Reading Patterns

[rowyn]

I am thinking about the buying habits of readers, and trying to subdivide them into several categories, in relation to a single author's works:

* Character fan. Follows the books about one character/group of characters, may not read other books by same author.
* Setting fan. Follows the books in a particular setting. May not read other books by same author.
* Story arc fan: Reader will follow the story arc through a trilogy or series, but may not read more books in a new story arc about the same characters/setting.
* Genre fan. Reads author's works in a particular genre, but not in other genres.
* Theme/review based. Readers who pick up the author's works based on theme, or reviews. This group has tastes with regards to the author that are harder to slot into the usual groups, and the author's works sometimes suit those tastes and sometimes don't.
* Former fan: Reader followed one of the patterns above, but for one reason or another stopped. "Former fans" aren't necessarily people who stopped reading an author entirely. They might be people who bought the first five books of a ten+ book series, and then lost interest in that series but are still interested in one or more other works by the same author.
* Author fan. Reads everything the author writes, regardless.
* Casual. Picked up one book, may or may not ever get another by that author.
* Other

I don't mean for these categories to be "each person is one of these types of readers". I came up with these categories because they are all groups that I fall into for different authors.

Examples where I am:

Character Fan: P. B. O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin books, Jim Hines' Libriomancer books.

Setting Fan: K.J. Charles, "Charm of Magpies" setting.

Author Fan: Diana Wynne Jones, Lois McMaster Bujold, Bard Bloom, Terry Pratchett, Brandon Sanderson

Story Arc Fan: J.K. Rowling's 7-book "Harry Potter" series.

Theme Fan: MCA Hogarth, Walter Jon Williams

Casual: Neil Gaiman (I started reading Neil Gaiman's Sandman in 1990 or so, and I've read at least three of his other books and a few short stories. I really liked Sandman at the time, but somehow none of his books that I tried have made me a fan of his non-comics work. I don't hate them, just not that into him.) 

Other: Courtney Milan. I've read eight or so novels/novellas by her, and I expect to read more. But she has a bunch of books out that I haven't yet bought or read, and I don't have any plans to go get more.

Former Fan: These are all cases where I read at least three books but stopped, even though more have come out:

Setting
George R.R. Martin: Wildcards

Story Arc:
George R.R. Martin: Song of Ice and Fire

Character:
David Weber: Honor Harrington
L. K. Hamilton: Anita Blake

Author:
Anne McCaffrey
Piers Anthony (I was young and foolish. Seriously, he really does think like a teenager and anecdotal evidence shows he is inexplicably appealling to kids between 10-17 or so, then they grow up and can't really remember why. If you're one of those people who still has nostalgic fondness for one of his books, DO NOT GO BACK AND READ IT. You will have regrets.)

In a lot of these cases, it's hard to pin down why my reading habits are the way they are. I liked  Charles' first three "Magpies" books and adored the spinoff, Jackdaw, but haven't sought out any of her other books in different series anyway.

In some cases, it was series fatigue: I stopped reading new Pern books long before I stopped reading McCaffrey entirely. I think that "historical romance fatigue" may be why I haven't read more books Courtney Milan. I liked the last historical romance I read by her, but I had a strange sense of 'sameness' while reading it that made me not want to get another one. I don't regard that as a "former fan" scenario because I'm pretty sure I will read more of her work in coming years.

Part of why I'm thinking about this is that it's so complicated. The "thousand true fans" theory hinges on the idea that you can hook people on your name, and they'll buy whatever you write. The "series sell" strategy hinges on "readers become hooked on a character or setting, and they won't necessarily read works with a different theme". And yet I know in my own experience that there are cases where I've read several books in a series and then quit that series -- but will still read other works by that author. As well as cases where I read a series but not other works by that author. OTOH, the "series sells" philosophy obviously works for most of the market, if not for me. Hamilton and Weber are very successful, 20+ books on in their series. And I've spoken to authors who kept writing in a successful series for the money, and yes, it worked for them better than branching out did. Even though they were sick of writing that series.

