Which novel series do you think has the most readers?

There's an "Ender" series?
Do you mean Endor?

And, it was excluded because I didn't know about it! But I included an "Other" category!
People who think of other another series are free to select "Other" and specify with a post. In fact, I encourage it!

 

Ah.... Ender's Game.... soooooo good!!! And to think that I could have been reading that in school this semester, but our teacher picked "An Excellent Mystery" instead. Grrrr....

Back to the Harry Potter books. Call them juvenile if you want, but J.K. Rowling writes good stories! She also has great talent for creating worlds, as well as an interesting plot with surprises at the end. And she can make you shiver, though that might have something to do with the fact I was up at three in the morning during a thunderstorm, while reading about characters hearing disembodied voices saying "Let me kill you, let me crush you, let me taste you...."

Anyway, I really liked reading those books and can't wait for the other three to come out.

Another point about the New York Times bestseller list. the keyword is "bestseller". that doesn't mean it's the best quality novel or most well-written or profound work. It just means that enough people have been disillusioned into thinking that it's good. That old ploy works for everything, Shakespeare, Magaret Atwood, Tolkien. Because they're famous, and granted, some of them even deserve to be, people (not all big readers either) read it expecting it to be good, and because they've been convinced by so many outside sources, like teachers, media, etc, they'll believe what they've read is good.

I'm not a big fan of Tolkien. Yes, decent plot, good character development, rah rah rah. However, I find it interesting when people who rarely read anything will pick up LotR and like it. The reason they don't read is because they don't have the imagination to experience the story the way people who enjoy reading can. With Tolkien, imagination isn't necessary, he does everything for you, you don't have to use your brain or open your mind at all. the word "over-rated" comes to mind.

Anyway, I'm sure I've offended a lot of people here, but that's been my experience.

 

Tenel Ka: "Another point about the New York Times bestseller list. the keyword is "bestseller". that doesn't mean it's the best quality novel or most well-written or profound work."

Yes, I was thinking about that earlier, actually. By using the Best-seller lists as a grounds for comparison, one is adopting the opinions of others. That individual is assuming that the consumers that purchased the book in question are capable of recognizing quality material.
Moreover, our opinions all vary.
Furthermore, the majority of the human race, in my opinion, appear to be tragically stupid. So, by referring to the Best-Seller lists, we're adopting the opinions of what could darn well be a stupid group of people.

By the way, I'd use a word other than "stupid", but I don't feel like searching my vocabulary for a replacement at the moment.

I don't find Tolkien to be such a marvelous writer either. I could never find the interest to sit down and read The Lord of the Rings.

I think I wanted to say more, but Boy Meets World is on...and, well, I kinda' still like that show. Grew up with it 'n all.

 

Furthermore, the majority of the human race, in my opinion, appear to be tragically stupid. So, by referring to the Best-Seller lists, we're adopting the opinions of what could darn well be a stupid group of people.

 

I so agree with Tenel Ka, Lord of the Rings sucked. I had to force myself through The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Rings. I can't even bring myself to read the other two. I think Harry Potter is awesome, some of the best work ever written. Someone could pay me to read Lord of the Rings and I wouldn't take the money but on the other hand I would read Harry Potter for free. Anyway that's pretty much all I have to say on this topic.

 

I gave up reading Harry Potter even faster than I gave up reading the Sword of Truth. Didn't like them at all. If someone writing a novel was intentionally trying to put in all the little things that I can?t stand, they couldn?t have done it better than JK Rowling. I?d rather read Ed Greenwood than JK Rowling, and that?s saying something

 

Gandolf: What's wrong with Harry Potter? I've heard nothing but good things about those books.
I've never read them myself, though. I was never tempted to pick one up.

And who's Ed Greenwood and Rowling?

 

Rowling's the author of Harry Potter.

 

Equinox: Ah. Thanks.

 

J.K. Rowling is a good author, but I have to go with John Ronald Reul Tolkien on this one. You can argue that he does all the imagining for you, but the fact is that those books are more adictive than any farmaceutical (sp?) product ever created. And the majority of its fan are sophistaced people that love to read. I (and most of my friends/tolkien fanatics) read about 250 books a year and tolkien tops them all. His plots are fairly predictable, but just as he's luring you into being confident of the ending... BAM! he adds the perfect twist. I think it must be in his genes because his son christopher also writes friggin well. You can picture all the characters perfectly in your mind (and they're different for each person). The wheel of time is also a good series, though.

 

I'm upping this to gather more votes. The "Other" category seems to be growing.

 

Addicting?
the LotR is about as addicting as brussel spourts. A guy in my Advanced Placement English Class has been reading his copy since the end of January, he says it's so hard to get through because it can't hold your attention for long. I would start into a paragraph on those books and then I would start to daydream because it was boring, similar to math class! I wanted to scream, "oh please don't tell me one more stupid, irrelevant thing!"
as for imagining characters, I find it a lot better to have a small, simple description, and picture the rest based on their personality and their development.

