connected groups: episodic series

I had how I was going to do these “connected group” blogs all outlined in my head before I posted the first one, right down to knowing most of the author groups I was going to refer to. Then Outlook ate the content of not one but two of the posts, namely the ones on episodic series and story arcs, which I had mostly written, no less. Just up and made the entire text of the messages disappear. I’ve never had that happen before and I still have no idea why it happened after a week or more of trying to figure it out.

Grumble, grumble, grumble.

So, anyway, I had to sit back and start over with those posts but this turned out to be a good thing because it gave me a chance to look over my bookshelves in greater detail. I found some groups I’d overlooked in my first rush to post AND I discovered something interesting.

The light bulb moment? The role romance plays in how the stories are linked is very important to how we classify them. Well, duh, we are discussing romance, you say. Yes, but that’s not how I mean it. At least I don’t believe it is. You tell me.

For instance, when one thinks of episodic series, it’s only natural to think of detective mysteries. Same character or characters, different case each installment. In the romance groups I’m going to be discussing in this blog entry, the repeating characters are the same couple (and their support group) in an ongoing relationship over the course of multiple episodes. Those individual “cases” are usually either of a suspense or mystery leaning.

At least theoretically with episodics, once the reader is familiar with the couple, these could be read/reread in just about any order. At least that’s true when we’re talking about straight mystery. I mean, who cares “when” in Hercule Poirot’s life one of his cases takes place. The case at hand is what’s important, not the quirky personality of the detective. That last is as much part of the background setting as the time and locale are.

When romance, and particularly a strong romance, is added to the equation, however, things become much more complicated. Let’s look at the J.D. Robb In Death series first, one of the more well-known episodics containing a strong romance. My daughter reads and rereads these with great glee. I read the first three, was happily satisfied and quite ready to move on. Part of this is because I’m not all that crazy about romantic suspense to begin with, and that’s what the series is marketed as, so small doses are quite adequate, thank you very much.

Part of it, however, is because of just what I was getting at above. It is one thing to have a trilogy about the same couple’s relationship, but quite another to have twenty books or more. I just don’t have the kind of patience when it comes to romance. And no matter how many times I tell myself I should be able to, I just can’t make myself drop into the middle of a romance. Sigh.

One thing I would like to state unequivocally, however, is that even though Roberts isn’t a favorite author of mine, I’ve heard enough about this series to appreciate that she’s done a good job both of pacing the romance throughout all the books as well as creating interesting cases. So, I think the In Death series stands as a great example of how a romance can be “strung out” over a larger number of books than readers would normally tolerate.

What I’m not sure about is whether any of them could be read and enjoyed out of order the first time around, which to me contradicts a great deal of what makes an episodic series episodic. What do the rest of you, particularly fans of the In Death series, think about this?

The first time I can remember running across a set of episodic romances was in a group of three or four Harlequin Intrigues in the early 1990s, Robin Francis A Spaulding & Darien Mystery. I loved those books because they were actually “real” individual mysteries, not romance watered down with a suspense thrill ride. I don’t remember the romance between the couple being a particularly strong part of each individual story but it was there slowly developing in the background. I do wonder if I would’ve felt the same way after more than, say, six books. (And all of this reminds me that I really need to find out what happened to that author.)

Another group of books I’d forgotten about and found while checking over my shelves again is the Merline Lovelace Cleo North Mysteries, a set of military-related romantic suspense stories. Part of the reason I forgot them is that I haven’t actually read them yet. I bring them up here anyway for two reasons. One, I trust Lovelace to do the military connection right and, two, the books are marketed as a tightly packed episodic trilogy. So, no matter how strong the romance is, or isn’t for that matter, I should be quite happy with only having three books to read. Anyone read these and can comment on how they work as episodics?

Now, let’s look at another group of romances that’s giving me fits classifying because I have one on my list – Linda Fallon’s Shades trilogy – that I’m still dithering about calling an episodic or not.

This group of romances set in southern Victorian America is about a psychic ghost-buster and his one-time fiancée. The individual cases they tackle are three true mysteries – hey, one usually has to solve the crime to set the poor, tormented ghost free, you know (G) – so there is absolutely no doubt their adventures are episodic in nature. I want to make that clear before I go on to say that their romance however is in no way a background development simply tying three separate books together. In fact, if one took the cases out, the development of their relationship would make one very complete romance, meaning the books almost have to be read in order. Luckily, there’s only three. All of which leaves me with the nagging question of whether to call the group an episodic, a story arc or a true hybrid.

What do you think?