So, one of the most common complaints I hear about is a lack of continuity between books in the Deathlands series.  In a post earlier today, Revo-Ray lamented, "... did the writer of this book actually read or know anything about any of the other books?"  In response to that post, I addressed the specific continuity break and how it happened, but it made me want to take a little extra time to talk about continuity in general.  Of course, this is only my opinion and I am eager to hear what other people think on the subject.

From a reader's standpoint, continuity is a great thing.  If you have been reading a series for a while (or reading a comic book series, or watching a television series) it is satisfying to see how things are connected, and to see the characters grow and evolve.  From a writer's standpoint, continuity is also pretty handy becuase it lets you bring back the dastardly Baron Notaniceguy (last seen twelve books ago being carried off by a giant mutie hedgehog), and set up the plot of a new book with some very simple exposition (Krysty exclaimed, "Look out!  It's Baron Notaniceguy!!  It looks like he is still pissed off about that hedgehog thing!!").

The thing is, while continuity is great for the short- to mid-term, at some point continuity becomes a straight jacket that boxes in the writers.  The comic book industry in particular has had to deal with this, where you have characters like Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man who have been around for many decades.  If Peter Parker was a high school senior in 1962, surely he must be a senior citizen by now.  Yet there he is, still looking like a young man, still webslinging across the Big Apple saving the day.  This is why Marvel and DC have these massive reboots every now and then.  "Oh, that Superman was on Earth-X, but the current Superman is on Earth-Prime", et-cetera.  The longer a series runs, the more it begins to collapse under the accumulated weight of its own continuity.

So what is a writer to do?  He's just been hired to write the ninety third book in a series, and at least ninety of those books are out of print even if he was insane enough to try to read them all.  So he familiarizes himself with the series bible, maybe he picks up one or two of the most recent books in the series that have not gone out of print  yet, and then he rolls up his sleeves and writes the best darn book he can.  If he has already written a few books in the series, then he has some past elements he can draw upon.  Maybe he pickes up on something from another author in the series (such as when Victor Milan introduced the Techno-Mages in Vengeance Trail and then Andy Boot brought them back for Thunder Rider).  But at the end of the day, he has to treat the series like it has a giant reset switch.  He can't kill off any of the major characters, or even damage them in a permanent way.  He can't reunite Doc Tanner with his dearest Emily, not unless he rips him away from her arms again before the last page and returns him to the Deathlands.  All he can do is create as much action, drama, and suspense as possible in the space of three hundred and fifty pages, and hope that the fans like it.  (Or I suppose he can crap out 350 pages of drek, and then cash his check and laugh at the rubes who paid money to read that garbage, but I honestly believe the vast majority of writers in the series take pride in their work).

I guess I just can't get all that worked up over the fact that in one book the companions have a pre-aranged duress code to let