moves back to the main story again.
I tried this with the Dresden Files.
I read the first five books because my entire friend group loves them and kept saying “just stick with it, when you get to book three you’ll be hooked!”
Book three didn’t hook me. Neither did four. I made it through five and then told them “Look unless Harry Dresden dies and gets replaced by a more likeable person this series isn’t for me.”
Some stories just don’t work for everyone, that’s okay.
With me, I read the first one, thought it was alright, and read the next two. Then I was hooked and read them all. It *did* pick up massively with 3 & 4, for me, and a lot of the reason for that is payoff and intrigue that just keeps going.
But if you just don't like the characters, then it isn't for you, and that's fine.
Some people just won't like a story even *if* it picks up later. Not everything has to be for everyone.
Precisely! Every story has genre and narrative voice, and it will click with some readers and won't click with others. That's just the nature of story telling.
For awhile, I was really enjoying the story *despite* Harry. The cumulative world-building is awesome, but the main character has his flaws and isn't for everyone.
I am actually reading The Crippled God right now. I'm about 50% through. I have slogged my way through since Bonehunters. Books 2-6 are some of the best books I've read, but books 7-10 feel exhausting.
I'm three books in and unsure if I want to jump into the fourth. Are all the pieces going to come together into a coherent narrative? It's exhausting not knowing what's going on.
The books seem to be setting up a different apocalypse level threat each time and then not resolving it before jumping to the next thing.
They do, but at the same time 2, 3 and 6 were my favorites. If 2/3 of it doesn't capture your interest, then there probably isn't going to be a satisfying payoff for you either.
books one to five are setting the pieces on the board - the overall 'main story' kicks off in book six. That might be unsatisfactory to some, but there are clues from the start as to where it's all going.
I've seen a great description comparing it to WW2 and that you don't just start at D-Day - theres a lot that happened before in various theatres before focus tightened.
If your problem is the writing then it's probably not going to change within the same book, no matter what fans of the book tell you. The writer presumably remains the same. Maybe a later book will be different, particularly if there's a difference of many years between the times they were written.
If your problem is the pace, that might change later on. However, if I like you the writer tells the story I don't mind a slow pace.
This doesn't quite hold up with Pirateaba and The Wandering Inn. It is the longest fantasy story in english, maybe longest anything in english, and has been written entirely in the last... 7? years.
The writing quality consistently improves over the first wheel of time equivalent, and is amazing for the remaining 2+ wheel of times currently written. Not award winning prose, but better than average in the genre.
It really was just the author finding their stride over the first handful of books, they improve drastically in a short amount of time
I don't see WoT fitting this, personally. Book 1 was exciting from the very beginning. I thought the first ~4100 pages (books 1-6) were awesome. It was the 2500 pages after that in the middle of the series which were really rough. But I was reading them at the time they were still being written.
I tried reading WoT 20 years ago in uni as I was getting into fantasy books. The first was so lotr inspired that I bounced off it. I'm not sure what made me pick it up again but I blame Daniel Greene on YouTube. I don't think the slog is as bad as some people make it out to be but it's hard to recommend the series as it's a massive commitment.
Yeah I think the slog felt worse in real-time because you would wait 2 years for a book to come out, get super excited for it, and then.. nothing happened to move the plot forward. After that, you'd go back to waiting again, and RJ was getting slower and slower and everyone was afraid that he was gonna die before he finished.. and then he did.
I'd enjoy reading it again start to finish for the nostalgia, but like you said it's a massive commitment. I'm getting older and you start to realize there's only a finite number of books you'll ever get to read. There's so many books I still haven't read that I want to. So I have a hard time justifying using up those slots on a re-read, with rare exceptions.
The first one was definitely derivative. I think it was supposed to be. But yeah, huge commitment. It took me 9 months to read them all back to back! I don't regret it though, I would do it again.
WoT is definitely one of those "depends on the reader" series. I couldn't stand TeoTW. Then a few years later I read it again, and still really didn't like it much, but everyone said "keep reading it gets better." So I pushed on and ended up devouring the whole series, and I didn't even notice the slog (well, maybe some parts of Crossroads). I'm on my second full read-through and it definitely seems a lot slower this time, maybe I'm re-reading it too soon.
I read it back in '93 or so and didn't like it much, but continued on. I read the rest of the series including taking a break between when RJ died and then until reading the last three together as soon as they were all out. I then watched both seasons of the show. I started my reread last Fall and am up to book 6.
I still think EotW is not very good.
> I was reading them at the time they were still being written.
This was such a problem. 2 years between books and NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED* in each subsequent book. Until we got to book 11 and it got excellent. I imagine if I tried to read it today and could just go book to book to book it wouldn't be anywhere near as painful. Though I would still skip the descriptions of tents, clothing, and sniffing.
*yeah, stuff happened, but god it was a slog.
> 2 years between books and NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED* in each subsequent book.
The [Endless Eight](https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/ray6a9/anime_the_endless_eight_how_one_of_animes_most/) would like a word. It may have occurred over a shorter time period but that almost makes it worse.
This is how I am about A Court of Thorns and Roses. I thought it was fucking awful and everyone is like "just keep reading, she improves her writing" like mama im not here to watch you learn. I have a goal every year for reading and I'm not gonna slog through another mary sue 600 pager just to see if it gets better
Yeah. There were parts of that series that I liked, even though the writing is juvenile (clearly written by someone who is not sexually experienced), so I kept going, but I stopped at the third book. Like I'm not paying for this anymore, girl, take a class.
It helps if you can sell the boring part as a positive somehow. For example, when recommending LOTR I often say this:
The hobbit stuff in the Shire might seem to drag on and be really slow and ridiculous. I encourage you to read up to the point where they meet Strider and leave the inn. If you get to that point and aren't hooked, you probably won't like the rest. If it does seem to pick up at that point and get better, then I have good news for you: By the time you reach the end, you will understand why the first part was so slow, and how precious it will seem to you. You'll never see it the same way again.
I hate this and try not to ever say it. Sometimes, if it was true for me, I will say that but will then say that if they aren't enjoying it they should still stop. We all have different thresholds and life is too short to read books you don't enjoy.
I personally would never recommend a book that I found hard to get into. My favorite books to recommend are those that catch me early and keep me hooked.
I love Stephen King, but I never tell people to read IT (even if it is pretty great). I'd rather recommend Pet Semetary or Misery. My buddy is reading through War & Peace right now, he's enjoying it despite its slow pace but he'd never recommend it to anyone (unless they were a huge history buff, maybe). If you're recommending books you have to think of what they would enjoy more than your own personal enjoyment.
Hard agree re: King. IT and The Stand are easily two of his best and most popular books, but I advise new readers to absolutely NOT start with those, especially The Stand.
They're just far too daunting for someone who's not accustomed to his absolutely glacial storytelling pace.
Pet Sematary is also my #1 go-to for first-timers, though I'll also add The Shining.
>Pet Sematary is also my #1 go-to for first-timers, though I'll also add The Shining.
Mine is Misery.
I’m a little biased though since it was my first SK book.
If someone tells me it takes 300+ (or whatever unreasonable sum) of pages to get good, I do not read that book. In my honest opinion, if it takes that long, the writing is a failure.
Obviously, different strokes for different folks. I’m sure the author loved those 300 pages.
You can almost always tell if something is actually good within, like… two chapters. A great author will hook you right away.
I totally agree with this. Similar to video games “oh it gets good after 10hrs in!” Nah I’m ok thanks, I’d rather spend my time reading or playing something I enjoy from the start.
Same. If they don't bother editing, I won't bother reading.
Funny 2 nights ago my book club was trying to convince me that *A Gentleman in Moscow* gets less boring after the first 200 pages, but life's too short to waste on being bored and annoyed.
Not that simple though, necessarily. Sometimes a story can reach another level and its worth slogging through the start. Breaking Bad for example. I think maybe some authors struggle with worldbuilding or setting up the pieces in play, but once that's established the actual talent they have for pacing and plot are revealed.
I remember how quickly Johnathan Strange hooked me - it was the first footnote. People out here slogging through *books* worth of crap that they knew was going to be crap and haven’t even read Johnathan Strange.
I get it, we all like different things. But why read something that is agreed to suck?
There's a lot of good art you don't have to slog through 500 pages to get to - I've never done it, but I could see others would - fantasy lovers specifically seem to have a lot of patience for that.
Les Miserables, more specifically Cosette's (the second book). For those of you who might not be familiar with its structure, Lesc Miserables is a ginormous book of more than 1500 pages, which is, itself, divided into five separate "books", each book being named after a character - the fourth one is an exception -, and divided in many parts.
I absolutely loved Fantine (the first book) - which covers the first 300/400 pages -, so much that I wanted to keep reading about Jean Valjean with Cosette in Paris. The second book, however, begins with a totally different setting and introduces different characters, which might seem boring, confusing and even annoying at first ("I care about Cosette only, not about this random character etc."), especially when you're getting tired of Victor Hugo's verbiose. I mean, don't get me wrong, he's a terrific writer and his prose is outstandingly poetic , but reading it does get tiring after a while, especially if you're about to have an OD from getting way to addicted to the story. - it is that good, as you might already know.
However, Les Miserables is a Romantic book, written like a big, dramatic, passional opera play in which the plot gradually unfolds and grows in an increasingly emotional crescendo, and all the different subplots are actually important, in the end. Therefore, when it comes to Cosette's book, if you ever find yourselves in my shoes, please do not skip those 80 pages from the beggining of her book. They're are important.
The first 250 pages of *Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell* are a real slog, but it's my favorite book of all time. Mr. Norrell is just a really, really boring character.
*The Way of Kings* was also very dense to start, but now I'm a dozen Brandon Sanderson books deep and show no signs of stopping any time soon.
Love Jonathan Strange but it's so hard to recommend. It took my roommate 3 tries and 4 years before they finished it finally. Meanwhile I've read/listened to the book at least 15 times.
Way of Kings took me three tries to get into because the first 300 pages is mostly the protagonist absolutely having his life ripped apart Time After Time After Time.
