littlemissattitude
Super Moderator
We're all familiar with the traditional approach to trilogies: a story told in three parts, beginning to end, but published in three separate volumes rather than in one book because it would be too long.
But Tim Powers, in "Last Call", "Expiration Date", and "Earthquake Weather", has approached the trilogy in a different way. Reading the first two volumes, one wouldn't necessarily realize that they had any relation to on another. Only when you get to the third volume does it become clear that all three books are part of the same story. Definitely an unorthodox way to present a trilogy. Or, anyway, I had never run across it until I found these books. I think this approach worked really well, at least in this one particular case.
The thing I'm wondering is, for those of you who have read this trilogy (are any of you out there?), do you think it worked? And for those of you who haven't, would knowing that a trilogy was arranged in this way, rather than in the usual way, make you more likely or less likely to pick up these books and read them?
My answer is that, after reading "Last Call", assuming it was a stand-alone novel, I did a little bit of research on Tim Powers and his work and discovered that there were two more novels in the series, but that their arrangement was not orthodox. Besides having really liked "Last Call", I specifically sought out the other two books in the trilogy very much based on the knowledge that they were arranged this way. I wanted to see how that arrangement worked.
So, what do you think?
But Tim Powers, in "Last Call", "Expiration Date", and "Earthquake Weather", has approached the trilogy in a different way. Reading the first two volumes, one wouldn't necessarily realize that they had any relation to on another. Only when you get to the third volume does it become clear that all three books are part of the same story. Definitely an unorthodox way to present a trilogy. Or, anyway, I had never run across it until I found these books. I think this approach worked really well, at least in this one particular case.
The thing I'm wondering is, for those of you who have read this trilogy (are any of you out there?), do you think it worked? And for those of you who haven't, would knowing that a trilogy was arranged in this way, rather than in the usual way, make you more likely or less likely to pick up these books and read them?
My answer is that, after reading "Last Call", assuming it was a stand-alone novel, I did a little bit of research on Tim Powers and his work and discovered that there were two more novels in the series, but that their arrangement was not orthodox. Besides having really liked "Last Call", I specifically sought out the other two books in the trilogy very much based on the knowledge that they were arranged this way. I wanted to see how that arrangement worked.
So, what do you think?
) but I can understand how three books that stand alone but can be connected for an avid reader would be an added attraction - almost like an inside joke only for his fans, not the casual reader.
