/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19762531]

>skips the introduction

[Anonymous No.19762541]

>>19762531
Honestly, they are often for people who have already read the book. I generally never read the introduction unless it is a non-fiction work. They often either force-feed the themes to the reader or spoil the book itself.

[Anonymous No.19762550]

>reads introduction if fact
>skips if fiction

[Anonymous No.19763008]

>>19762531
Wait, there are people who read introductions?

[Anonymouṡ No.19763095]

>>19762531

>cuts out the introduction

>posts it back to the minor academic who wrote it

>includes a cover note saying "YOU SEEM TO HAVE LEFT SOME OF YOUR ASININE MAUNDERING ATTACHED TO THE WORK OF A BETTER MAN"

[Anonymous No.19763153]

>>19762531
>reads only the introduction so as to not waste time

[Anonymous No.19763228]

>>19762550
That's the only way. Introductions in non-fiction is generally helpful; in fiction it's a mess.

[Anonymous No.19763250]

>reads the introduction
>gets bored and skips the actual book

[Anonymous No.19763629]

>>19762531
I skipped the introduction to Lolita that way. I didn't know it was an integral part of the book

[Anonymous No.19763820]

>>19763629
I skipped the introduction of His Master’s Voice by Stanislaw Lem not knowing that it was written by the fictional narrator and part of the story. The book might’ve been the most boring I have ever read, so it wasn’t a big loss.

[Anonymous No.19763980]

>reads the index
>promptly closes the book to never open it again

[Anonymous No.19764001]

>author thinks his friends and wife in the acknowledgments

ok I see we are already flexing at the reader

[Anonymous No.19764026]

>>19762531
>spend 2 hours reading Mahabharata
>reach page 1
I like it

[Anonymous No.19764036]

>>19763980
>do this
>continue to post on /lit/ about the book for at least 4 hours per day, for 3 months straight