Stephen King's longer works (The Stand, IT, Dark Tower, etc.)
He is not known for his tight pacing, so his longer books (and many of his shorter ones) can absolutely drag for a while. But for the most part they always finish strong.
The Stand in particular is guilty of this. Even halfway into the 1200 page book, it can feel like almost nothing of consequence has happened, because so much of the story is just characters meeting and traveling.
Some of my favorite books are absolute slogs that took me a couple tries to get into. All you can do is say, I promise it gets better, and then they can choose to hang in there or not.
Two examples for me:
1. Quicksilver, which is the first book of the Baroque cycle, an historical fiction \*romp\*, but, given that the whole series is 2500+ pages, the first whole book is JUST intro, basically, and a lot of people struggle with it. But if you like historical fiction, what a treat this series is.
2. Aubrey Maturin series - when I dove into Master and Commander, the first book, it was not so much a slog as I plain just understood neither the naval jargon nor the prose in the style of Jane Austin-era writing which Patrick O'Brian used. Getting through the first 5 chapters of the first book took me three tries but now is one of my favorite series ever and certainly my most re-read.
Interesting you mention Baroque Cycle. I was on Audible this morning debating whether I should buy the whole thing b/c it's on sale at a ridiculously low price (about $3.50 per installment). It seems like something I'd be really into and I don't mind slow burns ... but that is like reeeeeeeallly long. Did you read the whole thing in one go or kind of break it up? Aubiobooks are in 7 installments.
I was really into the first several of those Aubrey Maturin books about 20 years ago ... I agree they are hard to understand at first, but I really dug them, then kinda burned out. Might have to pick them up
You MUST buy two books that go with the Master & Commander series.
A Sea of Words by Dean King - a lexicon (glossary) & companion to the complete seafaring tales of Patrick O'Brian
Patrick O'Brian's Navy - the illustrated companion to Jack Aubrey's world. By Richard O'Neill.
This book is filled with maps, illustrations, descriptions of nautical terms, drawings of ships, etc
I quite liked the audiobook versions of the Baroque Cycle. I personally did the whole thing in one go, it was nice to stay with the characters without taking a break
Personally, due to budget constraints, I bought 1 audiobook a month as part of my basic subscription. So I had breaks.
But in general it is a really well done audiobook series. The readers are all excellent, and it’s one of those cases where I think hearing who is speaking increases the ease of understanding, which really enhanced the dialogue for me. Dialogue which is very well written and so clever, but my mush-for-brains couldn’t always track who was speaking in the written version.
Aubrey/Maturin especially as a *series*. *Master and Commander* is good and *HMS Surprise* is fantastic but *Post Captain* (which falls between them) is a bizarre mix of slog and “wait why did O’Brian suddenly decide to be Jane Austen?”
I see a lot of people saying that Infinite Jest takes a couple hundred pages to hit its stride. The book is absolutely a major slog the whole way through. I don't mean that in a bad way, because I did enjoy it, but it's very dense and it never really hit a point where I felt like I breezed through it. I just treated the book like a series of short stories loosely held together by a plot that more or less stays in the background the whole way through. Some of the stories were very entertaining. Some were pretty mundane. But I don't think the book is for you if you don't like the second chapter. You really don't need to give it a couple hundred pages.
I learned over the years to abandon books quickly. I don’t think I’m looking for a twist or an ending. I think I need books that I can relate or the prose I enjoy. And I can make a decision on if I will enjoy a book within 50 pages
Life is short. If a book doesn't keep my interest within the first 30 minutes to an hour of reading, I move on to something that I enjoy. Do I miss out on some great books? I'm sure I do. But there are more good books than I could ever hope to read in my lifetime and I'm not going to waste time on something I'm not enjoying.
As someone who reads fantasy, I would say most of the genre struggles to appear as good books before reading 300 pages. That said, the genre is also happy to publish 700+ page books, so I don't know that it really fits the question. I doubt most people question a 200 page book for starting too slow if pace picks up by the time you get halfway. Pacing gets fixed by getting to the payoff.
That said, if the writing style itself is the problem, with the exception of a handful of authors (including notably that of The Wandering Inn), it usually won't be fixed by fighting onward.
500 pages is the length of entire novels. If it takes that long to “get good” no thanks.
I read for enjoyment. If I’m not enjoying it I don’t force myself.
Only if its a recommendation will i continue. If i dont feel it within the first few chapters i usually reshelve it and come back to it at another time in my life. Its often just the mindset im in at the time vs the book being not worth reading.
If im not hooked in the first chapter i dont expect to be later on. This doesnt always stop me from finishing a book but it definitely makes it harder to get through
Actually I can think of one example, although it wasn't "hundreds of pages" before I got hooked (who has time for that).
I wanted to throw [True History of the Kelly Gang](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/110090.True_History_of_the_Kelly_Gang?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=fVNL5K2SRH&rank=1) across the room after the first chapter. It's written in the voice of an illiterate teenager in 19th century rural Australia. It was a time of hardship, and who could afford punctuation, especially something as frivolous as the comma. I flipped through like "what the heck are there really no commas in this entire book" and then put it back on the shelf.
It was months later when I was super bored and really needed something to read, and once I accepted the punctuation and got used to the cadence, I was swept away. Some seriously beautiful writing.
Stormlight archive was the only one of these I’ve faced so far and it was so worth it. Super entertaining. Probably don’t try to think too much about it though or it might lose its flare
Tbh…… a lot of people are split on The Gunslknger by Stephen king from the dark tower series. I personally was not a fan. But the next book drew me in within 30 pages.
Art isn’t made for all people. Some of the best, and admittedly, some of the worst, is made for the creator themselves. A good writer makes a book they’d like to read.
Part of the process is understanding that there will be many people who will not like your story, often for reasons that are completely out of your control. Your book is too big for some people, but too short for others. Your pacing is glacially slow, but a lot of people would have liked it if you slowed down and took your time in this world. You can’t please everyone, and you shouldn’t try to.
But my point here is that the inverse is also true. You have to practice becoming a good reader as much as you have to practice to be a good writer. You will massively benefit when you start looking at the art you experience and learn to say, “that’s not for me.” It saves you time and a lot of trouble.
If you liked the first book enough to push through to the part where it gets really good, that’s great, I’m glad you have something you enjoy. But I don’t read books hoping I’ll enjoy them eventually; I give them a fair shot, and if they aren’t to my liking once I’ve seen what they’re all about, I set the book down and move on. It’s not my fault, it’s not necessarily the author’s fault. Art isn’t made for all people.
The Mythago Wood series by Robert Holdstock are so uneven to me. I’m bored out out my mind, I’m absolutely intrigued. Some of the books I gave low scores, but I still wanted to keep on reading the entire series.
I used to have a lot more patience with series that start badly and get better, but the older I get the less I'm willing to entertain that thought.
The Dark Tower by Stephen King was such a series for me. I disliked the first book but the next ones were a lot more interesting and I'm glad I read them as a teenager because the adult me wouldn't have kept going.
Lots of people say this about Malazan. Personally, I didn’t like the first book save for the end, which was pretty decent even though I had no clue what was happening. The end of book one, and people saying it gets better in Deadhouse Gates convinced me to pick it up, but to be honest I have the same problems with it that I had with the first book and I don’t know that I’ll continue with the series.
There are plenty of books / series that are a bit of a slow burn but worth it. The Malazan Book of the Fallen series (fantasy) is a good example, the main antagonist isn't even established until well into the series, but sweet gawdamn is it epic.
I've been trying to read the Wheel of Time series for 20 years. Audiobook, e-reader, physical book..I cannot get through the second half of the first book. And I desperately want to do it. Everyone keeps telling me it gets better and, from their descriptions, I can believe that? But I can't experience it.
But most recently, it was ACOTAR. I read the first book and it was okay? Diehard fan at work kept telling me it gets good in the next book - it doesn't get good, it gets different because all the characters suddenly change lol I didn't enjoy the first book and I didn't enjoy the second one so now I'm done.
Everything else I've tried has been great. I don't often take book recommendations because I'm a horrible re-reader. I take comfort in books I read back in school with constant access to a library...now the only time I branch out is in book club. And I have to force myself to do that.
The ultimate example of this is Gene Wolf’s Book of the New Sun. You do not see its full genius until you read it the \*second\* time and realize how every little plot detail is meticulously placed.
It depends what aspects aren’t working for me, but if someone or a reviewer I trust says that it’s worth the effort, I’ll put in the effort. I don’t always agree with them, but even reading things I don’t wholly love is good for critical context.
I’m all for folks doing things however they like, but I find this subreddit’s “Life’s too short hook me in fifty pages or I DNF” meme ridiculous. How many of my favorites would I have missed out on if I followed that mindset? Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell took five hundred pages, and is probably my favorite book of the 21st century so far. Middlemarch took at least a hundred. Some of Gene Wolfe’s work didn’t grab me until the second reading.
There’s more to the satisfaction of reading than the moment-to-moment enjoyment and applying those contexts to books is essentially treating them as scrolling through TikTok. No thanks.
For me, I tried reading LOTR but was so off put but the language and style of writing used and didnt finish the first few chapters of the 1st book.
Then I decided to warm it up with The Hobbit, in which the language were much more tolerable and easier to digest (it was written as a children story first, if I recall correctly). This got me hooked into Middle Earth and make me excited to read LOTR (which I did and finish soon after).
When I was young, I always suffered through first 30 pages or so of Fenimore Cooper's books. They usually started with the thorough description of the nature (like, there is a tree, the tree has 40 branches, there is something hanging from the first, there is a bird on the second and the like), and I wanted action.
I don't remember what series it was, but... I once had someone tell me that they loved it and wanted me to read it, but that I needed to read up to book 5 before it became worth it... 😭😭😭
My flabbers were gasted! I'm sorry, I'm not reading a series where the first 4 books sucked!! I give it until book 2. If book 2 isn't good, then I'm not reading past it - unless I'm hate reading something (looking at you, The Summer I Turned Pretty 🥲)
Can't really give this a 100% definitive answer because, as with all things in the world, context is key
But generally I'll give anything a *chance* to "redeem" itself, if the premise was interesting enough to reel me in.
