You don't actually read prefaces and introductions, r-right anon?
Author here.
Sometimes that's the only part i read
If it's nonfiction and they're written by the author himself (e.g. in the Critique of Pure Reason) then yes, otherwise no. The latter case is just a scam for some academic to get a fatter paycheck for an unnecessary "new edition"
Rarely. I'll skim through them if it's a book I'm really looking forward to or if it has a reputation of being difficult.
>>25264483no. they're for the reread only.
>>25264483Nope after the first paragraph of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit I never read another one.
>>25264483Yes, I always do, I dont want to miss a thing even if it goes over my head.
>Preface spoils the novel's plot
>>25264483I only read them + the first chapter. You can usually guess the rest of the plot from that.
always except short story collections
>>25264724>>25264726Funny memes lads
I read one once and it had a massive spoiler, never again.
>>25264483>>25264492>>25264495>>25264501>>25264565>>25264777You did not finish the book.
The more important the topic is to me, the less I want to read secondary sources. I read introductions when I'm reading more for fun.
>25264816>muh vidya memesgo back
>>25264483>not availing yourself to knowledge of the depth, context, and historical background to better understand what you're reading>just filling in the blanks with stupid shit you made up on the spot and thinking it's just as goodniggymiggit
>>25264483I sometimes buy books just for the introduction.
>>25264724I fucking hate this.
If it's by the author and it's only a page long I might read it. If he has something important to say he'll put it in story, and I don't care about an author's biography.
>introduction by a different author>it criticizes and makes fun of the book
>>25264982It's not just as good. It's better.