I don't really have any conclusions from this, just musings and questions. Do you have any categories I missed? Do you find yourself more likely to fall into a particular pattern with most authors, or does it vary wildly for you too?

Comments

[greylistening.livejournal.com]

I would have to say that it does vary quite a bit for me. However, I almost always start reading a new-to-me author based on

-- genre
-- a recommendation from someone I trust.

And when I stick with an author or series, it's almost always because I love the setting or characters.

[rowyn]

Yes, I usually pick a new author because they're writing in a genre that I like and it was recommended to me. (Normally it has to be both, although sometimes I will stray out of genre based on a strong personal recommendation).

I will stick with a series if I really like it -- I'll read the sequel to anything I rate a 9. I will usually try other books by the author if I really liked one that they wrote. But when I liked it but didn't feel strongly about it -- a 7 or an 8 -- then it gets more random whether I'll keep going. And that determines my likelihood of trying other books by the same author, too. If I'd give a 9 to one series but the first book in another is only a 7, it's much less likely I'll try a third. There is SO MUCH stuff out there. @_@

[tuftears.livejournal.com]

Y'know, that's a good related topic, 'what motivates you to pick up a book from an author you have not previously read other books by?' For me, I look for a few definite things:

* Space traders and sometimes ambassadors with a heaping of First Contact
* An interesting and new setting that has rules that must be cleverly understood by the protagonists, frequently game-like i.e. David Gerrold's "Chess with a Dragon"
* Other fun topics that aren't frequently seen but I'm interested in, seen through the lense of fantasy and science fiction, like gourmet cooking, medicine (The Nick O'Donohoe Crossroads series, Jody Lynn Nye's Taylor's Ark books)
* Hero's Journey-style fantasy is generally a turnoff, also most variants of medieval fantasy that sound like they focus on the royalty or warriors because they're the only people who matter

Browsing inside often helps clarify a buy/no buy decision; I look at the writing and the dialogue (they may seem the same but they're not!) and see if they're interesting. Interesting dialogue doesn't have to be witty, but it helps. In writing terms, I want to see the book knows what it's about, i.e. not full of purple prose or third grade-level prose. Transparent writing styles or ornate styles, doesn't matter as long as it's competent.

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

WOW.

I'll read the rest of a series if I liked the book a 4. (And subsequent books don't get worse.) I might even try other books by the same author, especially if they are later works. In addition to being an Author Fan I tend to be a "Completionist Fan". Even if the story kinda sucks, I probably still wanna know how it ends.

There are exceptions. That horrible book about that horrible man by that Donaldson wretch, for example.

[rowyn]

*laughs* When I was reading that horrible book about that horrible man by that Donaldson, I was in high school and still a completionist. I'd finish every book and every series I started. It was actually Piers Anthony that broke me of it: I read his Tarot trilogy, which even 16 YEAR-OLD ME, who had the bad taste to like so much other Anthony, couldn't stand. I can't imagine how bad it must have been. D: I did finish it, but after that I no longer insisted on finish a book or a series just because I'd started it.

I use a 1-10 scale, and I basically never rate books a 4 or less because if I didn't like it more than that, I probably didn't finish it. Most things that are 5-6, I don't finish either.

[terrycloth.livejournal.com]

Seems reasonable. Mostly I think of it more like 'I really like this author and want to read everything', 'I kind of like this author and I'll at least follow this series but I don't know if I want to read the rest of his stuff', 'I like this author's sci-fi but not his historical fiction', and the far-too-common 'I used to like this guy but his recent stuff really sucks'.

Then there's 'I like this author a lot and wanted to read everything but he/she wrote way too much and I got overwhelmed and just gave up entirely'. Which describes at least three authors.

[tagryn]

Agree on all that.