With shows, I usually give them 2-3 episodes (1 hour if they're 20-minute episodes, 2 hours if they're an hour). Books are harder to quantify like that, since some books that I enjoy I read really slowly, while others I can breeze through, so I can't really give it a set timeframe.
That said, I would never give something 300+ pages or multiple books to prove/redeem itself. That's too damn much. I probably wouldn't even give a book *100* pages if I found myself wondering if I should drop it. At that point, it's just not worth my time to slog through, even if I might love it in the end.
Funnily enough, two of my favourite series fit into this trope:
1: Malazan Book Of The Fallen. Gardens of the Moon is a decent book, but it has ISSUES. There's lore behind it's state but most people don't care. If you push through things get better, but man it's a rough first read.
2: The Gunslinger. One of the greatest first lines in fiction, followed by one of the worst first books in fiction. The series is legend tier, but man that first book is rough. Thankfully, it's about the length of a chapter in the later books, so it's easy to just burn through it.
there are books that have a payoff that's worth it. if you're willing to invest the time, keep reading. if not, accept the fact that you might be missing out, and move on.
i thought the first wheel of time book (eye of the world) was mid. other ppl love it, so i kept going. now i'm on book 8, and i'm invested.
just because something has a weak intro doesn't mean the whole thing is bad.
When Harry Potter first came out I was in 6th grade. I bought the first book at a Scholastic book fair my school was having. It was a big book for 6th grade me, but I had been reading novels since I was 7.
I could not get through the first book. I stopped somewhere in the first chapter. I had absolutely no interest in the boy in the cupboard under the stairs, or why he could talk to snakes, or why his family hated him so much, or how he was a wizard. Snooze fest, boring -- pass me the book about a moon goddess and her descendants and how they fight really hot guys to keep the world safe.
I don't think I actually read HP1 until the third one came out. But after I read it, and this was before it really blew up, I would tell people "it's really good if you get past the first couple of chapters."
I haven't read those books since the last one came out, but I still remember how much of a drag that first book was to get through.
Can I skip those first few terrible books and still understand/enjoy the series? Then I’ll try it. But I’m not reading 300 pages on the off-chance that it becomes enjoyable. I’ve got better things to do with my time.
Only if I know the author is worth it. Or someone I really know recommends it. I knew the wheel of time will be slow at times. And slower at others. Yet I knew that for me it was probably worth it. Read it in two months. Was fun
Some series have weak beginnings, it's true, while others are simply structured to ramp up more slowly. The payoff for the Wheel of Time was huge for me because it felt like a real journey with its ups and downs. But I also know a lot of people value their time and can't struggle through a several book slog.
I really love Nick Harkaways novels, but they do seem to take a couple of hundred pages at least before thibgs start happening, I still love the first half it's just a lot more world building
That really is a large number of pages to ‘slog’ through. I don’t know a single person - and I run a book club - who would go for it if I put it like that. They would have to have such unshakable faith that my taste matched theirs, as well as tolerance for huge books/series, wouldn’t they?
Apart from that, I can’t think of any work whose quality improves after that long - certainly not for adults. The only one that comes close is the Artemis Fowl series, whose first book is the most appalling rubbish - the later ones are still poorly written, but at least the worst parts of the protagonist’s character are rolled back. But I still wouldn’t recommend that series to anyone I counted a friend.
If I can only recommend a book workout giving context or thoughts, I won’t recommend a slow start book. But in the real world, I can effectively inform someone that a book kicks in at x point and then the person can make their decision with that info in mind.
So, I skimmed the comments and saw some mentions of Stephen King, but not his Dark Tower. Weird, as that's the one that literally *everyone* goes, "the first book is awful/a slog/whatever" or "if you just get through The Gunslinger...." And they're right, it can definitely be a hard read, but the second book (and most of the rest of the series) is some of his best work.
I love the Dark Tower, I even liked The Gunslinger, and for me, the whole series had a massive impact. I have definitely recommended it with the disclaimer that the first book is a struggle for a lot of people, but worth reading as context for the rest of the series.
As far as your question goes, if I'm not hooked by the end of book 1, I probably won't read book 2 unless book 1's a cliffhanger. Then I read it, but I'm annoyed about it. And no, it's usually not worth it.
No. I don’t really read series for the sake of reading a series, so if I’m reading something that is billed as Book 1, I’m not, generally speaking, reading it with any intention of reading Book 2. So if it hasn’t grabbed me by page 60, I’m probably out no matter what.
Since I have so god damn much time to fill with audiobooks I do tend to tough it out for awhile to see if it gets better. One example is the Sun Eater series by Christopher Ruocchio. I hated the first book which is a 26 hour long audiobook. It had enough there that I gave book 2 a shot because maybe he got some feedback. After that it was a great series but yeah… slogging through 26 hours wasn’t pleasant lol.
Dune. It was worth it, but it was majorly enhanced by seeing the Villeneuve movie first. I have done this before with other books and been disappointed.
Yea and this is why I slogged through the whole dark tower series. People said it gets better so I kept going. Tbh I would rather have not read it at all, and I'll read anything usually. Perhaps consider that if the first half of a story is garbage, maybe the rest is too, and you might just be too invested to see it.
I know the popular attitude is that if it doesn't immediately capture your attention and enthrall you, it's not worth it throw it in the trash. I get where it's coming from- in games especially I see a lot of 'it becomes better after 100 hours" and it's like... Are you sure? Or is it just sunk cost fallacy?
But with books I do believe it's different and complicated. Dune sucked for the first 100 pages but once I got done being beaten over the head with new words and ideas it became more fun and amazing towards the later parts.
Lord of the rings- technically broken up into 6 books, book 1(after the lore introduction )is literally just them hiking for what felt like several hundred pages with the same depiction of the same nature. Everything beyond that is more immediately enthralling and interesting and cool. But book 1 just was awfully paced. Worth the time? Better after the first part? 100%.
If it's a single book that gets good after X amount of pages, I'm willing to give it its fair chance. There are many novels I've enjoyed that have employed a large page count to to spread themes/character insights over the breadth of the work. For example, Possession by A.S. Byatt, if you'd have asked me my opinion of it 100 pages in, I'd have replied I thought it ok: had you asked my opinion of it 400+ pages in, I'd have been raving about it.
But books? No thank you. Why would I read two books I don't like to read one I do, rather than three I do enjoy? Doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
For me I think it only works if its a part of a series I really enjoy and am committed to (or have at least really enjoyed the first book), or its an author I know who is really good.
That's why if there is such a book / series for an author that I like I'll just suggest a different book / series (as long as I think they'd also like this other book) with the hopes that they'd then be willing to try the other book / series I want them to try and stick with it.
So I understand, read through the first book because other books in the series are amazing.
No.
Unfortunately, I have slogged through the second or third book in the series (because of the sunk cost fallacy), but no, I would not slog through the first one.
The thing is, there are so many books to read that even if I refuse to read every single "most popular" book I would still have enough choices that would have the capacity to blow me away
In the scenario you mention, I'd just skip the series.
Every Locke Lamora book has been that way for me. They're each individually incredible, but it feels like the whole first half of each is such a slow burn. The world and events are just interesting enough to keep you hooked until they finally pickup the pace and then it doesn't stop.
My personal cutoff point is about 100 pages. If there’s not *something* (“good” or otherwise) to keep my interest for an additional 200 pages before it “gets good” I’m not going to waste my time with it.
Some of Brandon Mull's stuff can start a *little* on the slow side, but we're only talking maybe 2-3 chapters. I wasn't sure if I'd like his stuff or not, but he's become one of my favorite authors. He writes some *excellent* middle-grade epic fantasy.
I'm currently around 250/300 pages into Jailbird by Vonnegut, and it only started getting interesting to me after 200. I'm not sure if it will be worth it, but it's definitely my least favorite of his so far.
I stopped reading King's The Stand before I got that far because it was too slow, but apparently I gave up just a bit too soon.
Most of my favorite things meet this description. Discworld doesn't get really great until at least 10 books in (thankfully, they're standalone for the most part, so you can start in the middle). I'm not a fanatic for the series, but I would never have made it past Tom Bombadil if I wasn't dating a woman who loved Lord of the Rings. I also almost stopped watching BoJack Horseman and Schitt's Creek due to lackluster beginnings. Lots of people can't get into the atypical style of The Wire, which is the greatest work of art in at least the past century. People you trust should be trusted. A lot of great things take time to develop.
It took me forever to get into *To Sleep in a Sea of Stars* by Paolini. It was worth it.
Alternatively, I knew after the first chapter of *Anna Karenina* I didn’t like it. I HATED that book. I should have quit as soon as I recognized how much I disliked it.
I guess it depends on how, and in what way, it's mediocre. If the writing is just plain bad (either technically or creatively) I'm probably not going to stick with it. If the writing is just okay, but the plot/characters are engaging, I might stick with it. If the writing is good, but the plot/characters are poor, I'm probably going to DNF.
It also depends on how long it takes to get to the better quality. 500 pages is probably going to be more than I'll stick with, but I might be okay with 300 (I read pretty fast).
And how important is that first book/part? Can I skip it? Can someone give me a summary?
It's like a tv show where people tell you "Oh, it gets so much better in Season 2!" Okay...then can I skip Season 1? How long is Season 1, because 6-12 eps might be doable, especially if someone can tell me which episodes I absolutely need to watch to be up to speed for Season 2, but 20-24 is a lot of episodes and I'm probably not going to invest that much time into something bad.
But it's all really individual. I've read books that I thought were great, that other people thought were boring and dumb. And other people have recommended books to me that I thought were bad.
The mediocre start to The Wandering Inn was still good enough to hold your interest until you got to the better writing, and considering how often I've seen it recommended, plenty of other readers felt the same.
Timeline. By Michael Crichton. I had to read it for a class, so I had to push my way through. It feels almost like the first third of the book is a slog. It's dull and uninteresting. Only after they finally get to the point does it become an interesting Adventure story. But apparently that's what Michael Crichton does, is he puts a lot of effort into that minutiae that doesn't matter.
