this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
96 points (99.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
472 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Other people who've read it and who I've talked with seem to be split over whether the first book is better than the sequels, or the other way around. I prefer the sequels, my wife prefers the original. Do you have a preference?
As a child, I greatly preferred the original. A lot of the emotional subtext from the sequels went over my head (since I was raised in a very emotionally repressed environment), but I could totally grok the cold, somewhat impersonal nature of the first book. It was easier to imagine myself in this huge alien structure when I could understand the characters. Nowadays I think I'd probably prefer the sequels since I derive a lot of enjoyment from interpersonal drama and conflict. I'll admit that it's been ages since I've read them, so I can't say for sure.