I honestly can't think of one author that's a "I'll buy everything regardless" for me. There's just too much else out there that I want to read, and not enough time to do it in...maybe there was more "author fandom" back in the days when it was harder to get a hold of any but the most popular books in the genre, but those days are long gone. Plus, even giants like Martin and Gaiman and Scalzi have their off days; those tend to end up in anthologies where it gets sold as "NEW STORY BY XXX!" and turns out to be a disappointment more often than not.

I don't know if this qualifies as an actual "fan" category, but there's a fair number of authors that I'd fan as "I respect this person's work, and a lot of people I respect seem to like it, but I just don't have the time right now to even keep up with the series I'm already interested in, so..." These fans may actually buy some books, which end up sitting unread for years, but its more on reputation than actual experience enjoying their work. For me as a fan, I'd put Leckie, Martin, Gaiman, and Pratchett in that category. This is a phenomena that only the "superstars" probably get to experience and profit from, though.

[rowyn]

I used to go on author kicks where I'd just read EVERYTHING by one author that I liked. I got on a kick for Diana Wynne Jones back in 2003 or so and read 30 books by her in the next six months. I did that with Bujold at one point, too. I haven't read everything by Sanderson, but most of his work. But yes, the fact that I have easy access to a huge variety of work makes me feel less motivated to hunt down the Sanderson books I haven't gotten to yet, say. I gave up on Song of Ice and Fire is when I realized I'd have to re-read the first three books before I could read the new one(s), and I was not motivated to do so. (It didn't help that the people I know who'd read book 4 were unimpressed by it, back in the days before the TV show.)

[3rdragon]

I could have written that comment.

I used to be very author-completionist. Authors I read as a teenager, I read EVERYTHING (that the library had). And ones I really liked, I would buy what the library didn't. I think I just had more time as a teenager, and fewer books: I used to reread a lot, too (still do, but less so. There was a time when I could quote huge swaths of books I liked, or play memory games based on recalling and identifying dialogue snippets).

Possibly Madeleine L'Engle was the first author to break that for me: having finished all of her children's and YA books, I moved downstairs, and decided within five or ten pages of A Live Coal in the Sea that I was not old enough yet, and put it down. (This is also the first book I recall making a conscious decision not to finish.)

I suppose that I'm still pretty author-completionist for authors I really like (Bujold, Leckie, Wein, Hilari Bell -- or DWJ used to be), or for ones like Tamora Pierce or Robin McKinley that I'm not as over-the-top about, but who haven't lost my interest. Some authors that I used to be author-completionist about, I've shifted to series or character completionist as newer series haven't grabbed me as much (Sherwood Smith, which is probably related to growing out of the target audience for her younger books). A good rule of thumb is that if the first book really grabs me, I'll be author-completionist until dissuaded, and even then would probably be inclined to try new series unless I bounced pretty hard. (Conversely, if the first book I try is a bounce, I'm unlikely to try other series at all, unless something comes highly recommended, and even then I'll drag my feet. I'm unlikely to pick up Diana Gabaldon, even though people I know like some of her stuff a good bit.)

Then there's people who I'm not at a completionist level, but whose books impressed me sufficiently that I'd be open to reading more in any world or characters (right now you, Jo Walton, Neil Gaiman, Sanderson, and Sarah Monette are in this category).

I would have said that I was never story-arc-completionist, but no, you're right, Harry Potter is definitely that. I'm also aware that I'm more completionist than really necessary -- I'll probably finish anything that's a 2, 3 if I'm feeling finicky, though my long to-read list is making me a little more discerning. And if the story arc isn't complete, I may read a sequel, even if it's only a 5 or so.

It's worth noting that my read-though value depends strongly on time vs. numerical rating vs. impression the book made on me. I also dropped GRRM because the books were too much effort and too much waiting for too little payback. If I didn't like a book super-well but it had a cliffhanger ending and the sequel is easy to get, I'm much more likely to read it than if the sequel doesn't come out until next year, by which time the wait will have dulled the emotional investment that would urge me forward, leaving only the general 'meh,' assuming I remember the book at all.