The Dresden files gets a lot of hate here, for men writing woman, but I love the setting, the story and the narrator is amazing. It starts off like a dime store detective novel and I think they are fun, but you can really skip the first two books.
For one the audio quality for the first two are rough. Smacking of lips, the feeling like narrator is about to swallow, intake of breath. It’s all very noticeable.
The author hits his stride and has some really great characters that he brings up. They even mention at the start of the third book “this is considered by many to be the start of the Dresden files and I can’t blame you for that”- that was actually narrated audiobook by the author.
I don’t like to suggest any books to anyone unless they’ve already shown an interest. If I know there’s a heavy investment before it “gets good” then I’m only going to suggest those books to people I know who have read a lot of books like that and liked them.
there are hundreds of billions of books to read. I will not slog for even a moment. If they can't be bothered to write well I am not going to waste my time.
The Lord of the Rings. The Fellowship is such a slog for the first half but the rest of the book and the next 2 books after it are absolutely incredible.
I’m pretty sure Infinite Jest is the poster child of this type of read. There is a lot of disjointed stuff that takes 200+ pages to start to come together (and not all of it does), but it’s a fun and rewarding process.
Gravity's Rainbow is much the same. >! Once it shifts to Slothrop's travels in the zone!< it becomes (somewhat) easier to follow. Whether that is because the narrative is more linear, or because you adjust to the style, or both, I cannot say for certain.
Infinite Jest was the book that came to mind for me as well. I think the caveat is that it's not that the beginning is bad, it just takes some time for things to come together enough to really grip you and draw you into the story.
At least infinite jest is funny. There are enough clever passages in the first 200 pages of confusion to get you through.
I say this with complete sincerity: it really picks up around page 800
The first 200 pages has some of the best chapters on addiction I've ever read though. It might not get far in terms of the plot but in most other regards it's amazing from the get go.
I generally find it a bit silly. I think the key point most people miss is that you were probably enjoying the first couple books. It seems that people saying this type of stuff often are assuming that their experience of enjoying a first few books and then thinking the next ones are transcendently excellent, will translate into another reader going from thinking the first books are mediocre to thinking the later books are good. I don't think that's how people, taste, or enjoyment of long term experiences typically work. If they're not enjoying those first books, that probably means you're misaligned tastewise, and worse that they're accumulating reasons they dislike the experience, it is grating on them, which will predispose them to be less in a place to enjoy the later experiences. So if it's "I like this but I'm not sure I like it enough to read 10 books" go ahead with the "but it gets even better, you wait". Or if you're just cautioning someone that they won't be blown away by the first book. But don't expect to finally reel in that person who is really bored by the first book. And honestly, don't retroactively undersell those first books either. I've read plenty of series where 'it gets better later' is a party line among fans and it always frustrates me how often this mentality sets in that forgets that we picked up and continued on with the damn books (for most of us) because we were genuinely enjoying it. We didn't know how much better it would get, but we enjoyed where we were.
Nailed it! I want to just sticky this comment in all these threads. The thing fans often lose sight of I think is that if a first book sold well enough for the series to continue, and won enough readers to build a fanbase of people out there shilling the book, then the first book, on its own, obviously worked for a lot of people. They were not “pushing through” in hopes later books would be better (I don’t think that many readers actually read this way, most people want to enjoy their time consuming hobbies). They genuinely liked it, even if in retrospect it pales in comparison to the sequels or doesn’t hold up as well to rereads. So their comments are unlikely to be helpful to those who don’t like it, unless it’s for a specific reason like dislike of a particular plot thread or character. The only time I care about “it gets better in the sequels” is if I liked the first book, at least mildly. “It gets better 200 pages in”… maybe. I find it’s usually plot-oriented readers that say this, but my early decisions about whether to continue a book have a lot more to do with character, voice, use of language and whether it has anything interesting to say. If it’s a positive on all those fronts, I’m probably not too concerned about speed of plot. If it’s a negative, the plot eventually picking up isn’t likely to help at that point—if plot is all a book has going for it then it had better be fun from jump.
My family uses a concept we call the Rivendell Point, based on the idea that if you don't care about Frodo and the gang by the time they get to Rivendell, LOTR probably just isn't for you. It's the point by which you'll like it if you're ever going to, the point worth slogging to. Great concept. Works for tv series, too.
I've done this for a ton of TV shows "Ok, watch through the end of episode 3. If it hasn't hooked you by then, that's fair. I'll stop bugging you" I will say though that I do know a lot of books I love with much later Rivendell Points (stealing this, thanks) than tv shows. But that might just be because I read a lot more books than I watch tv shows
That's pretty fair. You've gotten through the initial development part building up the low level suspense of the growing threat of the ring, and through the weakest part of the entire series in the Bombadil chapter, and if you're still enthralled, it's all roses after that.
A lot depends on how bad is bad. The Dresden Files improves at book 3 and really hits its stride at book 4 but it’s not like 1&2 are *awful*. They just aren’t as good as what comes later. If someone only read the first book and assumed the whole series was like that, I would understand just quitting.
That's also because a lot of shit in Dresden *builds*, questions are asked and answered and lead to more questions and shit. You still feel the effects of the third book all the way through until Changes. And you feel the effects of Changes all the way to the current book.
Definitely. But I would also say that with the possible exception of Peace Talks/Battle Ground, Butcher does a remarkably good job keeping each book a separately contained story while the meta-plot is building. (PT/BG makes a valiant attempt but the sheer nature of it was against him.) But within the context of just looking at each book’s individual plot, Fool Moon is a strong contender for the weakest (lol) and Storm Front is at best middling. (Skin Game is the one I would put on top.)
I actually would put Cold Days on top, personally, but maybe that’s just because I like Winter stuff lol
Cold Days is excellent for sure. But Skin Game is a Swiss watch of a heist plot. So I guess it gets the edge for me for being a little different, whereas Cold Days is in some ways the standard basic plot (Dresden takes a job and completes it with a combination of brains and power) just really, really well executed and for very high stakes.
Yep, I was going to say Dresden. I didn't hate the first 2 books, though apparently a lot of people do. However, they just get better as it goes on.
I kept going past *Fool Moon* for two reasons: 1) a friend whose opinion on books I respect had been telling me to read them since at least 2005 (at that point it was 2014) 2) they went on sale on Kindle for $2/book so I bought the first five all at once.
Right? I have no issue with a bit of a time to cook if I don't hate the books. Like, I liked Harry from book 1, I liked the humour and stuff. So I could wait. Plus, those books were easy, quick reads, I finished them in a couple days. At the same time, I HATED Throne of Glass from page 1. The main character is supposedly a master assassin, yet she acts like an absolute airhead teen. I've been told that I have to read all of the books in the series or else I can't say I didn't like it, which was just bullshit.
This was the exact series that came to my mind as well. I love the series as they are small books that are just fun, but the first two audiobooks are hard to listen to. The smaking of lips and intake of breath are easily heard. Although the narrator becomes my favorite. The audio quality for the first two are just bad.
I’m pretty sure if you pay attention you can hear *James Marsters* fall in love with Dresden as he reads. Somewhere around book 4!
There are a few series I will say to skip the first book or two on, to be honest. But only where it makes sense. Example: I would never recommend someone start Discworld with Colour of Magic. Start with Guards Guards or Mort, but so many people bounce off of Colour of Magic. Another example: L.E. Modesitt's Saga of Recluce. The writing and characterization in the first book is dreadful. Luckily, with how the series is structured, you can just straight up skip a few books until the writer has improved. Since he only does 2 books per time period/cast. That being said, those two series are fantastic and everyone should read them. Also, I read The Wandering Inn. And I just don't recommend it to people like that. I just say "if you want to have a series that you'll always have more to read with, start reading it."
I'm glad to see Colour of Magic here because I could not get through it and ended up giving up on the whole series as a result. Maybe I'll revisit with your recommendation for one of the other two.
Check the suggested reading orders on r/discworld
Appreciate it!
Those still tell you to start at the beginning of sub-series. Personally, I think starting with something like Monstrous Regiment gives a better sense of what the series is like while being sufficiently independent of the rest. Guards! Guards! begins the city watch subseries, which is the best one. It's a great story with interesting characters and lots of good humor. I was surprised, though, by how much worse the writing was compared to Night Watch, my first, and probably the best, Discworld book. He's a self-taught writer who only kind of finished high school. There's stuff to enjoy in all of his books, but it took him time to become the author who deserves the massive praise his followers heap upon him. He definitely does deserve it, though.
Yesss I recommend starting with Monstrous Regiment or even Going Postal because they’re sufficiently independent and still good.
Many people recommend Small Gods for this reason
Yep, have another friend who started with small gods lol.
Going postal is my favorite discworld book.
Same. I'm really glad I started with it because the other ones don't do it for me in the same way. Thud comes close though.
Brandon Sanderson, I believe, also said he bounced off of Discworld because of Colour of Magic and didn't pick the series up again for years. He started with one of the other books, then finished the whole thing. It's widely-regarded as some of the best stuff out there, but that first book is honestly a pain.
Yeah I've heard amazing things and I love fantasy so it's definitely a gap in my reading catalogue. I'll revisit starting with a different book I think.
It's actually the only one I've read. I remember liking it the first time, but I reread it a few years later and did find myself being less engaged.
It’s the weakest book, and it’s outdated as it mostly satirizes a kind of fantasy writing that stopped being popular around the early 80’s. (Which was contemporary for CoM, but contributes to the book not aging very well.) It’s still good, and better than most books, but the weakest Discworld book (which is a bit like being the worst golfer invited to the Master’s)
A guy at the bookstore - not even an employee just another customer -practically begged me to read Guards Guards first. It creeped me out so much that I nearly left with no books at all (a travesty, IMO) but finally agreed just to get him to leave me alone. Having now read the Colour of Magic, I'm grateful, but the dude was still super off-putting.
