I recall images, and most of the time, it would be clear images to the point like I've been there myself but when I was reading that scene it wasn't even that clear.

I didn't like the ending of the book so I hope he changed it.

It's visual. AAMOF, sometimes I recall things that I read as a kid and I have a hard time remembering whether it was a book or movie.

Imagery, is it different for other people?

I ignore the preface, foreword, or introduction these days, saving it until I've read the book, and treating it as an afterword—which, it seems to me, most are intended as by the author, given how spoilery they can be, and it's the publisher who messes up by publishing them at the front of the book.

I feel like they kind of have to. It's the penultimate moment of the book, and the story doesn't really work without it imo. Although, I hear Shyamalan changed the ending (I thought the book ending was a copout, so I'm hesitantly optimistic about that), so maybe he changed that too? I hope not, sad as it was.

I’m typically a hard-copy book reader as well, however I do also tend to have a few audiobooks going for when I run out of podcasts and I’m doing tasks such as gardening, cleaning, or going on a long drive. I regrettably purchased this book following a recommendation without sampling the audio.

I’ll try and find the subreddit, thanks.

Yeah, I wish someone had actually taught what these sections mean at school. Many people know how to read, far fewer know how to enjoy reading.

Sometimes I think these things purposely have mini-spoilers that the author condones. For example, if the author feels they have left some deeper clues to a plot point that are missed, these prefaces can draw the readers attention. My logic for this is they aren’t usually the grand finale spoiler.

Personally, I find most books more enjoyable on subsequent readings when I know the plot and I can be impressed with how it unravels and the author has layers the groundwork. In situations where I’m struggling with something particular dense or prosaic, I’ll sometimes read a plot summary so I can just enjoy the beauty of the language.

I remember reading something about Grapes of Wrath (I don’t think it was actually Steinbeck being interviewed) where they were talking about the vignettes acting like broad landscapes that need painting before placing the characters in them. I’ll try and find a link if I can.

[removed]

I remember the scene like a movie or advanced VR game with smell, touch etc, unless there was a line of text or design element in the book so striking that it stuck in my mind, in which case I remember both simultaneously. I read a lot of kids' books though, and any illustrations will override my imagination.

It definitely lowers my enjoyment, exactly because of your reason: I'm always on the lookout for hints.

I bought the book because there was a good summary here on reddit (can't find it anymore) that only said that something mysterious about scientists is going on and nothing other spoilery.

Just finished the 3 body problem recently and I'm glad I skipped the preface I guess. Very much enjoyed taking the ride while having absolutely no clue where it was going. Had I read the preface the journey through it would have felt different because I would have specifically been on the lookout.

I recall images usually. Unless I'm thinking of specific quotes. When I enjoy a book I stop seeing text and it's almost like a day dream.

I’d have to see something to back that up but I would assume that on average when a copy of crooked house is being read that it’s being read for the first time.

I only got into Christie 3 years ago and have been making my way through her catalogue.

I don’t think it’s a problem having these discussions by the publisher in the book but if they could be at the end or even just mention ‘this foreword spoils the ending of the book, read with that in mind’ it wouldn’t take any more effort.

Because Agatha Christie’s works are everywhere, in book form, film, television show, and theatre. It is expected that the average reader will already know the plot when reading. (And there was a study done, that showed people enjoyed reading a story more when they knew what was going to happen, even if they thought they wouldn’t. I’ll have to see if I can find it.)

Almost all books that are older and have new forwards or etc will have spoilers in them, because it is expected that people already know what happens. You typically have to work pretty hard not to know the plot and spoilers of major works of fiction older than ten years old. I think it’s unreasonable to expect that older books won’t be spoiled, and if you don’t want them to be, it’s on the reader to avoid anything that might.

Also dont read the summaries on the books itself.

I'm currently reading the three body problem and i'm at ~250 pages of ~500 right now. And there is still not a single hint of what the summary spoiled.

>!The summary talked about the reason for everything being weird is some kind of alien civilization. I mean, everything is weird yes, but there is as far as i know nothing hinting about aliens yet.!<

I'm a very visual person. When reading, I can see what's being described, so when recalling something i've read I can see it clearly as if it was a movie or tv show I watched.

Yeah it’s maddening and I’ve stopped reading them.

I read a newly published copy of (I think) ‘crooked house’ by Agatha Christie last year and there was a foreword by either the publisher or another author that talked Christie’s inspiration for the novel and casually dropped in that ‘finding out X was the murderer was a really interesting twist in the genre at the time’.

And I’m just like; well it’s not interesting anymore is it!? Why wouldn’t you put that at the back of the book!

A book isnt about what happens its about how it happens, spoilers are a marketing gimmick

Not an answer to your question, I just want to tag on another book here.

I read Anne Mcaffrey’s “Dragonriders of Pern” as a kid and loved it. Back then I always skipped any preface a book had to offer.

So imagine my surprise when I picked up a copy as an adult, and the whole plot is spoiled in the preface. Like arguably the most interesting part of the story is just… sitting there. For anyone to read.

I tell people to skip the preface if they’re going to read it.

It can either work well as a literary device or destroy the whole book. No in-between.

For example, the book "They Both Die at the End" (which was hated by a lot of people; we'll disregard this) used the "spoiling" literary device. I think it worked very well because that's where the story revolved--them dying in the end. It also constructed some expectations that maybe they won't die after all and the title was a "clickbait." The point is, the spoiler in the title had an overall purpose for the book. It made us wonder what led them to that fate and how they were going to die (if it was true).

What ruins a book when a spoiler is provided in the preface is the lack of purpose. It's just there to be there. And it makes the reader infuriated because, as you said, what was the point? If the author gives a spoiler important enough, then it should work around the theme of the book or at least some other plot device.

God this just happened to me today. I had recently bought a copy of Pillars of the earth and was killing a few minutes before an appointment. The author starts off just telking a nice story of how he became I treated in cathedrals in his younger years even as he was not religious and how everyone thought he was nuts for writing something g other than the spy novels he was making bank with through the 80s. Then he mentions getting stuck on the last act until he decided tie into some very specific historical events of which I'm knowledgeable ans its like dammnit!

The same thing teasers and trailers do to movies. Thing is, some of them are better than others, just as some authors are better than others. Some prefaces ... aren't well inspired.

[removed]