J.D. Robb discussion

The In Death books are set "in the future", but is/was that really necessary to the mystery/suspense story line? Is the future setting an asset or distraction to the main plot lines and overall story arc? Why do you think Robb chose to write them in the future? Would these books work just as well in a "current" timeline? Let's hear your pros and cons. Build Your Case!

Great question

When I first tried to read Naked in Death a few years ago, I could not get into the story because the futuristic setting was annoying and distracting.

I tried again a few years later and just decided to ignore the setting and read it as a regular police procedural. This helped of course :)

No idea why she decided to set them in the future other than that is where her imagination took her.

I do think they would work just as well in a contemporary setting as they are police procedurals at heart.

I initially balked at starting this series because of its futuristic setting. I mean, when I read the year in the first paragraph, I stopped reading and only resumed because my sisters-in-law begged me too.

It took about two chapters for me to love the futuristic aspect of the stories. Robb has used current events to project into the future and she’s been uncannily on target with a number of elements. The world she created sparks my imagination here in the present, giving me stuff to chew on about how she’s designed the future. Yes, she could have written this series in the present but by setting it more than 60 years into the future (at the time of the release of the first book), she gave us more to consider within a different context.

I think this would be a more conventional police procedural if not set in year 2058 at the onset. It allows more flexibility and the absence of guns makes the murders more creative. And, it’s allowed me to salivate over some of the gadgets (auto chef!).

See I got into this series pretty late, like Festive in Death late, and I consider it a blessing that I have done so. Prior to getting into this series, I was a fan of anime (still am to this day) and there were some shows and movies that were in that genre, where looking back, had some similarities to the In Death series and its futuristic setting.

Ghost in the Shell, in particular, while I never really got confirmation about what country or city it was set in. But reading any volume of the In Death series, seeing New York City in the same cyberpunk setting that Ghost in the Shell's cities have, it made things a lot easier for me to handle when I started to get into the Eve Dallas/Roarke series.

My introduction to Eve and Roarke was with Remember When. Two books, same author under both her names. Up until this book I'd only read Nora Roberts and hadn't even heard of JD Robb. Took me awhile to realise it was one and the same author That book I think made it easier for me to except the future aspect.

I am a romance reader and so the mystery /police procedural didn't really click for me if that makes sense. I was reading it for Eve and Roarke and yes to find out about the diamonds. To then discover there were more books I had to read from the beginning.

I think why and how you started reading In death would greatly influence one's answer to this question. Could it be set in present day? Yes it could. Is it a distraction? For me not. For all our evolutionary advancements etc we're still people. What drives one to murder would always be for the same reason and that I fear will never change. Greed. Hate or jealousy even envy are all things that contribute to most murders.

Who knows why Ms Robb set this is the future really. This was suppose to be a trilogy. This was written after she was told to take a break. Maybe she wanted to write something completely different to anything she had written before. Maybe Eve & Roarke pestered her to write about them. Maybe she watched a Star trek episode and something clicked. This series started pre 2000, a time I think when the future held fear and excitement and thoughts of what could be was higher than before I think. Maybe writing in the present time would have meant to much homework. Having to be correct on procedures, and keeping up with all that entails.

I honestly don't know why Robb wrote it in the future. All I know is she has entertained me with some gadgets I hope becomes a Reality (AUTOCHEF!)

I think that the future setting makes sense. It prevents the series from becoming dated. Becoming dated is not something of a stigma but if an author wants to avoid that attribute, then doing what Robb has done is a smart move.

The Sue Grafton series is completely set in the 80s, and that too is smart. The show doesn't really appear dated because there is no continuity into the 90s. That series appears like a Hans Christian Anderson collection of fairy tales, because there is no growth or progress in linear fashion.

All things considered, the most annoying aspect of the In Death series for me is the use of discs. That dates the series a bit in my opinion. It is far less of an eyesore than the Star Wars prequels though. In THAT universe it seems like the inventors got dumber and kept inventing retro ships and other tech. At least the In Death series has common sense in its setting.

I love the futuristic setting from the start. Several devices presented early in this series were in the design phase back in the 90s. It was fun to see how Robb put the technology into the story. As a network engineer, I read many magazines that explained "what's next" with technology and looked forward to having the devices. Robb's vision often matched mine.

I like that travel is so fast and easily accessible by Roarke. It saves the author from time jumps or filling the page with airport activity, plane time, etc.

Now I wish the future time was 2095 or 3058. So much of the technology is in everyone's home today; it doesn't seem futuristic or unbelievable anymore, although I'm still waiting for my autochief.

On the negative side, when I found out the JD Robb was Nora Roberts, I gagged a little. I was not a fan of Roberts, or romance. To this day, I can't figure out what I had against her because I re-read the books that turned me off her, and now love them.

Sharon wrote: "On the negative side, when I found out the JD Robb was Nora Roberts, I gagged a little. I was not a fan of Roberts, or romance. To this day, I can't figure out what I had against her because I re-read the books that turned me off her, and now love them ..."

Weirdly, I had the same experience! I have no idea why my view of Roberts was negative. After finishing the In Death series binge, I started reading Roberts’ romance books and loved them.

That is so interesting Jonetta and Sharon. I was an avid Nora reader and now I can stand them.

I immediately knew that JD Robb was Nora Roberts. because of Goodreads. And the Internet in general. I haven't really read romances in my life. The romances that I disliked I cannot finish them completely. Though the romances I like have the same ratio to read books as my other favourites are to general books, the fact that I am never thrilled by sex scenes and never charmed by most couples' interactions makes me steer clear of romances.

Converse with that is the state that I have watched a lot of Indian movies in my childhood and they are mostly romances. They have soured me to the genre either bookish or onscreen. That might explain why I am depressed and bored by romance books.

Michelle wrote: "That is so interesting Jonetta and Sharon. I was an avid Nora reader and now I can stand them."

Michelle, I like romance as a teen, but in my 20s and 30s it got on my nerves. My mother and aunt were Harlequin fans. I told them I could write one of these books all it needs is a boy meets girl, boy captures girl, boy forces sex. then give a few grunts and live happily ever after. Oh yes, put Fabio on the cover. It isn't real. They claim that is why they read them. They have enough real.

The first couple NR books I read, I saw Harlequin and not the story.

Luffy wrote: "I immediately knew that JD Robb was Nora Roberts. because of Goodreads. And the Internet in general. I haven't really read romances in my life. The romances that I disliked I cannot finish them com..."

Luffy, do the Indian movies turn you off because of the way the women are treated or men for that matter? I'm trying to think back to some of the old movies I remember. I can't recall the treatment of the woman except by those outside the relationship. However, that is true of all mixed race couples real or fictitious in years past.

Sharon wrote: "Michelle wrote: "That is so interesting Jonetta and Sharon. I was an avid Nora reader and now I can stand them."

Michelle, I like romance as a teen, but in my 20s and 30s it got on my nerves. My m..."

Sharon I picked up one of my mom's Mills&Boon books one day and haven't stopped reading! It's interesting most of those authors I read like Nora Roberts, Linda Howard, Kay Hooper started branching out of that formulated romance writing and add a brilliant book exchange owner that asked if you like this try that.

My go to willl always be romance with something. That what's for me is so great about this series. Yes is set in the future but the love story and arc of Eve and Roarke is what's kept me here. The rest is added bonus of what the future could be with issues, events, gadgets and gizmos.

I agree with you Michelle. The good romance writers have a great story surrounding the romance. I like that too. I read most genre's these days. Mysteries are still my favorite, but a good romance and/or rom-com pick me up and make me feel good.

Ditto.