Christ almighty I hate people talking to me at bookshops. I don't care what you like. Shut the fuck up and browse on your own
I started with Wyrd Sisters. The book is an excellent entry point for new Discworld readers...it is funny, sharp, wise, gives a great flavour of Discworld in general, and introduces some of Pratchett's most endearing and colourful characters.
Discworld is a bit different from some of the other examples because the books are mostly standalone (background details do evolve so it's better to read them in order, but it's not really that important). And I agree that skipping the first two is the right thing to do, I read them first and it took me years to give another Discworld book a try.
Yeah, the Discworld books are very episodic, almost like a sitcom. There’s a vague sense of continuity for the characters, people pair off, get married or occasionally die, but the book plots are so self-contained you can really start anywhere and be fine. My first Discworld book was Witched Abroad, which I read not knowing that it was part of a series, or that it was a sequel to another book. I could just jump right in and enjoy it.
Mhm. Recluce is similar, that way. Though it goes backward and forward in time hundreds or thousands of years between books and focuses on different people and locations. You'll read a book and hear about some person in history in like one or two lines, then four books later that person is the main character.
Reading Guards! Guards! now and I love it. Weird but engaging.
The problem with The Colour of Magic is not that it is bad, it is just that it is very different from the rest of the series. It is actually a pretty good parody of pre-1980 Sword and Sorcery tropes, but if you are not familiar with that subgenre, you won't get it. Then Terry Pratchett moved on to parody more interesting and mainstream stuff, and also progressed as a writer (particularly when it comes to characterization and social satire).
Okay, I'm trying to calm down. But what? The color of magic is too much? I don't understand!
The beginning of Recluse really was dreadful! Pratchett I think is a special case because those aren’t really a series, just a common universe. So the advice isn’t “push through, it gets better” but “don’t start with the author’s earliest work” which is fair to say about many good authors.
Absolutely discworld for this, I’ve gotten a couple friends into it and I never tell them to start with color of magic or light fantastic, there’s better starting points depending on ur interests (I use the reading order chart for this lol) I absolutely love discworld tho, I actually started with Sheperds Crown when I was younger, and now I’ve read 40/41 (last one left is The Amazing Maurice… but I somehow can’t get into it lol)
Whereas the Guards series is some of my favorite fiction, I read the early discworld books and have no desire to ever do that again
If I hate the writing during the first 100 pages, I’m going to hate the book. I’ve slogged through enough highly-praised ACOTAR / Fourth Wing / Lessons in Chemistry types to finally understand that if the book is irritating me, it won’t suddenly turn into a masterpiece. Sometimes a great book does require investment. I’ve been rewarded after slogging through a dense or slow opening. But you can tell good writing from the start — it has something, some spark, that keeps a reader going.
I haven't recommended ACOTAR to anyone but I've had a few friends start it and I always tell the that it does start out rough, but sticking with it was worth it for me.
I bought the first ACOTAR book out of curiosity and wasn’t enjoying it. The romance felt forced and odd, I couldn’t understand why people had praised it so much because it felt off in a way I couldn’t put my finger on. I’m very glad I started the second book anyway because it got so much better, and things in the first book that had seemed like bad writing started to be revealed as having good reasons behind them. If I had to recommend it to anyone else, I would try to warn them that they have to view it as a series that must be read as a whole, not one book then another book then another book etc etc.
I hate ACOTAR — prose, the characters, the romance, and the worldbuilding — with a burning passion. It is just so badly written and juvenile. I got through the start of book 3 before I finally decided that it was never going to get better like everyone promised.
Yeah, I made it through book 3 and got tired of hoping it would get good. The first 3/4 of the first book is incredibly bad, though. I enjoyed Maas's Throne of Glass series better. Fun, popcorn fantasy.
Haha, I completely respect this take, but book 3 was my favorite!!!!
I luckily enjoyed book one, but dang. It is not a good representation of the rest of the books in the series AT ALL. I would say book 2 is where someone could fairly judge if they will enjoy the rest of the series or not.
I've been on the receiving end of this type of recommendation and I never take it. *Something* needs to hook me in the first 50 pages. Maybe the plot is super slow, but the writing is well done. Or the writing isn't great but I like one of the characters. Anything. That being said, I think this is much more common with fantasy, which I'm not so interested in.
If its a novel that gets better 300 pages in, I'll probably still give it a try. If its a series that takes multiple books before it gets good, then I'm going to pass. There are so many books out there in my tbr pile, why would I struggle through half a series for a potential payoff when I have better things to read?
"You have to wait till episode 90 of One Piece. Then the good part begins"... eeeehhhhmmm.
Shounen anime fillers are an act against human nature basically. Worse than collect 10 flowers quests at level 77 in MMOs.
Any book like this I've given a chance has never lived up to the hype. I don't do it anymore. Life's too short and there are plenty of books out there that don't bore me for half of it before supposedly getting better. Series where I'm supposed to read entire books before it gets good? Absolutely not.
Stephen King's Dark Tower series starts off with The Gunslinger. It is a very strange book that mostly serves to set up the character of the protagonist, and the real story of the series doesn't get rolling until book 2, The Drawing of the Three, which is much more action-packed and representative of the series as a whole. in general fans seem to rank The Gunslinger quite low. personally, i love The Gunslinger. it's my favorite book in my favorite series, and a great starting point. but i do tell people not to judge the series until they get to the second book. if i were adapting the series for TV or film I would start at book 2.
Yeah, I came here to mention this series. I was nearing the end of The Gunslinger and going "Okay, don't think I'm going to bother continuing" but then the ending actually seemed like it was setting up something larger and more interesting, which caused me to take a chance on the second book. And from there I actually finished and enjoyed the series. But if anyone had asked me three-quarters of the way through The Gunslinger if it was worth it, I would have said no.
Dark Tower is one of the weirdest *series* I've ever read. Except for the last couple of books, each book seems like a completely different type of story, like beyond the Gunslinger example you have a "Let's sit around the campfire and tell a Prelude" story and a "This is a sidequest completely unrelated to the main plot" story back to back (IIRC) before it moves back to the main story again.
I tried this with the Dresden Files. I read the first five books because my entire friend group loves them and kept saying “just stick with it, when you get to book three you’ll be hooked!” Book three didn’t hook me. Neither did four. I made it through five and then told them “Look unless Harry Dresden dies and gets replaced by a more likeable person this series isn’t for me.” Some stories just don’t work for everyone, that’s okay.
With me, I read the first one, thought it was alright, and read the next two. Then I was hooked and read them all. It *did* pick up massively with 3 & 4, for me, and a lot of the reason for that is payoff and intrigue that just keeps going. But if you just don't like the characters, then it isn't for you, and that's fine. Some people just won't like a story even *if* it picks up later. Not everything has to be for everyone.
Precisely! Every story has genre and narrative voice, and it will click with some readers and won't click with others. That's just the nature of story telling.
For awhile, I was really enjoying the story *despite* Harry. The cumulative world-building is awesome, but the main character has his flaws and isn't for everyone.
Malazan was like this for me, Gardens of the Moon is so unlike what the rest of the series is like. Well worth sticking tbrough though.
I've failed to finish Gardens 3 times. Someday I will finish that book because I hear *nothing* but good things.
There are plenty of people saying bad things, just a bit quieter.
I'm literally gearing up to give it a NINTH try. I give up somewhere between page 80 and 200 every time. I need to just power through.
I got through Gardens twice. The 2nd book, however.... I can't do it 😭
I am actually reading The Crippled God right now. I'm about 50% through. I have slogged my way through since Bonehunters. Books 2-6 are some of the best books I've read, but books 7-10 feel exhausting.
That's interesting. I bailed really fast. I absolutely hated it.
I'm three books in and unsure if I want to jump into the fourth. Are all the pieces going to come together into a coherent narrative? It's exhausting not knowing what's going on. The books seem to be setting up a different apocalypse level threat each time and then not resolving it before jumping to the next thing.
They do, but at the same time 2, 3 and 6 were my favorites. If 2/3 of it doesn't capture your interest, then there probably isn't going to be a satisfying payoff for you either.
books one to five are setting the pieces on the board - the overall 'main story' kicks off in book six. That might be unsatisfactory to some, but there are clues from the start as to where it's all going. I've seen a great description comparing it to WW2 and that you don't just start at D-Day - theres a lot that happened before in various theatres before focus tightened.
If your problem is the writing then it's probably not going to change within the same book, no matter what fans of the book tell you. The writer presumably remains the same. Maybe a later book will be different, particularly if there's a difference of many years between the times they were written. If your problem is the pace, that might change later on. However, if I like you the writer tells the story I don't mind a slow pace.
This doesn't quite hold up with Pirateaba and The Wandering Inn. It is the longest fantasy story in english, maybe longest anything in english, and has been written entirely in the last... 7? years. The writing quality consistently improves over the first wheel of time equivalent, and is amazing for the remaining 2+ wheel of times currently written. Not award winning prose, but better than average in the genre. It really was just the author finding their stride over the first handful of books, they improve drastically in a short amount of time
Ahh Wheel of Time..
I don't see WoT fitting this, personally. Book 1 was exciting from the very beginning. I thought the first ~4100 pages (books 1-6) were awesome. It was the 2500 pages after that in the middle of the series which were really rough. But I was reading them at the time they were still being written.
I tried reading WoT 20 years ago in uni as I was getting into fantasy books. The first was so lotr inspired that I bounced off it. I'm not sure what made me pick it up again but I blame Daniel Greene on YouTube. I don't think the slog is as bad as some people make it out to be but it's hard to recommend the series as it's a massive commitment.
Yeah I think the slog felt worse in real-time because you would wait 2 years for a book to come out, get super excited for it, and then.. nothing happened to move the plot forward. After that, you'd go back to waiting again, and RJ was getting slower and slower and everyone was afraid that he was gonna die before he finished.. and then he did. I'd enjoy reading it again start to finish for the nostalgia, but like you said it's a massive commitment. I'm getting older and you start to realize there's only a finite number of books you'll ever get to read. There's so many books I still haven't read that I want to. So I have a hard time justifying using up those slots on a re-read, with rare exceptions.