I would say that I am mostly not a genre fan, unless the author writes in one genre I like and one I actively avoid. (Too far into horror or erotica, say.) I don't really understand the people who get mad because Bujold writes space opera and fantasy-romance. (Though I would understand people who got mad because Ursula Vernon writes children's and whatever her T. Kingfisher stuff is. I guess Vernon is as close as I get to genre fandom, but that's more target age than actual genre division.)

I think the TL;DR takeaway from me is that if I like something, my potential readthrough value is generally quite high, so long as it doesn't require too much effort or too much waiting. The real trick is to break into the category where I'll actively seek out an author's work, rather than passively reading it if it comes my way, or throwing it onto the several-hundred-book-long list of stuff to read sometime. (I also buy very few books, and mostly get stuff from the library. Books I buy are either gifts, things I like so much that I need my own copy (relatively few, recently, especially as the library here is so good), or things that I want to read actively enough that I buy them when they come out/when I can't get them at the library.

[rowyn]

That is a lot of overwhelming.

I used to think it wasn't possible for an author I liked to write faster than I was willing to read, but no. I was wrong. It is. /o_o\

[archangelbeth]

"Theme/review based" can overlap with "series fan" (which is a combo of setting fan and character fan, I think? E.g., Cherryh's Foreigner series, or possibly Bujold's Vorkosiverse, where we love Miles but we'll read non-Miles books too, but Miles was kind of the "hook") -- sometimes a particular character/setting "clicks" and sometimes not. E.g., I can take or leave a lot of Cherryh's stuff, but I will follow the Adventures Of Bren And Associates till the end of days, and I love the hani of Pride of Chanur and sequels.

(The two Xanth books that I can pin down why I liked them are: Castle Roogna and the one with Mare Imbrium. Because I am a sucker for non-human characters, EVEN IF ONE IS A GIANT SPIDER AND I HATE BEING AROUND SPIDERS. *headdesk*)

[rowyn]

I should have defined my terms!

Series: a story that plays out over multiple books, or that follows the same general cast through various adventures.
Setting: all the books take place in the same world/universe
Character: books that involve a particular character

These certainly overlap, but they don't always. To use Micah as an example:

A "series fan" might read say, the Dreamhealers books.

A "character fan" of Jahir and/or Vasiht'h fan would want to read the Dreamhealers books and the Princes' Game books, because they all have those two characters.

A "setting fan" would read all the Pelted books: Dreamhealers, Princes' Game, Earthrise, Alysha, etc.

Pratchett did this too. There are books about the guards, and books about Vimes, some of whichinclude the other guards but some don't, and books about the witches, and standalones. So the Discworld was a setting, not a series (by this definition) because it had a bunch of different series and standalones set in it.

David Eddings wrote the Belgariad, which was one series/story arc, and then a second series in the same world, with the same main characters, but starting a new story arc.

[archangelbeth]

I'm trying to think where Bujold's Vorkosiverse fits there. Mostly it's Miles, but it's also Cordelia for 3 books, and Ivan for one, and Ellie Quinn and Ethan of Athos, and the Quaddies. I don't really feel that it's got the flavor of the Discworld in the sense of setting? Maybe because the non-Miles books aren't always standalone... Shards of Honor/Barrayar are a duology, and Falling Free is a standalone, but while Ivan's book could stand alone, it's... so thoroughly enmeshed in... in Milesatude?

*flails*

(No, no, the Mallorean was the same story arc! It explicitly said it was a reprise, because of that prophecy thing doing a certain amount of "actually, you have to keep doing this till you get it right." Or something like that. I mostly just remember Velvet suborning that other fellow's snake and keeping it in her bodice. And Belgarion realizing that just because the prophecy said "one son" didn't mean that a bunch of little (dryad) daughters wasn't an option. And flying being like swimming -- you don't think about the depth of the water when you're only using the surface, or something. ...and actually rather a lot of tidbits from both books. >_> Not so much the Belgareth/Polgara books, though, because those were getting a little....... ehhhh.)

