I've learned the hard way to just read them afterward.

Why they can't just print them at the end of the book is beyond me.

Did he tell you that?

Homie for the love of God please use spoiler text.

And then for paperbacks, there is the book cover. Anna Kareinina. Front cover has bonnet on railroad track. I wonder how that will end.

Well…when the author wrote the book did they write it to be taught in schools, picked apart for themes and symbolism, and analyzed for historical context and literary importance? Or did they write it to tell a story they wanted to tell? I suspect some authors actually would care if you enjoyed the story as written without knowing what came next. Writers put as much craft into foreshadowing and plot twists as they do into describing the curtain as blue because it symbolizes depression.

Agreed OP. I read the preface for Moby Dick and it spoiled exactly what happens in the climactic scene. I get that a lot of people know the ending, but I feel like you can illustrate the themes and motifs of the book without specifically mentioning the ending. It should be easy enough to allude to it vaguely

Even if the author wrote the preface, it was written after the book was written. You should read it after you read the book. If at all.

Exceptions: in textbooks, the preface often contains a description of what the book is about, what order topics should be studied in ("for a one semester course, do chapters 1-6, 10 and 14, for a two semester course, just do them all in order"), what knowledge is assumed, why you should use this book instead of the warhorse everyone else uses, and so on. Worthwhile stuff to see.0

Yeah, I learned this as a teen, any text added to the OG edition can have basically any adding spoiling it like 'I admire what my friend the author did here, not only killing the protagonist one time but two' or 'now I am older and we are republishing this book I am proud of not only killing the protagonist one time but two'

I don’t think Larry McMurtry gave a fuck about twists? It was just part of the story. It was never meant to be a mystery.

Short answer is that they exist so college students can read a book with the benefit of foresight and someone else's analysis and immediately jump to a level of analysis that would otherwise not be accessible until a second or third or more rereading.

Personally I think this is a terrible way to experience literature as it largely removes a reader's ability to analyze whether the novel is successful at maintaining tension and the element of surprise, while also biasing the reader toward certain interpretations. But some people don't have the time or are just intellectually lazy and want the easy way out.

(They also unfortunately perpetuate the idea that classic literature can't be spoiled because they're not meant to be entertaining, they're meant to be studied, and anyone who is looking for entertainment is just not intellectual enough for classics....but let's leave that for another day.)

Not at all. I loved ‘The Stand’ and other novels with a diverse and large cast. The difference between those stories and this one was - the story. Those had cohesive stories with a plot that built and arced. This book had zero story and no focus and no movement, just endless exposition.

That’s like saying you don’t like a movie with an ensemble cast because you like movies with a focus on a single character. That has nothing to do with the quality of the film, just your preference of structure? It’s like saying you hate Rashoman because it has multiple flawed narrators recounting their side of the story - it is kind of a meaningless critique.

I skipped Lolita's "Forward" for exactly this reason and, may I tell you, it significantly alters the experience of the book!

/r/gatekeeping

I knew what I was getting into. I’m entitled to my opinion.

This isn’t an answer to your question, but I experienced the same spoiler in the same book reading the prologue and I was so mad!! I still loved reading the book, but I wish I had found out organically.

I tend to read them at the end, when I'm reflecting on the book and what I thought of it.

This is a great example of "you were the wrong audience"

The book you seem to have wished it was is not one I would like or read, because I don't like horror and action books.

I liked this book. It's essentially dystopian speculative fiction just using the zombie framework in a grounded way. It's clever and well crafted and was a great read.

Don't read: preface

Do read: prologue

I recommend The Signalman, a ghost story that's short and relatively creepy even by today's standards. No long-winded descriptions. Dickens writes a great character study of someone who is creeped out in a train tunnel when he sees a ghost. Maybe in his novels he's long-winded but he can also evoke amazing imagery with just a sentence.

It can also be useful for students or anyone who wants to pick up on as many themes and foreshadowing as they can, but either only has time to read the book once or just doesn't prize going in blind as much as OP.

Larry McMurtry isn't such an author.

You picked the wrong book. TOTC doesn’t even sound like Dickens.

lol. Authors do in fact write stories meant to be received in a particular order and with maximum dramatic potential and impact.

Least condescending r/books comment