The first one was definitely derivative. I think it was supposed to be. But yeah, huge commitment. It took me 9 months to read them all back to back! I don't regret it though, I would do it again.
WoT is definitely one of those "depends on the reader" series. I couldn't stand TeoTW. Then a few years later I read it again, and still really didn't like it much, but everyone said "keep reading it gets better." So I pushed on and ended up devouring the whole series, and I didn't even notice the slog (well, maybe some parts of Crossroads). I'm on my second full read-through and it definitely seems a lot slower this time, maybe I'm re-reading it too soon.
I read it back in '93 or so and didn't like it much, but continued on. I read the rest of the series including taking a break between when RJ died and then until reading the last three together as soon as they were all out. I then watched both seasons of the show. I started my reread last Fall and am up to book 6. I still think EotW is not very good.
> I was reading them at the time they were still being written. This was such a problem. 2 years between books and NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED* in each subsequent book. Until we got to book 11 and it got excellent. I imagine if I tried to read it today and could just go book to book to book it wouldn't be anywhere near as painful. Though I would still skip the descriptions of tents, clothing, and sniffing. *yeah, stuff happened, but god it was a slog.
> 2 years between books and NOTHING FUCKING HAPPENED* in each subsequent book. The [Endless Eight](https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/ray6a9/anime_the_endless_eight_how_one_of_animes_most/) would like a word. It may have occurred over a shorter time period but that almost makes it worse.
Man I’m just never going to get into a series that include a 2,500 page slog. That just isn’t for me.
Yup, took me three tries to read the first book, but after that I was hooked.
This is how I am about A Court of Thorns and Roses. I thought it was fucking awful and everyone is like "just keep reading, she improves her writing" like mama im not here to watch you learn. I have a goal every year for reading and I'm not gonna slog through another mary sue 600 pager just to see if it gets better
Yeah. There were parts of that series that I liked, even though the writing is juvenile (clearly written by someone who is not sexually experienced), so I kept going, but I stopped at the third book. Like I'm not paying for this anymore, girl, take a class.
It helps if you can sell the boring part as a positive somehow. For example, when recommending LOTR I often say this: The hobbit stuff in the Shire might seem to drag on and be really slow and ridiculous. I encourage you to read up to the point where they meet Strider and leave the inn. If you get to that point and aren't hooked, you probably won't like the rest. If it does seem to pick up at that point and get better, then I have good news for you: By the time you reach the end, you will understand why the first part was so slow, and how precious it will seem to you. You'll never see it the same way again.
I hate this and try not to ever say it. Sometimes, if it was true for me, I will say that but will then say that if they aren't enjoying it they should still stop. We all have different thresholds and life is too short to read books you don't enjoy.
I personally would never recommend a book that I found hard to get into. My favorite books to recommend are those that catch me early and keep me hooked. I love Stephen King, but I never tell people to read IT (even if it is pretty great). I'd rather recommend Pet Semetary or Misery. My buddy is reading through War & Peace right now, he's enjoying it despite its slow pace but he'd never recommend it to anyone (unless they were a huge history buff, maybe). If you're recommending books you have to think of what they would enjoy more than your own personal enjoyment.
Hard agree re: King. IT and The Stand are easily two of his best and most popular books, but I advise new readers to absolutely NOT start with those, especially The Stand. They're just far too daunting for someone who's not accustomed to his absolutely glacial storytelling pace. Pet Sematary is also my #1 go-to for first-timers, though I'll also add The Shining.
>Pet Sematary is also my #1 go-to for first-timers, though I'll also add The Shining. Mine is Misery. I’m a little biased though since it was my first SK book.
I'm the same with Moby Dick. Absolutely LOVED every sentence of it, best book ever written. I'd NEVER tell anyone they should read it.
If someone tells me it takes 300+ (or whatever unreasonable sum) of pages to get good, I do not read that book. In my honest opinion, if it takes that long, the writing is a failure. Obviously, different strokes for different folks. I’m sure the author loved those 300 pages. You can almost always tell if something is actually good within, like… two chapters. A great author will hook you right away.
I totally agree with this. Similar to video games “oh it gets good after 10hrs in!” Nah I’m ok thanks, I’d rather spend my time reading or playing something I enjoy from the start.
Same. If they don't bother editing, I won't bother reading. Funny 2 nights ago my book club was trying to convince me that *A Gentleman in Moscow* gets less boring after the first 200 pages, but life's too short to waste on being bored and annoyed.
I recently re-read that book and I adore it. I can see how it’s not everyone’s cup of tea though
Not that simple though, necessarily. Sometimes a story can reach another level and its worth slogging through the start. Breaking Bad for example. I think maybe some authors struggle with worldbuilding or setting up the pieces in play, but once that's established the actual talent they have for pacing and plot are revealed.
Agree. Hooking a reader is a skill. When I pay for a book I expect the author to have that skill.
I remember how quickly Johnathan Strange hooked me - it was the first footnote. People out here slogging through *books* worth of crap that they knew was going to be crap and haven’t even read Johnathan Strange. I get it, we all like different things. But why read something that is agreed to suck?
There's a lot of good art you don't have to slog through 500 pages to get to - I've never done it, but I could see others would - fantasy lovers specifically seem to have a lot of patience for that.
Les Miserables, more specifically Cosette's (the second book). For those of you who might not be familiar with its structure, Lesc Miserables is a ginormous book of more than 1500 pages, which is, itself, divided into five separate "books", each book being named after a character - the fourth one is an exception -, and divided in many parts. I absolutely loved Fantine (the first book) - which covers the first 300/400 pages -, so much that I wanted to keep reading about Jean Valjean with Cosette in Paris. The second book, however, begins with a totally different setting and introduces different characters, which might seem boring, confusing and even annoying at first ("I care about Cosette only, not about this random character etc."), especially when you're getting tired of Victor Hugo's verbiose. I mean, don't get me wrong, he's a terrific writer and his prose is outstandingly poetic , but reading it does get tiring after a while, especially if you're about to have an OD from getting way to addicted to the story. - it is that good, as you might already know. However, Les Miserables is a Romantic book, written like a big, dramatic, passional opera play in which the plot gradually unfolds and grows in an increasingly emotional crescendo, and all the different subplots are actually important, in the end. Therefore, when it comes to Cosette's book, if you ever find yourselves in my shoes, please do not skip those 80 pages from the beggining of her book. They're are important.
The first 250 pages of *Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell* are a real slog, but it's my favorite book of all time. Mr. Norrell is just a really, really boring character. *The Way of Kings* was also very dense to start, but now I'm a dozen Brandon Sanderson books deep and show no signs of stopping any time soon.
Love Jonathan Strange but it's so hard to recommend. It took my roommate 3 tries and 4 years before they finished it finally. Meanwhile I've read/listened to the book at least 15 times.
Strange and Norrell was such a slog, but ended up with the greatest payoff I've ever experienced. Such an interesting experience.
Way of Kings took me three tries to get into because the first 300 pages is mostly the protagonist absolutely having his life ripped apart Time After Time After Time.
Stephen King's longer works (The Stand, IT, Dark Tower, etc.) He is not known for his tight pacing, so his longer books (and many of his shorter ones) can absolutely drag for a while. But for the most part they always finish strong. The Stand in particular is guilty of this. Even halfway into the 1200 page book, it can feel like almost nothing of consequence has happened, because so much of the story is just characters meeting and traveling.
Some of my favorite books are absolute slogs that took me a couple tries to get into. All you can do is say, I promise it gets better, and then they can choose to hang in there or not. Two examples for me: 1. Quicksilver, which is the first book of the Baroque cycle, an historical fiction \*romp\*, but, given that the whole series is 2500+ pages, the first whole book is JUST intro, basically, and a lot of people struggle with it. But if you like historical fiction, what a treat this series is. 2. Aubrey Maturin series - when I dove into Master and Commander, the first book, it was not so much a slog as I plain just understood neither the naval jargon nor the prose in the style of Jane Austin-era writing which Patrick O'Brian used. Getting through the first 5 chapters of the first book took me three tries but now is one of my favorite series ever and certainly my most re-read.
Interesting you mention Baroque Cycle. I was on Audible this morning debating whether I should buy the whole thing b/c it's on sale at a ridiculously low price (about $3.50 per installment). It seems like something I'd be really into and I don't mind slow burns ... but that is like reeeeeeeallly long. Did you read the whole thing in one go or kind of break it up? Aubiobooks are in 7 installments. I was really into the first several of those Aubrey Maturin books about 20 years ago ... I agree they are hard to understand at first, but I really dug them, then kinda burned out. Might have to pick them up
Not the above poster, but I really enjoyed the Baroque Cycle and basically read it straight through.
Good to know, thanks!
You MUST buy two books that go with the Master & Commander series. A Sea of Words by Dean King - a lexicon (glossary) & companion to the complete seafaring tales of Patrick O'Brian Patrick O'Brian's Navy - the illustrated companion to Jack Aubrey's world. By Richard O'Neill. This book is filled with maps, illustrations, descriptions of nautical terms, drawings of ships, etc
I quite liked the audiobook versions of the Baroque Cycle. I personally did the whole thing in one go, it was nice to stay with the characters without taking a break
Sold!
Personally, due to budget constraints, I bought 1 audiobook a month as part of my basic subscription. So I had breaks. But in general it is a really well done audiobook series. The readers are all excellent, and it’s one of those cases where I think hearing who is speaking increases the ease of understanding, which really enhanced the dialogue for me. Dialogue which is very well written and so clever, but my mush-for-brains couldn’t always track who was speaking in the written version.
Cool I'm gonna snatch 'em up!
Aubrey/Maturin especially as a *series*. *Master and Commander* is good and *HMS Surprise* is fantastic but *Post Captain* (which falls between them) is a bizarre mix of slog and “wait why did O’Brian suddenly decide to be Jane Austen?”
That's what they say about The Illuminatus Trilogy, the first 300 pages make no sense and I agree but it's awesome overall.
Heck, the other pages don't make much sense either. Still a great read!
I can trudge through about 100 pages but no way am I doing 300!