[marycatelli]

The Barrayar setting books are much more intermeshed than the Discworld ones are. Incidents in one book have a lot more consequences in others than occur (or would be plausible) in Discworld

[archangelbeth]

Yeah, that's probably why I feel Barrayar/Vorkosiverse is more interwoven than Discworld, so am not quite comfortable with it being "setting" over "Series."

I suppose there's probably a vague category of "it doesn't feel like X, and it's all tied together, so..." O:>

[marycatelli]

Andre Norton's Witch World is a better example of "setting." It's one of two series where I don't recommend reading in order -- Discworld being the other.

[archangelbeth]

Oh, point, that. ...I don't think I've ever read the first Witch World books, but I am extremely fond of Year of the Unicorn despite the title's bait-and-switch. (SPOILER! THERE ARE NO UNICORNS IN THIS BOOK. If you are a pre-teen who is a unicorn fanatic, YOU WILL FIND NO UNICORNS. On the other hand, shapeshifters.)

[marycatelli]

Yeah, it's the Year of the Unicorn the way we are in the Year of the Monkey right now.

[archangelbeth]

Yeah, I think I finally figured that out. It was still SUCH a bait-and-switch when I picked it up.

[rowyn]

This reminds me of how annoyed I was by Anne McCaffrey's short story collection Get Off the Unicorn (the title of which is perhaps the most epic copyedit fail ever, but there still weren't unicorns in it EITHER WAY.)

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

I would tend to call Barrayar as a "setting" more in this sense, and Discworld, frankly, as more like "a collection of settings, inside of another larger setting".

This is actually a pretty good example of a place where I'm more of a character fan than anything, I guess. Because I've read most (all?) of the Watch "Setting" books, and almost none of the other books in the series.

I guess for me, I'm pretty flexible with "setting". If an author has described enough of the universe that stories in other parts of it can even be imagined, it's a "setting". Heh.

[tuftears.livejournal.com]

The 'will buy in hardback' and 'will wait until it's cheaper' categories? :)

[rowyn]

*giggles* It turns out I am too cheap to pretty much ever buy hardcover, which is why I didn't think of this one. :)

[tuftears.livejournal.com]

There are only a few authors I like That Much. Lois McMaster Bujold is one. :)

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Steven Brust. Jim Butcher. End of list. :D (for me.)

[benalene.livejournal.com]

Hmm, I know that I am attracted to certain genres, namely fantasy and scifi. I mainly read to escape, so fiction that is more realistic usually doesn't appeal to me as much. That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo books, and I didn't expect that. I guess if something has a good mystery, that can pull me along.

If I liked one book by an author, and they have more books in the same genre, I will try them out. I've learned, though, that I don't just blindly follow an author irregardless of genre. For instance, I love Ray Bradbury's science fiction novels, but Dandelion Wine did absolutely nothing for me.

[marycatelli]

I follow authors into new genres as a way of discovering new genres with minimal risk.

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

Yeah, this applies for me too.

[canis-lupus03.livejournal.com]

... How about the "There's so many books I want to read out there- Oh, look! Shiny fanfiction! And it's FREE! And easily searched and sorted by rating/pairing/genre/tag etc. pp." category... ;-) Seriously, I used to read SO much, basically worked my way through any interesting shelves of the local library... and then the internet and fanfiction happened, and I've read maybe twenty? Thirty? original novels in the past ten or so years... Which is a bit of a scary thought, I used to read a book in a day or two, maybe a week if it was a big huge epic fantasy novel with a thousand pages. But then, computers and the internet weren't a thing yet when I was a kid. So while I'd do other stuff as well, reading was really my main leisure activity- and it still is, but it's fanfic instead...

[marycatelli]

There are authors whom I'll buy everything from.

