The one book theory, for those who have not heard it before, or would like
to debate it’s validity, is: each of us has one good book in us, If the
content of the book is spread over multiple volumes we diminish the authors
value by making it too hard to track all of the subject’s values across the
I developed the rule of one book per author early on when I read Hardy Boy
books. After about the 10th one I noticed a pattern.
Later on while reading Robert Heinlein in university, I notices the same thing. The same for Ayn Rand. Robert Pirsig’s Lila is very much a regurgitation – or at least draws heavily from his first book, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". I’ve read all the Harry Potter books — lots of redundancy there.
I have read many books by the same authors. This just shows that I am
willing to break my own rules and read a second or third book by an author. Loren Eisley for instance. I’ve read his autobiography, "The Night Country" and "The Invisible Pyramid". I’m considering looking for "Darwin’s Century" too. There is redundancy but I read them mainly because I enjoy his writing style.
I’d be prepared to entertain a second book by an author if it was on a
completely different subject too. For instance Pierre Berton’s book on
Vimy would be quite different than "The Comfortable Pew." I have one of the two but have read neither as yet.