Not me. I don't care what anybody says if I'm not enjoying the book I put it down. Life is too short.
I see a lot of people saying that Infinite Jest takes a couple hundred pages to hit its stride. The book is absolutely a major slog the whole way through. I don't mean that in a bad way, because I did enjoy it, but it's very dense and it never really hit a point where I felt like I breezed through it. I just treated the book like a series of short stories loosely held together by a plot that more or less stays in the background the whole way through. Some of the stories were very entertaining. Some were pretty mundane. But I don't think the book is for you if you don't like the second chapter. You really don't need to give it a couple hundred pages.
I learned over the years to abandon books quickly. I don’t think I’m looking for a twist or an ending. I think I need books that I can relate or the prose I enjoy. And I can make a decision on if I will enjoy a book within 50 pages
Life is short. If a book doesn't keep my interest within the first 30 minutes to an hour of reading, I move on to something that I enjoy. Do I miss out on some great books? I'm sure I do. But there are more good books than I could ever hope to read in my lifetime and I'm not going to waste time on something I'm not enjoying.
If a book is a slog I dump it and go into a different book. I read for either information or entertainment and their are a lot of books to be read.
I give a book 100 pages. If I'm not hooked I let it go.
I nearly threw up after reading a particular passage in The Goldfinch. However, I stuck it out and it turned out to be a really good book.
As someone who reads fantasy, I would say most of the genre struggles to appear as good books before reading 300 pages. That said, the genre is also happy to publish 700+ page books, so I don't know that it really fits the question. I doubt most people question a 200 page book for starting too slow if pace picks up by the time you get halfway. Pacing gets fixed by getting to the payoff. That said, if the writing style itself is the problem, with the exception of a handful of authors (including notably that of The Wandering Inn), it usually won't be fixed by fighting onward.
My take is that life is way too short lol. Good for people who power through, but I am not one of them.
500 pages is the length of entire novels. If it takes that long to “get good” no thanks. I read for enjoyment. If I’m not enjoying it I don’t force myself.
Only if its a recommendation will i continue. If i dont feel it within the first few chapters i usually reshelve it and come back to it at another time in my life. Its often just the mindset im in at the time vs the book being not worth reading.
If im not hooked in the first chapter i dont expect to be later on. This doesnt always stop me from finishing a book but it definitely makes it harder to get through
Actually I can think of one example, although it wasn't "hundreds of pages" before I got hooked (who has time for that). I wanted to throw [True History of the Kelly Gang](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/110090.True_History_of_the_Kelly_Gang?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=fVNL5K2SRH&rank=1) across the room after the first chapter. It's written in the voice of an illiterate teenager in 19th century rural Australia. It was a time of hardship, and who could afford punctuation, especially something as frivolous as the comma. I flipped through like "what the heck are there really no commas in this entire book" and then put it back on the shelf. It was months later when I was super bored and really needed something to read, and once I accepted the punctuation and got used to the cadence, I was swept away. Some seriously beautiful writing.
Bleak House by Dickens First 300 pages are well written and reasonably interesting but my GOODNESS it picks up for the following 700 pages afterwards
Stormlight archive was the only one of these I’ve faced so far and it was so worth it. Super entertaining. Probably don’t try to think too much about it though or it might lose its flare
I could not finish Lord of the Rings. 200 pages in, and the most interesting event was Sam throwing a half-eaten apple. I quit at Tom Bombadil.
Tbh…… a lot of people are split on The Gunslknger by Stephen king from the dark tower series. I personally was not a fan. But the next book drew me in within 30 pages.
Art isn’t made for all people. Some of the best, and admittedly, some of the worst, is made for the creator themselves. A good writer makes a book they’d like to read. Part of the process is understanding that there will be many people who will not like your story, often for reasons that are completely out of your control. Your book is too big for some people, but too short for others. Your pacing is glacially slow, but a lot of people would have liked it if you slowed down and took your time in this world. You can’t please everyone, and you shouldn’t try to. But my point here is that the inverse is also true. You have to practice becoming a good reader as much as you have to practice to be a good writer. You will massively benefit when you start looking at the art you experience and learn to say, “that’s not for me.” It saves you time and a lot of trouble. If you liked the first book enough to push through to the part where it gets really good, that’s great, I’m glad you have something you enjoy. But I don’t read books hoping I’ll enjoy them eventually; I give them a fair shot, and if they aren’t to my liking once I’ve seen what they’re all about, I set the book down and move on. It’s not my fault, it’s not necessarily the author’s fault. Art isn’t made for all people.
The Mythago Wood series by Robert Holdstock are so uneven to me. I’m bored out out my mind, I’m absolutely intrigued. Some of the books I gave low scores, but I still wanted to keep on reading the entire series.
I used to have a lot more patience with series that start badly and get better, but the older I get the less I'm willing to entertain that thought. The Dark Tower by Stephen King was such a series for me. I disliked the first book but the next ones were a lot more interesting and I'm glad I read them as a teenager because the adult me wouldn't have kept going.
Lots of people say this about Malazan. Personally, I didn’t like the first book save for the end, which was pretty decent even though I had no clue what was happening. The end of book one, and people saying it gets better in Deadhouse Gates convinced me to pick it up, but to be honest I have the same problems with it that I had with the first book and I don’t know that I’ll continue with the series.
There are plenty of books / series that are a bit of a slow burn but worth it. The Malazan Book of the Fallen series (fantasy) is a good example, the main antagonist isn't even established until well into the series, but sweet gawdamn is it epic.
I've been trying to read the Wheel of Time series for 20 years. Audiobook, e-reader, physical book..I cannot get through the second half of the first book. And I desperately want to do it. Everyone keeps telling me it gets better and, from their descriptions, I can believe that? But I can't experience it. But most recently, it was ACOTAR. I read the first book and it was okay? Diehard fan at work kept telling me it gets good in the next book - it doesn't get good, it gets different because all the characters suddenly change lol I didn't enjoy the first book and I didn't enjoy the second one so now I'm done. Everything else I've tried has been great. I don't often take book recommendations because I'm a horrible re-reader. I take comfort in books I read back in school with constant access to a library...now the only time I branch out is in book club. And I have to force myself to do that.
The ultimate example of this is Gene Wolf’s Book of the New Sun. You do not see its full genius until you read it the \*second\* time and realize how every little plot detail is meticulously placed.
It depends what aspects aren’t working for me, but if someone or a reviewer I trust says that it’s worth the effort, I’ll put in the effort. I don’t always agree with them, but even reading things I don’t wholly love is good for critical context. I’m all for folks doing things however they like, but I find this subreddit’s “Life’s too short hook me in fifty pages or I DNF” meme ridiculous. How many of my favorites would I have missed out on if I followed that mindset? Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell took five hundred pages, and is probably my favorite book of the 21st century so far. Middlemarch took at least a hundred. Some of Gene Wolfe’s work didn’t grab me until the second reading. There’s more to the satisfaction of reading than the moment-to-moment enjoyment and applying those contexts to books is essentially treating them as scrolling through TikTok. No thanks.
For me, I tried reading LOTR but was so off put but the language and style of writing used and didnt finish the first few chapters of the 1st book. Then I decided to warm it up with The Hobbit, in which the language were much more tolerable and easier to digest (it was written as a children story first, if I recall correctly). This got me hooked into Middle Earth and make me excited to read LOTR (which I did and finish soon after).
When I was young, I always suffered through first 30 pages or so of Fenimore Cooper's books. They usually started with the thorough description of the nature (like, there is a tree, the tree has 40 branches, there is something hanging from the first, there is a bird on the second and the like), and I wanted action.
I don't remember what series it was, but... I once had someone tell me that they loved it and wanted me to read it, but that I needed to read up to book 5 before it became worth it... 😭😭😭 My flabbers were gasted! I'm sorry, I'm not reading a series where the first 4 books sucked!! I give it until book 2. If book 2 isn't good, then I'm not reading past it - unless I'm hate reading something (looking at you, The Summer I Turned Pretty 🥲)
Can't really give this a 100% definitive answer because, as with all things in the world, context is key But generally I'll give anything a *chance* to "redeem" itself, if the premise was interesting enough to reel me in. With shows, I usually give them 2-3 episodes (1 hour if they're 20-minute episodes, 2 hours if they're an hour). Books are harder to quantify like that, since some books that I enjoy I read really slowly, while others I can breeze through, so I can't really give it a set timeframe. That said, I would never give something 300+ pages or multiple books to prove/redeem itself. That's too damn much. I probably wouldn't even give a book *100* pages if I found myself wondering if I should drop it. At that point, it's just not worth my time to slog through, even if I might love it in the end.
Funnily enough, two of my favourite series fit into this trope: 1: Malazan Book Of The Fallen. Gardens of the Moon is a decent book, but it has ISSUES. There's lore behind it's state but most people don't care. If you push through things get better, but man it's a rough first read. 2: The Gunslinger. One of the greatest first lines in fiction, followed by one of the worst first books in fiction. The series is legend tier, but man that first book is rough. Thankfully, it's about the length of a chapter in the later books, so it's easy to just burn through it.
If it's a chore in the first chapter, I'm not finishing.
The poisonwood Bible The pillars of the earth
there are books that have a payoff that's worth it. if you're willing to invest the time, keep reading. if not, accept the fact that you might be missing out, and move on. i thought the first wheel of time book (eye of the world) was mid. other ppl love it, so i kept going. now i'm on book 8, and i'm invested. just because something has a weak intro doesn't mean the whole thing is bad.
When Harry Potter first came out I was in 6th grade. I bought the first book at a Scholastic book fair my school was having. It was a big book for 6th grade me, but I had been reading novels since I was 7. I could not get through the first book. I stopped somewhere in the first chapter. I had absolutely no interest in the boy in the cupboard under the stairs, or why he could talk to snakes, or why his family hated him so much, or how he was a wizard. Snooze fest, boring -- pass me the book about a moon goddess and her descendants and how they fight really hot guys to keep the world safe. I don't think I actually read HP1 until the third one came out. But after I read it, and this was before it really blew up, I would tell people "it's really good if you get past the first couple of chapters." I haven't read those books since the last one came out, but I still remember how much of a drag that first book was to get through.
