I've read some of "I, Robot" many years ago, and recently started reading "World War Z". These two stories have two unique structures in my eyes, and I just wanted to know if it's because they're rare or because I haven't been paying attention. "I, Robot" is told as an interview with Susan Calvin, a woman who appears in some of Asimov's short stories (just like Multivac, and the famous three laws of robot behavior). Calvin, now an old woman, tells the interviewer about six or eight stories that happened to her, to people she knew, or people unrelated to her but related to the subject they discuss (shockingly, the subject is robots). Asimov could have easily just written those stories, dump them as an anthology with individual, somewhat interconnected stories, and let us enjoy it as a collection. However, he added Calvin and the interviewer as sort of a glue to unite these works of art into one work. That's what I mean by hybrid between a novel and a collection. Max Brooks' "World War Z" goes even further. It is told from the perspective of a member of some UN council that gathered the raw data about the Zombie war and analyzed it. That member decides to put out his own book of reports that are beyond the dry statistics, but about the stories of these people. So you have a collection of reports, basically. Tons of interviews, dialogues and monologues, each one from the perspective of a different person with a different history, demographic background, and experience of that war. It's sometimes overwhelming to read, because although these stories are VERY short, there are just so many of them. Brooks united here two things he experienced as a child. One was his obsession with zombie movies, and the other was a book he read filled with testimonies on WWII. World War Z is very dark, very realistic, and aside from some problems (including two characters who are basically caricatures of the big bad evil capitalist and cynical hateful government crony), it's a pretty good book. And the stories are mostly told in a very specific order, so you can see, through the eyes of the people who tell them, how the war gradually evolves. So even though it's not written as a novel, you still get the facts of the big picture slowly dripped into your brain with every individual story. He truly did design it to be a hybrid. I've tried writing something similar before knowing about the structure of Brooks' book. It sucks to have an idea and then finding out that someone had it 5 years before you did. If it's 50 years before you did, then fine. You could say you either didn't know, or were inspired, or whatever. But having it just a couple of years later sucks. And I'm not talking about plot here, but about structure. And still, luckily, my vision is different than Brooks' vision, so it won't be an identical structure. Certainly not a similar plot. So, I return to my original question: What books do you know about that are hybrids between a novel and a collection?