Do you read the intros?
Not often, and even then only after reading whatever it is they're introducing. They have a nasty habit of spoiling novels.
>inb4 reading for plot hurrdurr
almost always
If you don't like reading intros then you're not interested in perspectives on literature and are therefore an amateur reader.
>>7800206
you are correct
you're also about to get a bunch of 19 yr old community college dropouts who are gonna tell you about how academia and critcism is a spook and
>can't form your own opinions
>reading others thoughts kek
etc.
posts
>>7800177
>reading for plot
Tribune of the Plebs
I read them after or before depending on content.
I find it best to read after if it's an analysis.
>>7800206
I don't read them because authors tend to ramble too much or dedicate too much space to irrelevant topics
>>7800240
>ramble too much
>irrelevant topics
yes i'm sure you're very qualified to determine that
fucking kek
>>7800164
Last time I read an intro, some fuckwit spoiled the ending on the 3rd line.
How the fuck can editors be THAT stupid?
>>7800252
What would qualify someone to have an opinion?
>>7800164
When was the last time you read an informative intro? Translators' notes, yes, but the paid and largely irrelevant perspective of a lesser mind is the last thing I need before or after getting into the sort of work that could deserve secondary reading
Like >>7800177 I only read them after reading a story since I don't like spoilers. They are worthwhile to me when I go for a second reading.