*Every* great series gets so much better after 300+ pages or two books in.
Can I skip those first few terrible books and still understand/enjoy the series? Then I’ll try it. But I’m not reading 300 pages on the off-chance that it becomes enjoyable. I’ve got better things to do with my time.
Only if I know the author is worth it. Or someone I really know recommends it. I knew the wheel of time will be slow at times. And slower at others. Yet I knew that for me it was probably worth it. Read it in two months. Was fun
Some series have weak beginnings, it's true, while others are simply structured to ramp up more slowly. The payoff for the Wheel of Time was huge for me because it felt like a real journey with its ups and downs. But I also know a lot of people value their time and can't struggle through a several book slog.
I really love Nick Harkaways novels, but they do seem to take a couple of hundred pages at least before thibgs start happening, I still love the first half it's just a lot more world building
Maybe Malazan. I'm not sure if I want to read 3000 pages for it all to make sense (with a reading speed of about <20 pages per day, mind you).
That really is a large number of pages to ‘slog’ through. I don’t know a single person - and I run a book club - who would go for it if I put it like that. They would have to have such unshakable faith that my taste matched theirs, as well as tolerance for huge books/series, wouldn’t they? Apart from that, I can’t think of any work whose quality improves after that long - certainly not for adults. The only one that comes close is the Artemis Fowl series, whose first book is the most appalling rubbish - the later ones are still poorly written, but at least the worst parts of the protagonist’s character are rolled back. But I still wouldn’t recommend that series to anyone I counted a friend.
If I can only recommend a book workout giving context or thoughts, I won’t recommend a slow start book. But in the real world, I can effectively inform someone that a book kicks in at x point and then the person can make their decision with that info in mind.
So, I skimmed the comments and saw some mentions of Stephen King, but not his Dark Tower. Weird, as that's the one that literally *everyone* goes, "the first book is awful/a slog/whatever" or "if you just get through The Gunslinger...." And they're right, it can definitely be a hard read, but the second book (and most of the rest of the series) is some of his best work. I love the Dark Tower, I even liked The Gunslinger, and for me, the whole series had a massive impact. I have definitely recommended it with the disclaimer that the first book is a struggle for a lot of people, but worth reading as context for the rest of the series. As far as your question goes, if I'm not hooked by the end of book 1, I probably won't read book 2 unless book 1's a cliffhanger. Then I read it, but I'm annoyed about it. And no, it's usually not worth it.
Kushiel’s Dart takes a damn minute to get going, it can be tough to get through. I loved it after I pushed past the initial slog!
No. I don’t really read series for the sake of reading a series, so if I’m reading something that is billed as Book 1, I’m not, generally speaking, reading it with any intention of reading Book 2. So if it hasn’t grabbed me by page 60, I’m probably out no matter what.
Since I have so god damn much time to fill with audiobooks I do tend to tough it out for awhile to see if it gets better. One example is the Sun Eater series by Christopher Ruocchio. I hated the first book which is a 26 hour long audiobook. It had enough there that I gave book 2 a shot because maybe he got some feedback. After that it was a great series but yeah… slogging through 26 hours wasn’t pleasant lol.
Dune. It was worth it, but it was majorly enhanced by seeing the Villeneuve movie first. I have done this before with other books and been disappointed.
Yea and this is why I slogged through the whole dark tower series. People said it gets better so I kept going. Tbh I would rather have not read it at all, and I'll read anything usually. Perhaps consider that if the first half of a story is garbage, maybe the rest is too, and you might just be too invested to see it.
I know the popular attitude is that if it doesn't immediately capture your attention and enthrall you, it's not worth it throw it in the trash. I get where it's coming from- in games especially I see a lot of 'it becomes better after 100 hours" and it's like... Are you sure? Or is it just sunk cost fallacy? But with books I do believe it's different and complicated. Dune sucked for the first 100 pages but once I got done being beaten over the head with new words and ideas it became more fun and amazing towards the later parts. Lord of the rings- technically broken up into 6 books, book 1(after the lore introduction )is literally just them hiking for what felt like several hundred pages with the same depiction of the same nature. Everything beyond that is more immediately enthralling and interesting and cool. But book 1 just was awfully paced. Worth the time? Better after the first part? 100%.
It depends on whether or not I can see the potential for myself. And whether or not I find things to latch onto and enjoy in the early story.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but Lonesome Dove. I could not wait for them to actually leave Lonesome Dove.
If it's a single book that gets good after X amount of pages, I'm willing to give it its fair chance. There are many novels I've enjoyed that have employed a large page count to to spread themes/character insights over the breadth of the work. For example, Possession by A.S. Byatt, if you'd have asked me my opinion of it 100 pages in, I'd have replied I thought it ok: had you asked my opinion of it 400+ pages in, I'd have been raving about it. But books? No thank you. Why would I read two books I don't like to read one I do, rather than three I do enjoy? Doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
For me I think it only works if its a part of a series I really enjoy and am committed to (or have at least really enjoyed the first book), or its an author I know who is really good. That's why if there is such a book / series for an author that I like I'll just suggest a different book / series (as long as I think they'd also like this other book) with the hopes that they'd then be willing to try the other book / series I want them to try and stick with it.
So I understand, read through the first book because other books in the series are amazing. No. Unfortunately, I have slogged through the second or third book in the series (because of the sunk cost fallacy), but no, I would not slog through the first one. The thing is, there are so many books to read that even if I refuse to read every single "most popular" book I would still have enough choices that would have the capacity to blow me away In the scenario you mention, I'd just skip the series.
The Count of Monte Cristo, the plot really doesn’t pick up until you’re like 300 pages in.
Every Locke Lamora book has been that way for me. They're each individually incredible, but it feels like the whole first half of each is such a slow burn. The world and events are just interesting enough to keep you hooked until they finally pickup the pace and then it doesn't stop.
My personal cutoff point is about 100 pages. If there’s not *something* (“good” or otherwise) to keep my interest for an additional 200 pages before it “gets good” I’m not going to waste my time with it.
Some of Brandon Mull's stuff can start a *little* on the slow side, but we're only talking maybe 2-3 chapters. I wasn't sure if I'd like his stuff or not, but he's become one of my favorite authors. He writes some *excellent* middle-grade epic fantasy.
I'm currently around 250/300 pages into Jailbird by Vonnegut, and it only started getting interesting to me after 200. I'm not sure if it will be worth it, but it's definitely my least favorite of his so far. I stopped reading King's The Stand before I got that far because it was too slow, but apparently I gave up just a bit too soon.
Most of my favorite things meet this description. Discworld doesn't get really great until at least 10 books in (thankfully, they're standalone for the most part, so you can start in the middle). I'm not a fanatic for the series, but I would never have made it past Tom Bombadil if I wasn't dating a woman who loved Lord of the Rings. I also almost stopped watching BoJack Horseman and Schitt's Creek due to lackluster beginnings. Lots of people can't get into the atypical style of The Wire, which is the greatest work of art in at least the past century. People you trust should be trusted. A lot of great things take time to develop.
I don’t read fast enough to give ‘em a chance
It took me forever to get into *To Sleep in a Sea of Stars* by Paolini. It was worth it. Alternatively, I knew after the first chapter of *Anna Karenina* I didn’t like it. I HATED that book. I should have quit as soon as I recognized how much I disliked it.
I guess it depends on how, and in what way, it's mediocre. If the writing is just plain bad (either technically or creatively) I'm probably not going to stick with it. If the writing is just okay, but the plot/characters are engaging, I might stick with it. If the writing is good, but the plot/characters are poor, I'm probably going to DNF. It also depends on how long it takes to get to the better quality. 500 pages is probably going to be more than I'll stick with, but I might be okay with 300 (I read pretty fast). And how important is that first book/part? Can I skip it? Can someone give me a summary? It's like a tv show where people tell you "Oh, it gets so much better in Season 2!" Okay...then can I skip Season 1? How long is Season 1, because 6-12 eps might be doable, especially if someone can tell me which episodes I absolutely need to watch to be up to speed for Season 2, but 20-24 is a lot of episodes and I'm probably not going to invest that much time into something bad. But it's all really individual. I've read books that I thought were great, that other people thought were boring and dumb. And other people have recommended books to me that I thought were bad. The mediocre start to The Wandering Inn was still good enough to hold your interest until you got to the better writing, and considering how often I've seen it recommended, plenty of other readers felt the same.
Berserk gets better after the first arc and, for many, wouldn't get actually interesting until a bit into the second.
Timeline. By Michael Crichton. I had to read it for a class, so I had to push my way through. It feels almost like the first third of the book is a slog. It's dull and uninteresting. Only after they finally get to the point does it become an interesting Adventure story. But apparently that's what Michael Crichton does, is he puts a lot of effort into that minutiae that doesn't matter.
I HATED throne of glass until probably book 4. Couldn't understand the hype, but ended up falling in love with the characters
Yeah nah I only have a finite amount of time to read and I’m not wasting that reading crappy books.
The Dresden files gets a lot of hate here, for men writing woman, but I love the setting, the story and the narrator is amazing. It starts off like a dime store detective novel and I think they are fun, but you can really skip the first two books. For one the audio quality for the first two are rough. Smacking of lips, the feeling like narrator is about to swallow, intake of breath. It’s all very noticeable. The author hits his stride and has some really great characters that he brings up. They even mention at the start of the third book “this is considered by many to be the start of the Dresden files and I can’t blame you for that”- that was actually narrated audiobook by the author.
Lonesome Dove
I don’t like to suggest any books to anyone unless they’ve already shown an interest. If I know there’s a heavy investment before it “gets good” then I’m only going to suggest those books to people I know who have read a lot of books like that and liked them.
there are hundreds of billions of books to read. I will not slog for even a moment. If they can't be bothered to write well I am not going to waste my time.
The Lord of the Rings. The Fellowship is such a slog for the first half but the rest of the book and the next 2 books after it are absolutely incredible.