Not necessarily. Sometimes an author only writes one worthwhile book, and it's not necessarily her first.

I typically read an authors most notable book and then try to go chronological.

I find it interesting to compare and contrast their works as they get older to their opus.

>>7813521
>Harper Lee

>>7813527
>implying TKAM was even good
oh boy

>>7813529
>implying you have good taste in literature

>>7813523
This is the correct answer most of the time. Plus if you don't enjoy the author's best, there's usually not point in looking further.

>>7813534
Tell me why it's good.

It has no value if not for its civil rights message. Truly mediocre writing.

>>7813537
I wholeheartedly agree that typically if you don't like their best, you won't like anything else of theirs but sometimes their best work isn't totally accessible to every reader and it's better to start off with something a little less challenging.

>>7813538
It does just that. Instead of trying to sound pedantic in its wording, it simply conveys its message through a simple and easy to understand writing style, and it worked for the audience at the time, whose English was most likely also simplistic in nature

>>7813549
Im not just talking about prose. The plot is boring, the characters are flat and have no development throughout the novel, and the themes of civil rights were hackneyed even for the time.

>>7813575
What do you think of Ernest Hemingway?

>>7813615
He's better than Lee, though I've only read two of his novels.

not the 1st time but if youre serious abouit yeah

>>7813508
yes. it's kinda autistic, but I always do this