No.14665
>want to read an old classic
>first editions are incredibly expensive so the only option is to buy a newer edition published by someone like Penguin or Oxford
>the first 70-80 pages are a long winded introduction written by a "literary scholar" telling the reader how to interpret every part of the story, often spoiling it in the process
>he/she repeatedly, unconvincingly, asserts that his/her interpretation, that just so happens to conform 100% to modern sensibilities, is the correct one
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14670
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14671
>the first 70-80 pages are a long winded introduction written by a "literary scholar" telling the reader how to interpret every part of the story, often spoiling it in the process
>he/she repeatedly, unconvincingly, asserts that his/her interpretation, that just so happens to conform 100% to modern sensibilities, is the correct one
To be fair most classics do genuinely need to be explained to new readers. Anyone who's read them knows they often describe things as obscure and meticulous as per se obsolete news papers from one section of Europe that everyone on the entire damn continent read for some reason among other things.
Some moments genuinely need explaining especially if it's a historical piece or a modern one set to describe modern events happening locally most people even with high educations probably never learned about. And at times the author is actually writing something intentional on a certain issue meaning that their interpretation is pretty much correct. By not listening to them you're pretty much going into a book, reading it, and then finishing it with a complete sense of satisfaction even though you actually have no clue what you just read.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14672
Also
>Caring about spoilers.
Hello Reddit.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14673
>>14670
Well the one that prompted me to make this thread was a collection of Jean Racine plays, but it's something I've seen in a lot of books that has annoyed me.
>>14671
>To be fair most classics do genuinely need to be explained to new readers. Anyone who's read them knows they often describe things as obscure and meticulous as per se obsolete news papers from one section of Europe that everyone on the entire damn continent read for some reason among other things.
Most of that is usually explained by footnotes, though.
>Some moments genuinely need explaining especially if it's a historical piece or a modern one set to describe modern events happening locally most people even with high educations probably never learned about.
True, but the way a good deal of these introductions describe the climate of the author's times is way off base when compared with contemporary, or even other modern, historical sources. Besides, how the author portrays a historical event is almost always a part of a larger, more universal, theme or message which doesn't require extensive knowledge about it to understand, especially if said event was so minor that even most people with high education didn't learn about it.
>And at times the author is actually writing something intentional on a certain issue meaning that their interpretation is pretty much correct
I disagree. If you look into the scholarly writings of any major author, you'll see that there is rarely ever a solid consensus on what the author was trying to say. And for some reason, publishers have a habit of picking the worst of these scholarly writings to print with the book.
>By not listening to them
Oh I read them, for some of the reasons you've stated, that's how I know 99% of them are shit.
>>14672
It's only a minor annoyance, but yes, I don't like it when a major part of the novel I'm about to read, that the author almost certainly intended to take the reader by surprise, is spoiled. Upvote.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14674
>>14673
>Most of that is usually explained by footnotes, though.
You are correct however by the same people responsible for the introduction.
>Besides, how the author portrays a historical event is almost always a part of a larger, more universal, theme or message which doesn't require extensive knowledge about it to understand, especially if said event was so minor that even most people with high education didn't learn about it.
So are you saying you want to deduce the message yourself because if you do than you're countering your next point.
>I disagree. If you look into the scholarly writings of any major author, you'll see that there is rarely ever a solid consensus on what the author was trying to say.
90% of the time the author's message is blatantly clear. I don't even think I'd have to include an example of that. Although if you want one read Lovecraft's nigger poem and tell me what you thought the message was. If you want try figuring it out for yourself but eventually you find something on the author like political views or interviews that make you realize their crystal clear message. It's especially apparent in classical literature. If you want go the extra mile and read the authors biography, non fiction writings, if possible videos on them, and re read the book. Otherwise you can save yourself 3 hours and read what some guy already did for you in the introduction.
>Oh I read them,
Why, I thought only /v/, /a/, and /co/ were masochistic enough to keep doing things they know they won't like.
>
It's only a minor annoyance, but yes, I don't like it when a major part of the novel I'm about to read, that the author almost certainly intended to take the reader by surprise, is spoiled. Upvote.
Garbage taste. Downvoted.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14677
>>14674
>You are correct however by the same people responsible for the introduction.
Yes, but the footnotes tend to have far less fartsniffing than the introduction(though not always.)
>So are you saying you want to deduce the message yourself because if you do than you're countering your next point.
I'm saying that you don't need to know more about these minor events than what a short footnote can provide to understand the story. Focusing too much on them is missing the forest for the trees.
>90% of the time the author's message is blatantly clear
If that's true than the 70-80 page long introductions telling the reader how to interpret the story are unnecessary. Also, I should have clarified on that point more. What I meant was that, since there is a great deal of debate surrounding the precise meanings of most major works of literature, then it's very unlikely that the random English professor they got to write the introduction is going to have the answer when no one else in their field has been able to come up with a convincing one.