There are authors whom I'll check out everything from the library to check it out first.

[persephone-kore.livejournal.com]

Yeah... I can think of one author with one series I mostly love and another series that ate my brain one week and when I finished I was glad I'd borrowed instead of buying.

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

Piers Anthony: you're so right. -_- I was such a huge fan of his work as a teenager (and not just the Xanth books, but the Split Infinity series and the Orn series and the Aspects series). But eventually the scales fell from my eyes. I still love some of the ideas in his books, just not the constant cutesy sexism. :P I haven't read any of his books in decades.

As far "buying habits of readers", does the person who buys based on cover art figure into this? There are cover artists (like Michael Whelan) who will influence my buying habits as well, particularly at bookstores.

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

just not the constant cutesy sexism

*gasps*

Holy mother of God. I was already going to follow Rowyn's advice and not go back and read the Aspects series, but... I read this comment and thought about those books for a second and wow, now I'm really not going to go back and read them. :D

*ponders somewhat uncomfortably the ilcylic of 25 years ago*

[3rdragon]

Good question. I have a friend who loves Leo and Diane Dillon, and if she had the disposable income, would probably buy every book they ever did a cover for, regardless of all other merits.

[elbren]

there's a strong distinction between what I buy & what I read, because if I can get it at the library, I will. I follow series more than authors.

so, what I buy:
ebooks: recommended by someone (including the author for authors I follow) and less than $5 I'll pick up upon release. >$5 I'll wait for more info
paper: already read & liked & want around, or ebook is more expensive than paper to me & it's not available from the library

[ruggels.livejournal.com]

sailed in from a suggested link (MCA Hogarth). In general, I come in for Genre, and then once there, follow a series. Mostly my reading these days is non-fiction, and that focus is usually towards the early years of World War Two. When I was Younger, I read mostly Genre fiction, until I was soured on it by a string of bad fantasy novels in college. After that it was hard science fiction, and Historical non-Fiction, and the occasional thriller.

My mother comes in on Genre, and then follows authors. anything they write, she will read, and organizes her reading by author.

Both of us praise the kindle for being able to sample things before buying.

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

I can't think I'm a Character Fan for anyone, in any scenario where I am not also at least a Setting Fan. In the one listing you have for Story Arc Fan, I'm more of a Setting Fan there too, I read Potterverse fic. Both Slash, and Methods of Rationality. :D

I tend to be an Author Fan. Or like, an Author Cluster Fan, to create a new grouping. Niven leads to Niven and Pournelle, leads to Niven and whoever, leads to Pournelle and whoever, leads to whoever and whoever else, leads to whoever else and Niven, etc. ;) Or Correia, Ringo, Williamson, Seville.

But I have a strong tendency to read Entire Canon. I read so many books, and so quickly, that finding enough new stuff I like is hard. So I do a lot of re-reading, but when I find a new author I like... Oooh. I'll probably buy everything in the series I'm in at first, and eat those, and then one or two books in other series, and if I like those, then just... everything. "Why yes! I believe I'd like to spend a lot of money at Amazon, today..."

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

Here from haikujaguar!

Concept fatigue is definitely a thing, with me.

If I have fallen wildly in love with something an author's written, I'll probably try something else by that author, even if it's a different type of story. There's so much out there to try, though, that I tend not to want to start with long series--I want to use my reading time to try new things.

Also referred by Haikujaguar.

[wombat-socho.livejournal.com]

Things got a little out of hand, so I replied here (http://wombat-socho.livejournal.com/1439011.html).

[narile.livejournal.com]

I tend to pick up a new author based on what genre I'm currently interested in, then if I like the author I'll try more of their books, and if I like them still I tend to become an author fan.
So for me its Genre (of the moments mood) fan to get the book, then it becomes author fan once I settle down, even if the genre mood changes. Ie, I've not been in a SF mood for a couple of years, but I'll always pick up a new Niven if I see it.