 

Valyn,

I concur with IATDS in regards to Salvatore's writing. I found it highly unrealistic that Wulfgar has amazing dexterity, amazing strength, and is just about better than everyone except for Drizzt Do'Urden. I don't like Wulfgar. He seems too Superman-like.

According the AD&D publication, HALL OF HEROES, Wulfgar had a 19 Strength when 18/00 is the human maximum in 2nd Edition. I, too, didn't like him as a character.

 

Kier: "According the AD&D publication, HALL OF HEROES, Wulfgar had a 19 Strength when 18/00 is the human maximum in 2nd Edition. I, too, didn't like him as a character."

When I used to play D&D on-line, of my peers told me that he didn't like Salvatore's writing because Salvatore tended to write about the exceptions to the rules more often than just going along with the rules. He gives readers the impression that in D&D, you can make your own "Superman", basically.

I mean, look at Drizzt Do'Urden. I've seen character sheets of him that listed him as being the equivalent of an 18th level Fighter. But drow can only ascend to the 12th level, if I recall correctly. Aside of that, he's a Ranger.
He's a 16th level Ranger (though some sources label him as a 15th level) with the skill of an 18th level Fighter.

 

Don't know. Without hard numbers to base an opinion on, I don't even want to speculate.

 

Does anyone know where we can get the actual figures from? For reasons stated above, I guess we shouldn't refer to the Best-Seller Lists. Surely we could somehow access the publishers' marketing research information. Marketing research is available to the public, right?

 

Brussel sprouts happen to get you high, you know. I heard on CNN that veggie heads have raided all the 'green giant' factories in an attempt to get more!

 

I usually watch CNN every day, and I never saw anything about that...

In regards to the media, did anyone notice how there was actually coverage of Vanilla Coke? Has anyone tried it yet?

 

When I used to play D&D on-line, of my peers told me that he didn't like Salvatore's writing because Salvatore tended to write about the exceptions to the rules more often than just going along with the rules. He gives readers the impression that in D&D, you can make your own "Superman", basically.

Well, he wrote outside of the rules, and it's not like he would role some dice, then write a paragraph, roll some more, etc. But yes, he wrote extremes in the case of Drizzt and his assorted hangers-on.

I mean, look at Drizzt Do'Urden. I've seen character sheets of him that listed him as being the equivalent of an 18th level Fighter. But drow can only ascend to the 12th level, if I recall correctly. Aside of that, he's a Ranger.

Last I saw he was a 16th level ranger. That didn't bother me, what bothered was for a long time afterwards, every AD&D game I heard of, there seemed to be 3 players in EVERY game who wanted to play a chaotic good Drow ranger. So, much like the fanboy addoration of Drizzt, Mara Jade or Thrawn, I learned to hate them as characters because people made them out to be so much more by projecting their ideals on to them. But it also says a lot that Drizzt struck such a chord with so many people. I don't cast any aspersions on to Bob, because he's a good author and a pretty damn nice guy. I think he's about to become one of the most important names in science fiction and fantasy.

He's a 16th level Ranger (though some sources label him as a 15th level) with the skill of an 18th level Fighter.

Heh heh, go back even further and you'll find out that Drow aren't even a race, but elves that have done something SO heinous that they have been cursed by their deities and turned into monsters. After a time these cursed elves came together underground and began to worship Lloth, the spider-goddess.

 

I think harry potter books have the most readers right now. You don't have to love sci-fi/fantasy books to get what the books are about.
Jordan is definitely one of the top five writers right now. The bastard is just taking FOREVER to put out his books.I think he is losing fans because of it. Every time he writes a new book I have to go back and re-read the entire series.
GRRM is my favorite, but he is also taking forever. He's tring to ride his current popularity and get his Wild Cards books to sell more copies.
Terry Goodkind is also truning into a heavey hitter. I didn't like his last book though.

 

Kier: "That didn't bother me, what bothered was for a long time afterwards, every AD&D game I heard of, there seemed to be 3 players in EVERY game who wanted to play a chaotic good Drow ranger."


I've heard of that problem, too!
As a matter of fact, one of my first D&D characters was a drow ranger. However, I created this character before I even knew about Drizzt Do'Urden. For the most part, whenever I played dark elves, they were evil.

"Heh heh, go back even further and you'll find out that Drow aren't even a race, but elves that have done something SO heinous that they have been cursed by their deities and turned into monsters."

Wasn't it that Lloth used to be Corellon's (the god of elves) lover? But she plotted against him or something? If I recall correctly, it was Lloth's fault that the dark elves are where they are today. She manipulated them and so forth.
It's been a while since I read about Forgotten Realms lore.

 

The smell of Brussel sprouts alone is enough to make me retch.

 

What are you talking about?

 

We're talking about brussel sprouts (the pot substitute).

 

Other.

Specifically "Star Trek". They may not be better, but definitely have a larger base of people reading them.