>Why, I thought only /v/, /a/, and /co/ were masochistic enough to keep doing things they know they won't like.
I only said 99% of them are shit. There's always a chance that the next one is going to be that legendary introduction that isn't shit which will change my mind about the whole thing.
>Garbage taste. Downvoted.
Come on, man. Don't take away all my karma like that, I worked so hard for it ;(((
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14678
>>14665
What i do is i carefully cut the introduction of all the new books i've bought, put them in a pyre and burn them
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14679
>>14678
the books, not the introductions
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14680
>>14679
That way i can know what my redditor friends think without reading a huge pile of old books nobody cares about. jk
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14681
>>14673
The introductions to the Fagles' translation of the Iliad and Odyssey were some good food for thought; the one for the Aeneid however lacked everything but the spoilers. I've yet to read anything egregious in introductions of the PC or SJW stripe; is the Racine one that bad?
>>14672
I think it's worst if it's a mystery novel.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14682
What's the worst introduction you've ever slogged through?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14683
Find a digital copy of it. If it's really old it's almost certainly available on Project Gutenberg or the Internet Archive, and probably has an audio version on LibriVox if that's your thing. If you really want a physical copy and you're stuck between an expensive edition and a cucked reprint, just buy a cheap used paperback and skip the essay or read it afterwards.
I feel you, though. This has been creeping into Shakespeare stuff for a few years. Probably because half the audience are EngLit majors whose professors told them Shakespeare was the world's first feminist author or some other nonsense.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14684
>>14683
Many people try to think too hard about what they read. I like literature because the style of the author is enjoyable to read or the way the characters are depicted or the plot itself. Modern theory is so focused on analysis and interpretation and "lenses" (I despise their use of this word) that they fail to actually see the words on the page.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14687
>Reading introductions ever
Well you should have started by telling us you were a faggot. You read introductions, if ever, after you finished the book, to laugh at how retards completely missed the point or pleasanty enjoy confirming your own conclusions.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14980
>>14665
>the first 70-80 pages are a long winded introduction written by a "literary scholar" telling the reader how to interpret every part of the story, often spoiling it in the process
>he/she repeatedly, unconvincingly, asserts that his/her interpretation, that just so happens to conform 100% to modern sensibilities, is the correct one
read how to read a book mortimer goes into that specifically
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14981
>>14665
What this anon >>14687 said.
Unless you're reading something from BCE, like The Iliad or The Epic of Gilgamesh, where it might be a good idea to have some introduction to give you a bit of context, you avoid that shit like plague and then laugh at pretentious soy retards after you finished the book and in no danger of having their fart huffing affect your interpretations.
>>14671
>To be fair most classics do genuinely need to be explained to new reader
They really aren't. Kys.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14983
skip introductions, this goes for EVERY book
Evola's "Revolt against the modern world" begins with the editor saying that actually Evola was never a fascist and people mislabel him as a nazi when he was just a reclusive aristocrat who even wrote articles against nazis.
Hayek's "Constitution of Liberty" begins with the editor saying how disappointed Hayek was for not having articles published about his book in the MSM like NYT.
just avoid them like the plague
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.14987
>>14983
Hunchback of Notre Dame starts with some redditor talking about pop culture influences. Mood destroying cancer.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15029
>>14983
What is the issue, exactly?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15031
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15032
>>15031
If you don't know the answer, it's okay. No need to keep a pretense here, this is an anonymous forum.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15036
>>15032
that guy isn't me but I 100% agree with him and I also know the answer, unfortunately you will never understand it because you're a normalfag
the issue is that idgaf whether the MSM shills an author or not, but to normalfags like yourself the ultimate measure of success is not objective truth, it is quantity of social approval. as for Evola, idgaf whether people think he's an ebul nazi facist or not, but again, to normalfags such as yourself the ultimate measure of success is quantity of people who like and approve of a person, not the objective truth of his (or her) theories
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15039
>>15036
Is your interest in objective truth that leads you to think that whoever asked a question matters at all? Or that to whom something is addressed or to with what intent it was written matters at all with regards to the truth of its contents? It's you who dragged identity into this, you little ass. Why an introduction was written is irrelevant.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15046
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15048
>>15046
Read the fucking thread, scum.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15050
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15119
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15166
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15195
>>14665
why do people whine about this so much? Like, is it that hard to just skip the intro and just read the story?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15197
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.15203
>>14981
>Unless you're reading something from BCE
Those can be shit too. I remember reading an intro to one of Aristotle's work, where the editor wrote at length at how enlightened we now are that we know there are no superior or inferior caste or races of men, and that women are equal to men, and that we've always been the one human race.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.16900
>>15197
He's still got a point. you don't have to read an introduction if you're not interested in it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
